quote:
I say just leave it be. Much like refusing to grant a transfer request to a player, LSU's reputation can only be hurt by demanding the buy-out money. LSU should be seen as a place where coaches come from far and wide to be a part of not as a bitter, jilted lover. If Chavis doesn't want to be a part of LSU, then good-bye and good luck. Time to move on and look ahead to better things.

Buyouts aren't anything new. Everyone in the industry (coaches and universities) understand how they work. Nobody is going to look unfavorably at LSU for requiring Chavis to pay a buyout (assuming it's a clear cut issue).

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by cajunjj

Madison, AL

Member since May 2008

7427 posts

Posted on 1/26/15 at 10:38 am to moneyg

frick the Chief! Shades of Nick Saban!!!

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by shutterspeed

MS Gulf Coast

Member since May 2007

63883 posts

Posted on 1/26/15 at 5:14 pm to moneyg

LSU isn't short anything. It's a conditional buy-out clause within a larger contract already paid out. In this case, we're talking about the difference of a few days here. Sure, LSU may be legally entitled to it, but you're fooling yourself if you think it won't appear petty within coaching circles.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Mulat

Avalon Bch, FL

Member since Sep 2010

17517 posts

Posted on 1/26/15 at 5:30 pm to moneyg

quote:
Buyouts aren't anything new. Everyone in the industry (coaches and universities) understand how they work. Nobody is going to look unfavorably at LSU for requiring Chavis to pay a buyout (assuming it's a clear cut issue).

YEP!

0 ...

Report Post

Tiger Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board