I have a theory that I think explains Ohio State's consistency:
LOCATION.
Specifically, location relative to recruits.
Ohio isn't the strongest recruiting area in the country but it is a very fertile recruiting area and the strongest one that only has one major school. Florida and Texas are both stronger but they also have UF/FSU/Mia and UT/aTm/OU*. Additionally, the stronger recruiting areas also generally have more nearby schools making inroads. Obviously Michigan and Notre Dame and to a lesser extent Penn State get some talent out of Ohio but when you look at Florida the competitors in border states include Georgia Georgia Tech (more historical than current), Alabama, and Auburn plus a bunch more not much further. It is the same with Texas, not only do the Longhorns have to compete with aTm, they also have the Sooners, the Huskers, and a slew of other teams in their backyard poking around.
*Yes, I know that Oklahoma isn't actually IN Texas but if you look at their roster you wouldn't know it. Remember that Dallas is half way between Austin and Norman so a whole lot of Texas kids grow up closer to Oklahoma Memorial Stadium than DKR.
I think that creates a REALLY high "floor" for Ohio State football because even when the Buckeyes aren't all that great, they still have a boatload of talented local kids who grow up as Ohio State fans so the talent never really gets all that bad.
On the other hand, Ohio State has less room to grow than some of the other schools for two reasons:
- There isn't much to pick up locally. Unlike say Florida which can muscle out FSU and Miami and become UBER-talented, the Buckeyes don't have a major local competitor so when they get stronger . . . there isn't much to pick up.
- There isn't much in the way of nearby fertile recruiting territory to expand into. Western PA is pretty strong but Ohio State gets a decent share of that even when they aren't all that good. The rest of PA isn't very strong. Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky, and West Virginia are all relatively weak (compared to Florida, Texas, California, Ohio anyway).
Compare Ohio State and Alabama under my theory outlined above:
When they falter:
Alabama gets hit hard. They lose local kids to their instate competitor, Auburn. Additionally, there are LOTS of local-ish helmets and near-helmets that swoop in to pick off Bama HS talent (the Florida Schools, UGA, LSU, TN). Finally, the nearby OOC kids lose interest and go to other nearby schools.
Ohio State doesn't get hit nearly as hard. Their strongest instate competitor is probably Cincy at least right now but they are nowhere close to what Auburn is. The Buckeyes do lose more often to Notre Dame, Michigan, and Penn State when they are faltering but that is it. On a down-cycle the situation isn't nearly as dire in Columbus as it is in Tuscaloosa.
When they shine:
Alabama has lots of room to grow. There is a ton of talent in neighboring Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi plus they can muscle out Auburn to take almost all of the local talent. As Bama's star burns brighter they get a larger share of that instate and nearby talent and you end up with uber-talented Bama squads.
Ohio State has LOTS less room to grow. The talent in PA, MI, IN, KY and WV pales in comparison to the talent in Alabama's neighboring states and there aren't any major local schools to muscle out to begin with.
