i have read on here that LSU backed out of a contract to play you guys back in the '90's and owe ya'll $500,000. I've followed LSU for quite a while and never heard this. what's the deal?

ibf the million page thread

tigers are ***** cats that welch...not once but twice

go away kitty troll

you've been very informative. i guess there's not much to it.

Ok, picture a thread that will have about 7 pages of posts similar to the one above. There will be about a dozen posts that give an explination of the situation. About 4 of them will be accurate. A few LSU posters will come over. About three or four of them will be d-bags. One or two will be okay.

Wait three weeks and the same thread will happen again.

i see. guess i'm not on here enough to know the extent of past coverage. appears to be a charged issue. i'm not a troll. i have no problem in saying what i mean.

quote:

---

I've followed LSU for quite a while and never heard this.

---

Apparently you weren't paying attention during that whole fiasco.

I'm too tired of the subject to go over it again.

LSUGD, we over here at texags would rather b*tch about the 100,000 that Groff lost on the deal rather than set down at the table and work out a new deal that would bring in millions of dollars of revenue. And Lord knows the athletic department needs it right now.

Yes, lsu went back on the deal... some say it had to do with increased number of games and others will point out that at that point lsu just wasn't very good and we were winning.

Either way, it turned dirty and lsu backed out of the contract and refused to pay us what we were due.

A&M-LSU series at Tiger Droppings

Look what happens before most of the breaks in the series...

[This message has been edited by Scotch (edited 7/25/2009 10:16p).]

LSU signed a 10 year contract with us, home and away.

We won 5 years in a row.

Joe Dean, your AD at the time decided he didn't want to play us any more and ended the series.

You owed us 200,000, Dean refused to pay, our AD Wally Groff threatened a lawsuit and Dean told him he would have the venue in Louisiana and Wally settled for 100K.

This occurred after LSU did the same thing several years earlier when we won several straight, and that is why we will never play you again except in a bowl game.

quote:

---

You owed us 200,000, Dean refused to pay, our AD Wally Groff threatened a lawsuit and Dean told him he would have the venue in Louisiana and Wally settled for 100K

---

I believe that on a breach of contract claim, the plaintiff can establish venue in the county in which the contract was supposed to be performed, which technically would be Brazos County in this case. Just saying...

It was going to be a case about semantics and gray areas. The contract said that a team could back out if they supplied an appropriate substitute. But per my memory appropriate substitute wasn't really defined in the contract. So when LSU backed out I believe that they provided either La Tech or a La directional school as a substitute. A&M didn't agree that the substitute was appropriate, but settled due to the uncertainty involved.

Other points are that:

1) At the time the contract was cancelled, A&M was consistently winning, and appeared to have the potential to start dominating the series.

2) LSU's schedule got harder around that time (I think due to SEC expansion), and that was one of the factors that lead to LSU cancelling the series.

3) I think the LSU athletic department felt burned by A&M, as they sponsored A&M for the SEC back when the SWC was about to break up. Based on who you talk to, A&M was set to go to the SEC and only ended up in the Big 12 because of political pressure & getting approval for Reed Arena.

4) Despite our rivalry, LSU has a habit of not regarding A&M as an equal. Most of the early games versus LSU were played at LSU every year - it was not a home & home series. That changed during the 1980-90's contract. But recent offers from LSU have gone back to the "we're better than you" mode. They offered one game to be played in Baton Rouge. They also were trying to sell us on a home & neutral location series - the home games would be in Baton Rouge, neutral games in Houston. Regardless of the strength of our respective football programs now, that is not something that A&M will agree to. If LSU had regarded A&M as an equal, we might have established another LSU v. A&M series, versus the A&M v. Arkansas series.

5) I'd love it if somehow another A&M v. LSU series was established. Based on proximity, history, and culture we are natural rivals. Family members & friends that went to LSU agree that it would be a good thing if the series was renewed. I won't expect it to happen, though, unless there are changes to the BCS system. Why add a potentially hard game if it could cost you millions?

Still, the series should have never stopped. It would have been going continuously for around 25 years now, and would have probably become one of the few prominent inter-sectional rivalries recieving "gameday" attention every year.

The Aggies have played LSU more times than ANY other school that wasn't in the SWC.

Oh, and you naysayers out there... We recruited better in Louisiana when we DID play them vs. when we haven't... Not to mention they get whatever they want in SE Texas with our without us.

I believe dermdoc and RDV got it about right. I have never personally seen the contract, but my knowledge comes from Wally Groff. They owed us $200K and we took half.

Caz, I believe there is something in LA law that if you sue the state of LA venue has to be in LA.

In Fed Court, 28USC1391(d) provides that an alien may be sued in any district. Since anyone from Louisiana, except those who play football at A&M, should be considered "aliens," then you are right, proper venue could lie in Texas.

Another issue might be that this would a suit buy one state against another and I am still working on that venue question.

I just don't buy that LSU was afraid of tAmU. There has to be another explanation.

[This message has been edited by SRFL (edited 7/26/2009 9:22p).]

This series was the victim of the BCS, of that there is no doubt. I also think the coming advent of adding a game to the schedule probably gave some incentive to schedule another for sure home win. At the direct football level I think Dinardo was the coach then and wins were scarce and anything to assure a better record was considered and done. I think there was some big fear of the A&M program really starting to cherry pick recruits in LA. Sure is interesting how things turn out.

what was the duration of the contract? i thought it was for 5 or 10 years. unless it was for 15 or 20 why would they owe us money?

quote:

---

This series was the victim of the BCS, of that there is no doubt. I also think the coming advent of adding a game to the schedule probably gave some incentive to schedule another for sure home win.

---

Both the current BCS and the 12th game were way way after the 1996 and 1997 games which LSU backed out of. The events of that time was SEC expansion and A&M's dominance in the series. Why LSU backed out of the final two games is really a matter of conjecture. SEC expansion and the need for home games for revenue are the most often cited reasons (although interestingly, the 1996 game was to be in Baton Rouge ... and LSU home game) but regardless the way things happened left Wally Groff and A&M as a whole very upset with LSU. Texas A&M felt burned and considering the end of the prior series in the 1970's left alot of Aggies just not wanting to deal with LSU anymore.

-------------------------------------------------------
"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." John 14:6

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world." The words of Jesus; John 16:33

I was around for last series but not the 70's.

They were a top 25 team, not a top 10 like now.

The SEC schedule was tough enough without starting the year vs. a ranked opponent- which we typically were at the time.

Nowadays nobody in the B12 or SEC would schedule such a long contract vs. a "power" team. Especially as your 1st game.

What RDV said.

With that out of the way, the series should be reinstated. But only as a home/home.

We only will renew if LSU fronts up the money first.

quote:

---

I just don't buy that LSU was afraid of tAmU. There has to be another explanation.

---

Why do you have a problem? all you have to do is go look at the series record and see what was going on in the years previous to lsu backing out, you will get a definite reek of kitty pee.

SEC expansion resulted in losses of home games for LSU which is why they canceled the series. But it also needs to be pointed out that A&M agreed to cancel. The changes in college football that were taking place at that time resulted in schools changing their OOC scheduling philosophies. The trend was towards scheduling cream puffs & maximizing home games.

The LSU series was one of the things that put us on the map back in the 80's. Sure we lost 3 of the first 4 games, but the publicity was awesome. The games were always packed, and the rivalry had the intensity of an OU/tu game, only better because Baton Rouge has better food than Dallas.

I think that the Arkansas series will help our program, but it is not going to be nearly as fun as it was to go to BR for a game than travel to Dallas or Ft. Worth to play SMU or TCU.

Sure LSU fans can be obnoxious, but for the most part they are harmless fun to be around. Oh well, I sure to miss that series.

No contract was breached, this is one of the many urban legends on this board.

The series was set for 10 games with a rollover. After 10 games (86-95), LSU elected to end the series as the SEC was now an 8 game conference on an 11 game schedule. LSU wanted 7 home games a year and the only way to guarantee that was by playing 3 non-conf games at home (and as the schedule was only 11 games, that meant ALL non-conf games were to be in Baton Rouge).

For A&M, we agreed with them. The Big 12 moved the Ags to 8 conference games as well and we were angling for 7 home games too. Why it was we agreed to play USL on the road in '96, only Wally and RC know for sure.

LSU paid the amount that was owed to end the series and thus, the series was ended.

By the way, the idea that it ended because we were winning...LSU went 19-5 in '96 and '97, we went 15-10.

quote:

---

They were a top 25 team, not a top 10 like now.

---

from 90 to 95, they were unranked when we played them.

quote:

---

By the way, the idea that it ended because we were winning...

---

Let's see, 5 losses in a row from 91-95 ended the second series, and a 39-8 beatdown in red stick by our 1975 team ended the first series.... nawww, the kitties losing surely didn't have anything to do with the end of the series.

LSU vs. Texas A&M

Date Season W/L Score Location Notes

Sep. 2 1995 L 17-33 College Station
Sep. 3 1994 L 13-18 Baton Rouge
Sep. 4 1993 L 0-24 College Station
Sep. 5 1992 L 22-31 Baton Rouge
Sep. 14 1991 L 7-45 College Station
Sep. 29 1990 W 17-8 Baton Rouge
Sep. 2 1989 L 16-28 College Station
Sep. 3 1988 W 27-0 Baton Rouge
Sep. 5 1987 W 17-3 College Station
Sep. 13 1986 W 35-17 Baton Rouge

Sep. 20 1975 L 8-39 Baton Rouge
Sep. 21 1974 L 14-21 Baton Rouge

Rab79, LSU was about to start a 13 year, still going upswing (and I realize that DiNardo bottoms out in '98 and '99) that would have seen LSU go at worst 9-4 against us ('98, '99, '02 and '08 would have been a race to the bottom).

That we won five in a row, a streak that corresponds with the best 10 yr stretch in Aggie history (86-95) is good for us, bad for them. But LSU knew this in '89 and didn't end the series until after the 10-game contract was fulfilled and the realities of the SEC schedule became evident to the bottom line.

quote:

---

LSU went 19-5 in '96 and '97, we went 15-10.

---

yeah, I'm sure if lswho had that crystal ball in 95 and knew they would be able to dominate they would have continued the series.

Got any stock tips for 2008?

LSU Granddad,

As an A&M and LSU grad, let me apologize for all the assos on this post. Most Ags, really aren't like that.

DermDoc, has the facts, straight up and simple.

Red Stick.

“The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotion, spends himself in a worthy cause; who at best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement; and who at worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who have never tasted victory or defeat.”