- 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: Jacques Doucet Just Posted This on X
Posted on 10/28/25 at 4:53 pm to DByrd2
Posted on 10/28/25 at 4:53 pm to DByrd2
quote:If LSU claimed a violation of a “morality clause” (the existence and particulars of which remain speculative) that was bad enough for Kelly to settle for half, why not void the contract altogether and not pay a dime? Seems like TAF and its donors would want to hold onto that money to pay a new coach.
Unless they know they were caught in some shite and didn’t want it public, as would happen in a trial/suit.
None of that adds up.
5
Posted on 10/28/25 at 4:56 pm to Ice Cold
Nobody knows particulars. You, me… everyone here is speculating.
I will say that sometimes as a man it’s easier to swallow your pride, take what you can manage that is there free and clear, and distance yourself.
I will say that sometimes as a man it’s easier to swallow your pride, take what you can manage that is there free and clear, and distance yourself.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:00 pm to Ice Cold
Thank you, Todd Graves. I’m gonna get Canes tonight for the family.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:04 pm to DByrd2
How long before details of what he did to have this brought up. Hopefully the reduced payoff is true...leaves more $$ to hire the next coach.
quote:
Contractual morality clause violation
What it is:
A clause in an employment or endorsement contract that gives the employer the right to terminate the agreement if the employee or endorser engages in certain behavior.
Examples of violations:
* A public scandal or criminal act
* Behavior that brings the company or brand into disrepute
* Disagreement with company values in certain situations, such as negative public comments about a company's products
Consequences:
* Job termination
* Loss of endorsement deals
* Financial penalties
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:13 pm to habz007
quote:
Thank you, Todd Graves. I’m gonna get Canes tonight for the family.
Don’t you mean.. “Fam-Uh-Lee”
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:16 pm to hg
quote:
Wasn’t there a time where his wife was leaving him that made it to the board?
LSU coach Brian Kelly files for divorce in Baton Rouge court from his wife of 28 years; also seeks restraining order against her to protect assets
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:17 pm to DByrd2
Moscona just put a video out few hours ago about how big LSU's payout is to BK
Right on par he's always the last to know.
Right on par he's always the last to know.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:17 pm to BhamTigah
Nah, just an arse clown move.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:17 pm to Ice Cold
quote:
If LSU claimed a violation of a “morality clause” (the existence and particulars of which remain speculative) that was bad enough for Kelly to settle for half, why not void the contract altogether and not pay a dime?
This is obviously speculation, but:
Probably because it all but guarantees a lawsuit that neither side wants to deal with.
It’s not “You violated your morality clause therefore we only owe you half of the buyout.”
It’s “We would like to negotiate this buyout down. We believe your (insert scandalous actions) are a violation of your morality clause. If you’re not willing to negotiate here, we can have this argument in court. Alternatively, you can accept a reduced buyout as a lump sum payment, allowing you to go get another job without any salary offsets and avoiding a potentially nasty legal battle.”
The lump sum payout and elimination of offsets is the carrot. The threat of making Kelly take it to court (a case that either side may win, but would be potentially damaging/embarrassing regardless) is the stick. The strategy does not require LSU’s justification to be iron-clad. It just has to be legitimate enough to make Kelly consider the carrot.
ETA: If you’re LSU, the settlement is worthwhile because A) you may lose the lawsuit and be on the hook for the full buyout and B) you probably don’t want yet another public airing-of-dirty-laundry if you can come to an acceptable compromise.
This post was edited on 10/28/25 at 5:21 pm
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:24 pm to lostinbr
quote:
This is obviously speculation, but:
Probably because it all but guarantees a lawsuit that neither side wants to deal with.
It’s not “You violated your morality clause therefore we only owe you half of the buyout.”
It’s “We would like to negotiate this buyout down. We believe your (insert scandalous actions) are a violation of your morality clause. If you’re not willing to negotiate here, we can have this argument in court. Alternatively, you can accept a reduced buyout as a lump sum payment, allowing you to go get another job without any salary offsets and avoiding a potentially nasty legal battle.”
The lump sum payout and elimination of offsets is the carrot. The threat of making Kelly take it to court (a case that either side may win, but would be potentially damaging/embarrassing regardless) is the stick. The strategy does not require LSU’s justification to be iron-clad. It just has to be legitimate enough to make Kelly consider the carrot.
