- 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: Cam Akers update!
Posted on 12/8/16 at 3:10 pm to TigerFanNKaty
Posted on 12/8/16 at 3:10 pm to TigerFanNKaty
quote:
If all this is true about Brennan it just blows my mind that someone, who is suppose to be an ace recruiter could frick up the most important position at LSU. Especially knowing the recent track record
LSU is only allowed to offer 1 QB? Brennan should know he will have to compete wherever he goes.
2
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:01 pm to Superbonics
There is always anomalies in life.
Liberals use this propaganda to makes laws and start arguments.
That's like saying that 99% of your crop ripens in June but you're going to wait until August to harvest, allowing the 1% to mature.
That makes no sense, neither does waiting in recruiting. Some of these kids need you to build a relationship and feel like they are part of your program.
Don't be that guy.
Liberals use this propaganda to makes laws and start arguments.
That's like saying that 99% of your crop ripens in June but you're going to wait until August to harvest, allowing the 1% to mature.
That makes no sense, neither does waiting in recruiting. Some of these kids need you to build a relationship and feel like they are part of your program.
Don't be that guy.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:08 pm to Cadello
Were we supposed to get left at the altar like Flippe Franks did one year ago? You same people were crying that we stopped recruiting other QBs.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:13 pm to tenderfoot tigah
I understand Brennan's frustration in some point, but Lowell is on the fence, and he's on the fence. What are we supposed to do?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:32 pm to tenderfoot tigah
The issue is that there was no reason at all to worry until O did this nonsense with offering Tua. We were set. Now we may not be. I still think we sign both of our guys we have now, but we may have to sweat a little when before all that nonsense we had no reason to sweat.
Why ruin a good thing?
Why ruin a good thing?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:35 pm to tigersbh
I agree. If he's that put off by us offering someone else it tells me one of two things, he wanted to look around and this was his excuse to do that or he's already shying away from competition which doesn't serve him well to lead LSU in the SEC
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:36 pm to BASED
Does this thread even discuss Cam Akers?
OM losing their OC and lead recruiter today probably only leaves LSU abd FSU on Akers list.
OM losing their OC and lead recruiter today probably only leaves LSU abd FSU on Akers list.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:38 pm to tenderfoot tigah
This is a completely different situation.
This kids bleeds purple and gold and was disrespected by us.
And find my post where I did what you are accusing me of.
Easy to lump everyone into any scenario you disagree with.
Baited again
Come on down Cam Akers! Be great at LSU!
This kids bleeds purple and gold and was disrespected by us.
And find my post where I did what you are accusing me of.
Easy to lump everyone into any scenario you disagree with.
Baited again
Come on down Cam Akers! Be great at LSU!
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:43 pm to Rebel
this board never disappoints 
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:43 pm to Rebel
You're right, my bad.
One thing that kinda worries me about Akers is the possibility of Jaluuke not being here next season. I feel like those two have a pretty good relationship. It seems like this recruitment is coming down to LSU, Tenn, and FSU. I don't think he goes to ole miss but if he does then nobody else had a shot anyway.
We have a lot of uncertainty around the offensive staff right now which could hurt us. I could see Tenn or FSU getting him if we have a lot of turnover on offense, especially if we bring in a spread guy, because that takes away from our biggest selling point which is getting our RBs the ball a hell of a lot
One thing that kinda worries me about Akers is the possibility of Jaluuke not being here next season. I feel like those two have a pretty good relationship. It seems like this recruitment is coming down to LSU, Tenn, and FSU. I don't think he goes to ole miss but if he does then nobody else had a shot anyway.
We have a lot of uncertainty around the offensive staff right now which could hurt us. I could see Tenn or FSU getting him if we have a lot of turnover on offense, especially if we bring in a spread guy, because that takes away from our biggest selling point which is getting our RBs the ball a hell of a lot
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:49 pm to Rebel
quote:
OM losing their OC and lead recruiter today probably only leaves LSU abd FSU on Akers list.
Unless they hire someone he really likes to the staff...I wouldn't put it past OM to hire another HS coach to get a kid like Akers (ala Shea).
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:52 pm to SabiDojo
SabiDojo, you practice law.
Any idea what the "Just Cause" deal is that is apparently a possibility of happening to Freeze?
Can you break it down to a few sentences?
Any idea what the "Just Cause" deal is that is apparently a possibility of happening to Freeze?
Can you break it down to a few sentences?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 5:32 pm to Rebel
Usually, it's language in a contract that allows an employer to fire an employee and not pay severance or other benefits.
Idk if that applies to contracts for coaches but that's usually what it is.
Idk if that applies to contracts for coaches but that's usually what it is.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 5:42 pm to tigersbh
(no message)
This post was edited on 1/10/21 at 8:46 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 5:46 pm to SabiDojo
It must apply to Freeze. My OM sauce that is actually real keeps referencing it.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 5:55 pm to Rebel
ETA: I know y'all don't want a history lesson.
Yeah, I don't know what is going on with Freeze's contract but if I drafted one for a HC I would want a certain violations of NCAA rules to be a reason for just cause termination. Of course, I don't know how it's done in their industry
Yeah, I don't know what is going on with Freeze's contract but if I drafted one for a HC I would want a certain violations of NCAA rules to be a reason for just cause termination. Of course, I don't know how it's done in their industry
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 6:07 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 6:16 pm to SabiDojo
I know for sure that Miles'contract had an "including but not limited to" list of things that could get you fired for cause (i.e. no buyout). "(O)ne or more major, significant or repetitive" SEC and/or NCAA violations was definitely on the list.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 6:22 pm to The Baker
quote:I'm in agreement with you except I thought our reaction to Brennen's comments contained more manufactured drama than Brennen's comments themselves.
I'll be honest. I don't really blame O as much as everyone else. It was definitely an unnecessary error but Brennan's reaction sounds way over the top for an offer that never went anywhere. I doubt Coach O thought of the magnitude of this reaction (because, tbh it's a little dramatic).
Unforced error by CEO? Maybe. Depends on point-of-view.
If you're viewing this through lens of the Felipe Franks flip, then no.
If you're viewing this through the lens of Brennen's plainly obvious (at that time) desire to be at LSU even with current coaches, then definitely unforced error.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 6:23 pm to Martin Blank
I would imagine so.
Yeah, it's one of those things where if it's too specific you are boxed in with those terms but if you're too vague the court will probably not enforce the provision.
So, like you said, you would have language like "including, but not limited to,"
Yeah, it's one of those things where if it's too specific you are boxed in with those terms but if you're too vague the court will probably not enforce the provision.
So, like you said, you would have language like "including, but not limited to,"
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News