Rod vs John Cooper

Submitted by Brodie on
When the coaching search began last year, I compared it to the Ohio State coaching search 20 years ago. There are some superficial similarities between RR and Cooper. Mostly they are: - Both were very successful coaches at small big conference schools. - Both were hired from outside the program after over 40 years of dynastic rule. - Both brought the spread to schools that traditionally would have never run it. - Both had really awful first years. In fact, you could draw a similar parallel between Lloyd and Earle Bruce. That said, what struck me more was what sets Cooper and Rodriguez apart. Namely that Rod seems to be making a genuine effort to embrace Michigan and our traditions. Cooper came in to OSU overly cocky and it cost him... Rod has been cocky, too, but also eager to learn and understand. I guess the point of this was to get my feelings out there, blasphemous as they may be.
MGoBoard
Posts that will get me thrown in a WLA gulag

KRK

November 19th, 2008 at 12:49 PM ^

Yeah, I didn't mean to be accusational with that. I just didn't know if he had actually said anything. I prefer to use the term "confident". It's a nice way of saying that you feel that you are superior to everyone in everyway, but just don't need to make it known, even though you are by using the word confident. Yeah, that makes more sense.

Joined: 07/17/2008

MGoPoints: 5605

mjv

November 19th, 2008 at 12:50 PM ^

Brodie -- All successful head coaches are self-confident to the point of being cocky. I honestly haven't seen it publicly from RR, but I'm certain he is. Any job like HC at a major program is only appealing to someone that has absolute faith in himself. Why would you take on all of the crap associated with the job if you didn't believe you were absolutely capable of succeeding?

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 3656

mjv

November 19th, 2008 at 1:16 PM ^

Brodie -- Your quote is "was that Cooper, by refusing to embrace anything that had come before him, had too much self confidence and it ended up costing him more than one national championship." They had not won an NC since 1968. He came in almost 20 years later. Cooper's failing was to develop quality QBs. Stanly Jackson handing M a TD in 1997 pretty much sums up OSU QB play during his time in Columbus. Against everyone else in the big ten, Cooper's OSU teams were good enough to just line it up and beat inferior opponents. Against Michigan, he needed real contribution from his QBs. If RR could have just lined em up and run over the opposition this year and had a realistic expectation of winning 7 games, maybe RR was being arrogant in turning away from the past. With our complete lack of experience and OL depth on offense, sticking with a pro-style running heavy offense was a recipe for pure disaster that would have put us no closer to a return to prominence. this year has been a disaster (one that would have happened regardless of head coach) but we are one season into installing an offense that will catch us up to the times as opposed to being a decade behind the times.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 3656

Hannibal.

November 19th, 2008 at 1:37 PM ^

Cooper lost to Michigan for so many reasons, it's crazy. He had great quarterbacks from 1995 through 1998 and he only won one of those games, thanks to terrible defense (1995), terrible red zone performance (1996), and Charles Woodson (1997). The comparison is somewhat valid though. Having won a Rose Bowl at Arizona State, Cooper seemed like a can't-miss. He didn't change the style of offense too much, but he did have that outsider quality that always hurt his ability to gain favor with the fans. His poor record against Michigan probably had more to do with his tendency to choke in big games than disrespect for the tradition, since he sucked horribly in bowl games too.

Joined: 09/09/2008

MGoPoints: 9051