1. Hired external "independent" investigations are done for clients that the firm serves. There is no doubt that certain operating assumptions were in play to ensure that the investigation, its results, and the manner of their reporting would be in some way helpful and/or favorable to the university. See Baylor.
2. The university had its opportunity to act in accordance with the report's recommendations or to suggest an amendment based on newly surfaced evidence. Instead President Knee-Jerk fires Fitz when the water gets hot.
3. Fitz's suspension is an admission of what most here have stated. Coach knew or should have known about widespread, long-term, sexually abusive hazing. The actual hazing seems to be undisputed at this point. The report sounds to me to be crafted with a willing credulity wrt statements exculpating administration to the degree possible, with Fitz as the "gosh even he didn't know, but we are establishing high-level accountability" cutoff.
4. If they were really sexually abusing players (and it sounds as though they were), while Fitz seems to be in position to hurt NU based on their process, he is not being unfairly punished. One would think whispers of this had made it elsewhere in administration over a course of over 15 years. Perhaps not, but if so Fitz's might not be last head that should roll.
5. As above, kudos to the journos.