- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Legal question regarding Chavis...regarding termination
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:26 pm
I read an article with the same information that is has been floating around for many days, so nothing groundbreaking or new information. My question is aimed at his starting with aTm.
Since it is beyond easy to prove Chavis started recruiting for aTm way back in January, LSU didn't "fire" him on the spot. Is this because firing him would negate the buyout? In normal firing, yes I'm sure it would. But a firing for finding out your coach is working for another college (fricking wierd), although that college hasn't started paying him yet, sure seems like firing for cause would still qualify.
So for the lawyers (or wanna be lawyers) out there, will Chavis be considered "working" for aTm in January if recruiting for them without pay? Wouldn't the free ride on their jet be enough to be considered compnsation? etc
What is the one thing that LSU has to show to get the money? IYHO
Article
Since it is beyond easy to prove Chavis started recruiting for aTm way back in January, LSU didn't "fire" him on the spot. Is this because firing him would negate the buyout? In normal firing, yes I'm sure it would. But a firing for finding out your coach is working for another college (fricking wierd), although that college hasn't started paying him yet, sure seems like firing for cause would still qualify.
So for the lawyers (or wanna be lawyers) out there, will Chavis be considered "working" for aTm in January if recruiting for them without pay? Wouldn't the free ride on their jet be enough to be considered compnsation? etc
What is the one thing that LSU has to show to get the money? IYHO
Article
This post was edited on 3/2/15 at 1:28 pm
13
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:35 pm to GeeOH
GG article for those wondering. Don't click if you are offended by his words.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:36 pm to GeeOH
They definitely have a case. If they can prove without a doubt that he "accepted compensation for his work" before his buy out date we will win and it might not even make it to a hearing.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:42 pm to GeeOH
$400K is chump change. LSU is probably going to roll over on this because they don't want to be bothered by it. Believe me, everyone is all fired up to fight about stuff like this until deposition times are approaching and your own lawyers start prepping you for them. At that point, the mind numbing process you are about to go through becomes clear to you, and you'll do about anything to avoid it.
Expect an out of court solution with a non-disclosure on the details (except maybe the public nature of the institutions will prevent secrecy. In that case they'll split the difference.) LSU fans will be convinced we won; TAMU's that they did.
Expect an out of court solution with a non-disclosure on the details (except maybe the public nature of the institutions will prevent secrecy. In that case they'll split the difference.) LSU fans will be convinced we won; TAMU's that they did.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:46 pm to docTQ4
quote:He abandoned his job, that's a key factor.
They definitely have a case. If they can prove without a doubt that he "accepted compensation for his work" before his buy out date we will win and it might not even make it to a hearing.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:47 pm to Penrod
I fully expect the boys in Birmingham are going to get into this with two SEC schools seeing each other over a fricking coach!!!!
I think the big loser here is Chavis who will retire in a few years with no respect and aTm which will be revealed to have violated protocol in contacting Chavis without permission from LSU.
Believe me....there is much more to this story. Guilbeau is getting close.
I think the big loser here is Chavis who will retire in a few years with no respect and aTm which will be revealed to have violated protocol in contacting Chavis without permission from LSU.
Believe me....there is much more to this story. Guilbeau is getting close.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:47 pm to Penrod
Why would LSU "roll over" and not atm?
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:48 pm to Penrod
quote:
stuff like this until deposition times are approaching and your own lawyers start prepping you for them. At that point, the mind numbing process you are about to go through becomes clear to you, and you'll do about anything to avoid it.
I'm pretty sure all we have to do is hand a lawyer our signed originals of the contract. The written contract is our deposition (basically)....why would our guys have to testify?
Its not the point of this topic, but I don't' understand why some of you think LSU is on the defensive for questioning someone carrying out their end of a contract. If a construction company doesn't complete work yet got paid in full, do you think LSU would "roll over" or file suit on them for the $4ook?
This post was edited on 3/2/15 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:50 pm to GeeOH
If he wants to play the card that he didn't begin working for A&M until mid-February, then the NCAA may have some questions as to why a non-coach was recruiting for A&M.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:54 pm to BMoney
quote:
, then the NCAA may have some questions as to why a non-coach was recruiting for A&M.
