I guess there are several definitions as to what constitutes a "good fan." For some, being a good fan means giving your time, money, and emotional support to the team, no matter what. For others, being a good fan means supporting your team, but not being blindly foolish about it. (I'm not saying anyone is being blind or foolish.) I think I fall somewhere in between, closer to the later than the former.
These days especially, a university's athletics department is a business. Sure, wins and losses, championships and rivalries still matter. But, the bottom line is more important than previous. A university's AD has to make decisions which he thinks will most positively affect that bottom line.
Using USC as the example: If each home-Saturday, Tanner sees full parking lots, a full stadium, money spent on concessions, and donations being made to the Gamecock Club, he has no motivation for change. The fans are his customers, and the fans must be happy with the product/service if they are spending money.
I'm not advocating sabotage. What Clemson fans did to Ken Hatfield was despicable. (For those too young to remember...Clemson fans were making contact with kids Hatfield was recruiting, telling them why they should NOT go to Clemson...in an effort to get rid of Hatfield quicker.)
If you aren't happy with the football product, quit spending your money on it. Quit going to games. Quit donating to the Gamecock club.
If you think things are heading in the right direction, and Muschamp just needs a few more years to show real progress, keep giving, keep attending.
I don't know the future for this staff. I'm supportive, but admit I'm not sure they will get it done. But, if things get bad, and consistently bad, I'm not playing a game of "I'm a better fan than you because I stayed and cheered for 4 quarters" with anyone. I'm a fan of Quinton Tarrintino, but I'm not spending money watching/buying his movies if they aren't good.