Started By
Message
re: Big coaching addition?
Posted on 12/11/25 at 10:33 am to Henry Jones Jr
Posted on 12/11/25 at 10:33 am to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
So he hasn’t agreed to anything then
I keep seeing people say things to the effect that an MOU isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. Incorrect.
Here’s a little primer that hasn’t changed in the hundred years since I was 1L:
A mutual agreement between parties is a contract regardless of how it is labeled. And yes, it can be legally enforceable according to its terms.
If the parties only use phrases like “we intend to do x,” instead of “we promise to do x,” then there isn’t much to enforce. But if the parties say “we promise to do x in accordance with more detailed terms to be agreed upon,” you can’t just walk away from it for no better reason than that you changed your mind. Every contract includes a duty of good faith and fair dealing.
A MOU signed by the parties is, in fact, a form of legal contract. It’s just a contract that acknowledges it isn’t the final agreement and there are more terms to flesh out. And it leaves potential ambiguities that a party might use to justify a breach of the agreement. E.g., a MOU in this context might allow firing for cause, leaving the definition of “cause” as a detail to be hammered out in the final agreement.
An MOU often will leave consummation of the final agreement subject to conditions that need to be met first, which the law calls conditions precedent (e.g., a satisfactory background check, review of audited financial statements, etc.). But if those conditions are met, the parties are legally obligated to go forward unless there is some other escape clause written into the MOU.
The terms of a signed written agreement don’t become unenforceable merely because the contract is labeled an MOU. Take the promissory note you signed for your home mortgage and instead label it an MOU. Hell, label it Grandma’s Recipe for Chicken Soup. If you voluntarily sign your name under the statement “I promise to pay ….,” you are legally obligated to pay.
Can we please just stop this ridiculous repetition that an MOU means nothing. I see it everywhere on this board and it’s just ignorant. Please stahp.
/rant over
1
Posted on 12/11/25 at 10:59 am to Landmass
We can call Lane whatever, but I've said this before, and I will continue to say it despite all the man's short comings; he's got an eye for talent, and he can see potential where others cannot. Is he an anomaly? I don't think so. I'll save my opinion on Golding because there's just too many moving parts right now. But it'll be telling when the adrenaline wears off and he's got to go out and put together our offensive coaching staff. And let's see what he does with the portal and who he's able to keep from entering it.
THIS
and losing Lane is/was a disaster.
Lane's potential deity at OM was confirmed for me around the time we beat TN at TN (with that shitty team) and the scolding he gave us for our attitude following a satisfactory loss to BAMA. It took fortuitous circumstances (his daughter) to retain Lane when his clear intentions to "fall up" were confirmed during Auburn gate.
Although highly risky, knowing what was clearly coming, I would have forced the issue with Kiffin following the 10 win 2023 season or the10 win 2024 season by offering to make him the highest paid coach, build a statute, whatever it took. Instead the decision was made to offer him the world after the target vacancies materialized (Florida/LSU) and basically put all of our retention leverage on his loyalty to what he had built at OM. Not a good strategy.
If by some frickery Golding (or the next coach) proves to be great hire then the question is where does he land next or do we do what it takes to retain him. I hope next time it is the latter.
THIS
and losing Lane is/was a disaster.
Lane's potential deity at OM was confirmed for me around the time we beat TN at TN (with that shitty team) and the scolding he gave us for our attitude following a satisfactory loss to BAMA. It took fortuitous circumstances (his daughter) to retain Lane when his clear intentions to "fall up" were confirmed during Auburn gate.
Although highly risky, knowing what was clearly coming, I would have forced the issue with Kiffin following the 10 win 2023 season or the10 win 2024 season by offering to make him the highest paid coach, build a statute, whatever it took. Instead the decision was made to offer him the world after the target vacancies materialized (Florida/LSU) and basically put all of our retention leverage on his loyalty to what he had built at OM. Not a good strategy.
If by some frickery Golding (or the next coach) proves to be great hire then the question is where does he land next or do we do what it takes to retain him. I hope next time it is the latter.
This post was edited on 12/11/25 at 11:08 am
Posted on 12/11/25 at 11:13 am to Fullmonty
The best thing that Lane brought to the table was exposure and this year that exposure turned to bad exposure so not really regretting him being gone now. I may regret that later but shite, we offered him the same contract that LSU did. It wasn't for a lack of trying. If we let him just walk out the back door because we didn't want to compete, I would have a much bigger problem with it.
