I think your take is silly. Contracts have 2 or more parties. One party is rarely allowed the discretion to say what the terms of the agreement mean--that's what courts are for. It was always obvious that MSU was going to say the firing was "for cause," because any other action made them contractually liable for the $70+ million. Them saying it doesn't make it true. It's exactly the situation Michael Scott was in--he can say that he's declaring bankruptcy, but it means nothing until a court grants him bankruptcy.
I'm pretty sure that MSU and Tugger will settle this case for an 8-figure payout and that the settlement agreement will state that he was not fired for cause. When that happens, I will not return here and post clown gifs--because I understand that it's foolish for someone to ascribe some moral dimension to decisions made by entities like MSU and Tugger.
I. Cant. Help. Myself.