For the many true believers in former Northwestern University football coach Pat Fitzgerald, the news that the coach had settled with his former employer in his $130 million wrongful termination suit following a hazing scandal was vindication, pure and simple.

Reading between the lines of the carefully worded statement, it was clear the university did not have hard evidence its lawyers believed would stand up in court that Fitzgerald knew about the inappropriate conduct, replete with sexualized acts and other forms of hazing, among his players. (There is no dispute that the conduct took place, as confirmed by an outside investigation, and that it involved ritualized humiliation for freshmen, especially those who performed poorly on the field). The terms of the settlement were not made public, as is typical, but we'd wager that Fitzgerald got many tens of millions of dollars. "We're very, very satisfied with the terms of the settlement," Fitzgerald's agent, Bryan Harlan of Excel Sports told ESPN's Pete Thamel.

See that extra "very," a tactic echoed rhetorically elsewhere by Fitzgerald's shrewd lawyer, Dan Webb? That's code for, "we didn't settle in the middle, we actually won."

Northwestern got played. Big time.

Here's what President Michael Schill wrote to the campus in 2023:

As the head coach of one of our athletics programs, Coach Fitzgerald is not only responsible for what happens within the program but also must take great care to uphold our institutional commitment to the student experience and our priority to ensure all students -- undergraduate and graduate -- can thrive during their time at Northwestern. Clearly, he failed to uphold that commitment.

Here's what Webb got the university to say yesterday:

Northwestern appreciates Coach Fitzgerald's 26 years as a Northwestern player and coach. Northwestern is proud of Coach Fitzgerald's teams' success on the field as well as its (sic) success in the classroom. Northwestern University had the highest graduation rate of any Division 1 football program during 2016-22.

Quite the difference, no? It reads like Northwestern just emerged from a Maoist struggle session.

Winning -- or as close as possible to being able to declare victory while still avoiding the spectacle of a trial -- was crucial for Fitzgerald if he is to return to coaching. He's been savvy so far, staying quiet and out of the picture and volunteering on a high school sideline while his lawyers went to work. Now Harlan can do his job and get Fitzgerald another lucrative gig. On social media, Fitgerald's fans variously called for his reinstatement, his being granted a game as "honorary coach" and a whole variety of other forms of Northwestern humiliation.

In 2023, we wrote that Schill, who initially dithered about what to do, was right to fire Fitzgerald. Here's what we said and we have not changed our minds:

This "should have known" question is, of course, complicated. One argument is that players are adults who make their own decisions and that their coach cannot, and never will, know everything about what they are doing when he is not physically present. The opposing view would be that ignorance is no defense in instances like these when you are the boss, and an educator to boot.

Indeed, Fitzgerald had a duty to adhere to the university's policy on harassment and inappropriate conduct, and most people would say that also means creating the kind of climate where egregious violations of that policy don't happen.

Fitzgerald either knew about it, and looked the other way, which means that he violated the terms of his employment, or he truly did not know, which is both what he has said and what the settlement implies. But that still brings his role as a leader into question. Our position back then was that this was Fitzgerald's program and whether he knew about it or not was not the issue. It took place on his watch. Period. The great coaches of old, we argued, would have fallen on their swords and said something along the lines of: "I knew nothing of this but this was still my responsibility." They'd have loved their universities too much to take them to the cleaners.

Of course, people with contracts have the right to hire lawyers and try and get paid out and this case surely turns on the legality (or not) of firing this coach for "cause" and how that did or did not breach the terms of his contract. We're not surprised by the existence of a settlement; we were surprised by the one-sidedness of the rhetoric thereafter.

One reasonable conclusion from the events of the week is that maybe future contracts with Northwestern coaches should be written differently in the first place. It's also a reminder that the academic world is very different from what was the case in 2023 when issues such as sexualized hazing were white hot on campus. Now, universities have other worries.

They include those of a fiscal variety. Many millions of dollars leave Northwestern because of this mess, with a hefty share going into the pockets of expensive lawyers. Meanwhile, Northwestern at the end of July reduced employee benefits, implemented a hiring freeze, reduced non-personnel expenses by 10% and forwent annual compensation increases. It also reduced the university's budget "attributable to staff" by about 5% and eliminated approximately 425 filled and open positions.

The Fitzgerald settlement ennobles neither side.