He did beat OU but that's not the point. The point is you are paying a guy 5 mil. per year whose staff is discombobulated. I can understand if his record was 6-7, 8-4 but his record is 6-7 and 5-7 with no improvement and making coaching changes.....again. If I was in your AD's shoes, I would pull the plug on the whole Strong experiment and go with someone else. And please nobody start telling me how if you fire Strong then no black football players will want to play for Texas again or that it somehow sends the wrong message to future coaches. I'm pretty sure future coaches would understand that if you make 5 mil a year you are expected to win and progress not lose and regress. Pretty simple really.
I think there are a few reasons that would be given to keep Coach Strong around. I'm not saying there aren't good counterpoints to them or that I agree 100% with them, but I think there is SOME logic behind them, and then it just comes down to how the people making the decisions feel on the topic.
First, whether people would have predicted how this season went or not (mostly not), I don't think anyone with a sense of reality (and certainly not those in power) expected Texas to be "back" until year 3 or year 4. That's why they hired Strong in the first place. That's why they were fans of the whole "cleaning out" he did of the program. Year 3 and 4. Again, year 2 went way worse than most of those people would have thought I'd imagine, but... the goal was always for year 3 to be good and year 4 to be back in the mix of things. At least some people want to stay the course for that. And those people can find ways to support that, even in this season.
Which brings me to the second part. I mean, the people who were looking towards season 3 as the first real indicator can point to the special teams mistakes that lost the Cal and Oklahoma State games that didn't continue later in the season. Those two games that could have been wins(but, no, weren't) would have given Texas 7-5. They also would have given Texas wins over 3/4 of the best teams in the conference. They aren't the only "coulda shoulda woulda" losses on the schedule this year either. And yes, as I said before, there are perfect counterpoints to this thought process... most obviously, they WEREN'T wins. But given some added support from the AD and new coaching hires, could you imagine where the close games (Cal, OSU, and Tech) would be wins? Sure. Could you imagine where a situation like the ISU game wouldn't have happened? Sure. So there's that.
And the third reason that comes to mind involves continuity, recruiting, and even a hypothetical future coaching hire. Texas isn't Kansas. It might be near impossible, even in these low times for UT fans, to imagine a situation where Texas could devolve into the mess that the Kansas program is. But, there is something that Texas COULD do that would be similar to something Kansas has done: fire coaches quickly in succession in hopes of finding a better solution. That's bad. It's bad for current recruiting. It's bad for long term recruiting. It's bad for setting up your best current players to transfer. Kansas is clearly an extreme example of this, but they don't even have a full roster right now because of all the players they lost to transfers and all the recruits they lost as they swapped one coach that did the unthinkable and made Kansas relevant for a promising young coach who never had the chance to make his mark on the program because they swapped him for a big name coach who they hoped would be a game changer (but who really just didn't give a crap at that point) and then left the program with the new guy and hope he can fix the mess that all of that caused. Now, I get it, this would just be the second recent coaching change, not the 4th or 5th... and Texas has a better chance of getting someone who won't need to be changed out than Kansas but...
... that brings me to my final point. If you're going to fire a head coach after two years, despite the fact that the plan was to give him 3 or 4 years at least anyway, you sure as hell better have a home run replacement picked out, and you sure as hell better be certain you're getting him. I'll be honest, a quick glance around the college football landscape and I'm not sure who that guy would be. I'm not sure who the guy is that I think would just blow everyone away because everyone would know that, look out, this guy is bringing Texas back to the top! And I'm not sure, of the few guys who MIGHT be that, which ones aren't either at a point where moving on doesn't make sense for them (like Saban) or where they aren't in a dream job that would overrule even a great opportunity like being the head coach of the University of Texas (like Harbaugh, who is coaching at his alma mater now). An up and comer with potential? Isn't that what we chose Strong for? Honestly, the only guy out there who was on my previous wish list aside from Strong who I think might consider leaving his current gig, who I'd want and who'd be potentially a good cultural fit is David Shaw. Sure, there are some NFL situations that get batted around a bit, but I'm not a huge fan of the main one I keep hearing, and again... it better be a done deal if you're even considering that right now.
So yeah, there are plenty of reasons that the powers that be aren't following a Sooner internet dweller's recommendations about firing Coach Strong after 2 years. Like I said, I don't agree with them 100%, but there's a logic to them that most people can probably see, whether they agree or not.