COLUMBIA, Mo. — The predecessor is gone, the interim is in place and the search for a replacement is already underway. But there’s still an intriguing twist in play amid the departure of Desiree Reed-Francois from the University of Missouri’s athletics director post.
While most eyes will rightfully drift toward the candidates to replace Reed-Francois and the causes of her unexpected move to the University of Arizona, the more subtle matter of her contract buyout is worth monitoring.
At face value, it’s fairly simple: Because she left Mizzou before the end of her contract, she owes the university money based on a scale established in that agreement. Arizona, as is common of a new employer in the college sports world, is offering to help foot that bill — it’s one of the costs of doing business when it comes to administrators and coaches.
People are also reading…
That’s where the situation changes.
In a public document obtained by , Reed-Francois’ university said it is limiting how much buyout assistance it will give her — and that she’s expected to try to lower or remove entirely the buyout she owes MU. It’s a decision made by financially strapped Arizona that could impact Reed-Francois’ personal finances but also lead to Missouri not receiving the full buyout outlined in the outgoing AD’s contract.
Buyout discussion starts with Reed-Francois’ latest Mizzou contract, which she signed in March 2023 as an extension — or amendment, in administration parlance — to her initial deal in Columbia.
The contract extension ran through the end of the 2027-28 academic year and promised pay of $1.25 million per year — broken down as a $900,000 base salary and $350,000 in non-salary compensation — plus deferred compensation payments of $250,000 made every June.
Getting out of the contract required Reed-Francois to pay liquidated damages, colloquially known as a buyout, to the university, which is calculated by a simple formula: She owes half of what she would have made by the end of the contract.
In the deal’s remaining four years, MU would have paid Reed-Francois $5 million in regular compensation, meaning she owes $2.5 million. The inclusion of deferred compensation in her buyout likely pushes that number close to $3 million.
But it’s hard to precisely calculate, since there are not an even four years left on the deal, given that the contract was set to expire at the end of June 2028. Still, it’s safe to assume the buyout is at least $2.5 million and likely upwards of $3 million.
Even that figure could change.
Arizona, in submitted to its Board of Regents requesting the approval of Reed-Francois’ hire, wrote that it had lined up donor support to help with handling the buyout.
The school “agrees it will contribute up to $1.5 million toward any remaining buyout obligation of Reed-Francois to the University of Missouri. UArizona’s contribution, if any, will be sourced only from donor-based funding,†it wrote in the memo.
That still leaves at least $1 million for Reed-Francois to pay herself. (Her contract with MU dictated buyout payments occur monthly through the term of the deal unless both parties agree on a lump-sum structure.)
And even the $1.5 million Arizona is willing to pull from donors, it would rather not have to send over to Mizzou.
According to the memo, Reed-Francois “will undertake best efforts to reduce or eliminate any financial buyout (she) may owe to the University of Missouri.â€
That process may sound ambiguous, but the desired outcome is clear: The school with a $177 million deficit wants its athletics director to come cheaply, and it’s putting the burden on her to make it happen.
What isn’t readily apparent is what Reed-Francois’ “best efforts†to reduce or nix her buyout would look like. Is that a polite letter? A legal challenge? It sets the stage for further tension between the outgoing athletics administrator and university leadership.
It also remains to be seen whether MU would be willing to sacrifice money to appease Reed-Francois. If “best efforts†involve going the legal route, the university might not have a choice. But it doesn’t seem to have an obvious incentive to let Reed-Francois walk away freely, particularly given the surprising nature of her exit and the reality that the value of her buyout could likely fund two years of her eventual successor’s salary.
An MU spokesperson wouldn’t comment on whether the university is prepared to reduce the buyout, citing rules restricting the release of information regarding personnel issues. The spokesperson also wouldn’t confirm, for the same reason, whether any discussions between Missouri and Reed-Francois had taken place around her buyout.
The buyout money may be a small and subtle detail amid the broader athletics director shakeup, but it’s still something to watch as Mizzou and Reed-Francois move in different directions following her tenure.