the two comments to that article than by the article itself.

My main grievances with Bronco:

His all-or-nothing "delegation" style as HC was too limited.

He remained a reluctant (though improved) recruiter. His work ethic as a recruiter was not where it needed to be, I don't think. It got better, but not by enough.

BYU needs an ambassador at the HC spot more than most --if not all-- Universities out there. Bronco was not an ambassador (no knock on him — he just wasn't).

His severity in recruiting & treating non-LDS players (many ethnic minorities) — though expedient to his way of doing things — seriously limited the ceiling of our program. I didn't find it all that respectful, either. That some kids were willing to deal with it said a lot about them & their families — but was hardly a feather in Bronco's cap.

While I respect & agree mostly with Bronco's general disdain for professional sports, if you want to succeed at the highest levels of collegiate athletics, you need to accept it as a very vivid ambition at some level in the hearts of more than half of your incoming players. Whether or not they have a real shot of ever making it — it shouldn't be a primary job as a HC to downplay that dream. (Bronco himself I know struggled immensely with this for a couple years after he graduated, so I get it's personal for him. I still think his approach on that was wrong as a D1 HC.)