There have been so many things that have happened, off the field with the program, I wanted to try to do a post that I felt like could represent what I'm thinking happened with the situation regarding the mutual agreement of DC Chad Glasgow and Texas Tech to part ways, but I needed some time to try to figure out how I wanted to proceed. This is that post.
I also wanted to preface this post by saying that these are all of my thoughts and since we only have two things that we know, that Feldman tweeted that Glasgow had been fired and that JUCO CB Kasseim Everett said that he tried to call Glasgow but that Glasgow's phone was disconnected, I could write "I think" before everything, but please assume that everything should read with the idea that these are my thoughts. And I realize that this is a very speculative post and I don't do many truly speculative posts, but there's so much information that we don't know about the situation, so we're left to guess.
The timing of this thing was thrown all askew when CBS Sports Bruce Feldman tweeted on December 20, 2011 that Texas Tech had fired Glasgow:
"Just heard that Tommy Tuberville has fired Texas Tech DC Chad Glasgow. That's fourth assistant to go this offseason there."
At this point was mostly likely having discussions about terminating Glasgow, or did in fact tell Glasgow that he was terminated. Either way, Texas Tech was in a lose-lose situation because if Texas Tech did nothing or issued a no comment, then the natural reaction was that something was afoot. The other option was to make a comment, which is what Texas Tech did through Blayne Beal:
"I have confirmed that," Beal said, "and I will even confirm that he will not be fired. He has not been fired, and he has not resigned."
Technically, all of this is and was true at the time. Technically. There were most likely some details that needed to be worked out in regards to a possible buyout or negotiations. When attorneys get involved, and most likely were involved, then these sorts of things take time.
Again, I don't know what could have been said to make this situation any better because once Feldman let the cat out of the bag, I think we all knew that the writing was on the wall and it was just a matter of timing.
This is where things get murky and ugly. Let me be clear: I don't know what happened. I'm not saying that anything is fact or fiction or anything like that. I don't know what happened and most likely, neither do you. The rumors started the national signing day for JUCO players, December 21, 2011. One day after Feldman broke the news. You can read my summation of some of the rumors here and you can also read them from this comment. From what I could tell, the fine folks at DTN didn't say that any of this was fact, it was all very much, "this is what I heard," or, "this was posted on another site". If some of you took it as fact, then that's your right, but for me, this was just additional information that may have been right or wrong.
It's a safe bet to think perhaps Glasgow wasn't pleased with something, most likely the recent hires that had been made and that it may have been a revelation to Glasgow that Tuberville had made the decision that the defense would be reverting back to the 4-3, rather than the 4-2-5 defense that Glasgow was employed to run. If I were Glasgow I wouldn't want to be in charge of a defense that I didn't feel comfortable running. You can make your own decision about how Glawgow should have reacted, but the only confirmation that we have that Texas Tech will be running the 4-3 is from some of the JUCO commits. Either way, Tuberville hired a new offensive line coach that isn't a "spread" guru and we haven't heard a peep out of offensive coordinator Neal Brown. Perhaps it's just a difference in their personalities, but it's not as if there are ton of schools that are running the 4-2-5 so Tuberville's coaching pool was somewhat limited, which again may be an issue with Tuberville making an attempt at something innovative that has backfired on him.
So, you have to take those rumors with the idea that they may be true and they may be completely made up. I get the feeling that there were some bad feelings between Tuberville and Glasgow and that it truly was a mutual agreement that they should not work together. What happened in between could be anything from the two things linked above, to the very real possibility that Tuberville told recruits that Texas Tech would be switching to the 4-3 before telling Glasgow, that Glasgow heard it from the JUCO players and may have told Everett's dad what happened, i.e., "Well, some JUCO players told me that we're switching to the 4-3, before Tuberville even informed me, and if you're looking for some reassurance from me as to whether or not what's happening or whether or not I'll be the defensive coordinator next year, then I may not be the person that can do that." That's not be bad-mouthing, but it may be telling the truth. It very well could have been that simple and something like that could have been turned into, "Glasgow was bad-mouthing Texas Tech". Alternately, Glasgow could very well have been defaming Texas Tech and Tuberville, we just don't know at this point.
A Disconnected Phone
Same thing applies to Kasseim Everett. You take his comments for what they are worth. They may be true, they may not be true. Per Sooner Nation, Everett announced his intention to go to Texas Tech at the signing ceremony, and even put on the hat. Afterwards, OU coaches Bob Stoops and Willie Martinez contacted Everett and told him that he made the wrong decision (which makes me wonder how they knew that he didn't actually sign the LOI, which would seemingly make Everett off-limits, but I don't know) and then Everett apparently tried to call Glasgow, but his phone had been disconnected. Everett said that his father had a relationship with Glasgow and there are rumors (see above) that Glasgow bad-mouthed Texas Tech to Everett's father. There is nothing in the Sooner Nation article that says that Everett's father and Glasgow didn't talk. It just says that when Everett tried to contact Glasgow that Glasgow's phone had been disconnected.
I have not listened to this intereview, but on December 22, 2011, Texas Tech defensive end's coach Robert Prunty was on the Williams and Hyatt Show (sorry Hyatt, I don't sign up for any subscription based stuff!) and Prunty said that he talked with Everett 5 minutes before he signed. I don't think that Prunty is lying.
What I think happened is that the coaching world is a small one, and that Stoops and Martinez probably knew that Glasgow was either gone or close to being gone in some form or fashion and that they told Everett, sure, you just talked with Prunty, but your defensive coordinator is about to be let go. Try calling him. I don't fault Stoops or Martinez for doing this, especially because Everett hadn't signed on the dotted line. It ain't over til he's signed.
