Sports

Actions

Utah State receives response from attorney of Blake Anderson

Posted
and last updated

LOGAN, Utah — Two weeks after Utah State University informed head football coach Blake Anderson of their intent to end his employment, his attorney responded.

A spokesperson for the university told FOX 13 News in a statement that a 70-page response was received late Monday night.

"The university is reviewing it now," the spokesperson said. "Once a final decision is made, we will post the announcement on Utah State Today."

When speaking to the law firm representing Anderson, they told FOX 13 News they are waiting to release the contents of the 70 pages after USU issues their response.

"As a courtesy to the university, we won’t be commenting or releasing the response while Coach Anderson is still employed by USU," Anderson's lawyer said in a social media post.

Further details about what was contained in the response were not made available by the university spokesperson.

Anderson was placed on leave following an investigation involving student sexual misconduct and the school informed him of its intent to end employment on July 2.

He was given 14 days to respond to the notice, which his attorney did just shy of the deadline.

The school previously claimed its actions stemmed from Anderson's noncompliance with Utah State policies requiring the reporting of sexual misconduct and prohibiting school employees from investigating alleged sexual misconduct on their own.

In the aftermath, multiple other athletic executives were also dismissed, including Utah State Associate Vice President and Deputy Athletic Director of External Affairs Jerry Bovee, Director of Player Development and Community Austin Albrecht and Amy Crosbie, the executive associate athletics director for internal affairs and senior woman administrator.

Anderson's attorney issued the following statement to ESPN on July 2: "USU is going to be fighting an uphill battle if they try to fire him for cause just to avoid paying Blake what he's owed. Stiffing a head coach by blaming him for what his supervisor allegedly failed to do is a novel approach that hasn't been tried before, but that theory will never hold up in court."