Briggs: Kuligowski's lawsuit against Toledo is as sad as it appears flawed

There are leaps.

There are bounds.

And then there are the jumps in logic made by Craig Kuligowski in his bombshell $10 million lawsuit against the University of Toledo.

They are so long that Carl Lewis would be jealous.

Kuligowski — the Toledo alum and Varsity T Hall of Famer who was widely regarded among the top defensive line coaches in the nation — may or may not have a case that the university fired him without due process.

I can’t say.

But the central premise of his age and race discrimination suit — that Toledo is unlawfully pushing out older white employees to diversify its athletic department — doesn’t add up.

Let’s look at the case.

Kuligowski was sent home early from the 2022 Boca Raton Bowl and later fired after the University of Toledo alleged that — “based on substantial evidence” — he “committed a significant and/or intentional violation” of its non-retaliation and standards of conduct policies, according to a copy of his employment separation letter.

At the time, three people familiar with the situation told The Blade that Kuligowski had verbally harassed a female UT staffer who earlier in the year had reported him for allegedly making an inappropriate comment.

The suit contends that version of events is misrepresented and overblown.

Kuligowski accuses UT of seizing on a “false and frivolous” report of sexual harassment against him in the fall of 2022 — the coach said he supposedly commented on a female employee’s “fancy pants” (he denies the remark) — and using that to justify his firing for the incident on the Rockets’ trip to the Boca Raton Bowl.

On that trip, Kuligowski alleges that the complainant sat down next to him and he responded, “If my wife knew you were near me, she’d kill you.”

“Obviously this was not an actual threat,” the lawsuit states, “but a joke born of an uncomfortable situation.”

The woman filed a formal complaint, and Kuligowski was fired weeks later.

Why?

“Because he was the wrong age and the wrong race,” the suit argues.

Kuligowski, 55, is white.

The suit even goes so far as to state: “Even if a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason exists (for Kuligowski’s firing), it is merely pretext for unlawful discrimination.” (Translation: If a white man at Toledo is fired for burning down a building, that is also racism.)

As evidence, Kuligowski alleges UT athletic director Bryan Blair said during a department staff meeting he wanted to hire “more coaches who were representative of current student-athletes.” Kuligowski believed that meant more coaches who were “younger and Black,” according to the suit.

The suit notes UT hired Frank Okam, 38, who is Black, to replace Kuligowski as defensive line coach, and also selectively cites a few other instances in which younger Black men succeeded older white men. For instance, Blair and his top deputy, Al Tomlinson, followed former AD Mike O’Brien and Dave Nottke. (O’Brien was pushed out. Nottke was not and remains a regular presence at UT athletic functions.)

So, what to make of all this?

Again, I can’t speak to exactly what happened and how his dismissal was handled procedurally.

Maybe a smoking gun will emerge.

But the larger, more sensational charge of reverse racism in the Toledo athletic department strikes me as insulting as it is flawed and reductive.

First, it is hard to imagine UT was looking for a reason to dismiss Kuligowski.

His ego could be a handful — “I look forward to making Toledo great again!” he wrote in his cover letter applying for the job in January, 2020 — and his final performance evaluation was satisfactory but not glowing. On a scale of 1 (“unsatisfactory") to 5 (“consistently exceeds”), head football coach Jason Candle gave him an overall rating of 3 (“meets”) in June, 2022.

But no one could deny Kuligowski loved his alma mater and was a good coach. What’s more, he had just received a two-year extension in March, 2022, and was celebrated as a member of the ‘22 class of the school’s athletic hall of fame.

All the while, UT was cooking up a reason to dismiss him?

That feels like quite the reach, and the reputed reason why feels like an even longer one.

While it is true that institutions should strive to represent the communities they serve in their search for the best and most dynamic talent, the suggestion that UT athletics discriminates against white employees is laughable.

Consider: Since Blair came to Toledo in 2022, he has hired four head coaches. All are white; two are over 40 (the Age Discrimination in Employment Act forbids age discrimination against people who are 40 or older).

Further, there are 15 administrators with associate or assistant athletic director titles at UT. Fourteen are white. And, by the way, Kuligowski himself replaced a younger Black coach at Toledo.

These are just facts, not a commentary.

Point is, you can cherry-pick your way to just about any conclusion, whether rooted in reality or not.

On a personal note, I might add that I’ve seen firsthand here the misguided leaps of logic.

The suit alleges that the University of Toledo leaked its “wrongful finding” on Kuligowski to The Blade and notes that we reviewed the coach’s personnel file, “which could have only come from sources within the University.”

The implication: Toledo was orchestrating a smear campaign against Kuligowski.

The reality: Our UT beat writer, Kyle Rowland, and I received a tip the week of the Boca Raton Bowl from a source not employed by the university. Word was Kuligowski had been sent home, and we began asking around. Truthfully, UT did not want this story — an embarrassment for the university — to get out. We obtained Kuligowski’s personnel file through a public records request, which was fulfilled on Jan. 25, 2023, almost two weeks after his firing.

But I digress.

We’ll see what happens.

It’s hard to fathom things have reached this sad juncture, but here we are.