ETA: If you’re LSU, the settlement is worthwhile because A) you may lose the lawsuit and be on the hook for the full buyout and B) you probably don’t want yet another public airing-of-dirty-laundry if you can come to an acceptable compromise.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:29 pm to lostinbr
All of that is great and certainly feasible but ignores the brute fact that lots of people litigate potentially embarrassing claims for a lot less money than what is involved here.
It could happen, but history says it’s very unlikely.
It could happen, but history says it’s very unlikely.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:30 pm to Ice Cold
quote:
If LSU claimed a violation of a “morality clause” (the existence and particulars of which remain speculative) that was bad enough for Kelly to settle for half, why not void the contract altogether and not pay a dime? Seems like TAF and its donors would want to hold onto that money to pay a new coach.
Could go south when trying to hire the next coach if you completely voided. Maybe this settlement keeps both sides hush? I don't know. I am only a simpleton.
And I don't mean like LSU has done anything wrong, so they need to be quiet. What I mean is the next coach might look at this and see they voided the entirety over a "morality clause" and might be turned away from dealing with LSU. They wouldn't want that to happen to them. Especially on something really technical. If it was like some really outrageous and publicly known morality issue then sure void it all, but it might be both sides just agreeing to let it be.
This post was edited on 10/28/25 at 5:41 pm
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:33 pm to skullhawk
Why are both Verge & Woody still employed? Neither have been good at their jobs a lot of things have gone bad(Les w/students, O with all his issues, BK with being lazy and dis engaged along with player issues not being reported!) Neither one should have a job!
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:41 pm to Ice Cold
quote:
why not void the contract altogether and not pay a dime?
To avoid litigation and the risk of losing in court.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:44 pm to dinner roll
Correct. It's really a nice meeting around the middle for both to be done with it. If true, I like it a lot. This is awesome.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:44 pm to Ice Cold
quote:
All of that is great and certainly feasible but ignores the brute fact that lots of people litigate potentially embarrassing claims for a lot less money than what is involved here.
I mean.. organizations negotiate settlements rather than going to court all the time.
It’s not just about embarrassment. It’s also (I would say mostly) about risk management. Both sides have a risk of losing the lawsuit.
A bit of a simplification, but: if LSU thinks they have a 50% chance to win in court and Kelly’s willing to accept a 50% buyout, then the rational decision is to settle rather than deal with the cost and negative publicity of litigation. The stronger LSU’s case, the lower the “rational” negotiated buyout should be.
The inverse is also true for Brian Kelly.
quote:
It could happen, but history says it’s very unlikely.
I don’t think that’s true at all.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:53 pm to DByrd2
If there are morality clauses in his contract that he violated, why do we owe him anything?
You violated this important morality clause so bad that we're gonna only pay you $27 million to leave because of your bad morals and coaching.
You violated this important morality clause so bad that we're gonna only pay you $27 million to leave because of your bad morals and coaching.
This post was edited on 10/28/25 at 5:55 pm
Posted on 10/28/25 at 5:54 pm to DByrd2
Wonder why moscona did not talk about this today, if true. Doucet wouldn't say it if it wasn't true.
All media including local has been very critical of Brian Kelly since Sunday night. Peculiarly, moscona has been very calculated in what he has said almost to the point of refusing to be overly critical
All media including local has been very critical of Brian Kelly since Sunday night. Peculiarly, moscona has been very calculated in what he has said almost to the point of refusing to be overly critical
Posted on 10/28/25 at 6:03 pm to Big EZ Tiger
quote:
If there are morality clauses in his contract that he violated, why do we owe him anything?
Because both sides would risk losing it all or paying it all.
Why go to court to risk that when you can both agree to settle? Also, why want that negativity to come out on either side?
It could be something really technical.
Posted on 10/28/25 at 6:12 pm to beauchristopher
Yeah.
These issues do not get worked out in an impromptu Sunday meeting lasting an hour or two. Kelly has to be confronted with accusations, consult with counsel and negotiate with LSU.
Absent REALLY compelling moral/ ethical issues ( not an affair) this takes weeks, at best . Tens of millions of dollars are at stake.
These issues do not get worked out in an impromptu Sunday meeting lasting an hour or two. Kelly has to be confronted with accusations, consult with counsel and negotiate with LSU.
Absent REALLY compelling moral/ ethical issues ( not an affair) this takes weeks, at best . Tens of millions of dollars are at stake.
Page 9 of 11
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News