In terms of MoneyLaw lessons, I think that the brouhaha at Ave Maria raises the issue of a school's mission and of whether the majority of the faculty must buy into the school's stated mission in order for the school to run smoothly. My guess is that the faculty at Ave Maria views the school's mission very differently from the way that the administration views it.
At Houston, we had a choice of having the traditional, non-specific, not-very-useful mission statement (we'd teach well, do interesting research, and serve our community--as if every other law school didn't do those things, too) or we could try to be more specific and UHLC-centered. As part of our strategic plan, we went for the latter option, which was a pleasant surprise to me.
That certainly helped us w/our external audiences: the University, the bar, prospective students, and (perhaps) our alumni. I don't think that having a specific mission statement--in and of itself--helps with the internal audiences unless the dean actually makes choices about resources based on that mission statement. Every discussion in a school is hypothetical unless resource allocation is part of the discussion.
As for the problems facing Ave Maria itself, my heart goes out to everyone there. These crises are often life-changing for those involved. I know that I'm still experiencing some post-2006 effects of my time at Houston, and I'll bet that I'm not the only one.