Criticism, good or bad - it's all just dust in the wind relative to program outcomes. Nothing said here, positive or negative is going to make this team better or worse. Fan knowledge of football has no bearing on how many wins we will or won't get. There is only one metric that matters: winning. As a coach, Doc's job is to bring home championships. It is his job. It isn't the job of fans to do that. Fans buy tickets and speak their minds, and most matters little to the objective: winning. That is the primary accountability of the head coach: Doc. He has achieved the objective once in his tenure. To some, that appears to be sufficient, to others it is a demonstration of failure.
Doesn't matter who know more about football than someone else, or who is being perceived to be too negative or too filled with green kool-aid. If you think Doc's performance to date is satisfactory, you are probably positive about the future. If you are a believer that past performance is the most reliable indicator of future outcomes, you are probably frustrated. I happen to be a believer in the latter.
Depending on your outlook, constructive criticism is "fire the head coach" or it could be "we're headed in a good direction". Constructive is in the eye of the beholder. I think change is good every ten years, especially of you have only one championship in that duration. I know Doc isn't going anywhere at least until his contract is over, so I'm content to wait it out, What's the alternative.
And to stay on topic: beating Ohio won't matter much to me if we end up as we have in all but one of the previous years under Docs tenure.