Jump to content

Auburn Hires Derrick Nix as OC


W.E.D

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Hank2020 said:

The announcement maybe part of future lawyer action about his buyout.

100%

Lane is behind the Chris Lowe story too from "anonymous sources". 

It's intentional and childish. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites





Just now, W.E.D said:

That would be a violation of Nix’s buyout with Ole Miss.

Please keep up

Use a little imagination. That condition of the contract is easily avoided.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mikey said:

The only one I've seen that claims Nix will be calling plays is Kiffin. Freeze has plainly stated that he'll call plays himself next season.

As stated above, this seems to be about Lane claiming that Nix won't be calling plays. It was discussed that Nix has a contract clause that voids a buyout if he leaves for an OC job with play calling duties. I haven't seen this reported anywhere other than being discussed on message boards, but that seems to be where Lane is coming from. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Not going to lie, I find the Lane post funny 

On a related note, have any of the beat writers or podcasters explained why he keeps on bringing up the play calling thing? I’ve read the explanation here, but I would imagine most people are unaware 

Nix has a buyout clause that he has to be OC and call plays.  Hence why we've been getting Lane crying about Hugh calling plays

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, W.E.D said:

Nix has a buyout clause that he has to be OC and call plays.  Hence why we've been getting Lane crying about Hugh calling plays

Right, I just think that’d be a slam dunk tweet or pod segment to explain that. It’s probably the most interesting aspect of this offseason for us so far 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, W.E.D said:

100%

Lane is behind the Chris Lowe story too from "anonymous sources". 

It's intentional and childish. 

Yep, thats the negative side of Kiffin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mikey said:

Use a little imagination. That condition of the contract is easily avoided.

We don't even know what the exact condition was.

Do you want Hugh and the entire AU staff on the record in a deposition? It's probably rather delicate. Lane is petty enough to sue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, W.E.D said:

Nix has a buyout clause that he has to be OC and call plays.  Hence why we've been getting Lane crying about Hugh calling plays

If he’s not doing full OC duties , there is a buyout owed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, W.E.D said:

Nix has a buyout clause that he has to be OC and call plays.  Hence why we've been getting Lane crying about Hugh calling plays

Draw a line through it and sign the contract. Would think you could hire him to water the field if you wanted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, W.E.D said:

We don't even know what the exact condition was.

Do you want Hugh and the entire AU staff on the record in a deposition? It's probably rather delicate. Lane is petty enough to sue

Exactly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dual-Threat Rigby said:

Right, I just think that’d be a slam dunk tweet or pod segment to explain that. It’s probably the most interesting aspect of this offseason for us so far 

I'm shocked no one has gotten a hold of his contract yet.

 

Maybe once it is official, he'll leak it to AU friendly pods and get the story out

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SaltyTiger said:

Draw a line through it and sign the contract. Would think you could hire him to water the field if you wanted.

This is in Ole Miss contact,  not Auburn's 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, W.E.D said:

This is in Ole Miss contact,  not Auburn's 

Draw a line through it. Would not think it would be tough to get out of.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Draw a line through it. Would not think it would be tough to get out of.

If such a clause even exists there are more ways around it than we can even imagine. Were it that binding, AU would have looked elsewhere to fill the position.

Edited by Mikey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotta be honest here. If we would have hired Lane, I would be on his side, including his antics. That said, even his own fans have to know he rubs a ton of people the wrong way. 
Since he isn't our coach, I find Lane a Major Dbag. Can’t stand him and put him in the same bucket as my dislike of UGA and Kirby. 
I love taking Nix from him and frankly I hope a QB from Ole Miss enters the portal and Nix gets him to transfer to the good guys!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Draw a line through it. Would not think it would be tough to get out of.

What?  You can't just draw a line through an existing contract and claim that is invalid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JFDTiger80 said:

Gotta be honest here. If we would have hired Lane, I would be on his side, including his antics. That said, even his own fans have to know he rubs a ton of people the wrong way. 
Since he isn't our coach, I find Lane a Major Dbag. Can’t stand him and put him in the same bucket as my dislike of UGA and Kirby. 
I love taking Nix from him and frankly I hope a QB from Ole Miss enters the portal and Nix gets him to transfer to the good guys!

I'd be on his side to an extent.  The twitter stuff would be funny, but he's just kicking his own ass by mocking an assistant taking a new job and hurting any future hirings. 

There's a reason assistants leave in droves every year for lateral positions 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, W.E.D said:

We don't even know what the exact condition was.

Do you want Hugh and the entire AU staff on the record in a deposition? It's probably rather delicate. Lane is petty enough to sue

But it is easy to get around. Hugh could “let him call plays for one game.” Then he could say it wasn’t working out and take back play calling duties. Hugh could dictate what plays Nix calls. So many ways around that clause that will easily hold up if Ole Miss decides to sue. And btw, it wouldn’t be Lane filing a lawsuit. It would be the athletic department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ScotsAU said:

But it is easy to get around. Hugh could “let him call plays for one game.” Then he could say it wasn’t working out and take back play calling duties. Hugh could dictate what plays Nix calls. So many ways around that clause that will easily hold up if Ole Miss decides to sue. And btw, it wouldn’t be Lane filing a lawsuit. It would be the athletic department.

He was our #1 OC target last year....with the same contract.  If it was so easy to get around, we would have hired him a year ago.

The buyout is now a year lower and we're comfortable with it or our risk tolerance has gone up after a year 1 floundering.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, W.E.D said:

He was our #1 OC target last year....with the same contract.  If it was so easy to get around, we would have hired him a year ago.

The buyout is now a year lower and we're comfortable with it or our risk tolerance has gone up after a year 1 floundering.

You are digging to deep and playing into Lanes pettiness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

You are digging to deep and playing into Lanes pettiness.

I'm not buying into anything.  You're a donor who I assume hasn't been banned from the donor forum, go read post a year ago discussing Nix

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, W.E.D said:

He was our #1 OC target last year....with the same contract.  If it was so easy to get around, we would have hired him a year ago.

The buyout is now a year lower and we're comfortable with it or our risk tolerance has gone up after a year 1 floundering.

Then no idea why that would’ve held it up. That clause is so easy to get around legally. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...