DeCenzo discusses Bennett’s removal as football coach at Coastal Carolina University

Removing the football program’s founding coach from his position was an agonizing decision that Coastal Carolina University President David DeCenzo wrestled with before finally notifying David Bennett he’d be replaced, DeCenzo said during a wide-ranging discussion Wednesday with The Sun News’ editorial board.

“There was much angst and emotion, but I finally came to a point where I knew what I needed to do,” said DeCenzo, who described Bennett as a friend.

DeCenzo delivered the news Friday to the coach who developed the university’s program from the ground up beginning in 2002. He’d sent word to Bennett that he wanted to see him when the coach returned from a recruiting trip, DeCenzo said.

The president said he wanted to make sure word of the decision didn’t leak out before he was able to talk with Bennett.

“He’d earned the right to learn it from me,” DeCenzo said.

It should not have been a surprise, however, DeCenzo said. They had met two years earlier to discuss the program’s performance and that brought about changes in the assistant coach staff.

The move had nothing to do with the arrest of a longtime football equipment coordinator on forgery and embezzlement charges the same day. “I had no control over the prosecutor’s office,” he said.

The decision came from an understanding that a consistently successful football program is a key to maintaining the growth of the university, DeCenzo said.

One of the key questions surrounding the coaching search is what kind of budget Coastal Carolina will have to spend on the next head coach and how much the university will owe Bennett, who signed a 10-year contract in May of 2007.

“It’s [DeCenzo’s] desire that that salary would be in line with the other two primary sports coaches, [men’s] basketball and baseball -- which would be a base salary of about $175,000,” CCU director of news and public affairs Martha Hunn said after speaking with DeCenzo later Wednesday when The Sun News presented further questions.

“And it would have incentives awarded based on outcome, and those outcomes would be, for example, wins, academic performance, character of the team -- like with the other coaches.”

Terms of Bennett’s 10-year contract -- which paid him an initial base salary of $160,000 with annual eight-percent raises -- indicate he is owed the full remainder of his salary if terminated within the first five years and 50 percent of the remaining salary if let go after five years. He is five seasons into that deal but not yet five calendar years.

After speaking with DeCenzo, Hunn said that whatever money is owed to Bennett is “not relevant” to the question about how much the school has budgeted for its next coach.

“And as far as how much the university is on the hook, that’s actually going to be a legal determination,” Hunn said.

As for his role in choosing that next coach, DeCenzo indicated he will be every bit as involved as he was in the decision to relieve Bennett of his coaching duties.

“He’s working with the athletic director on that,” Hunn said after speaking with DeCenzo. “[He said] by state law, anyone hired will be hired by the president. It will be a highly scrutinized decision and therefore he will be actively involved in that hiring. It has such a tremendous impact on the university, on what the university needs to achieve and on the future of CCU football. He said that the athletic director is doing the vetting, and President DeCenzo will have a role in the decision.”

Asked earlier in the day about including the chairman of the board of trustees in the meeting Friday to inform Bennett that the university was making a coaching change, DeCenzo said word of the decision was communicated through the chain of university board members in advance.

“The decision was mine,” he said, “but you don’t do something like that without informing your board.”

After informing Bennett of his decision, DeCenzo said he told the coach he planned to read a prepared statement at the scheduled news conference. He read the statement to the coach at Bennett’s request and made some changes in the contents at the coach’s suggestion, DeCenzo said, contradicting an earlier recollection from Bennett that DeCenzo’s recitation of the statement was how he’d received word of his removal.

Reached Wednesday, Bennett said, “I’m going to take the high road and not comment on it all. It caught us completely off guard. I’m going to wait and let our lawyer get in there with it and handle it all.”

Bennett is beloved in the community and DeCenzo said he hopes the university and coach will come to an agreement on another role for him.

Because such decisions are tied to terms of a contract, DeCenzo is limited in how much he can say, but noted: “I value what David can do and I’m hoping to find a way to use what he’s good at ... I know he can do things that will benefit us.”

After speaking with DeCenzo, Hunn said later Wednesday that the notion of reassigning Bennett to another role within the university was part of his thought process from the beginning.

“He said that David Bennett brings tremendous value in community engagement [and] that currently the university does not have anyone directing volunteers and directing sports tourism, and so that’s his hope is that at the turn of the year that discussion can continue,” Hunn said. “But from the very beginning, that was something he knew he would communicate to Coach Bennett.”

Bennett declined further comment.

DeCenzo said he knew the move would upset Bennett’s many supporters, but he also knew that shouldn’t be a factor in the decision.

“I am entrusted to lead and that does not mean making popular decisions,” he said. “That doesn’t mean it didn’t come without personal expense. ... I’m not trying to be cold-hearted ... but I can’t accept mediocrity. The role of football is too important to the school’s growth.”