Can't State sues Geno Ford for $1.2 million

[Hilltopper]

Can't State is looking to get some payback from Geno.

Record Courier

Can't State University is seeking $1.2 million from former men’s basketball coach Geno Ford, alleging he broke the terms of his contract when he joined Bradley University in March.

In a lawsuit filed April 26, Can't State says Ford ended his employment without permission and never paid the damages he owed the university for the four years remaining in his contract, which would have expired in 2015.

Shortly after 9:30 p.m., the school announced Ford as its new head basketball coach, before Ford had alerted the Can't State Athletic Department or his players.

Players on the Can't State basketball team were upset they learned about Ford’s departure via a press release on Bradley University’s website, rather than in person from their coach.

“It’s not that he left,” Can't State forward Justin Greene said previously. “I know this is a business. It’s how he left. You couldn’t tell us?”

[Dave in Green]

It's all attorney legalese from here on out. But my non-legal interpretation tells me that Bradley seems to be focused on the fact that they got permission to interview Ford and thus did nothing wrong, while Can't is focused on the precise wording of their contract with Ford beyond merely interviewing for another job.

From what Can't is saying now, their contract with Ford is pretty explicit in terms of buyout. It seems to me that it's irrelevant that Bradley got permission to interview Ford if they followed that up by immediately hiring him without concern for the wording in Ford's contract with Can't.

It may be that Bradley and Ford thought they could work out a compromise with Can't, while Can't apparently wants to go by the letter of the contract. It seems as if that would be fairly easy for a judge to work out depending on the precise wording of the contract, and if there are any other signed documents that might mitigate portions of the contract.

[BirdZip]

Can't State University is seeking $1.2 million from former men’s basketball coach Geno Ford, alleging he broke the terms of his contract when he joined Bradley University in March.

In a lawsuit filed April 26, Can't State says Ford ended his employment without permission and never paid the damages he owed the university for the four years remaining in his contract, which would have expired in 2015.

I like how the author knew Can't State graduates would be reading the article, so he helped them out by doing the math for them.

[zip37]

If it weren't for screw-ups''Can't State wouldn't get much ink!

[GP1]

I like how the author knew Can't State graduates would be reading the article, so he helped them out by doing the math for them.

I respectfully disagree. The first paragraph alone uses the word "alleging". Along with many words longer than six letters makes this article impossible for a Can't grad to read.

[Quickzips]

Kind of a bold move by Can't if you ask me. They've had a pretty good track record of bringin in successful coaches to follow up successful coaches. Suing your previous coach on the way out the door (regardless of the circumstances of his departure) is going to put up a pretty big red flag for any future candidates once Senderoff bolts for greener pastures.

[ZachTheZip]

Kind of a bold move by Can't if you ask me. They've had a pretty good track record of bringin in successful coaches to follow up successful coaches. Suing your previous coach on the way out the door (regardless of the circumstances of his departure) is going to put up a pretty big red flag for any future candidates once Senderoff bolts for greener pastures.

And I'm fine with that.

I'm hoping for a long and expensive legal battle.

[skip-zip]

It's all attorney legalese from here on out. But my non-legal interpretation tells me that Bradley seems to be focused on the fact that they got permission to interview Ford and thus did nothing wrong, while Can't is focused on the precise wording of their contract with Ford beyond merely interviewing for another job.

From what Can't is saying now, their contract with Ford is pretty explicit in terms of buyout. It seems to me that it's irrelevant that Bradley got permission to interview Ford if they followed that up by immediately hiring him without concern for the wording in Ford's contract with Can't.

It may be that Bradley and Ford thought they could work out a compromise with Can't, while Can't apparently wants to go by the letter of the contract. It seems as if that would be fairly easy for a judge to work out depending on the precise wording of the contract, and if there are any other signed documents that might mitigate portions of the contract.

There's the issue. Having been involved in many employment contract situations, you can bet that all parties in this issue will paint a much different picture of what things "say" and "mean". And it probably won't even matter. Much of the time, the filing of the lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt to pressure someone into negotiating a settlement.