There's a ton more after the jump, so please click on through.
A Mutual Parting of Ways
In what seemed like forever, although in reality it was nine days, Texas Tech announced that Glasgow and Texas Tech had parted ways. This is fine and it allows Beal to be accurate as he said that Glasgow would not be fired. Again, I know it's a technicality, but whatever, to me it's irrelevant how he was let go, the fact that he's no longer the defensive coordinator is the real story.
Athletic director Kirby Hocutt made the sports-talk circuit on that day and made it clear that the relationship had soured, which is why I think this makes sense:
"It’s hard to explain at times why change is inevitable and things just don’t work," Hocutt said. "The timing and fit’s not right. It was a mutual conversation and, ultimately, a mutual decision that it was in the best interests for our football program and in the best interests of Chad personally and professionally to part ways. Those are never easy conversations to engage in for either side, but we wish him only the best."
I don't know how much I can add to that, so I'll just say that if they weren't getting along, then this was the best solution. I imagine that with the holidays, people weren't working on the 23rd through the 26th, which means that there were really five business days between Feldman's initial report and when the mutual agreement occurred. They may have all known it was going to happen, but just had to work out some contractual details.
Tuberville's Contract Situation
On January 18, 2011, as one of the last things that former AD Gerald Myers would do, he extended Tuberville's contract to 2015. It is standard for most college coaches to have five years on their contracts, so that they can tell players that he intends on being there for the long haul. We should all perk up if in January of 2012 Hocutt extends Tuberville's contract to 2016. I've always assumed that Tuberville came to Hocutt and told him that he and Glasgow weren't getting along and he wanted to go in another direction. Hocutt assured Tuberville that he would take care of the mess and deal with the buyouts, but that 2012 was the year that he needed to show improvement. I think that Tuberville did a good job of keeping the program at a good level in 2010, but the football team took a dip in 2011 and despite any reason for the losses, the buck stops with Tuberville.
Essentially, I think that Hocutt gave Tuberville a kitchen-pass for him to get the coaches he wanted, but that he needed to show him the baby in 2012.
Hocutt was hired as the Miami AD in 2008 and Randy Shannon had been the head coach since 2007, a year before Hocutt arrived. After Miami's 7-5 season, Hocutt fired Shannon, again, despite a winning record, but Hocutt essentially gave Shannon three years to prove he should be the head coach and 2012 will be Tuberville's third year.
If Tuberville is not extended in 2012, and the time to do this sort of thing is now or prior to National Signing Day, which I think is February 1, 2012, then I think this is a clear indication that Hocutt has made himself perfectly clear to Tuberville.
You can argue whether or not Tuberville should have more than three years, but I think the results need to be in the W's column. The defense obviously has to improve and there has to be some continuity on the defensive side of the ball in order for there to be significant improvement.
I've received some emails and Twitter responses about how I need to be more positive about the program and that I need to give the football program more time.
I didn't create this situation. Tuberville did. He's the one that has gone through two defensive coordinators in two years, which is almost unheard of. I was willing to give Tuberville a pass after hiring and then firing James Willis due to the fact that the actual cause of termination may have had something to do with alleged spousal abuse and I had a hard time faulting Tuberville for knowing whether or not a person has a history of that sort of thing. But the Glasgow situation is completely different. Tuberville has to start taking some of the blame here. I'd love to be writing about how I should be patient, but Tuberville isn't being very patient, so I can't imagine why I should implore fans or anyone else to have that very same trait.
If Tuberville were to come out and acknowledge that he made a mistake in going to the 4-2-5 and that he takes the responsibility for the poor defense last year, then I think he'd come across as a person who is actively trying to be better. He should also say that he knows the 4-3 inside and out and although he may not coordinate the defense, the failure or success of the defense is going to rest squarely on him and he will do more coaching and teaching this year than he's done in his 17 years as a head coach.
I think it would do wonders for his public perception.
What I suspect Tuberville will say is that the 4-3 is really the 4-2-5 and so there's not going to be much transition, if any transition at all.
That's the wrong move.
The best way to embrace a fan base is to take responsibility for your actions and "own" whatever it is that you're after. This is not owning the situation:
"As you heard (Thursday), Chad Glasgow decided to leave and it was one of those deals where he was a young guy, he was disappointed, we were disappointed," Tuberville said. "I tried to talk him into staying, but sometimes when things are not going very well a change of scenery is good for you in our profession. We both decided it was best to do this and go on."
"I'll hire someone in the next couple of weeks to be our defensive coordinator.... It wasn't really playing, it wasn't really coaching, it was just the type of players we were putting on the field against what other teams we were playing put on the field -- I watched that Baylor game last night and felt sorry for both teams playing against those offenses with all their speed. You have to have speed these days on defense."
Tuberville also talked about his thoughts on the defense going forward. Rumor has it that the Red Raiders will switch back to the 4-3 defense it ran as late as 2009.
"Our defensive philosophy is not going to change," Tuberville said. "Players win games and we've got to get bigger defensive linemen and we've got to get more players and more depth to play that can play in open space. We were terrible tacklers last year, and we got better as the year went on but you've got to be able to have more than seven or eight guys. You've got to sub and have depth... We're not that far away, but sometimes it looks like you're far away when you're not playing as well as you need to play.
"I thought we had a chance to win seven or eight. We should have beaten Missouri and probably should have beaten Kansas State, but we just didn't match well against other teams -- I guess Texas A&M is another team we matched up pretty well against."
Tuberville, this is your time to own this mo-fo.