This is definitely an interesting read, but the theory does have data points that don't quite add up, most notably John Cooper. Coop's first five seasons were pretty underwhelming - 4-6-1, 8-4, 7-4-1, 8-4, and 8-3-1. I know Cooper has always blamed his early struggles on "too many slow white guys," but that theory really doesn't stick if you are serving up mediocrity 5 years in.
I do think there is something to the idea that a coach has stayed too long and become stale, but perhaps Earle Bruce's firing in 1987 was premature and that's why Cooper's tenure sticks out as an anomaly. Or maybe it's because Coop just wasn't a good fit for OSU, or a host of other reasons. Who knows, but nevertheless it does deserve more of an analysis in this article because it blows a big hole in the central thesis of the writer's argument.