USA TODAY’s Paul Myerberg puts Ohio State’s consistency front and center in Big Ten program ranking

USA TODAY’s Paul Myerberg released a Big Ten-wide ranking of the sport’s programs, and his framing of Ohio State is rooted in a single idea: consistency. The premise of the ranking is not simply which school has the most dazzling single-year performances, but which programs have most often sustained the kind of profile that leads to national-title opportunities, season after season.

Myerberg’s argument, as presented in the account published by Yahoo Sports, treats Ohio State as the Big Ten’s most “recession-proof” program historically. In other words, even when the college football landscape shifts, the Buckeyes remain a frequent player in the title picture, which is a different standard than asking which team is best in a given moment.

The column highlights the continuity of championship-level expectations by pointing to multiple coaching eras that produced national championships for Ohio State. It cites the school’s national-title hoists under Jim Tressel, Urban Meyer, and Ryan Day, grouping them as evidence that the program’s success has not been confined to one generation of leadership.

That matters because the Big Ten is usually defined by cycles. Recruit talent, quarterback play, coaching transitions, and even conference-wide offensive trends can swing quickly. A ranking that rewards sustained readiness puts Ohio State’s history in a category that is less about flash and more about institutional durability: the ability to reload, to keep recruiting at a high level, and to perform when the calendar demands it most.

At the same time, the ranking’s focus on longevity is also a reminder that “best” can be measured in different ways. A program can be dominant in certain years, but less consistent across decades. Myerberg’s approach, as described in the Yahoo Sports report, explicitly draws a distinction between being the most consistent program and being the best team at any specific point in time.

For Big Ten fans, the exercise is more than an offseason talking point. Rankings shape how the league is discussed during recruiting cycles, how matchups are previewed, and how expectations are set when preseason narratives start forming. Even if supporters disagree with specific placements, a list that is built around sustained championship relevance tends to reinforce a familiar hierarchy for the sport’s most followed schools.

The immediate takeaway is not a single number but a lens. Ohio State’s place in Myerberg’s ranking reflects an emphasis on the program’s repeated ability to reach the sport’s biggest stage, rather than one-time results. The next step for observers will be to see whether the Buckeyes can keep turning that historical standard into current-season performance, especially as new contenders within the Big Ten push to close the gap.