Posted on 12/11/25 at 11:43 am to Fullmonty
He’d have never taken any offer with a substantial buyout to prevent him from leaving. He doesn’t even have that type of contract at LSU. Nothing would’ve prevented this.
Posted on 12/11/25 at 12:00 pm to TeeteringBrink
Titling or referring to an agreement as an MOU/LOI/Grandma’s Recipe for Chicken Soup/ Employment Agreement does not confirm the agreement is binding or nonbinding.
However, normally you would not title or refer to an agreement as an MOU/LOI if it is intended to be binding. Typically when the parties enter into something that is titled "MOU" it is to draft and confirm that they are in agreement on the major terms to be included in a to be drafted binding agreement. There is no reason to spend time and money on all the details if the parties are not on the same page regarding the basic terms.
At the same time a MOU may have some binding provisions (for example that a party agrees not to solicit or consider other offers for a period of 30 days). This binds the party to work exclusively in good faith for this period to reach the details of the binding contract. There could be money damages if a party breached this 30 day binding provision but no one can be forced to do a job (see 13th amendment to US constitution).
Unless you read the terms of the agreement it is speculation regarding what part, if any, of an agreement (however titled or referred to) is binding or nonbinding.
However, normally you would not title or refer to an agreement as an MOU/LOI if it is intended to be binding. Typically when the parties enter into something that is titled "MOU" it is to draft and confirm that they are in agreement on the major terms to be included in a to be drafted binding agreement. There is no reason to spend time and money on all the details if the parties are not on the same page regarding the basic terms.
At the same time a MOU may have some binding provisions (for example that a party agrees not to solicit or consider other offers for a period of 30 days). This binds the party to work exclusively in good faith for this period to reach the details of the binding contract. There could be money damages if a party breached this 30 day binding provision but no one can be forced to do a job (see 13th amendment to US constitution).
Unless you read the terms of the agreement it is speculation regarding what part, if any, of an agreement (however titled or referred to) is binding or nonbinding.
Posted on 12/11/25 at 12:08 pm to Fullmonty
Pete in his press conference right now:
quote:
Kevin Smith is "Coaching his @SS off"
Golding noted he is all in right now and will figure out his future in January
Posted on 12/11/25 at 12:09 pm to TMRebel
He’d have never taken any offer with a substantial buyout to prevent him from leaving. He doesn’t even have that type of contract at LSU. Nothing would’ve prevented this.
Maybe. Maybe not.
But it would have made me feel like we were truly committed.
I mean we have all but cucked away the schools traditions to "win" at football and so far, we have a co-west championship banner and CFP appearance (which value is pending being embarrassed by Tulane or beat down by Georgia) to show for it.
Maybe. Maybe not.
But it would have made me feel like we were truly committed.
I mean we have all but cucked away the schools traditions to "win" at football and so far, we have a co-west championship banner and CFP appearance (which value is pending being embarrassed by Tulane or beat down by Georgia) to show for it.
Posted on 12/11/25 at 12:47 pm to Fullmonty
So what would you be asking for in this case? For us to publicly announce an offer that he wouldn’t have signed in 2023/2024? I’d like to understand the mechanics of what you’re asking for. The fanbase is likely not privy to ANY communications between us and Lane’s reps in those years. And we shouldn’t be if he didn’t WANT to sign anything then because that hurts the stability of the program.
Posted on 12/12/25 at 12:42 pm to TMRebel
The point is I don't care what Lane WANTED.
Mechanics would have been to offer 2025 money in 2023/2024 and require a serious contract buy/out clause. If Lane rejected this then start a search and suggest to Lane that he needed to look elsewhere. Lane needed us to build his resume at the time especially after how 2022 season ended.
And yes, if we had pushed him out, we may have sacrificed the successes of the 2023 through 2025 but from my perspective it would have been a better look for OM not being a bitch program. Instead the approach was please use us Lane for as long as you want. Simply short sited and not acceptable to passively participate in the stepping stone perception.
A program "stabilization coach" is going to get us to 7- 5 and a bowl game. We have proven we can achieve this level of success. LOL To break the cycle we will necessarily need to keep hiring high risk/high reward head coaches. Some might refer to this as understanding our reality or self awareness.
We need some long term take no prisoners thinking. The top priority should be to establish/require real long term commitment from the coaching risks we are undoubtedly going to have to take to achieve real winning. This includes contracts weighted heavily in our favor in return for giving them their shot in the SEC.
