How is what we are doing different from what TAM did re: Chavis?

No it's that he was so distracted during a bowl game we came out running around like retards, and lost.

Big difference is we would pay buy out without being sued.
Chavis owes buyout, and is trying not to pay!

A top tier coach is never not under contract, bro. The point in the Chavis issue is that he clearly gave 0 fricks about the bowl game and also was recruiting while still under contract (aka being paid by LSU).

this isn't complicated.

This board doesn't fail to amaze me

i think the outrage began when there were pictures of him getting off a plane in a&m garb, while still being employed by lsu....or at least thats how i remember it.

I didn't mean to come across like an a-hole. I've just had to explain that exact situation to dumbass TAMU fans 1 too many times when they attempt to justify Chavis' dealings with LSU. Call me jaded.

Another point is that most of these mid-season contacts are done via intermediary. Someone connected to LSU reaches out to the coaches agent and discusses. Whatever the agent decides to discuss with their client is no business of ours.

Nope. Any person under contract is free to discuss openings with potential employers while under that contract provided that are not under a non-compete or it doesn't violate that non-compete. No coach will sign a non-compete that prevents them from pursuing other opportunities. The difference is that Chavis was doing work for A&M while still employed by LSU and his performance for LSU during that time suffered. If either of these were allowed by his contract then whoever wrote it should be fired.

quote:

---

No it's that he was so distracted during a bowl game we came out running around like retards, and lost.

---

Y'all lost the game b/c of a shitty call at the goal line by the refs that took away a TD.