I think they supported his efforts to win football games, and tolerated his behavior as a prickly employee and poor representative of the University.
Meaning they looked at Bo pretty much the same way many folks in the fanbase did, and actually gave him a longer leash than Youngstown State and LSU. I'm guessing they had private interactions we didn't, and it's possible Bo Pelini bears some responsibility in how that relationship went.
I understand some of you don't like Harvey Perlman and Shawn Eichorst, and that's fine, too. I never thought about them much one way or another. They were administrators with lot of responsibilities beyond hiring, firing, or caretaking the head football coach. Perlman wouldn't have the time or inclination to weigh in on a PR initiative to help Bo Pelini. It absolutely wouldn't have happened without Shawn Eichorst's knowledge and approval, even if he hated the f#&%er. I believe Eichorst got his comeuppance less than three years into his choice of head coach, and Eichorst deserved his firing as much as Pelini.
But isn't it a bit weird to be in Year Four of Scott Frost, on the heels of three losing seasons, talking about Moos and Frost trying to get out of a game they think their players are destined to lose, and we're talking about Harvey Perlman?
To put it another way, if Eichorst and Riley had remained, made the exact same moves as Scott Frost, posted the exact same results, and tried to duck out of the Oklahoma game to get the beleaguered head coach an easy W, would you be More Supportive or More Tolerant?