Nobody is glossing. They are just facts that paint a whole picture of experience. Whether it's one or 20 years ago. Was just pointing out this is not a coach who ran a 1920 offense and did nothing creative ever in his life and that it's an awful hire. He did do *some* things that have made him a successful coach.
And to your last graph, if it's a rb is not relevant to his job as passing game coordinator, why is then his "up the middle" play style at the end of his Stanford career?