...Whatever. The poll was laced with sarcasm.
...
I did not intend anything to be sarcastic, and I apologize if you interpreted it. After I ran out reasons that I could think of for believing things would be better, I did include a humorous answer (Nostradamous), but it was not intended to detract from the serious answers. Some of the answers were rather short because of the limitations of a poll format, and I apologize for that. To clarify what I intended some of the answers to mean:
2. History doesn't repeat - I meant this to mean that the past has no bearing on the future, so there is no reason to believe that just because Ohio struggled in the past that they will struggle at any particular point in the future.
3. there were no structural reasons - I meant this to mean that Ohio's failures of the past were due solely to the coaches who were hired in the past, and that there is no limitations on how good Ohio might have been with different coaches (based on Monroe's comments, I believe this would be his answer)
4. Solich has repaired structural problems - I meant this to mean that in the past there were some things that made success at Ohio much more difficult, particularly things like the lack of a summer school program allowing students to remain on campus during the summer, and poor facilities, including the lack of an IPF. Solich has improved those things, and thus, in the future the next coach won't have these limitations (I would have guessed this to be your answer, Wes)
Others: "It's all random luck" and "I have no particular reason" were meant to fill space, and to provide catch-all answers for those who didn't want to put much thought into the poll. "Nostradamous" was intended for humor only. The final answer was intended to give people who disagree with the premise of the poll, that Ohio will improve in the future, an answer they could choose.
Had I thought of your answer, Wes, I would have included it, and dropped one of the others such as "It's all random luck" or "Nostradamous".