- 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: Whoever decided "hey lets try to job BK out of his contract" needs to be sent to pasture
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:33 pm to LSBoosie
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:33 pm to LSBoosie
quote:
I don't know that I would say it's mostly accepted considering most coaches are not fired with cause weeks or months after they are actually fired.
It's because they actually go through with the settlement negotiations.
1
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:36 pm to OceanMan
I disagree with your position.
Reading what LSU released, said in the press conference the day or so after, and the lawsuit, Kelly was terminated and he was open to a financial settlement. They did not agree to mutually separate. He was terminated.
He did not agree to terms outside the contract.
He stated "As we discussed in our meeting, I'm open to your desire to reach a settlement of what's
owed to me under the contract, although of course it would have to make sense
financially." (This is from the letter he sent that day to LSU)
He absolutely can. They can offer all they want. He is under no obligation to accept it. In fact, he is not under obligation to do anything. His own words describe that fact.
The rest of your argument has no merit based on this premise.
Reading what LSU released, said in the press conference the day or so after, and the lawsuit, Kelly was terminated and he was open to a financial settlement. They did not agree to mutually separate. He was terminated.
He did not agree to terms outside the contract.
He stated "As we discussed in our meeting, I'm open to your desire to reach a settlement of what's
owed to me under the contract, although of course it would have to make sense
financially." (This is from the letter he sent that day to LSU)
quote:
He cannot leave that meeting thinking LSU intends to do anything but settle.
He absolutely can. They can offer all they want. He is under no obligation to accept it. In fact, he is not under obligation to do anything. His own words describe that fact.
The rest of your argument has no merit based on this premise.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:42 pm to OceanMan
quote:
and my assumption was
But you stated it as fact. The same thing that you are mad other people are doing.
quote:
No, I don't, but as per Brian Kelly's legal team, it is.
Wait so now you believe Brian Kelly's legal team?
quote:
The point is, he either wants his full buyout
Lol when I said this you responded with "He wants more than that."
quote:
Brian shouldn't have said he was open to negotiations if he wanted more than what was in his employment contract.
Maybe he was open to negotiations until he realized that LSU was no where close to what he was expecting. Or maybe he was open to negotiations until the dumbass governor started running his mouth.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:43 pm to OceanMan
quote:
It's because they actually go through with the settlement negotiations.
So you are admitting that what LSU did is not "normal"?
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:44 pm to deathvalleytiger10
Kelly can also drop his case and accept that he will be paid the full amount monthly over the next 6 years. He must also actively seek employment, that if obtained, will offset the monthly payment due.
LSU is the party that can sit back and do nothing but cut a check every month.
Now… LSU was trying to make this easier for everyone, but Kelly doesn’t get to decide that he gets full payment in a lump sum tomorrow with no strings attached.
LSU is the party that can sit back and do nothing but cut a check every month.
Now… LSU was trying to make this easier for everyone, but Kelly doesn’t get to decide that he gets full payment in a lump sum tomorrow with no strings attached.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:47 pm to bayouboo
Kelly has all the leverage. He doesnt have accept shite. He doesnt have to make a settlement and he can sit back and collect checks for the next 6 years and as far as them making him look for employment....all he has do to is demand 25 mil/yr to return to coaching. No one will pay that and LSU cant make him take a smaller salary.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:48 pm to IrishDave
Then that settles it. Wait 6 years for his full amount.
Why did he file a lawsuit?
Why did he file a lawsuit?
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:49 pm to bayouboo
because they are trying not to pay him at all...thats why his lawsuit is about just cause.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:53 pm to IrishDave
No. LSU hasn’t sent him his official letter (that no one on this board is aware of).
He is trying to force them to send him one. But the contract states that they can send the notice anytime before the end of the contract expiration.
He is trying to force them to send him one. But the contract states that they can send the notice anytime before the end of the contract expiration.
This post was edited on 11/13/25 at 2:55 pm
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:54 pm to bayouboo
quote:
Kelly can also drop his case and accept that he will be paid the full amount monthly over the next 6 years. He must also actively seek employment, that if obtained, will offset the monthly payment due.
LSU is the party that can sit back and do nothing but cut a check every month.
Now… LSU was trying to make this easier for everyone, but Kelly doesn’t get to decide that he gets full payment in a lump sum tomorrow with no strings attached.
Absolutely. None of that is in dispute to my knowledge.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 2:57 pm to bayouboo
quote:Where?
But the contract states that they can send the notice anytime before the end of the contract expiration.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:01 pm to Salviati
Section 11 A and 11 B 1
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:04 pm to IrishDave
quote:
as far as them making him look for employment....all he has do to is demand 25 mil/yr to return to coaching. No one will pay that and LSU cant make him take a smaller salary.
Civil litigation tends to use a reasonable person standard. A reasonable person would conclude that Kelly was not making a good faith effort to find employment by demanding above market compensation. No. LSU cannot force him to accept a smaller salary, but they can find him in breach of contract, nullifying his buyout.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:06 pm to IrishDave
quote:
they are trying not to pay him at all
You sure about that? Link? (I’ll Save you some time, because there’s not one. Anyone asserting that at this point in time is simply making it up)
To the contrary, Kelly’s own lawyers stated LSU tried to give him $30m.
This post was edited on 11/13/25 at 9:41 pm
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:07 pm to bayouboo
quote:
But the contract states that they can send the notice anytime before the end of the contract expiration.
If they don't send a letter of termination, then he will continue to get paid as usual, which I believe is more than the buyout. Isn't the buyout like 90% of the remaining contract?
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:07 pm to IrishDave
quote:
because they are trying not to pay him at all...thats why his lawsuit is about just cause.
He could just wait for LSU to make a “for cause” claim to respond if that were the case. He’s clearly trying to force LSU’s hand to gain leverage for a more favorable negotiated settlement.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:13 pm to deathvalleytiger10
Yes. That seems to be the case.
LSU may be willing to continue paying him until they are ready to formalize the termination.
It looks like they were trying to simplify this for everyone via a settlement, but Kelly filed a suit.
LSU may be willing to continue paying him until they are ready to formalize the termination.
It looks like they were trying to simplify this for everyone via a settlement, but Kelly filed a suit.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:15 pm to OceanMan
quote:
I get all of this, I'm trying to piece together how it got there. But I do disagree to an extent, I do think that given the situation, this isn't exactly "basic" commercial litigation, Kelly should have maybe tried to negotiate before putting this narrative out there.
The reasoning behind the filing is abundantly clear. There is a better than 99% chance the words "for cause" were used by an agent of LSU as leverage in the negotiations. There is simply no other logical reason to file asking for a simple declarative judgment on the issue of for cause firing than it has been mentioned or suggested.
I will agree this is somewhat unusual since in 30 years of contract litigation I have never seen someone locked out, someone hired to do their job, press releases and press conferences held regarding a changing of the guard without the type of termination being already communicated in writing to the former employee. The main reason being that firing for cause normally requires a very specific procedure outlined in the K and if it hasn't been followed then it can't be retroactive save some very unusual situations like embezzlement.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:18 pm to bayouboo
quote:
It looks like they were trying to simplify this for everyone via a settlement, but Kelly filed a suit.
It would be logical to think if he felt threatened with a change of course to firing for cause that he would want to get all legal channels going.
At that point you aren't talking about a settlement or paying the buyout over time. You are threatening to not pay at all.
Posted on 11/13/25 at 3:19 pm to Obtuse1
The contract clearly states written notice to him and his company.
Shouldn’t his lawyer wait for the written notice?
Shouldn’t his lawyer wait for the written notice?
Page 7 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News