- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Hate him or not GOV Landry exposed a problem in the contract.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:38 pm to gringeaux
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:38 pm to gringeaux
If taxpayer money being used for paying out coaches contracts is a moot point (not ever going to be used), then simply take out any references to that (directly and indirectly) in such contracts.
1
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:40 pm to bgtiger
quote:
Has the state ever paid the buy out?
it's been many years since LSU Athletics has taken any money at all from the State or from Student fees.
in fact, just the opposite.
the athletic department GIVES money to the Academic side of the university.
the state was never going to be on the hook for any of that buyout.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:41 pm to bgtiger
quote:
Has the state ever paid the buy out?
The answer to your question is no.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:42 pm to moneyg
quote:
That's not the point he made.
He said it twice.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:43 pm to HEtiger
I agree, but they write the contract b/w the coach and LSU not the coach and booster. But I am not sure there has been a time when a school (ie tax payer) has payed a buyout.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:44 pm to The Baker
quote:
It sounds like he's saying... "Don't put the state in that situation again" and he's right.
Then just insure that the next contract is written differently, what’s the point in bringing this up publicly other than to be an attention whore? They wouldn’t have fired him if they didn’t have the buyout assurance from outside sources.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:47 pm to The Baker
quote:
He said it twice.
Let me rephrase.
That’s not the ONLY point he made. And it’s not applicable to this firing. And, there’s almost zero chance an AD would pull that because assuredly he’d be toast.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:49 pm to tigerfoot
quote:
Landry is not incorrect that these contracts are out of control
I agree that contracts have gotten crazy, but why does it matter. The vast majority is paid by donation (TAF - a private, non-profit). In fact BK was only paid about $400,000 a year by LSU. The remainder was from TAF. TAF is funded through donations - even if some the donations are forced as a requirement to buy tickets (TAF fee).
Posted on 10/30/25 at 3:56 pm to LCrox
quote:
Back in the day the State ‘subsidized’ the Saints as a way for them to remain in NO. Didn’t the State rent office space in the buildings owned next to the Fome.
Google AI says the state is paying $9.1 million per year to rent 320,000 square feet in Benson Tower.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 4:01 pm to BigBinBR
quote:
He stated that there is misinformation out there about the contract and that it is explicitly stated IN THE CONTRACT that if a donor does not step up to pay the buyout that the state of louisiana is on the bill.
But he’s leaving out the part that BK would not have been fired so there would have been no buyout if a donor hadn’t agreed to pay it.
LSU does not have the money in hand yet.
quote:
Sources indicate that one major private donor is set to fund almost the entire buyout, although the donor's identity remains confidential.
If something happens and that donor does not fund the buyout then the state is on the hook. Like the old saying goes "don't count your money until the check clears the bank." Landry is focussing on making sure that does not happen again with the next contract because Woodward cannot be allowed to be responsible for another massive contract.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 4:15 pm to The Baker
quote:where does it say this explicitly?
it is explicitly stated IN THE CONTRACT that if a donor does not step up to pay the buyout that the state of louisiana is on the bill.
Posted on 10/30/25 at 4:26 pm to The Baker
They don’t want it fixed or they’re too stupid to know it needs fixing
Posted on 10/30/25 at 4:30 pm to The Baker
quote:
sounds like he's saying... "Don't put the state in that situation again" and he's right.
The state was never once in that situation. Do you morons actually believe that TAF doesn’t set up agreements with the boosters for these contracts?
Posted on 10/31/25 at 8:17 am to lostinbr
I don’t believe the State could possibly be completely off the hook unless the University somehow removed ties from the State and even then I’m not sure it’s possible because even private universities have bonds with the respective States. That said it has never nor will it ever be an issue. LSU football has been self funded. If they weren’t profitable we wouldn’t have a 6mm AD searching for 10mm coach. People seem to forget this is a business because it’s tied to our public university.
Posted on 10/31/25 at 8:23 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
There's a way to do this behind the scenes that achieves the exact same goal
Look at me
Look at me
Look at me
Look at me
Posted on 10/31/25 at 8:28 am to The Baker
Obviously Landry is not an articulate communicator AT ALL. It’s sad.
However, some of his views on CFB contracts are dead on. CFB contracts have collusion problems on all levels. Everyone has seen this coming & nothing was said until now.
However, some of his views on CFB contracts are dead on. CFB contracts have collusion problems on all levels. Everyone has seen this coming & nothing was said until now.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News