Brian Kelly Sues LSU For Complete $54 Million Buyout, While LSU Seeks Firing With Zero Buyout

Former LSU football coach Brian Kelly (right) is suing LSU for his full, $54 million buyout. Scott Woodward (left) fired Kelly on Oct. 26 and said then that the buyout was being negotiated. (Tiger Rag file photos).

GLENN GUILBEAU, Tiger Rag Editor

Former LSU football coach Brian Kelly and his lead attorney Bennett Speyer of Toledo, Ohio, and other representation filed a lawsuit Monday night against LSU seeking Kelly’s full, $54 million buyout after his firing by then-LSU athletic director Scott Woodward on Oct. 26 in the fourth year of a 10-year, $100 million contract.

The suit filed in the 19th Judicial District of East Baton Rouge Parish came after LSU attorneys let pass a 5 p.m. Monday deadline submitted by Kelly and his representation requesting LSU give them written confirmation that LSU will “fulfill its contractual obligation” to pay the entire $54 million buyout to Kelly.

Kelly previously had turned down settlement offers of $25 million, then $30 million.

LSU not answering that request by 5 p.m. Monday apparently means LSU doesn’t wish to pay the full buyout and is now saying it wants to fire Kelly with cause, which means it would not owe him any of the buyout.

There had been media speculation via LSU’s side that LSU expected to get Kelly’s buyout down to approximately $27 million via negotiations because of a clause in Kelly’s contract under the “Termination and Suspension” title. Media speculation that is now proven not to be true, at least not yet.

“This agreement may be terminated for ’cause’ by LSU at any time prior to its expiration, upon written notice to Employee,” the contract says and adds that, “Cause’ for termination shall be defined as,” and lists several items. The one LSU sources have pointed to is Item D, which says:

“Engaging in serious misconduct, which either displays a continual, serious disrespect or continual, serious disregard for the mission of LSU, brings employee into substantial public disrepute sufficient – at the discretion of LSU – in a manner sufficient to materially impair employee’s ability to perform his obligations without material adverse impact on the team or program, or constitutes moral turpitude and breaches his high moral and ethical standards applicable to him as a visible representative of LSU, including – but not limited to – a knowing and material act of dishonesty, misrepresentation, or fraud.”

On the night Kelly was fired on Oct. 26 after a 49-25 home loss to Texas A&M dropped the Tigers out of the playoffs for the fourth time in Kelly’s four seasons, Woodward mentioned an ongoing negotiation.

“I made the decision to make a change after last night’s game,” Woodward said in an LSU athletic department release. “We wish Coach Kelly and his family the very best in their future endeavors. We will continue to negotiate his separation and will work toward a path that is better for both parties.”

But a highly connected Tiger Rag source that night questioned if there was any real negotiation.

“Brian Kelly accepted his fate, but he is insisting on his full buyout,” the source said.

Four days later on Thursday, Oct. 30, LSU fired Woodward – a day after Louisiana Governor Jeff Landry said Woodward would not be involved in the search for and hiring of a new coach to replace Kelly. Because of what Landry called the “terrible” contract Woodward gave Kelly when he hired him away from Notre Dame after the 2021 season.

“No, I can tell you right now, Scott Woodward will not be selecting the next coach,” Landry said at a press conference. “Hell, I’ll let Donald Trump select him before I let him (Woodward) do it.” 

Landry had also reportedly suggested to LSU Board of Supervisors members and LSU officials in a meeting at the Governor’s Mansion on Oct. 26 that Woodward be fired.

Executive deputy athletic director Verge Ausberry replaced Woodward on Oct. 30 on an interim basis and was elevated to athletic director without the interim tag last week by incoming president Wade Rousse. Ausberry’s name is on Kelly’s lawsuit.

Kelly’s lawyers say Kelly was fired without cause, which usually means the complete buyout for the fired party. LSU’s release on Oct. 26 did not mention cause or without cause, but it sounded more like without cause.

The 48-page lawsuit says Kelly and his representation want a “declaratory judgment confirming that LSU’s termination of Kelly is without cause and that Kelly is entitled to receive the full liquidated damages (buyout) in his contract.”

Meanwhile, LSU is changing its story. LSU attorneys told the Baton Rouge Advocate on Monday that Woodward did not have “the authority to terminate coach Kelly and/or make settlement offers to him.”

The lawsuit also pointedly answered the widespread recent media speculation from LSU sources that Kelly’s buyout would be halved because of the above morality clause.

“LSU has never claimed that Kelly was terminated for cause, and, prior to November 10, 2025, never asserted that he engaged in any conduct that would warrant such a termination,” the lawsuit states. “To the contrary, LSU repeatedly confirmed, both publicly and to Kelly, that the termination was due to the team’s performance, not for cause. Kelly never engaged in any such conduct, and LSU never relied on any incident of cause prior to Kelly’s termination.”

LSU has possibly not been more public about how Kelly may have violated the moral clause above for its own legal reasons. Because publicly stating accusations of such moral clause violations could lead to legal disputes, especially if Kelly contests the allegations. That could result in prolonged litigation and additional costs for LSU.

Kelly’s attorney, Bennett Speyer, had no comment when reached Tuesday, but attorney Tom Mars, a college football coach contract and buyout specialist, did.

Mars was asked by Tiger Rag what he thought the chances of LSU getting Kelly’s buyout below $54 million are.

“Approximately zero,” he said.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


− seven = three
Powered by MathCaptcha