Urban Meyer is 49-4 at OSU. That's 92.5%. John Cooper won 70% of his games there. It's absurd to say that it's easy to win like Meyer has won. Nobody ever has.
Meyer lost one game this season, by a field goal, to the number 3 (4?) team in the nation.
And please, please, in light of the decade-plus of suck that preceded him, tell me how easy Nick Saban has it. Anybody who says winning is simply the way it is at Alabama spent the first part of the decade on an island with Glide, pre global Internet connectivity.
Nobody ever proposed that winning as much as UMeyer has at OSU is easy. Nor has anybody said that anybody could win big at Bama. Don't know why you would interject those angles into the discussion. The question is whether that success makes them among the greatest coaches. Most successful in terms of wins and losses? Yes. Best coaching accomplishments? I don't believe so.
Of course, Meyer has benefited from more than just the inherent advantages of coaching at OSU. Thus far, Michigan and PSU have been a shadow of their former teams during Meyer's tenure. This year's OSU schedule was like watching the Royals play a 12 game stretch vs. 10 minor league teams, one above average major league team (Mich.) and one major league title contender (MSU). And because Meyer managed to win all the minor league games (some by the skin of his teeth), and split his games with real major league teams, you give him boat loads of credit for sweeping the minor leaguers. I don't. Yes ... he is a good football coach. And yes ... he has won more than a few big games with more talent and resources than all but a handful of teams have ever duplicated. But how do you measure his value added impact to the OSU program? That's my question. I like coaches who do more with less. You like coaches that win big at places where you don't have to recruit .. you select from a rich pool of prospects who were raised to want to play for Bama or OSU. You don't have to identify young talent in the coaching ranks. Proven assistants are waiting in line. You run the same plays and schemes other teams run. The only difference is you run those plays with the Joey Bozas and Derek Henrys of the world. How hard is that? At OSU and Bama, the coach's most demanding challenge is managing player egos. And that job is made infinitely easier when you have the depth of talent those programs have. How many teams have won national championships with their 3rd string QB? Only at OSU.
Your reference to the Mike Shulas and Bob Davies of the world demonstrates only that not even OSU or ND or Bama can sustain great success with really bad head coaches. Nobody you reference demostrated HC success either before or after their brief moments in the sun. Bad hires produce bad results. Nobody felt the truth of that more than ND in the years between Holtz and Kelly.
Saban and Meyer have been crowned. There is no taking that from them. Their national championships alone will ensure their place in history. But like so many other success stories in life, you have to wonder. Did it take great coaching? How much was it admittedly good coaching and how much was it all the overwhelming institutional advantages. In the case of Bill Snyder and Gary Barnett, and in other cases throughout all of sport, we know it was truly great coaching. To this day, I would argue that neither Saban or Meyer rise to the level of Amonte-Hiller in any discussion of elite coaches. She won national championships against institutional powers at an "outpost" school with no history, a paltry budget and walk-on players. Saban and Meyer did it with professionals at magnet schools with unlimited budgets. Which is more impressive?
GOUNUII
