Undone

If the options are sticking with Bo or taking Tressel, I'd take Tressel in a heartbeat. Wouldn't even have to think about it.

I think the more interesting thing is to speculate on who you'd get rid of if Bo stays (which he will, unfortunately). -I'd get an actual QB coach. -I'd probably get rid of Beck. -I'd can Ross Els, yesterday. -I'd definitely can Papuchis. Or find a kids' table for him somewhere.

If the options are sticking with Bo 'The Human Meltdown' Pelini or going with him, yes. Yes, I am.

Either way, I don't want another "up-and-coming" assistant who's never been under the spotlight before. Get someone that's proven. Throw the huge sacks of money at him.

Frost's resume is no more impressive than Bo's was in 2007. He's never been an FBS head coach. Therefore, he's a gamble. Just like Bo was a gamble. Make the decision Osborne was incapable of - throw a dump truck load of money bags at the guy who's won at least a conference title with an FBS program. I'd take D'Antonio or David Shaw, in that order.

^^^^^^This.

I will say though that he's got to be the best possible option. So the insinuation in the OP of trying Fyfe is just not happening. At all. But that actually makes me feel WORSE about the situation. His zone read game = pretty good. But when a good defense stacks the box, he just doesn't cut it.

Agreed. This is my take on Tommy, and WOW do I feel terrible saying this...but he doesn't have the pedigree to be the starting QB of a team that strives for top 10 football. He's just not good enough. He doesn't match the average level of talent of the rest of our skill position players (like Abdullah, Westerkamp, Bell, etc.). He's in the same league as Cody Green and Martinez in my not-so-humble opinion. Someone will chime in and claim that completion percentage doesn't mean much in the college game...but seriously, he does not have the accuracy. He just doesn't.

I feel like he'd define our power game and would be capable of stopping this never-ending offensive no-man's-land. Both in recruiting a style of QB that's doable for us and in scheme. But that's just hypothesis.

Agree with both of you. I guess my point was that the reason this frustration is reaching a fever pitch is because it's likely we'll get at least one of the next two. If so, we hit the nine win mark, which although is relatively pointless to us all at this point will rationally probably seem to hold a fair bit of sway with Eichorst. Bo has hit his peak, which is really more like a sustained plateau. I personally would take David Shaw. But that's just me.

No, it doesn't. The worst regular season record we can currently wind up with is 8-4. We went 5-7 that year.

From the standpoint of realistically getting someone to replace Bo that is passionate about taking over for a coach that won 9 games for seven straight seasons (because the odds are we'll win one of the next two...notice I said "the odds"), it does matter. It's a constant state of limbo.

Exactly. That loss either speaks for itself, or it doesn't. You decide. But like I said, if we go 10-2 & win a bowl game, it gets complicated for the administration. We know Bo's not going to win a conference title with his staff (and maybe not even with different staff), but firing a guy that goes 10-2 is intricately complicated. Maybe he'll make it easier though and lose three straight to go 8-4. This'll be interesting.

Meh. He also just said "We need to coach 'em better." Obviously what he says in the pressers doesn't matter after seven years. The blowouts speak for themselves. The most painful part about all of this would be to go 10-2 in the regular season and then win the bowl game. Chances of him being fired in that scenario? Really seems next to nothing. And I'm not ok with that.

The difference? Probably four or five aneurysms.

This assessment by McKewon is so damn good. It's probably the most concise way to sum up the issues on both sides of the ball. Only thing I'd add - in seven years, we've yet to recruit an above average QB. Add that to McKewon's quote above in the OP, and that's about the sum total of it.

Confirmed. Bucky shows up to rip Old Milwaukee tall boys and leave after 'Jump Around.' Outcome on field irrelevant. Thank you for this confirmation.

Really interesting stat.

I don't get much of a rise over talking trash with opponents' fans here. Really pointless. And, for you badger fans that haven't noticed, that really isn't the vibe on this board for the most part. I can say pretty definitively though that on average, this is the attitude of the average Badger fan that stops in here: -When they beat Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska, or another storied program the rhetoric is "How do you like getting embarrassed by perennial powerhouse Wisconsin?!" -When they lose, the rhetoric is "We're just here to drink beer anyway, not a big deal." It's interesting how that second one is a complete polar opposite of our fan base.

I agree with the majority of what you're saying, but I still think that the question of where we could potentially be if we stop marrying ourselves to recruiting only dual-threat QBs is very underrated. If you snag a kid who has inherently more passing ability and you pair him up with the stable of WR's we've gotten along with our ability to recruit and coach great I-Backs, it seems like worth a shot to try. I so badly want to see Bo try to find a kid that's 'pass first, run second,' but it apparently just isn't going to happen. I hate saying this, because it feels disloyal to Tommy...but I'm constantly wondering if we'd be a different (read: much better) offense with a pass-first guy.

There's just no way Beck gets fired. It's hard to believe people are entertaining this.

This. I keep imagining what we'd have with a guy even like K-State's QB given the fact we have a Heisman candidate running back.

I agree with you. But to play devil's advocate with the way we used our passing downs, if Tommy isn't throwing the ball too strong and over the head of his receivers (happened multiple times Saturday, including a first down play action pass where his man was wide open and he overthrew him), how does that possibly change perceptions of the passing plays we ran?

It's hilarious that you can't see the irony in this and his comment after reading through most of this thread. Also, has it occurred to you that possibly Beck is trying to tune up the passing game after seeing the atrocity that was our offensive line against Michigan State? Maybe he feels the way we actually win in Madison and Indy is to work on the passing game as much as we can, seeing the way Michigan State stonewalled Abdullah. But I'm sure someone will chime in and claim that Beck went away from the run too much in that game, and that we could have won if we just would have handed it off 50 times to Ameer.

Agreed. This is what gets inside my head, too. Because of Abdullah's insane run-up to this senior year and not really seeing anyone behind him doing what he's done (for the next couple of seasons), it makes the 'if not now, when?' question all the more challenging. ...but then I look at D'Antonio. A relative 'nobody' in the bigger college football world until recently when in my opinion he quietly slipped into the coaching elite and brought a program really far. I think Bo can do what D'Antonio has done. But this season is surely his best chance yet to get the conference title.