As I have said, if we are going to simply get robbed every time we land and prove out a successful coach who can win at a high level then WHAT IS THE POINT.
If this doesn't register, I don't know what else to tell you.
Mechanics would have been to offer 2025 money in 2023/2024 and require a serious contract buy/out clause. If Lane rejected this then start a search and suggest to Lane that he needed to look elsewhere. Lane needed us to build his resume at the time especially after how 2022 season ended.
And yes, if we had pushed him out, we may have sacrificed the successes of the 2023 through 2025 but from my perspective it would have been a better look for OM not being a bitch program. Instead the approach was please use us Lane for as long as you want. Simply short sited and not acceptable to passively participate in the stepping stone perception.
A program "stabilization coach" is going to get us to 7- 5 and a bowl game. We have proven we can achieve this level of success. LOL To break the cycle we will necessarily need to keep hiring high risk/high reward head coaches. Some might refer to this as understanding our reality or self awareness.
We need some long term take no prisoners thinking. The top priority should be to establish/require real long term commitment from the coaching risks we are undoubtedly going to have to take to achieve real winning. This includes contracts weighted heavily in our favor in return for giving them their shot in the SEC.
As I have said, if we are going to simply get robbed every time we land and prove out a successful coach who can win at a high level then WHAT IS THE POINT.
If this doesn't register, I don't know what else to tell you.
Posted on 12/12/25 at 1:09 pm to Fullmonty
I simply disagree with your premise. He had a contract after 2022 with a buyout. If he didn’t agree with our demands in your plan, starting a search costs us and the boosters $60 million just to get him out the door. After that, you have to get boosters, who were just fine with winning a Peach Bowl and having a good time in ATL, to hit the eject button on that, fund a buyout, and then we’d need to find a coach who was sufficiently “loyal” who would be fine with walking in to an Ole Miss program who fired a winning coach because he wouldn’t limit his options for other employers. That’s essentially a wrap for football at Ole Miss.
So we’re not going to meet on this one. Is what it is.
So we’re not going to meet on this one. Is what it is.
Posted on 12/12/25 at 2:24 pm to TMRebel
I simply disagree with your premise. He had a contract after 2022 with a buyout.
How much and was it meaningful? No
If he didn’t agree with our demands in your plan, starting a search costs us and the boosters $60 million just to get him out the door.
I never said fire him, nor would I actually do that. But I would have made it clear to him that he should consider moving along.
Wouldn't that have been the cats arse if Lane had no good place to land (23/24) thereby obliging Lane/Sexton to make peace with or move on from OM. Tough spot for Lane but very dignified for us where OM is offering Lane 2026 level money at the same time for serious contractual commitment .
After that, you have to get boosters, who were just fine with winning a Peach Bowl and having a good time in ATL,
Agreed and true that those with the gold make the rules LOL
to hit the eject button on that, fund a buyout,
see above - no buyout to fund .
and then we’d need to find a coach who was sufficiently “loyal” who would be fine with walking in to an Ole Miss program who fired a winning coach because he wouldn’t limit his options for other employers.
see above there would be no firing - but yes to finding a coach that is loyal and more importantly will sign a loyalty type contract
That’s essentially a wrap for football at Ole Miss.
If we can't retain a good coach its a wrap anyway, unless your satisfied with and average 7-5 record.
IDK maybe to your point above regarding big booster attitude this is just Kobayashi Maru.
How much and was it meaningful? No
If he didn’t agree with our demands in your plan, starting a search costs us and the boosters $60 million just to get him out the door.
I never said fire him, nor would I actually do that. But I would have made it clear to him that he should consider moving along.
Wouldn't that have been the cats arse if Lane had no good place to land (23/24) thereby obliging Lane/Sexton to make peace with or move on from OM. Tough spot for Lane but very dignified for us where OM is offering Lane 2026 level money at the same time for serious contractual commitment .
After that, you have to get boosters, who were just fine with winning a Peach Bowl and having a good time in ATL,
Agreed and true that those with the gold make the rules LOL
to hit the eject button on that, fund a buyout,
see above - no buyout to fund .
and then we’d need to find a coach who was sufficiently “loyal” who would be fine with walking in to an Ole Miss program who fired a winning coach because he wouldn’t limit his options for other employers.
see above there would be no firing - but yes to finding a coach that is loyal and more importantly will sign a loyalty type contract
That’s essentially a wrap for football at Ole Miss.
