Want more from Front Office Sports
in your search results?
Ex–Ohio University head football coach Brian Smith had a four-month relationship with an undergraduate student, new records show.
The university placed Smith on leave on Dec. 1 and fired him Wednesday after the first-year head coach led the Bobcats to an 8–4 record this season.
New documents obtained by a Front Office Sports public records request show two letters sent by university president Lori Gonzalez to Smith and his lawyer, and another message sent by the attorney back to the school. The first letter from Gonzalez, dated Dec. 12, is a notice of intent to fire Smith; the second letter is attorney Rex H. Elliott’s response on Tuesday; and the third letter is the official termination letter, dated Wednesday.
In the notice letter, Gonzalez lays out the university’s reasons for firing Smith. She says that he triggered a for-cause firing in several ways, including:
- “Participation in extramarital affairs, including one with an undergraduate student, to which you have admitted”
- “Repeated use of alcohol in your office, in violation of university policy”
- “A public appearance during which you smelled strongly of alcohol and were intoxicated in your demeanor”
The school had previously been tight-lipped about Smith’s situation. Smith’s attorney told the school’s public TV and radio station, WOUB, three days after the coach was put on leave that they still hadn’t received a formal reason for the decision. The silence led to widespread speculation and criticism from student media.
Gonzalez wrote that Smith’s extramarital affairs including the relationship with the student triggers clauses in his contract that refer to a potential firing for any “disrepute, scandal, and ridicule” that reflect poorly on the school.
In response, Elliott wrote that “Coach Smith didn’t participate in an extramarital affair and you know it,” saying the coach and his wife had been separated since earlier this year. The two finalized their divorce earlier this month. “Coach Smith did not hide the relationship, and even his now ex-wife didn’t accuse him of engaging in an extramarital affair,” he wrote.
Elliott said Smith met the student “at an establishment in Athens” and didn’t know she attended the university, but the two were in a “perfectly appropriate consensual adult relationship.” He wrote that the woman did not work in the athletic department and Smith ended the nearly four-month relationship in early November. The letter says OU does not have a policy barring employees from dating students.
The university president claimed in her letter that Smith admitted to athletic director Slade Larscheid that he “carried on an affair” at the on-campus Ohio University Inn, where he was spotted by a parent of one of his football players.
Smith’s lawyer responded that the claim was misleading because Smith was living at the inn following the separation from his wife. The coach told Larscheid that he saw the parents while with a 41-year-old woman he was dating after the student, according to Elliott.
Gonzalez also cited Smith’s drinking in her letter, saying his contract bars him from drinking “as to impair” his duties. Elliott said that this claim has “no relationship to the truth” because “Coach Smith has never been inebriated at an OU event.”
Gonzalez also cited a violation of university policy: drinking in his office, for which Smith was reprimanded last month. In his response, Elliott wrote that coaches were toasting victories after home wins “with Bourbon provided by your husband to Coach Smith in his office.”
Elliott also wrote about other instances of university employees drinking on campus, including when an associate athletic director invited Smith to the office of a faculty member who offered him bourbon, and all three of the men drank together.
All told, Elliott wrote, “There is zero basis for a ‘for cause’ termination and Coach Smith intends to vigorously pursue litigation should OU continue down this reckless path.”
In Gonzalez’s Dec. 17 termination letter, she wrote that she “reviewed and considered” Elliott’s response, but the university still “has ample cause” to fire the coach.
Read the documents here:
