You wrote no about the large number of bowl games defining for you what makes a successful coach, but then went on to explain how a bowl helps with PR, and how a bowl gives more practice time, and how a bowl helps with recruiting.
Pointing out the benefits that a successful coach that wins (or in the case of a 12 game schedule at least the same) more games than they lose gets? Crazy talk!
Then you wrote about all of these coaches who took their teams to bowl games.
I wrote about good coaches that have proven that you can take a doormat program that was in as bad, if not worse, shape than Illinois, and win at least the same or more games than they lose. And those coaches have proven that you don't need the 5 you are more than happy to let Lovie and Whitman take.
And to top it off, recruiting could tank
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but...
you would retain Lovie since he led the team to a bowl game. You wrote no, but I'm pretty sure you meant yes.
Again, I don't know why this confuses you so. Yes, If Lovie Smith gets to 6-6 I think he should be retained. Anything below that and he should be fired. And, yeah, a great benefit of going 6-6 in the regular season is getting to go to a bowl game.
Look, if you want to say that simply getting to a bowl game these days is meaningless, then say it. But, while you're saying that, please be sure to remind yourself that Lovie hasn't even been able to meet that lowest of low expectations.