So... Talent vs. system... and you're on the system side of the argument.
The contradiction is, you said [Redacted] is a 'bridge-guy'. To quote you: "(Bz) will build the team up into a job that is looked at favorably by other coaches due to the talent on the roster".
Do you see the flawed logic?
I want the best for these guys coming in and think they all have a ton of potential. I'm just hopeful that they fit into Bz's eventual successor's 'system'.
Eh, I'm not really a system guy as 90% of the time talent is going to win out over a well coached group of scrubs, thats been proven. So I completely agree that getting the best talent possible is what should be done by any coach. That said i'd rather take a guy like CJ Harris who has some athletic limitations but is coachable and has the desire to work himself into a good player, over a guy like Melvin Tabb who obviously didn't work out.
I think you grossly overestimate how good a shape the WF program was in when Bzz was hired. I don't care who the coach was, a roster of the 5 freshmen in the 2010 class, CJ, Ari, TW (when eligible), and Gary Clark wasn't going to do anything. CJ and Ari were sophomores, neither of which could create their own shot at the time, Ty still wasn't ready, Gary Clark was a great shooter but couldn't get his own shot, and none of the freshman were thought to be instant program altering guys.
That roster is why I think WF had difficulties getting a coach they originally wanted, thus ending up with Bz. Other coaches had scouted the freshman and knew they couldn't carry the team from the get go, or that they were possibly overrated anyway and knew the core of the team had just graduated. No coach was winning anytime soon with that roster so it was difficult to get a coach to want to come into that scenario.
I know a lot of you guys don't agree with my take on it and that's fine. We will see how it turns out in about 2 years. Bzz is going to leave the program in better shape talent wise than when he was hired.
So no I don't see any flaw to my logic, but i'm don't think you agree with me, which is fine.