BK FIRED (Sloan too)

[Hatchertiger]

Jeff doesn’t like Woody is what I’m hearing. Was with former BOS member today and he confirmed. He has no idea who hire might be but look for new prez to be hired before decisions are made. Woody might not be in on that either. What does that signal?

 

[dachsie]

Wonder what violations of morality clause was there?

 

[Fishhead]

Jeff doesn’t like Woody is what I’m hearing. Was with former BOS member today and he confirmed. He has no idea who hire might be but look for new prez to be hired before decisions are made. Woody might not be in on that either. What does that signal?

Woody was not even included in all the meetings Sunday. He's on life support at LSU

 

[Nutriaitch]

Wonder what violations of morality clause was there?

the kind that don't get mentioned in public

 

[Nutriaitch]

Woody was not even included in all the meetings Sunday. He's on life support at LSU

as long as we don't fuck up his replacement.
better make damn sure Jay Johnson likes the new guy.

 

[Hatchertiger]

Woody was not involved with the extension that got Jimbo the huge buyout although he gets the blame. He was for BK. Will be interesting to see if he hangs on.

 

[Nutriaitch]

Woody was not involved with the extension that got Jimbo the huge buyout although he gets the blame.

correct.
everyone in the media is saying Woody gave Jimbo that buyout (it was actually Bjork that did).

But Scott DID sign Kelly to his deal. that's on him.
Basketball is on him too.

Mulkey was an obvious homer, but that sport hemorrhages money.
Jay Johnson is the best coach on campus, but that's a sport that floats right around break even.

the two sports that actually generate revenue?
sorry Scott, but that's not good enough.

 

[Herb]

the kind that don't get mentioned in public

There must be something in the water in Baton Rouge...
Les Miles
Ed Orgeron
Frank Wilson
and now Maybe Brian Kelly...

They've all been embroiled by what John Hiatt sings about here:

 

[BobRodes]

About that negotiated settlement: I have spoken about it with some “friends in low places” in the Notre Dame community who tend to know things about things.

As I understand it from them, it’s something of an open secret that Kelly is keeping a “concubine” on the side, all the while running on about working on his relationship with his wife and saying his filing for divorce was fake news. This is the “morality clause violation” that some folks are mentioning.

Reading between the lines, nobody on either side wanted all of that to be the number one news event in sports for a while, and nobody on either side wanted the protracted litigation that would surely ensue if LSU used it as a reason to refuse to pay the buyout—a Kelly lawsuit would have enough legs to make it to trial, and not enough legs to be sure of winning. So it would seem that both sides settled for halt.

 

[Nutriaitch]

I have spoken with some “friends in low places” in the Notre Dame community who tend to know things about things. As I understand it from them, it’s something of an open secret that Kelly is keeping a “concubine” on the side, all the while running on about working on his relationship with his wife and saying his filing for divorce was fake news.

Reading between the lines, nobody on Kelly’s side wanted all of that to be the number one news event in sports for a while, and nobody on LSU’s side wanted the protracted litigation that would surely ensue if they tried to use that to keep the whole thing. So they split the difference.

My opinions only, but I suspect they are pottery accurate.

I have no insider knowledge, but I'm usually pretty decent at reading between the lines.
and this sounds about like what I would have guessed.

 

[BobRodes]

I have no insider knowledge, but I'm usually pretty decent at reading between the lines.
and this sounds about like what I would have guessed.

I’d say this is insider knowledge more in the sense of a people who know people are saying thing rather than a hard evidence thing. But I seem to remember reading somewhere that Kelly was stepping out with someone. Is that sort of common knowledge down your way, like he didn’t try too hard to keep it quiet, or is that news to you?

 

[Fishhead]

Louisiana does have quite the population of short women, so he'd have options

 

[houtiger]

IF BK had a friend on the outside of his marriage, I am not sure that would trigger a violation of any morals clause, unless she was a prostitute which is illegal. People do it all the time. There's no law against it. Nobody could claim that it reflected negatively on the university, since it was unknown by the public prior to the firing. If LSU knew about it and said nothing about it and did nothing about it, how could they claim that it ever hurt LSU in any way shape or form? If they went to court, I think Kelly has the better case. Not to mention I think it would make LSU look cheap and slimy, checking up on their head coach to get "compramat" on him. That's not exactly the kind of thing you want to see in an employer.

