In nature, elements change states due to a variety of enivornmental factors (changes in pH, the presence of other ions). Elements like iron can either be oxidized or reduced, when possible, to take an altered form. What you don't see though is iron transforming into aluminum or titanium.

In life, people change states due to a variety of socioeconomic factors. Solich taking a snap in the shotgun, or reducing his dependence on the option, is not significant because his fundamental properties remain unchanged (loyalty, focus on establishing the run, calm demeanor).

If Frank fired an offensive or defensive coordinator after last season (a successful one relative to OHIO standards), or threw on 15 consectutive possessions, or gave a stirring speech to the media, I would consider that significant change.

If Frank started running Oregon's offense I would consider that iron turning into titanium, and I would quit my job to take up alchemy (the process of turning metals into gold*).

Frank has not changed. His players have. I'm not worried. But I understand why other fans are. I still honestly believe he's our fastest route to a MAC Championship. And above all, the man has been a blessing to this university.

*Although alchemy is a fictional chemical process, there is evidence with modern technology and nuclear power trace amounts of gold can be created

I agree about Frank being the fastest route to a MAC Championship and a blessing to the university.

I disagree when you say that Frank has not changed. I posted that NY Times link that you are very familiar with to illustrate the point that he has made major changes before.

He installed an entirely new offense. Yes, a 66-year-old head coach made a major shift from philosophy to try something new.

For a while, it worked. Now, it doesn't.

No matter the reason the plan doesn't work now, it's his job to:
a. Change it
b. Stay with it

The point you are trying to make is that Frank has not changed. He has.

He may do it again. Or not. But he's surprised people before. Even his old boss.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1933&dat=20041216&id=eQgiAAAAIBAJ&sjid=cGkFAAAAIBAJ&pg=5794,6756385

 

I alluded to his shift in his play design during the transistion from Nebraska to OHIO in an earlier post. There's a better article out there; I'll try to find it.

Maybe what I'm not making clear is that Frank's ability to adapt has always been a fundamental property of his human element.

If I want Taco Bell but I'm driving along and get off at the exit and there's only a Hardee's. I adapt and get Hardee's. I don't "change". What remain's the same is my fundamental willingness to eat fast food in favor of non-fast food alternatives.

What most percieve as change is often superficial and really trivial in nature when it comes to modeling an outcome.

Frank has not changed. What has literally changed are his players (graduation, attrition, underachievement by position players). We could go into a seperate debate on whether Tyler Tettleton, or anyone else has actually changed or not.

I keep focusing on the fact that Frank is not a variable and I can't stress it enough. If we performed a sensitivity analysis on the outcome of this season we might see the resulting blame lie years ago in the poor recruiting class of 2010 (?) that LC has so thoroughly examined. The outcome deviated massively based on the play of one individual (TT). So if you want to place blame on Frank for recruiting the variables, take him to court over that issue back in 2009, not 2013. And allow him to present the evidence on why that recruiting class turned out the way it did.