- 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
re: Bruce Feldman Reporting
Posted on 12/21/23 at 3:38 pm to 1999
Posted on 12/21/23 at 3:38 pm to 1999
quote:
Matt Moscona
@MattMoscona
Mike Denbrock and LSU agreed on a contract extension Dec. 6. All contracts must be approved by the BOS, which met two days later, Dec. 8. Denbrock's deal, however, was not on the agenda. The next LSU BOS meeting is Feb 23 when, presumably, the extension would be approved.
Oh I would MELT melt if this happens.
Not a lawyer, but does it mean nothing that LSU and Denbrock agreed to a contract even though the BOS can't approve it yet? Is that not binding at all? If not, what's to stop schools/coordinators from shopping around after a verbal agreement to a contract extension now that all the cards are on the table?
1
Posted on 12/21/23 at 3:55 pm to Ingeniero
quote:
Not a lawyer, but does it mean nothing that LSU and Denbrock agreed to a contract even though the BOS can't approve it yet? Is that not binding at all? If not, what's to stop schools/coordinators from shopping around after a verbal agreement to a contract extension now that all the cards are on the table?
It’s not an uncommon thing. Verbal agreements can be nuanced, but I think LA tries to protect them pretty easily.
This post was edited on 12/21/23 at 3:58 pm
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News