Here's the risk I see in a lot of posts and theories about the current state of NU.
Most posters / fans are convinced that the players have talent -- where is the proof in this? Strong recruiting class rankings? Rivals 100 and their kind are not measured objectively for any sort of accuracy -- they are in the (big) business of selling and providing information that is subjective at best. Has anyone ever seen an objective analysis of the top 25 recruiting classes and correlations to wins, BCS bowls and NCs? I have not.
Is "the players have talent" true because the radio play by play guys says so?
My point is that while the coaching staff can take blame, it might also be true that the current roster of players is not as good as some would believe. And the risk comes in turning over an entire coaching staff only to see marginal results again. Say Pellini does come to town, brings his own staff and then NU proceeds to go 7-5 or so and finishes 2nd in the North next year, then what? This is entirely possible (i.e how many thought NU would be 4-4 right now) and could lead folks to re-think their belief in the current talent level at NU. That said, it is much easier to run coaches out of town and boo them than direct frustration toward 19 to 22 year old kids who are just playing a game.
All I'm saying; is their compelling evidence that these players are really all that good?
Well, if they aren't that good, then our 'coach' shouldn't have recruited them. Or he should have taken the talent they have and cultivated it, taught them.
I think the players have talent, and our coaches don't know what to do with it.
Some inept people get to high positions, and the only way they stay there is to surround themselves with talented people to hide their own failings.
This is what BC does, he gets talented HS and JUCOs that he thinks have the fundamentals, then hopes he can get by with teaching them a complicated scheme.
Doesn't work, this method always starts to unravel after a period of time, as it is now.