[GP1]

Kind of a bold move by Can't if you ask me. They've had a pretty good track record of bringin in successful coaches to follow up successful coaches. Suing your previous coach on the way out the door (regardless of the circumstances of his departure) is going to put up a pretty big red flag for any future candidates once Senderoff bolts for greener pastures.

Bold move or stupid move? I vote for stupid move for all of the reasons you note. There isn't a single coach with any ambition who would take this job now. Thank you Can't for reinforcing all my beliefs about everything associated with your school. My God are they stupid people over there.

[Zip Watcher]

Kind of a bold move by Can't if you ask me. They've had a pretty good track record of bringin in successful coaches to follow up successful coaches. Suing your previous coach on the way out the door (regardless of the circumstances of his departure) is going to put up a pretty big red flag for any future candidates once Senderoff bolts for greener pastures.

Bold move or stupid move? I vote for stupid move for all of the reasons you note. There isn't a single coach with any ambition who would take this job now. Thank you Can't for reinforcing all my beliefs about everything associated with your school. My God are they stupid people over there.

I agree that it will give pause to future candidates .. but frankly, there's only so many D1 jobs .. they'll fill it when they need to. I do think this may reduce the quality of their candidate pool the next time out.

Go Zips!

[taxpayer]

I can't imagine that the language isn't clear; if it isn't, shame on both parties and particularily Can't State.

I believe it's time for University Presidents/Boards and the NCAA to put their foot down on this matter. A contract is a contract unless one party breaches a condition of the contract. The NCAA has turned a blind eye toward this subject for years. If a student athlete decides to move on there is a one year "sit" as a condition for transfering. If a coach makes the same decision, they are free to go.

Most players commit to a particular school based upon the head coach who continually states his commitment to said university by referencing his "contract extension" which ends in 2016 for example. Player commits to school, attends one class, usually in first summer session and coach decides the grass is greener over there and departs. Players either decide to leave, which costs them a one year sit and the coach makes more $. The university has their player and acquires a new coach and the process goes on. What a lesson in business and ethics the NCAA and the member universites are teaching our young athletes and contributing boosters, I might add.

I propose that the contract language either be modified with specific language that should a coach leave prior to his contract ending that he/she has a penalty to pay; a buyout clause equal to the contactual committment enterred into by both parties. If a coach is fired due to poor performance, the university is responsible to honor their contract and continue paying the coach. Evidently, language similar to this was in Coach Ford's contract at Can't State; I compliment Can't State for demanding the contract be honored, I just hope the language is very specific and clear for their sake.

As far as the student athlete is concerned, if the head coach who recruited them elects to break their contract prior to the students graduation or gets fired, the student athlete is free to transfer to another university without penalty if they so choose. The current rules would still apply to players transferring if the coach who recruited them remains, a one year sit.

Am I too idealistic? Your thoughts?

[GP1]

I can't imagine that the language isn't clear; if it isn't, shame on both parties and particularily Can't State.

I believe it's time for University Presidents/Boards and the NCAA to put their foot down on this matter. A contract is a contract unless one party breaches a condition of the contract. The NCAA has turned a blind eye toward this subject for years. If a student athlete decides to move on there is a one year "sit" as a condition for transfering. If a coach makes the same decision, they are free to go.

Most players commit to a particular school based upon the head coach who continually states his commitment to said university by referencing his "contract extension" which ends in 2016 for example. Player commits to school, attends one class, usually in first summer session and coach decides the grass is greener over there and departs. Players either decide to leave, which costs them a one year sit and the coach makes more $. The university has their player and acquires a new coach and the process goes on. What a lesson in business and ethics the NCAA and the member universites are teaching our young athletes and contributing boosters, I might add.

I propose that the contract language either be modified with specific language that should a coach leave prior to his contract ending that he/she has a penalty to pay; a buyout clause equal to the contactual committment enterred into by both parties. If a coach is fired due to poor performance, the university is responsible to honor their contract and continue paying the coach. Evidently, language similar to this was in Coach Ford's contract at Can't State; I compliment Can't State for demanding the contract be honored, I just hope the language is very specific and clear for their sake.

