The thing I've always liked about Sipple is his level-headedness. He says the things that should be said. Sometimes that doesn't please the sky-is-falling crowd because the tenor of his articles are more upbeat than they're feeling after a football loss. Because of this, Sip is often pegged as a fan-boy rather than a reporter. Bottom line is, Sip tends to see things from a much keener perspective than the fan in the stands. He is more fair than many of the other journalists covering Husker sports. And while it's painful to read an article like this, I think it is also a fair analysis of the state of the program.
I think you're giving Sipple FAR too much credit. He's already anointed Erstad as a success, with nothing to back it up. Sipple IS a fan boy. Which is why that article was striking. As I said to a friend of mine, when Steve Sipple jumps off your bandwagon, the bandwagon has lost all four tires and is probably on fire.
Hell, Sipple will still claim Mike Anderson didn't get a fair shake.