ketch,
I read the article (stating that so it doesn't get thrown back at my reply). The frustrating thing about your commentary is if feels like you're nitpicking over word choices rather than the spirit of your stance. You say things like 'he's a hell of a coach' and "Big 12 coach of the year candidate" then balk when people accuse you of saying he's a "great coach". To many, it's a generally held belief that to be a coach of the year candidate you've had to have done a great job so feels like you're really trying to split hairs there.
Another thing that I think many will take issue with is you using the volume of close quality losses against as a positive sign he's actually doing better than we think. To me this is actually my greatest concern with Shaka. I recognize that wins and losses are always a shared responsibility, but the common theme in a lot of the losses has been our inability to execute in late game situations. I acknowledge that inexperience is a key factor in this, but from many's perspective, mine included, when it becomes a consistent pattern of stagnancy on offense in particular, then that falls at the coach's feet for not being able to put his players in positions to succeed.
Another note that I took away was you citing his coaching of the US U-18 team as a reason for why he can actually coach, but when it comes to acknowledging his recruiting prowess, you don't mention that at all? Seems a bit selective on your part. Where would his recruiting be if he didn't coach a team with Allen, Coleman, Bamba, and Banks? Perhaps you're even overrating his abilities on that front?
