“It is our policy to not comment on pending litigation.”

Evidently, stiffing your former employer on a contract provision is something else you can do at Georgia Tech.

Georgia Tech athletic director Todd Stansbury has been sued for breach of contract by Oregon State, his former employer, according to court documents obtained by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The story was first reported by The Oregonian earlier Saturday.

Oregon State, from where Stansbury was hired in September 2016, alleged in its lawsuit, filed Wednesday, that Stansbury stopped making payments on money owed the school as part of his buyout for leaving before his contract was completed.

Stansbury left his position as Oregon State AD a little more than a year into the job. He signed a five-year contract in 2015.

Stansbury owed about $2.1 million when he left for Tech and had been making payments through July before stopping, according to court documents.

Maybe he forgot.

Given that Stansbury had made considerable progress in repaying the debt, reducing the principal owed from the original $2.1 million to $1.4 million as of Oct. 31 of this year, along with interest accruing at the contracted 9 percent, the dispute may concern how much is still owed or the rate of its repayment.

Or not.

The best thing here is that he’s playing both ends against the middle.

The buyout was a central element of the contract that Tech and Stansbury crafted together. Stansbury had strong interest in taking the job, as did Tech in hiring him, but the buyout was a major obstacle for him to accept.

To help him handle the obligation, then-president G.P. “Bud” Peterson agreed on a contract that included a $1.1 million loan from the athletic association to Stansbury to help cover the buyout. The loan would be forgiven if he were to stay through his five-year deal. (He would owe the entire amount immediately, plus interest, if he were to leave early, a term that Stansbury accepted as an indication of his commitment to Tech.)

His salary also was generous, at least in part to further assist with the buyout. Stansbury’s starting salary was $900,000, an 80 percent raise from his Oregon State salary and $200,000 more than predecessor Mike Bobinski was making at the time he took the AD job at Purdue.

You know, we give SEC ADs crap all the time for the way Jimmy Sexton runs all over them, but the way Georgia Tech handles contract negotiations with its athletic hires pretty much qualifies as Olympic level buffoonery all on its own.  They can do that!



Filed under Georgia Tech Football, See You In Court

7 responses to ““It is our policy to not comment on pending litigation.”

  1. 81Dog

    Anyone going to work for the GTAA should hire Paul hewatt’s agent to negotiate the deal. For a bunch of self professed smart guys who understand math, tech sucks at this game, don’t they?


  2. RangerRuss

    “Maybe he forgot.” Hehehehe.


  3. Hogbody Spradlin

    9 percent interest! Pretty spiffy these days.


    • Dawg1

      NO worries, he got his new employer to loan him money to cover his debt to his old employer. The Wolf of 404 is apparently on the Madoff plan!


  4. Russ

    I’m just surprised that an individual actually had to pay a buyout. I always thought those were just numbers on paper, and one organization or the other paid some nominal amount to check a box.


  5. Bulldog Joe

    Night shift opportunities are always available at Waffle House.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. BMan

    I’m sort of amazed that Tech, through the loan to Stansbury that would be forgiven if he stayed 5 years, was essentially on the hook for only $1.1M of the buyout, leaving Stansbury on the hook for the rest. I always thought the hiring school paid those out entirely, but maybe I’m naive.

    Still, if Tech gave him a $1.1M loan to help with the $2.1M buyout, how has he only paid it down to $1.4M thus far?