- 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: So if Kelly has not been fired nor suspended..
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:27 am to lsucoonass
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:27 am to lsucoonass
quote:
No he was terminated
Otherwise he’d still be on the field
They filed a lawsuit so the court could make a decision on this issue. It is not cut and dry, as evidenced by the lawsuit.
He has been effectively terminated from his position, but the terms of the separation have not been agreed to. LSU intends to send the formal notice of termination once the terms are agreed to.
It's like yall do not want to understand this
0
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:29 am to LSUFanHouston
Maybe Woody fricked this up and LSU is trying to save a little money. 
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:30 am to OceanMan
quote:
The terms of separation have not been settled. Kelly is trying to frame that as LSU changing the deal, while a deal hasn’t actually been made.
The terms of separation are in the original contract.
Both sides can certainly amend the contract to select other terms. But the “default” is there.
Very rarely at this level are contracts completely fulfilled.
Coach is fired
Coach resigns
Coach retires
Contracted is extended
Contract is replaced
Contract is fulfilled
That last option is least common
This post was edited on 11/12/25 at 10:31 am
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:31 am to Pikes Peak Tiger
quote:
Is he wrong? If LSU didn’t notify him of cause, it’s a pretty big legal gamble to try and do it retroactively
Yes he’s wrong. LSU would be well within its rights and would in fact be GENEROUS to try to negotiate a reduced lump sum settlement despite having the ability to fire for cause.
They would also be idiotic to formally fire him with negotiations ongoing when they have cause in their back pocket
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:32 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
No one has said that.
He is owed 90 percent of certain parts, over time, with duty to mitigate.
IF he is fired without cause. You are saying it right now quoting the liquidated damages if Kelly is fired without cause. LSU is negotiating, Kelly's lawsuit alleges that LSU implied they still have the right to do so
quote:
BK may be betting that lsu does not have cause and he is not worried about mitigation
I've posted plenty about my opinion on this subject
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:33 am to Adam Banks
quote:
Yes he’s wrong. LSU would be well within its rights and would in fact be GENEROUS to try to negotiate a reduced lump sum settlement despite having the ability to fire for cause.
They would also be idiotic to formally fire him with negotiations ongoing when they have cause in their back pocket
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, I'm glad someone else understands this situation
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:34 am to Adam Banks
quote:
They would also be idiotic to formally fire him with negotiations ongoing when they have cause in their back pocket
Hence Woody fricking up the whole thing.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:34 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
The terms of separation are in the original contract.
Both sides can certainly amend the contract to select other terms. But the “default” is there.
yes, I know, I've already said this.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:36 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
The terms of separation are in the original contract.
Correct, and Kelly doesn't want to abide by them. Specifically, the mitigation clause. Kelly is controlling narrative at the moment.
LSU is still abiding by the contract, paying Kelly what is owed and negotiating in good faith an ending.
Kelly's suit against LSU to reduce his downside in the negotiation. Kelly wants to get MORE than what is in his contract AND go coach somewhere else. That's not currently allowed in his contract that was posted here yesterday.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:42 am to loogaroo
quote:
Hence Woody fricking up the whole thing.
As much as I knock woody this didn’t even happen either. There has been no evidence that LSU with or without Woodward issued a written formal notice of termination
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:43 am to Fast Times @ LSU
quote:
negotiating in good faith an ending.
Why is lsu negotiating if they have what they need to fire for cause?
Because they either don’t have it or aren’t confident it will withstand trial.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:43 am to LSUFanHouston
I dont understand how the AD does not have authority to fire a HC. Isnt that his/her job?
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:45 am to Fast Times @ LSU
quote:
Kelly wants to get MORE than what is in his contract AND go coach somewhere else.
Isn’t this speculation?
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:46 am to Adam Banks
quote:
despite having the ability to fire for cause.
You’re speculating that they do.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:47 am to Adam Banks
quote:
There has been no evidence that LSU with or without Woodward issued a written formal notice of termination
Hopefully this is the case.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:55 am to Fast Times @ LSU
quote:
Kelly wants to get MORE than what is in his contract AND go coach somewhere else
Correct, for the most part (IMO). He wants the mitigation removed so he has flexibility in coaching somewhere else. The mitigation would put him at 70 y/o and not coached in 5 years. Would be a tough sell at that point. If he takes 1-3 seasons off and takes a big job, that all goes to LSU by the time he is potentially on the hot seat again. He gets mitigation removed, that’s a lot more flexibility and yes that’s what he is going for. It isn’t something with zero value. It may be difficult to enforce, but not if he gets a job.
But make no mistake, his actions show he thinks he has already earned the entire LSU contract. The offer LSU gave was very fair IF he plans to coach again, but that apparently wasn’t enough. So…he is using the lawsuit hoping LSU panics and gives another offer with no mitigation
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:57 am to tigerbait1.6
quote:
I dont understand how the AD does not have authority to fire a HC. Isnt that his/her job?
Schrodinger's head coach. Brian Kelly is both fired and not fired.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:58 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Why is lsu negotiating if they have what they need to fire for cause?
Because it’s a bad look to go after your head coach when you are looking to hire another.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:59 am to Adam Banks
quote:
LSU would be well within its rights and would in fact be GENEROUS to try to negotiate a reduced lump sum settlement despite having the ability to fire for cause.
The ability to fire for cause must be backed up with actual proveable cause.
Posted on 11/12/25 at 10:59 am to Mo Jeaux
quote:
You’re speculating that they do.
Brian Kelly is the one speculating that they have cause to fire him that’s why he’s rushing this declarative judgement on the grounds that he has been formally terminated
This post was edited on 11/12/25 at 11:00 am
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News