No Ollie's cheating was morally reprehensible. UConn reporting it, as it is obligated to do, is perfectly appropriate. Somehow you are arguing that ethics are only must be followed "if you care about them." That's the kind of moral slippery slope that inevitably gets people into trouble.
Here's a great example, Kevin cheated, maybe he felt like other coaches must have been cheating because he was doing so poorly against them. Who knows he may well have been right (cough, cough Tremont cough) but that didn't make what he did appropriate. Once he cheated he then felt he had to lie to bosses. That was fine because the other coaches probably did that as well, right? Once he had lied to his bosses, he really had to lie the the NCAA. I'm sure he felt like he had no choice, in his view, because he couldn't admit to being both a cheat and liar. Now he is looking at a show cause order.
Of course he could have done the right thing, apologized and gone away quietly, but that would be admission that he's not the man we once thought he was. So instead honoring his agreement in his contract (and the CBA) which terminates upon, among other things, UConn's determination that he has violated NCAA or university policy, Kevin decided to get money to which he has no legal or moral right. When the University appropriately refused he, essentially, had a tantrum, threatening to get through extortion what he is not entitled to at law. Eventually this devolved into KO trying to smear a man that once described as a "second father" whose support "meant everything to (Ollie)."
So here we are and this once "high character guy" is defined by his actions as a disloyal, cheater and liar. It is sad really. That is the problem with thinking that ethics is only important when you "care about it." Eventually, you care about nothing and accordingly are ethically bankrupt.
