Same with YU. Some Torah giants adopted the tactic of refusing to step into the place. Others not only did enter the building but they even taught there.
But it was a question only of tactics, not daas Torah opinion on YU’s theology, which has, of course, been considered dangerous and deviant by the Torah giants who addressed it even close to a century ago.
Moreover, in YU’s case, a certain Rav (not YU’s “The Rav”) who taught there was asked why he taught there given the above. He explained regretfully that he was somehow convinced by a certain R”Y of YU that the future of Torah in America was only in YU but that had he known at the time that this would not be the case then he would not have taught in YU.
So the greatness of some of the people who taught there does not in any way convey legitimacy to that institution and its theology, particularly in light of the gedolim’s strong opposition to which those same people there agreed.