As far as the student athlete is concerned, if the head coach who recruited them elects to break their contract prior to the students graduation or gets fired, the student athlete is free to transfer to another university without penalty if they so choose. The current rules would still apply to players transferring if the coach who recruited them remains, a one year sit.

Am I too idealistic? Your thoughts?

You are too idealistic. Anyone who uses the words "ethics" and "NCAA" (although NCAA isn't a word) in the same sentence is being too idealistic.

There is a difference between breaking a contract and sending the wrong message. If Can't believes Ford broke his contract, Can't sends the wrong message by going to court. Sometimes you have to keep focused on moving forward and not get angry over the past. Yoda once said, "Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." In Can't's case, Yoda would have said, "Anger leads to poor coaching candidates in the future. Poor coaching candidates lead to losing." I guess the question on this case is...What is the upside for Can't?

[Captain Kangaroo]

What is the upside for Can't?

$1.2 million dollars. That makes an impact in a MAC Athletic Department budget.

[Zip Watcher]

There is a difference between breaking a contract and sending the wrong message. If Can't believes Ford broke his contract, Can't sends the wrong message by going to court. Sometimes you have to keep focused on moving forward and not get angry over the past. Yoda once said, "Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering." In Can't's case, Yoda would have said, "Anger leads to poor coaching candidates in the future. Poor coaching candidates lead to losing." I guess the question on this case is...What is the upside for Can't?

Short term cash, if they win.

I agree with Yoda .. there appears to be more downside than upside for this approach.

Pursue it very far, I hope they do.

Go Zips!

[GP1]

Pursue it very far, I hope they do.

Hmmmm. Short sighted potheads they are.

[Captain Kangaroo]

From the article:

Under the contract, Ford also agreed that if he were to cut his employment short, he would pay his base salary and supplemental salary — then $300,000 — times the number of years remaining in the agreement. In its lawsuit filed with the Portage County Common Pleas Court, Can't State calls for $1.2 million, plus interest and cost, from Ford for breach of contract.

Seems pretty cut-and-dry? Ford should cough up the cash.

I don't see it being a deterrent to hiring future coaches. K.e.n.t. is a nice mid-major gig, and any up-and-comer-ladder-climber would take it, regardless of the law suit outcome. They may not sign a stupid contract like Ford, but they'll sign one regardless.

[GP1]

I wonder if it was in Ford's contract with his new school to pick up any money he would owe Can't for leaving early.?.?.

Actually, I wonder how many contracts there are or have been out there that nobody has pressed the issue on.?.?.?.

[Quickzips]

What is the upside for Can't?

$1.2 million dollars. That makes an impact in a MAC Athletic Department budget.

Just to clarify, Can't State is highly, HIGHLY unlikely to see a $1.2 million dollar payout on this. Even if the case eventually does go to court, which in all likelihood it will be settled for a much smaller dollar amount well before it ever sniffs a jury, these types of liquidated damages clauses are just not favored much in the courts. The courts will likely look at that big, $1.2 million dollar figure and say you are essentially trying to put a barrier in front of the guy ever leaving his position. They will likely look at it as a loose form of indentured servitude (we've got a big problem with that in this country) and would be very hesitant to issue a judgment anywhere close to that amount.

It really is puzzling to me why Can't State is continuing to push this. They are unlikely to receive a payout that is going to cover their costs, it is going to have a deterrent effect on future coaching hires, it isn't going to bring Geno Ford back. It just seems like leftover bitterness and animocity is clouding their judgment to the point where they are making a bad decision just to try and screw with Ford and Bradley.

[MDZip]

Think I can cut their search short. He may have been 9-21 last year but he has a lot of MAC coaching experience. And look, he's beaten UNC, Virginia, Maryland, Depaul and Butler. The Flashes need to lock him into a long term deal right now!

