re: Orgeron contract extension approved by BOS

quote:

---

While apparently legal, is it simply coincidence that while a big 3 head coach is in turmoil, that the athletic committee members weren't there?

---

Who knows. I don't have (and likely very few people do) enough of a point of reference for comparison for this type of situation specifically (voting on one issue in the AD while another toxic issues is pending). We also have no idea the reasons the missing board members have for not being there. I believe more than one are attorneys. For all we know, they had prior obligations that didn't allow them to be present.

But when someone sits in for them, it's not the person sitting in voting how they want, but the person sitting in is just voting how said board member told him/her to vote. I'm not following the live feed, but was the vote unanimous? If so, it's kind of a non-issue. Most of these types of meetings are nothing more than a formality anyways. I think you may be reading to much into it with the Wade stuff as that isn't even a topic for discussion at this particular meeting, right?

But, if you're wondering why the legality of what they did wasn't explained to the board, the board is probably well aware as they assuredly have had meetings from time to time to vote on other topics where this has been implemented. Happens all the time with corporations.

I'm done with this circus of an organization. Garbage from the top to bottom. The incompetence shown by the President, AD, and BOS is just unfathomable.

Some of you may continue to support it, but as an actual Alum of the university, I'm withdrawing financial support at all levels.

quote:

---

Who knows. I don't have (and likely very few people do) enough of a point of reference for comparison for this type of situation specifically (voting on one issue in the AD while another toxic issues is pending). We also have no idea the reasons the missing board members have for not being there. I believe more than one are attorneys. For all we know, they had prior obligations that didn't allow them to be present.

---

Dude....

IF the motion was out there before the meeting, and all board members were aware that it was coming up for vote, current members could have easily proxied their vote, mailed it in or whatever, or maybe even allowed a current member to vote on their behalf. We've even done it on a conference call. The point is, you do not "appoint" people to pass motions like this.

It just smells. BTW, were these appointments for open seats or replacing people that weren't there? If that's the case, then how many people resigned right before this vote?

If I'm President, no way I allow this to happen in the way it is being reported.... especially something of this magnitude.

quote:

---

I think it sends a bad message IMO. And here's why I think this. It's not so much about Orgeron specifically but more about what if we fire Orgeron in two years and are looking for a new coach? If we make it known that we force coaches to win an SEC title or National Title before even discussing any sort of guarantees in their contract, what new prospective coach would want to work for an administration like that when all the other big programs are just throwing money and guarantees at their coaches? Coaches care more about security and guaranteed pay (just like athletes) much more than the job itself. If you're operating below the market, coaches are going to be more interested in schools paying at or above the market. A lot of it is all optics. And it's not like we don't have the money, so I don't see the big deal.

---

I don't agree with this idea that we have to pay the current coach a competitive salary to attract prospective coaches down the line. Presumably those coaches wouldn't have been 10-27 at their previous stop.

Those coaches can look at their resumes and know that they can legitimately command more than the coach here. They know what this situation is and why it's unique.

quote:

---

From a negotiation standpoint, what in the actual hell is driving the need to give him a raise/extension?

---

Negative recruiting and transfer exodus

quote:

---

Are they expecting someone to come in and offer him a better deal?

---

No, he's a great recruiter and the players love playing for him providing him a great reputation and facilitating his recent top recruiting class and we want to minimize risk relative to negative recruiting. As we stand right now, LSU's 2020 recruiting class is currently ranked #4 consisting of 1 5-Star and 7 4-Stars, we don't wanna derail that progress by upending coaching stability. Is what it is.

quote:

---

Negative recruiting and transfer exodus

---

You know the ultimate cure for negative recruiting? Winning the biggest games like Bama.

quote:

---

neither CEO or his agent bent LSU over a barrel and raped them with this extension.

---

That's the most shocking part of it to me. Not only was I surprised at the deal itself, but was shocked Orgeron and his agent didn't seem to try to stick it to LSU like most agents do

quote:

---

LSU's getting a better coach

---

when did coach O win a natty as a OC and play for another as a HC? or even win the west? like gus?

GTFo gump

Gus might have stunk last year but he won Natty as OC and won SEC as HC and played in national championship as HC.

There is no way Orgeron is better coach than Gus. Our HC has 0 in game coaching. Cannot even review plays. may be a better recruiter

I will support LSU and want him to win.

Nobody deserves anything. LSU deserves the best coach and as an LSU fan I want the best. Given the salary for HC's. He is getting paid on par and I don't disagree.