Started By
Message
re: Chris Low: LSU “kidding itself” if it think it can leverage BK to take a reduced buyout
Posted on 10/27/25 at 9:23 pm to ChetRando
Posted on 10/27/25 at 9:23 pm to ChetRando
I’ve read his contract. Thanks.
It’s 11.A.1.e. and 11.A.1.q., and if you think that they can terminate him for cause because of on-field performance, you’re retarded. Also, that’s the for-cause termination provision of his contract, not the buyout provision, which relates to a termination without cause.
It’s 11.A.1.e. and 11.A.1.q., and if you think that they can terminate him for cause because of on-field performance, you’re retarded. Also, that’s the for-cause termination provision of his contract, not the buyout provision, which relates to a termination without cause.
1
Posted on 10/27/25 at 9:30 pm to Shunface
quote:
Who gives a frick, a single donor has it covered
I love our retarded LSU fans.
Not so retarded.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 9:44 pm to Mo Jeaux
The implication of a "reduced buyout" would be that there is enough recorded that it may potentially be considered "for cause" by a reasonable person but that would obviously require litigation, which neither side would want. I bring up the PIP example because a PIP is just paperwork in anticipation of a 'for cause" termination. I was more thinking about the "any duties" language within "e." Stories I saw said the morals clause was why it was insane, but e. is obv a catchall that seems like it could cover most anything with enough paperwork. If Chris Low says it can't happen, then I guess it's not worth the state of Louisiana to look into and they should just open the checkbook.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 9:55 pm to ChetRando
I think things like that are wishful thinking from my fellow LSU fans.
I think the negotiations going on are probably more along the lines of lump sum rather than payout over time, combined with things like waiving/reducing the offset and/or waiving the mitigation requirement. They may point to “for cause” as a bluffing tactic, but an actual for-cause termination would generally only work for something really egregious.
I think the negotiations going on are probably more along the lines of lump sum rather than payout over time, combined with things like waiving/reducing the offset and/or waiving the mitigation requirement. They may point to “for cause” as a bluffing tactic, but an actual for-cause termination would generally only work for something really egregious.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 9:59 pm to aspiclark
Hate to break it to you, but it’s over and Todd Graves paid the lions share of it.
Now you’re free to go and keep making shitty posts about LSU.
Now you’re free to go and keep making shitty posts about LSU.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 10:03 pm to aspiclark
$27 million in 30 days or $53 million over the next six years reduced by whatever you make at your next job and/or litigation costs? That’s the choice that is being presented to him.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 10:53 pm to T1gerNate
litigation costs he says
Posted on 10/27/25 at 10:54 pm to T1gerNate
Real question is what is the conversion rate between a Louisiana chicken finger and the US dollar?
Posted on 10/27/25 at 10:57 pm to TommyM
Ole Tom Mars been at this a minute or two.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 10:59 pm to T1gerNate
that will be 54 million dollars please, make checks payable to mr brian kelly
Posted on 10/27/25 at 11:04 pm to T1gerNate
I believe I’ll take the $53 million and see your asses in court if need be.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 11:19 pm to Henry Jones Jr
quote:
I believe I’ll take the $53 million and see your asses in court if need be.
LSU fans are trying to make the cardinal sin of pissing off Jimmy Sexton.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 11:21 pm to aspiclark
Thomas Mars is the guy who got Freeze fired and Nutt paid.
Posted on 10/27/25 at 11:51 pm to aspiclark
It's Louisiana and a state matter. The jury would likely not be favorable for Kelly.
Lsu has leverage
Lsu has leverage
Posted on 10/27/25 at 11:58 pm to ShermanTxTiger
brian kelly has a contract. jury? what exactly are you alleging? what jury?
Posted on 10/28/25 at 12:42 am to aspiclark
They want to punish Kelly for making them look stupid. How dare he fail so badly
Posted on 10/28/25 at 4:11 am to TMRebel
Matt always said no way they can fire him!
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:16 am to aspiclark
No chance he takes a lower buyout
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:20 am to Hugh McElroy
quote:isn't Coach in breach of contract if he can't coach?
coach should think twice before signing a contract with an institution that has demonstrated a willingness to welch on their contracts.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:43 am to aspiclark
What does it matter. We have someone committed to pay it regardless
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News