*closer* to the program:

For example:

Game prep = average (how do you know? How many games have you prepped for at his level? How do you know how he prepped vs how it played out?)

In-game adjustments = bad (same as above — you don't know what adjustments were made, nor how they were countered, nor how they worked)
Kalani recruiting = bad (we have better recruiting classes now than ever... so this is just plainly not a balanced opinion)

Kalani usage of timeouts = piss poor (judgement formed without good examples, nor stats. I tend to agree a bit, but not fully)
Kalani’s 4th down prowess = piss poor (he's aggressive, and has over done it a couple times, but this is again an opinion without study given)
Football IQ = average (you don't know that and many disagree. Certainly higher football IQ than you, which disqualifies you from judging his football IQ IMO)
Football innovation = average (not sure, here, but this is just throwing crap against the wall to see if it sticks)
History of coach hiring = average (I probably grade him lower than you, as "less than average" here so we maybe agree, but still more opinion, and I don't value my opinion more than Tom's or Kalani's own)

Hardly a secret. (certainly just a bunch of opinions with little data or studies to back it up). Making rash decisions on this type of analysis would be doing a poor job by Tom Holmoe.