I don't get this mindset at all. The 6th year of a "rebuild". Look around the nation over the last 30 years and try to find coaches that took 5 years much less more than that to get a program going. Frank Beamer at Virginia Tech is one, but there's not many. If you look at Ferentz, Briles, Patterson, Alvarez, Barnett, Tiller etc, etc...they all had won big by year 4. We're in year 6 of this thing, have not defeated a top 25 team in 2 years, have not finished in the top 25 in 6 years, have a 2-4 record against Iowa and an 0-6 record against Wisconsin.
A coaching change is going to be made, the question is whether it will be made after the Bowl game or after next season? Interest in the program was very low prior to this scandal breaking, and recruiting was already at the bottom of the B1G. I don't see how this team improves on the field next year and without improvement a change is certain to be made.
There are positives and negatives to both making that change after the bowl or enduring one more season and then making a change. I am in favor of whichever method leads to the best hire. Recruiting is f'd either way (not that it was good anyway)...either we make a change after the bowl and a new guy has to scramble to put together a 2017 class while this scandal is still fresh in everyone's minds or we wait until 2018 and the new guy has to put together a 2018 class (late, but probably not as late) and probably doing it with a program coming off a worse year on the field.