Programs? Performances ? Cyclical or Perennial Powerhouse

[sparcboxbuck]

So, not exactly where I should post this. Mods, please feel free to move if better placed elsewhere (e.g. recruiting threads).

One of the things that I?ve been thinking about lately is how cyclical some programs performance seems to be, yet we continue to field top-10 teams year in and out.

Here?s my observation, and I?m interested in hearing some thought from the rest of you:

TOSU has been blessed with a very nice run as of late. For that matter, the run ? with a few exceptions ? extends beyond JTs era. Say what you will about Coop, and I?m one of the first to take a shot at the guy, but we had some darn fine teams under him as well. We were just a few games short of a couple NCs under Coop as well. But I digress?

So, we?ve had this nice run while some other teams who have had perhaps less change (e.g. coaching, student athlete admissions standards, etc.) have come and gone during our ?steady as she goes? performance over the last 15 ? 20 years. A couple of examples that come to mind are the U, FSU, PSU, Texas, ND and others.

I mean seriously? I have a six year old who?s first word was Buck-a. How many Saturday?s has that kid been disappointed because his Buckeyes lost? Not too many!

I?m wondering what your opinions are regarding what keeps a program like ours, tsun (for the most part), SC and others as perennial contenders while others seem to rise and fall with the tides.

The comment that made me finally post this is as follows (from the Bryce Brown recruiting thread tonight):

They've been bringing in high quality recruiting classes even during this down period. They need someone who can develop a quality offense. It's been horrible ever since '02.

So, how is it that in ?02 the U (as an example) and tOSU were at the top of the world but took such divergent paths for the next six years? Obviously there?s been some changes at the U as far as coaching goes? but there?s been other stable programs? big time programs, that seem to go away after a couple of strong showings.

Is it recruiting? National exposure? Coaching? Player development? What is it that our program seems to be doing right that other programs with similar means aren?t doing?

At the end of the day... I'm just happy to be in the place where we are. We're all very lucky to be fans of such a great program... what ever it is they are doing.

Discuss?

:osu:

 

[leroyjenkins]

So, how is it that in ?02 the U (as an example) and tOSU were at the top of the world but took such divergent paths for the next six years?
:osu:

Maybe look at the coaches in that National Championship game. We had JT, and they had Coker, who was little more than a manager, and not near the developer that JT is. Da U will be back, it will just have taken them 6-7 years to be relevant.

 

[BB73]

I think the primary factors are a program's history and financial backing. Alumni and fans of the powerhouse programs value the success of their teams, and support a program with donations for top-flight facilities. They also put pressure on the athletic department to make coaching changes during the tough times, and the traditional programs have more money available for top-notch coaches.

A program with a rich history can get back among the elite rather quickly with a solid coaching hire. Look at what happened at Oklahoma and USC after they each had an unimpressive decade in the '90s. JT has taken tOSU to the top, and Saban probably will probably get 'Bama back among the elite fairly soon. Bo Pelini will only be given a handful of years to make Nebraska a championship contender once again.

Of course it takes great players to have a great program. But recruits are attracted to teams partly based on their history of success and the quality of the athletic facilities. A head coach that's a proven winner and looks to be staying where he is also influences those decisions. That has helped USC, tOSU, and Oklahoma stay among the elite over the past several years.

There is a cyclical quality, but the lows usually don't last as long for the traditional programs because their fan bases won't tolerate mediocrity.

 

[Fungo Squiggly]

There is a cyclical quality, but the lows usually don't last as long for the traditional programs because their fan bases won't tolerate mediocrity.

Except Michigan. :scum4:

 

[BB73]

Except Michigan. :scum4:

I had intentionally avoided mentioning both TSUN and Ntre Ame, since it's difficult to have them discussed rationally.

 

[ScriptOhio]

I had intentionally avoided mentioning both TSUN and Ntre Ame, since it's difficult to have them discussed rationally.

Only "difficult" I think it is actually "impossible".

 

[grnvllbuck]

Simple.....A damn fine DEFENSE year in and year out allows the Buckeyes to be "in" every game (and win most of them).

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

I'll jump into the Michigan, ND analysis.

I do think that Michigan's program is a little stodgy and slow to embrace change or to open up the piggy bank for facility improvements. I do, however, think that their heart is in the right place. They do believe in tradition, and that makes them reluctant (too reluctant in my opinion) to "keep up with the Joneses." All of which has contributed to their being very cyclical. Let's see if bringing in RR is eventually viewed as a break with this way of thinking.

Notre Dame pretends to stand for tradition. Yet, unlike Michigan, they are the most money grubbing (nbc contract, luxury boxes before OSU or Michigan), coach firing (6 coaches in the last 30 years) program out there. They want it both ways. They want the national image of being the stodgy, tradition bound program but they don't want to put their money where their mouth is like Michigan. The fact that it hasn't translated to on-field success for them is karmic justice of epic proportion.

Just another difference between UM and ND, and why I respect the former but not the latter.

 

[martinss01]

the most important factor is the community. a schools history and tradition lives on only if enough people feel it is important and relevant enough to sacrifice of themselves in order to carry it forward. the reason tOSU has been so successful over the years is because we as a community have embraced football at every level from pee wee to the pros. we support it and we follow it passionately. we're more willing to give to our favorite programs so that they can do the things required to field a better team. hire better coaches, get access to better equipment and facilities etc. when you look at college football as a whole, stop and think of how many ohio products (not just tOSU products) are out there being wildly successful. not just on the field, but on the sidelines as well. don't forget to factor in how many of those tOSU coaches cut their teeth at other ohio schools.

while its completely indirect, its the people in the stands watching the game who make the program successful. they are the ones funding it and making certain everyone from the top to the bottom of that organization knows how important it is. they are the ones making it possible for a school to pay coaches millions a year. they are the ones that make spending 10's of millions on facilities a norm for powerhouse programs. mastermind coaches, big time facilities, star athletes, rich traditions. all those things are a natural consequences to a large and dedicated following.

its the same with every other major program.

 

[Steve19]

I agree with martinss01, its the fans that make the difference. Check the perennial powerhouses and you will usually find that the community in which they are located really supports the sport. People live and die for football in places like Ohio and Texas. It is by far the number one high school and kiddie sport.

Da U doesn't enjoy that kind of support. They have a fanbase but football doesn't enjoy the support it has in Ohio. Football and basketball also appeared to me to be pretty well supported in California, although not to the same extent. Lucky for methomps lots of kids back East would like to try out the beaches (did I spell that right?) there.

The time I spent living in Chapel Hill last year also convinced me of this. Every single kid has a basketball hoop up. From the age of three, kids have mini-hoops in the backyard. Same in Raleigh and Durham, nearby, where NC State and Duke find their home support. The place is as basketball mad as Ohio is football mad. However, it's not as football mad as Ohioans are basketball mad.