Well, it is the biggest win in a calendar year and we were 4-8 since last year's win over a 7-6 OSU team.
Seriously, Dana's big problem is not so much his record against good teams as it is his record against mediocre and worse teams.
We did beat a 9 win Texas team in 2012; a 10 win OSU team in 2013; and an 11 win Baylor team in 2014. Although it does not look like we will get one this year, that's 3 wins over 9+ win teams in 4 years.
Were that not offset by losses to teams like Syracuse, Kansas, ISU and Maryland and a mediocre record against mediocre teams, people would not be so displeased.
Reasonable people don't expect us to be consistently great. Most probably even accept that the poor w-l record against 9 win and better teams is going to be fairly common. The problem most see is that we can't do well enough against the average and worse teams for the occasional wins over really good teams to bring us a good season.
Our problem is not talent. It's not depth, and it's not even so much our record against the upper echelon. We might be able to swallow the 5-11 against Baylor, TCU, OU and OSU, even though none of those teams has been consistently great during our 4 seasons.
It's the 7-9 against the rest of the league which is the reason we are in the bottom half.
The only schools over which we have a winning record are Kansas and ISU. Against TTU, KSU and Texas we are a combined 3-7.
Is it unreasonable to think that has something to do with coaching?