...he obviously wasn't looking to can Bo, who obviously could've stood to hear some support.
How do you know?
Which part? I'll explain both.
Bo served his head up on a plate Friday but still has a job. If you are looking to get rid of Bo you do it this past weekend fairly controversy-free. You don't give Bo the opportunity to turn things with a bowl win. We may play Texas, beat them and Bo gets signficant support back. Possible we screw the pooch in the bowl and SE makes a move but IMO it's to say firing wasn't the plan because the perfect firing opportunity came and went
You can't look at Bo's behavior during and after the game and say the job-situation wasn't involved? Hell Bo was overheard questioning why he should do the tv show if he wasn't going to be coach anymore. Bo didn't know his status or even seem to have a feel for it. Better communication than that is needed. Bo's meltdown could've been averted if SE dealt with that toxic situation rather than let it fester. If Bo is the guy he should've gotten support before Saturday.
All I'm saying is that you can't make a statement like "he obviously wasn't looking to can Bo" just based on the fact that Bo didn't get fired. You're on the outside looking in and seeing very little. You have no idea what went on behind closed doors, who talked to who, what boosters might have had to say with the weight of money, if Osborne was involved, if he had Perlman's permission or had his hands tied, etc. etc. etc.
It's equally just as possible that he was looking at nothing
but canning Bo but was unable to. We just don't know.