re: Canada and Orgeron : The story

Sadly we have football ignorant morons on this site like the first cut and hot Carl and geauxst writer who have proven they know nothing about football by saying Matt sucked. Your info coincides with infonfrom
Troy game and Pitt fans. Surreal. Boy did o shite the bed.

quote:

---

I thought it was 1.7 and done. I never saw an additional 2 years at 650K. If so, that's my mistake. The overarching narrative has been he just gets the 1.7m.

---

Bruhhhhh. This has been explained numerous times in this thread.

If he doesn't take the buyout, LSU owes him $3,000,000 minus whatever money he earns elsewhere over the remaining term of the contract (2 more years). Chances are, he will get another job for at least $650k per year.

If he gets a contract for $650K per year, that's $1.3M plus $1.7M in buyout money, or $3M.

Now, if someone chooses to pay him $800k per year (not a huge stretch), that becomes 1.6M + 1.7M = $3.3M. However, without agreeing to the buyout, he would still make only $3M total.

quote:

---

I thought Canada gets $1 million now in lump sum, and the $700,000 is paid out in installments over time. He is getting $1.7 million total.

---

That's my understanding.

I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies.

Orgeron says he did not know who was in for that play or why Brossette was starting. You want him knowing everything, but you don't want him interfering with the offense. So if you don't want him interfering in the offense, then why do you care that he did not know that Brossette was starting?

If he did know, would that change your assessment of Orgeron? Or...... would you have criticized Orgeron for allowing a third stringer in there to start the game? Would your complaint have even existed if Brossette does not fumble? Was Brossette fumbling Orgeron's fault? Maybe someone should have asked Canada or Ensminger or someone associated with the offense this question?

In my mind it does not matter if Orgeron knew why Brossette was in the game or not. What mattered was that was a play that was run all year long, that it was blocked correctly and run correctly...which it was in terms of execution. If Brossette does not fumble, we don't have this discussion. What if Guice had fumbled after a 5-6 yard gain on a very good tackle by the opposition?

Your whole argument rests on the outcome of that play and why Orgeron let a third string RB start the game. My contention is that 1) it really does not matter 2) Orgeron is b.sing us on that- he knew why and who was going in.

Why no criticism of Canada in the MSU game where his offense got throttled, shut down and humiliated? Why no crticism for the lethargic play of he offense (and defense) against Syracuse the week before?

I'm not spinning, you are

(no message)

quote:

---

Who cares what someone else MIGHT pay him. Without a new job LSU would owe him 3mil + without an agreed buyout for less:

---

This all started in response to your question as to why he would accept the buyout if LSU didn't have "dirt" on him.

quote:

---

I'm just pointing out the inconsistencies.

---

No you're not. You're attempting to change the conversation from one very clear point of discussion to an entirely different one that literally nobody else is talking about. You are spinning.

quote:

---

Orgeron says he did not know who was in for that play or why Brossette was starting. You want him knowing everything, but you don't want him interfering with the offense. So if you don't want him interfering in the offense, then why do you care that he did not know that Brossette was starting?

---

You can keep spinning and trying to change the discussion point. I'll keep repeating the same thing.

Orgeron has made it very clear multiple times that he was the decision maker and the team was going to do what he wanted it to do, including THE SAME PRESS CONFERENCE that he admitted he didn't know who the starting running back was.

quote:

---

If he did know, would that change your assessment of Orgeron? Or...... would you have criticized Orgeron for allowing a third stringer in there to start the game? Would your complaint have even existed if Brossette does not fumble? Was Brossette fumbling Orgeron's fault? Maybe someone should have asked Canada or Ensminger or someone associated with the offense this question? In my mind it does not matter if Orgeron knew why Brossette was in the game or not. What mattered was that was a play that was run all year long, that it was blocked correctly and run correctly...which it was in terms of execution. If Brossette does not fumble, we don't have this discussion. What if Guice had fumbled after a 5-6 yard gain on a very good tackle by the opposition? Your whole argument rests on the outcome of that play and why Orgeron let a third string RB start the game. My contention is that 1) it really does not matter 2) Orgeron is b.sing us on that- he knew why and who was going in. Why no criticism of Canada in the MSU game where his offense got throttled, shut down and humiliated? Why no crticism for the lethargic play of he offense (and defense) against Syracuse the week before?

---

This is you continuing to try to change the point of discussion by continuing to talk about things that literally no one else is talking about. This is you spinning.

quote:

---

I'm not spinning, you are

---

The 5 paragraphs above of you trying to change the discussion point prove otherwise.

quote:

---

This all started in response to your question as to why he would accept the buyout if LSU didn't have "dirt" on him.

---

Yes, but then you posted this:

quote:

---

You also keep being obtuse in regards to the terms of the buyout. $1.7M + 2 years at $650K = $3M

---

Where did you get the 650K? You didn't qualify that with a hypothetical of a new job paying him that amount until I questioned your facts. There are way too many half-truths floating around.

I've never said this before, but if this is true, screw Ed Orgeron.

this fits the board narrative so it gets 150 upvotes