I agree. I think Frost's history as a player is helping to control the way people talk about him. There's a decent chance a different coach would still be here in season four with these performances, but I think the word choice and overall tenor would be a lot different.Very good post overall. I think part of the challenge in evaluating Frost is that everyone wants him to succeed as a former player. I certainly want him to succeed. But football is a business, and the evaluation of Frost should be no different than any other coach we could have hired. There should be clear goals/expectations set for any coach, and if those goals are not met, then the responsible thing to do would be to move on. We certainly do not know what expectations were set by Moos previously, or what Alberts has set, but I think most fans would expect at least one winning season in four years. It feels like we are trying overly hard to find reasons to retain Frost rather that simply evaluating him objectively as we would if it were Mike Riley, Bill Callahan, or some other name unaffiliated with the Husker program. Just my two cents.
You can tell there's a general hesitancy among a lot of folks in the way they talk about Frost. I think that's OK given his history here. But to your point, the evaluation process does ultimately need to be objective, and I think it will be. I think most people inside and outside the program understand what kind of needs to happen from here on out. MSU was the starting point for that and they failed. That was a pretty significant hit to Frost in more ways than one. Kind of like removing a pretty critical piece of the foundation he was left standing on.
Last edited by a moderator: