So being an alleged serial abuser is enough to fire him? So if I can get someone to allege something against you and I can present rumors that allege something about you. You should be fired.
Again, one instance in 2009.
Yes, 2009 was an anchor that changed Zach's life forever. In terms of lawful termination, that went a long way to losing him the benefit of the doubt.
From that event/arrest forward, any rumor of domestic violence, even the unsubstantiated, has to be treated maximally seriously, investigated each time. Now let's speculate that all such rumors are always deeply investigated and always remain unsubstantiated. Even then, if recurring rumors are frequent enough that they become a distraction, that could be enough to fire him. If the follow-up rumors are frequent or dark enough to become a PR liability, then again that's enough to fire him.
Places of work aren't courts of law. And administrator inconvenience, colleague discomfort and an institution's risk of lost reputation in the face of "alleged serial abuse" legitimize any termination.
Meanwhile: You know what would also absolve OSU of that risk? The fact that Zach wasn't a good football coach. What else? His DUI. His belligerent twitter persona. That he photographed his genitalia during team activities and had a sexual relationship with an OSU football subordinate.
So yeah, even if the entire nation flips and sides with Meyer's handling (and we all may), there's insufficient reason to conclude Zach Smith got a raw deal. That, looking back, boy did he obviously deserve to keep that job.
Job wise, Zach Smith made approximately one squillion fatal errors.