Yep, I personally think they are screwed. I hope someone here knows the rules better, but how can aTm pay for him to go recruit without it being a violation and without the free travel, meals, lodging, etc being "compensation" to him.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:56 pm to BMoney
When LSU lawyers schedule depositions of recruits, family members,coaches at TAM, subpoena phone records , hotel receipts, credit cards, Chavis is going to fold his little pup tent so fast your head will spin.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:57 pm to Penrod
Uh no. The BOS has their heels dug in on this one. There will be no out of court settlement for less than the 400K. aTm will end up paying the money in the end.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 1:57 pm to GeeOH
Hanigriff said on his show today it is being reported that LSU (or LSU lawyers) have told A&M to make up their minds - either he was working for A&M and owe LSU 400.000 or he wasn't. In that case LSU will turn A&M in for recruiting violations for having a coach not on their staff recruiting for them. Hanigriff (whose opinion I respect) also said that at first there is no way he believed that this was a done deal before the bowl game. Now he does.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 2:03 pm to GeeOH
As I somewhat alluded to HERE, I'm not sure that LSU's best option is to go after the $400K.
Now, we all know that he left and started working for A&M.
But, now he's "admitting" that he was working for LSU while he was out recruiting for eaTme.
Perhaps LSU best position would be to sue him AND A&M for damages, breach of contract, extracontractual damages, etc. We could sue A&M for interference with contractual relationship. If what Chavis is saying is correct (i.e., that he was still working for LSU and eaTme should have known that), then it seems A&M interfered with his LSU contract by having him recruit for A&M while he was under contract with LSU.
Perhaps there are more damages (at least, more than $400K) going that route.
It is, after all, what Chavis is "admitting" -- even though we all know it's a crock of $hit.
LSU should also file a complaint with the SEC and NCAA on the basis that Chavis is admitting that he was still working for LSU while he was recruiting for A&M.
Now, we all know that he left and started working for A&M.
But, now he's "admitting" that he was working for LSU while he was out recruiting for eaTme.
Perhaps LSU best position would be to sue him AND A&M for damages, breach of contract, extracontractual damages, etc. We could sue A&M for interference with contractual relationship. If what Chavis is saying is correct (i.e., that he was still working for LSU and eaTme should have known that), then it seems A&M interfered with his LSU contract by having him recruit for A&M while he was under contract with LSU.
Perhaps there are more damages (at least, more than $400K) going that route.
It is, after all, what Chavis is "admitting" -- even though we all know it's a crock of $hit.
LSU should also file a complaint with the SEC and NCAA on the basis that Chavis is admitting that he was still working for LSU while he was recruiting for A&M.
This post was edited on 3/2/15 at 2:06 pm
Posted on 3/2/15 at 2:07 pm to GeauxLSU8
I can't understand why every assistant coach in the country doesn't have language in their contracts prohibiting lateral moves within the conference.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 2:08 pm to BMoney
quote:Weren't we talking about not signing a DC right away so he can recruit during the no-contact period?
If he wants to play the card that he didn't begin working for A&M until mid-February, then the NCAA may have some questions as to why a non-coach was recruiting for A&M.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 2:09 pm to MMauler
quote:
Perhaps LSU best position would be to sue him AND A&M for damages, breach of contract, extracontractual damages, etc. We could sue A&M for interference with contractual relationship. If what Chavis is saying is correct (i.e., that he was still working for LSU and eaTme should have known that), then it seems A&M interfered with his LSU contract by having him recruit for A&M while he was under contract with LSU.
I think we would still be able to do that? Right? Any law gurus know if those damages stay on the table?
On second thought, aTm may want to go thru this so they can get a signed confidentiality settlement barring further claims..
I still think the NCAA should step in and pound aTm for this OBVIOUS recruiting violation and tampering charges. I personally think Chavis should have to answer to the NCAA as well.To think we are in trouble because a recruit backed out on us, yet aTm can go around having unpaid coaches from other teams flying around recruiting for them?
Posted on 3/2/15 at 2:11 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
Weren't we talking about not signing a DC right away so he can recruit during the no-contact period?
Totally different situation with him on so many parts...but I understand your point
Posted on 3/2/15 at 2:21 pm to Penrod
They will come to some kind of settlement.
My guess is LSU lowers the buyout and A&M pays some part of the buyout to appease everyone.
Then, A&M will be left with the Chavis results on the field. Chavis can bitch all he wants about LSU offense but he's about to find out how much the LSU offense protected his mediocre defensive alignments at certain key points of a game.
My guess is LSU lowers the buyout and A&M pays some part of the buyout to appease everyone.
Then, A&M will be left with the Chavis results on the field. Chavis can bitch all he wants about LSU offense but he's about to find out how much the LSU offense protected his mediocre defensive alignments at certain key points of a game.
Posted on 3/2/15 at 2:22 pm to GeeOH
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News