Started By
Message
0
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:01 pm to RB10
quote:
He gave 30 Day notice on January 5. He has pictures of himself recruiting for aTm In mid January. That's breach of contract if he is still an LSU employee. If he wasn't an LSU employee at that time then his contract was terminated with over 10 months left on it, therefore he would LSU money.
Are you an attorney?
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:06 pm to Tecate
quote:
Are you an attorney?
Does my being an attorney make you more wrong?
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:06 pm to RB10
yes
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:09 pm to RB10
quote:
Does my being an attorney make you more wrong?
No...but then it wouldn't make you more right either.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:10 pm to Broski
Wait wait wait wait wait
Chavis doesn't recruit, so this argument is invalid.
Chavis doesn't recruit, so this argument is invalid.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:11 pm to Tecate
fwiw I'm now reading that LSU had already filed suit against Chavis before he filed suit against LSU and aTm. Therefore LSU will be the plaintiff and Chavis will be the defendant.
Not sure if true, so again, fwiw.
Not sure if true, so again, fwiw.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:43 pm to RB10
He was recruiting Michael divinity at john ehret high school for aTm in late January
Posted on 2/27/15 at 5:51 pm to Gradual_Stroke
deal with it oh really 400,00 dollars worth.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 7:12 pm to Broski
Dude needs to do a lot of cardio.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 8:14 pm to Agforlife
quote:
MessagePosted by Agforlife
Depends on whether or not he had signed an employment contract with A&M yet or if he was just a family friend advising thar young man.
Well if he didn't sign his contract and was having contact with recruits while representing Texas A&M let the recruiting sanctions begin. And pay us our money.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:04 pm to npt817
The Brazos county court can render no judgement against LSU as it is a Louisiana state entity. Chavis' suit is aimed at aTm. The Texas district court can rule that aTm has to pay Chavis if Chavis has to pay LSU. But only a court in Louisiana can rule on whether or not Chavis owes the buyout to LSU. The Texas suit will only determine the obligations between aTm and Chavis, not between Chavis and LSU.
This post was edited on 2/27/15 at 9:05 pm
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:41 pm to Broski
What a fat pos.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 9:55 pm to Broski
Seems like this whole transition has gone swimmingly for all parties involved....amrite? 
Posted on 2/27/15 at 10:01 pm to RB10
quote:
He gave 30 Day notice on January 5. He has pictures of himself recruiting for aTm In mid January. That's breach of contract if he is still an LSU employee. If he wasn't an LSU employee at that time then his contract was terminated with over 10 months left on it, therefore he would LSU money.
this is the short and sweet version. chavis is going to help pay for orgeron and steele's contracts.
thanks chief
Posted on 2/27/15 at 10:04 pm to Tecate
the dude breached his contract. pretty clear to see he is lying. he'll end up getting A&M to pay the buyout to LSU if I had to guess.
Posted on 2/27/15 at 10:05 pm to Agforlife
quote:
Depends on whether or not he had signed an employment contract with A&M yet or if he was just a family friend advising thar young man. I lean toward the family friend thing because after all y'all have vehemently told us that Chavis doesn't recruit
What about all those TD threads ya'll started about Chavis meeting with this guy and that guy? And the word recruit was used? Oops
Posted on 2/27/15 at 10:18 pm to npt817
quote:
Well if he didn't sign his contract and was having contact with recruits while representing Texas A&M let the recruiting sanctions begin. And pay us our money.
Bebe was doing this, so we probably shouldn't throw stones from our glass house on this one. On the sanctions at least.
This post was edited on 2/27/15 at 10:19 pm
Posted on 2/27/15 at 10:21 pm to OleRockyTop
quote:Well, that depends a little bit, doesn't it?
This is a free country your allowed to wear shirts that say whatever the hell you want them to say
If Chavis claims he's still employed by LSU at the time (as he's currently doing), then photos like that demonstrate, at the very least, improper and damaging behavior to his employer. Pretty sure there is some code of conduct written into his contract that he will not willfully engage in activities harmful to LSU while under contract.
Also seems to strongly imply that he was actively recruiting for A&M, at a time that he claims he still had ties to LSU (and thus, no official tie to A&M). At a period near to signing day, no less. Wouldn't that be a pretty big no-no in the NCAA's eyes?
Posted on 2/27/15 at 10:21 pm to Broski
Page 2 of 5
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News