A Coach's Challenge: Unraveling the Kent State Termination Saga
The Genesis of a Legal Battle: Unjust Dismissal Allegations
Former Kent State University football coach Kenni Burns has taken legal action against the institution and several key figures, citing claims of unjust termination, violation of contractual agreements, and reputational damage. This move comes after his dismissal in April 2025, following a tenure marked by a 1-23 win-loss record with the Golden Flashes.
Unveiling the Financial Conspiracy: Burns' Core Claim
Burns asserts that his termination was not performance-based but rather a calculated strategy by the university to reduce expenses. This central argument forms the cornerstone of his lawsuit against Kent State.
Naming the Defendants: Key University Officials Included
The lawsuit extends beyond the university itself, specifically naming Kent State's president, Todd Diacon; the senior vice president for finance and administration, Mark Polatajko; general counsel, David Ochmann; and the institution's board of trustees as co-defendants.
Contested Allegations: Purchasing Card Misuse and Booster Loan
Prior to his termination, Burns was placed on administrative leave due to alleged improper use of his university purchasing card and an ongoing investigation into a substantial six-figure loan received from a university booster, as widely reported by media outlets.
Burns' Defense: Lack of Training and Prompt Reimbursement
In his legal filing, Burns refutes the accusations, stating that he never received adequate instruction on the proper use of the purchasing card. He further claims to have submitted all necessary receipts and to have repaid a portion of the disputed card expenditures to the university via a check exceeding $7,000, which the university subsequently cashed.
Financial Hardship and University Support: A Complex Relationship
The lawsuit also highlights Burns' personal financial difficulties during his coaching tenure, attributing them to a temporary relocation necessitated by flooding and the university's alleged failure to disburse his full salary.
The Booster's Aid: A Loan Amidst Financial Strain
These financial pressures reportedly led Burns to accept a loan from Mike Awad, a university booster and vendor. Burns contends that a university official approved this arrangement, although Kent State's internal investigation found "conflicting evidence" regarding the university's awareness of the loan.
Loan Repayment Details: Monthly Installments and Interest
Burns' legal document specifies that he received several monthly loans from Awad, all of which were repaid with interest. The university's investigative findings indicate that Burns reimbursed Awad $109,000 through a series of payments over a 14-month period between 2023 and 2024.
Contractual Amendments: Altered Termination Clauses
The lawsuit further suggests that the groundwork for Burns' dismissal was laid in early 2024, during the finalization of a one-year contract extension through 2028. This amendment reportedly altered the terms of his compensation in the event of a "for-cause" termination, significantly reducing the payout from a percentage of the total contract (approximately $2 million) to a percentage of his base salary for the season of his dismissal (around $371,000).
Strategic Maneuver: Allegations of Cost-Saving Measures
Burns' lawsuit explicitly states that, based on available information, the modification to his contract's termination clause was a deliberate act by Kent State to facilitate his unjust termination, thereby circumventing the more substantial buy-out terms of his original agreement and ultimately saving the university a significant sum of money.
A Proposed Settlement: The "Quiet Departure" Offer
The legal filing also reveals that while Burns was on administrative leave, David Ochmann, the general counsel, approached him with an offer to accept financial compensation in exchange for a "quiet departure." Burns was reportedly given a single day to consider this offer before being informed that the university would pursue a "for-cause" termination.
University's Stance: No Comment on Ongoing Litigation
In response to inquiries, a spokesperson for Kent State University informed ESPN that the institution refrains from commenting on active legal proceeding