[Captain Kangaroo]

What is the upside for Can't?

$1.2 million dollars. That makes an impact in a MAC Athletic Department budget.

Just to clarify, Can't State is highly, HIGHLY unlikely to see a $1.2 million dollar payout on this. Even if the case eventually does go to court, which in all likelihood it will be settled for a much smaller dollar amount well before it ever sniffs a jury, these types of liquidated damages clauses are just not favored much in the courts. The courts will likely look at that big, $1.2 million dollar figure and say you are essentially trying to put a barrier in front of the guy ever leaving his position. They will likely look at it as a loose form of indentured servitude (we've got a big problem with that in this country) and would be very hesitant to issue a judgment anywhere close to that amount.

It really is puzzling to me why Can't State is continuing to push this. They are unlikely to receive a payout that is going to cover their costs, it is going to have a deterrent effect on future coaching hires, it isn't going to bring Geno Ford back. It just seems like leftover bitterness and animocity is clouding their judgment to the point where they are making a bad decision just to try and screw with Ford and Bradley.

He signed a contract. @ $300k/year. He knew he'd be on the hook for 1.2 million if he departed with 4 years remaining.

300k/yr in Portage County is a ton of money. And now he's at 700k/yr, plus perks. We should all be so burdened with indentured servitude.

[Hilltopper]

What is the upside for Can't?

$1.2 million dollars. That makes an impact in a MAC Athletic Department budget.

Just to clarify, Can't State is highly, HIGHLY unlikely to see a $1.2 million dollar payout on this. Even if the case eventually does go to court, which in all likelihood it will be settled for a much smaller dollar amount well before it ever sniffs a jury, these types of liquidated damages clauses are just not favored much in the courts. The courts will likely look at that big, $1.2 million dollar figure and say you are essentially trying to put a barrier in front of the guy ever leaving his position. They will likely look at it as a loose form of indentured servitude (we've got a big problem with that in this country) and would be very hesitant to issue a judgment anywhere close to that amount.

It really is puzzling to me why Can't State is continuing to push this. They are unlikely to receive a payout that is going to cover their costs, it is going to have a deterrent effect on future coaching hires, it isn't going to bring Geno Ford back. It just seems like leftover bitterness and animocity is clouding their judgment to the point where they are making a bad decision just to try and screw with Ford and Bradley.

He signed a contract. @ $300k/year. He knew he'd be on the hook for 1.2 million if he departed with 4 years remaining.

300k/yr in Portage County is a ton of money. And now he's at 700k/yr, plus perks. We should all be so burdened with indentured servitude.

Its been my experience that things are put into a contract for a reason. He signed it and if he didn't get adequate legal representation at the time, thats his problem. Maybe he can get Judge Judy or Judge Joe to feel sorry for him and let him off the hook.

[Quickzips]

What is the upside for Can't?

$1.2 million dollars. That makes an impact in a MAC Athletic Department budget.

Just to clarify, Can't State is highly, HIGHLY unlikely to see a $1.2 million dollar payout on this. Even if the case eventually does go to court, which in all likelihood it will be settled for a much smaller dollar amount well before it ever sniffs a jury, these types of liquidated damages clauses are just not favored much in the courts. The courts will likely look at that big, $1.2 million dollar figure and say you are essentially trying to put a barrier in front of the guy ever leaving his position. They will likely look at it as a loose form of indentured servitude (we've got a big problem with that in this country) and would be very hesitant to issue a judgment anywhere close to that amount.

It really is puzzling to me why Can't State is continuing to push this. They are unlikely to receive a payout that is going to cover their costs, it is going to have a deterrent effect on future coaching hires, it isn't going to bring Geno Ford back. It just seems like leftover bitterness and animocity is clouding their judgment to the point where they are making a bad decision just to try and screw with Ford and Bradley.

He signed a contract. @ $300k/year. He knew he'd be on the hook for 1.2 million if he departed with 4 years remaining.

300k/yr in Portage County is a ton of money. And now he's at 700k/yr, plus perks. We should all be so burdened with indentured servitude.

Just telling you how the courts are probably going to look at this. Trust me on this one, I pretty well know what I'm talking about when it comes to contracts.

[Doug Snyder]

From the article:

Under the contract, Ford also agreed that if he were to cut his employment short, he would pay his base salary and supplemental salary — then $300,000 — times the number of years remaining in the agreement. In its lawsuit filed with the Portage County Common Pleas Court, Can't State calls for $1.2 million, plus interest and cost, from Ford for breach of contract.

Seems pretty cut-and-dry? Ford should cough up the cash.

I don't see it being a deterrent to hiring future coaches. K.e.n.t. is a nice mid-major gig, and any up-and-comer-ladder-climber would take it, regardless of the law suit outcome. They may not sign a stupid contract like Ford, but they'll sign one regardless.

+1

[GP1]

Just to clarify, Can't State is highly, HIGHLY unlikely to see a $1.2 million dollar payout on this. Even if the case eventually does go to court, which in all likelihood it will be settled for a much smaller dollar amount well before it ever sniffs a jury, these types of liquidated damages clauses are just not favored much in the courts. The courts will likely look at that big, $1.2 million dollar figure and say you are essentially trying to put a barrier in front of the guy ever leaving his position. They will likely look at it as a loose form of indentured servitude (we've got a big problem with that in this country) and would be very hesitant to issue a judgment anywhere close to that amount.

It really is puzzling to me why Can't State is continuing to push this. They are unlikely to receive a payout that is going to cover their costs, it is going to have a deterrent effect on future coaching hires, it isn't going to bring Geno Ford back. It just seems like leftover bitterness and animocity is clouding their judgment to the point where they are making a bad decision just to try and screw with Ford and Bradley.

Good post. It is very shot sighted for Can't to do this. Don't get me wrong, I hope they continue down this path for a long time. The more they focus on the past, the less likely they will focus on the future. Loss of focus will kill an organization faster than anything. MAC schools have limited resources. To spend those valuable resources on a pissing contest is a waste of those resources.

I'd be interested to know if there was an arbitration clause in the contract. I work in the construction industry and almost all contracts have arbitration clauses now and it wasn't that long ago nobody used them. The idea of having them would have been laughed at. Filing in Portage County Court may be an indication there is not, but I really don't know.

[skip-zip]

What is the upside for Can't?

$1.2 million dollars. That makes an impact in a MAC Athletic Department budget.

Just to clarify, Can't State is highly, HIGHLY unlikely to see a $1.2 million dollar payout on this. Even if the case eventually does go to court, which in all likelihood it will be settled for a much smaller dollar amount well before it ever sniffs a jury, these types of liquidated damages clauses are just not favored much in the courts. The courts will likely look at that big, $1.2 million dollar figure and say you are essentially trying to put a barrier in front of the guy ever leaving his position. They will likely look at it as a loose form of indentured servitude (we've got a big problem with that in this country) and would be very hesitant to issue a judgment anywhere close to that amount.

It really is puzzling to me why Can't State is continuing to push this. They are unlikely to receive a payout that is going to cover their costs, it is going to have a deterrent effect on future coaching hires, it isn't going to bring Geno Ford back. It just seems like leftover bitterness and animocity is clouding their judgment to the point where they are making a bad decision just to try and screw with Ford and Bradley.

This is pretty good. I touched on some of this earlier. Just because it's written in a part of a contract may not mean much. Some other part of the contract may negate it, the law may not support it, the details may be interpreted differently by different people, or a jury could find the breach penalties to be extremely excessive. Please don't fool yourselves into thinking that this is likely a clear issue.

As I said, in most cases this is merely an attempt to push for a settlement. If they pursue this all the way to the end to try to get some portion of that amount as a judgement in their favor in a courtroom, it may not even be worth their time and expense.

I also agree with those who have stated that Ken+ is a good enough job for an up and coming coach that this won't be a deterent. In fact, I think this kind of thing happens more often than we ever hear about.