[NU Sports] OSU game highlighted Randy Walker's shortcomings

[Michael Vance]

At 11/16/2005 09:55 PM, SjT \(Stephen J. Truog\) wrote:
>Yes, the overnight success of the
>'95-96 Cats was an abberation -- that's a statistical
>fact.
>
>Walker's approach doesn't appear to be about quick
>fixes -- it's a  program building strategy for the
>long haul

OK, here are two questions for those calling for Walker's head:

1) Which is better, 10-1 or 9-2 for one, maybe two years in a row, followed 
by 3-5 years of records between 1-10 and 3-8, repeated ad infinitum?  Or 
consistently going 6-5 or 7-4 year in, year out?  And no, for the purposes 
of this question, there is no third choice.

2) Do you honestly believe that consistent, high-end (8-3 record minimum, 
but usually 9-2 or better) success in football can be achieved instantly, 
or even in seven years?   OR is it more realistic to expect a 3-5 years of 
6-5, then 3-5 years of 7-4, then 3-5 years of 8-3 until finally you reach 
the consistent Nirvana of 9-2 or better?

I'm not sure what you would call consistent, but when compared against our 
in-league competition -- Michigan, dOSU, Wisconsin, PSU -- we're talking 
about a lot longer than 5-7 years.  And even they have had pitfalls 
lately.  All but Michigan have suffered through non-bowl seasons in recent 
memory.

-Michael