College Sports Law Blog

Following the college basketball season, Geno Ford accepted the head basketball coaching position at Bradley University (“BU”) thereby leaving Kent State University (“KSU”) jilted in the process.  In turn, KSU sued Ford and BU for the damages associated with his departure in accordance with the liquidated damages clause in his contract.  KSU is seeking $1.2m from Ford and $25,000 from BU based on a claim for tortuous interference with contract. 

Forrest Moore, a former baseball student-athlete, sued Mississippi State University (“MSU”), head baseball coach John Cohen (“Head Coach”), and associate athletics director Mike Nemeth (“Associate AD”) in Mississippi state court relating to the alleged termination of his scholarship.  Mr. Moore claims he was recruited by former MSU head baseball coach Ron Polk and received an eighty percent (80%) scholarship after a “stellar high school pitching career.”  After his freshman year, Coach Polk retired and MSU hired Head Coach who, according to Mr. Moore, never liked him and immediately requested that he take a reduction in scholarship.  Mr. Moore did not agree to take a reduction in scholarship and his relationship with Head Coach was nothing short of volatile.

Collegiate Licensing Company (“CLC”), the biggest player in the licensing of collegiate merchandise, received a cease and desist letter from a Washington D.C. attorney on behalf of unnamed clients requesting that CLC stop limiting the suppliers that provide licensed apparel.  Similar to the American Needle case (involving the NFL), the unnamed product manufacturers will likely argue that limiting the companies able to manufacture licensed products will damage competition in violation of antitrust laws.  In sum, the question is whether the universities’ limitations on the number of manufacturers who produce licensed apparel will drive up prices for consumers.  It is worth noting that CLC is a party in O’Bannon v. NCAA and Keller v. NCAA. 

For any questions, feel free to contact Christian Dennie at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

After a bizarre few weeks where former head football coach Bill Stewart (“Coach”) allegedly requested that reporters “dig up dirt” on head coach-in-waiting Dana Holgorsen and Dana Holgorsen was allegedly removed from a casino for drunken behavior, West Virginia University (“WVU”) and Coach agreed to a settlement valued at $1.65m.  On June 10, 2011, the parties entered into the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release of All Claims (“Agreement”) whereby Coach would resign as head football coach effective June 10, 2011, agreed not to disparage WVU or any agents, and agreed to release all known or unknown claims against WVU.  In return, Coach received $1.65m as general and liquidated damages (the structure was undetermined) and other benefits in which Coach was entitled (i.e., accrued vacation time and sick leave). 

The Wall Street Journal has provided an interesting analysis of the major infractions cases currently plaguing many of the top college programs in the country.  In The NCAA's Last Innocents the authors point out that only 17 institutions competing in FBS have been able to detour the wrath of the NCAA Committee on Infractions.  The proud 17 institutions are Boston College, Northwestern, Penn State, Stanford, Air Force, Boise State, Bowling Green, Central Michigan, Colorado State, Florida Atlantic, Kent State, North Texas, Ohio, Rice, Troy, University of Alabama, Birmingham, and Western Michigan.  It appears one of the lucky few will soon drop off of this list.  Boise State is currently being investigated for major violations.  The article is a short and good read.

The saga surrounding Jim Tressel, Terrelle Pryor, and the Ohio State University (“OSU”) brings to mind several important points.  Often times, coaches on college campuses look at NCAA compliance officers as the police and NCAA compliance in general as a burden.  Most NCAA compliance officers cringe at the thought of being called the police, but the stigma remains.  NCAA compliance is the necessary evil to balance the playing field, thus coaches are required to be cognizant of the rules and abide by them.  

Former University of Southern California (“USC”) assistant football coach Todd McNair has filed suit against the NCAA relating to the Committee on Infractions’ and Infractions Appeals Committee’s decisions relating to him and the investigation undertaken by the NCAA relating to Reggie Bush’s relationship with Lloyd Lake.  On June 3, 2011, Coach McNair filed suit in Superior Court in Los Angeles County requesting unspecified damages based on causes of action for libel, slander, tortuous interference with prospective economic advantage, tortuous interference with contractual relations, breach of contract, negligence, and declaratory relief.

The NCAA Division I Infractions Appeals Committee (“Committee”) recently reviewed and affirmed the Committee on Infractions’ (“COI”) decision relating to the University of Southern California (“USC”).

The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that the Samford University (“SU”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. The case was narrow in scope involving violations of financial aid legislation.  Specifically, during the 2007, 2008, and 2009 summer academic terms, SU provided impermissible athletically related financial aid to numerous prospective student-athletes prior to their initial full-time enrollment in violation of NCAA Bylaw 15.2.8.1.4-(b).  None of the prospective student-athletes were enrolled in the specified minimum of six (6) credit hours during the summer term prior to full-time enrollment as required under NCAA legislation.  Although the infractions were limited in terms of bylaws violated, the Committee found that the violations occurred over a significant period of time, three (3) years, and involved forty-nine (49) student-athletes.  After the investigation concluded the case was submitted to the Committee through the summary disposition process, which is an alternative to a formal hearing before the Committee that may be utilized when the NCAA enforcement staff, the member institution, and involved individuals agree to the facts of an infractions case and that those facts constitute major violations of NCAA legislation.

The NCAA Committee on Infractions (“Committee”) recently issued its findings and found that the East Carolina University (“ECU”) committed major violations of NCAA legislation. The case involved academic fraud by four (4) baseball student-athletes (student-athletes 1-4) and a women’s tennis student-athlete (student-athlete 5) who worked as an English tutor in the athletics department.  Additionally, two of the baseball student-athletes violated NCAA ethical conduct legislation by providing false and misleading information to the institution regarding their involvement in the academic fraud and the extent of the impermissible academic assistance they received.  After the investigation concluded the case was submitted to the Committee through the summary disposition process, which is an alternative to a formal hearing before the Committee that may be utilized when the NCAA enforcement staff, the member institution, and involved individuals agree to the facts of an infractions case and that those facts constitute major violations of NCAA legislation.