I wonder if it is not a girl? Misuse of funds? You would think a man making 9 mil a year would not do that.

 

[Fishhead]

So having a girl on the side is absolutely immoral, and there was a morality clause in the contract.

Nobody said it's illegal.

And if it's "not a girl", is that less moral or is it illegal? I don't get that part of your comment.

What if it was a student? She's 18 or 19. Immoral now? Still not illegal.

That clause was put into the contract because of Miles and Ed O.

It wasn't due to illegal actions. It was due to immoral actions. If Kelly didn't wanna have that in the contract, he shouldn't have signed off.

 

[Nutriaitch]

IF BK had a friend on the outside of his marriage, I am not sure that would trigger a violation of any morals clause,

there is a list of coaches out there in multiple sports that have been fired for things like this.

so yeah it could absolutely trigger a “morality clause”.
especially if the other person was in any way also affiliated with the University.

 

[BobRodes]

IF BK had a friend on the outside of his marriage, I am not sure that would trigger a violation of any morals clause, unless she was a prostitute which is illegal. People do it all the time. There's no law against it. Nobody could claim that it reflected negatively on the university, since it was unknown by the public prior to the firing. If LSU knew about it and said nothing about it and did nothing about it, how could they claim that it ever hurt LSU in any way shape or form? If they went to court, I think Kelly has the better case. Not to mention I think it would make LSU look cheap and slimy, checking up on their head coach to get "compramat" on him. That's not exactly the kind of thing you want to see in an employer.

I wonder if it is not a girl? Misuse of funds? You would think a man making 9 mil a year would not do that.

Kelly probably would have the better case. But there’s also the angle of calling the woman as a witness and dragging her through the mud. And Kelly looking equally slimy for trying to ditch his cancer-survivor wife for a (probably) younger woman and then trying to deny it, and so on. He probably decided that 25 million looked pretty good if he could avoid all that noise by taking it.

I suspect that if it were something criminal like an underage girl or misuse of funds there wouldn’t be a compromise. More likely, the woman in question is someone local who wants to keep the affair private.

 

[houtiger]

So having a girl on the side is absolutely immoral, and there was a morality clause in the contract.

Nobody said it's illegal.

And if it's "not a girl", is that less moral or is it illegal? I don't get that part of your comment.

What if it was a student? She's 18 or 19. Immoral now? Still not illegal.

But if the Uni knew about it and did not fire BK for it as soon as they knew, he could argue that they were OK with it. It only became an issue when he lost 3 of the last 4 games, the last game in a pathetic blowout. So, would the morals clause hold up in court in that case? Very doubtful to me. BK may concede some money, but I don't think he would concede down to 24 million, about half, which is what I see floating around on the internet.

 

[Nutriaitch]

So, would the morals clause hold up in court in that case? Very doubtful to me. BK may concede some money, but I don't think he would concede down to 24 million, about half, which is what I see floating around on the internet.

neither side wants this to end up in court. all that does is drag both parties names through the headlines only for them to end up coming to a number somewhere between zero and the full amount.

so its up to both to agree on what's the right number to keep it out of the courts.
there's a lot of things that we the public will never know:

1. What exactly was the "morality clause" violation?
2. What did LSU know and when did they know?
3. Did LSU ever confront Kelly about it (prior to this week)?
4. Was there other "dirt" that all just added up on top of the losses?
5. etc.

Kelly has things he can negotiate on his side to soften the blow of less money too.
Maybe LSU gives him a much lower amount ($27 mil is the number I saw reported), but gets it over a shorter period of time.
Or maybe gets all of the reduced amount without having to "make reasonable effort to find a comparable job in the sport to mitigate the amount".

different ideas like that (and then some we not even thinking of) will all get tossed around.

all to keep this as out of public eye as possible.

 

[houtiger]

BK must make a good faith effort to obtain a job, per his contract, and his salary would be deducted from the amount LSU owes him.

https://ath-ems.lsu.edu/prr/contracts/Employment%20Contracts/Football/Brian%20Kelly%20-%2011.28.21.pdf

 

[Herb]

there is a list of coaches out there in multiple sports that have been fired for things like this.

You say Petreeno I say Petrieno....