If we can't retain a good coach its a wrap anyway, unless your satisfied with and average 7-5 record.
IDK maybe to your point above regarding big booster attitude this is just Kobayashi Maru.
Posted on 12/12/25 at 2:38 pm to TMRebel
quote:
I simply disagree with your premise. He had a contract after 2022 with a buyout. If he didn’t agree with our demands in your plan, starting a search costs us and the boosters $60 million just to get him out the door. After that, you have to get boosters, who were just fine with winning a Peach Bowl and having a good time in ATL, to hit the eject button on that, fund a buyout, and then we’d need to find a coach who was sufficiently “loyal” who would be fine with walking in to an Ole Miss program who fired a winning coach because he wouldn’t limit his options for other employers. That’s essentially a wrap for football at Ole Miss. So we’re not going to meet on this one. Is what it is.
Yeah I can’t see how this would be possible at all either. Same for when the rumor came out that we gave him the ultimatum to sign or we’ll move on. The logistics of paying him out $40 million and the optics of firing a successful head coach because you’re afraid he’ll leave is ridiculous.
Posted on 12/12/25 at 2:53 pm to Fullmonty
quote:
I never said fire him, nor would I actually do that. But I would have made it clear to him that he should consider moving along. Wouldn't that have been the cats arse if Lane had no good place to land (23/24) thereby obliging Lane/Sexton to make peace with or move on from OM. Tough spot for Lane but very dignified for us where OM is offering Lane 2026 level money at the same time for serious contractual commitment .
Your scenario assumes Lane very politely leaves on his own thereby forfeiting $10’s of millions of dollars. Your scenario also assumes that Lane wouldn’t be a narcissist POS and completely tank our program from the inside out. You think what he did in a span of one month was bad….just imagine him having a year or two to fully dismantle everything. It’s an absolute fairytale to think Lane would put aside any and all selfishness to do what we’ve determined to be the right thing to do for university that has absolutely zero preexisting ties to Lane.
Hell even Matt Luke had to be bought out.
This post was edited on 12/12/25 at 2:54 pm
Posted on 12/12/25 at 3:06 pm to pankReb
the optics of firing a successful head coach because you’re afraid he’ll leave is ridiculous
Maybe. But you can't deny it would have been ballsy and certainly would have sent a message to our next good coach (if Lane chose to pass) not to bother with us if your not serious because we are. I like those optics.
The corollary to your point is that we are just fine with continuing to employ and coddle a head coach who is all but certain to leave. Sorry not down with this.
Waiting to press until he had a place to land was too little too late.
What is definitely ridicules is that I am two weeks removed and still grappling with what happened and how to avoid a repeat disaster in the future. LOL
Merry Christmas.
Maybe. But you can't deny it would have been ballsy and certainly would have sent a message to our next good coach (if Lane chose to pass) not to bother with us if your not serious because we are. I like those optics.
The corollary to your point is that we are just fine with continuing to employ and coddle a head coach who is all but certain to leave. Sorry not down with this.
Waiting to press until he had a place to land was too little too late.
What is definitely ridicules is that I am two weeks removed and still grappling with what happened and how to avoid a repeat disaster in the future. LOL
Merry Christmas.
Posted on 12/12/25 at 3:10 pm to Fullmonty
quote:
What is definitely ridicules is that I am two weeks removed and still grappling with what happened and how to avoid a repeat disaster in the future. LOL
Same brother
Posted on 12/12/25 at 3:20 pm to pankReb
It’s an absolute fairytale -
As you know southern fairy tale begins with: "Y'all ain't gonna believe this shite"
But this shite is very believable. At the end of 2022 Lane was not a hot commodity he had just dropped 4 of 5 and we looked like the same Ole Miss and him the same old immature Lane. Nobody legit really wanted him or was willing to chance him.
So you think he is going to turn around and wreck our program. I don't think so, he needed us to do well for his sake and his so called selfishness would have been to our advantage.
As you know southern fairy tale begins with: "Y'all ain't gonna believe this shite"
But this shite is very believable. At the end of 2022 Lane was not a hot commodity he had just dropped 4 of 5 and we looked like the same Ole Miss and him the same old immature Lane. Nobody legit really wanted him or was willing to chance him.
So you think he is going to turn around and wreck our program. I don't think so, he needed us to do well for his sake and his so called selfishness would have been to our advantage.
Page 2 of 2
Latest Ole Miss News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News