Look, I don't know if firing O'Leary was the best "integrity" move. But he absolutely lied, and that's absolutely the wrong thing to do, so I don't blame ND officials for holding him accountable the way they did. It seems harsh, and it's almost certainly true that his lies are not at all the reason he got the job in the first place. But the message was at least a good one: We won't tolerate lying to get ahead, not even if you're good at winning football games.
Contrast that stance with the way ND has responded, almost uniformly, during every "crisis" in Brian Kelly's tenure. A student died in 60 mph winds, but the wind was "unremarkable." Zero accountability for the incident - we were all responsible, so no one was. What was the message here? "We will try to mislead people about the decision-making process and the conditions that day, so long as you are . . . in the first year of your contract?"
Wins vacated because of academic cheating, for the first time in our history. And, once again, no one is accountable. Brian Kelly publicly proclaims that his responsibility is "Zero. None. Absolutely none." No one ever bothers to correct that statement. What's the message? You don't have to be accountable for anything pertaining to the "student" in student-athlete. If they cheat, it's on them; if they win, you get the praise (and the extension)!
Meanwhile, Fr. Jenkins promises to vacate wins if players were ineligible, then appeals the NCAA order to vacate after admitting players were ineligible, then issues a public statement whining about vacating wins despite expressly agreeing to do so. What's the message? He boxed himself in on what was "the right thing to do," which he didn't need to do at all. Having done so, though, he declined repeatedly to meet the standard he himself had set, and complained repeatedly about how unfair it was that he might have to do what he said he'd do. "I'm willing to say the right thing, but not do the right thing."
At around the same time, of course, knowing that ND would be vacating wins, Swarbrick declared that the football has never been in better hands and that 2012 (one of the years to be vacated) "bought us the time to do it right." He knew we weren't doing it right; that's why we had to vacate wins. But he said it anyway, and he never really had to dial it back. Message: I can lie straight to your faces, knowingly, and there will be no consequences.
Can the University be trusted to act with integrity when it comes to football? It seems to have adopted a "do whatever it takes" attitude when it comes to protecting the program from accountability. Of course, at the exact same time, it seems to refuse to "do whatever it takes" to compete and win at the highest level. I admit that it's still hard for me to understand.
And we do it all for a mediocre coach who has achieved zero major bowl wins, has repeatedly suffered humiliating defeats in our biggest games, has had several embarrassing sideline episodes, has failed to deliver a national championship in eleven full seasons (and has never even really been close unless measured by "in the conversation"), and who might take over the ND record for most wins by a head coach (seems likely he'll reach 106 in 2021) five years after assuming the mantle as the coach responsible for the most losses (31 by 2016).
It's hard to figure out why we've decided to act this way. But it's still pretty easy to spot an integrity problem.