I'm on your side when it comes to developer over recruiter. Pure technician is probably too narrow because some guys cannot communicate well. But, if a guy is technical, can teach, and commands respect, I weigh that combination over "recruiting." The truth is most kids aren't idiots. They want to go play for whomever is gonna make them the best. Well, at least the best players think this way. So the "recruiting" happens anyway.
Idk if there's a "one size fits all" for this debate guys. I think all of you are right, to varying degrees.
Example #1- Kids value getting developed over everything else.....then Texas gets two 5* kids on the OL instead of going to, say Bama who ANNUALLY puts kids in the league 1st round.
Example #2 - A&M landing all those kids, without open market NIL that doesn't happen. They still finish Top 10, maybe Top 5 but definitely not over the likes of Bama and UGA. The separator here.....$$$$$....not wins, not coaching abilities/development, not recruiting prowess....A&M is exhibit A showing that MONEY TALK$
Example #3 - A school like Wisconsin...super solid football development factory...one of the reasons why I clamored for us to hopefully pull the DC Jim Leonhard. You take a coach like that, and give him SEC/TX/FL/SFLA level talent and he's already a certified problem as a coach, give him the Jimmy's and Joe's and look out....problem is or question is, can he recruit? We don't know, and will never know. Is it because most kids just aren't willing to go there or is it because he can't recruit well enough to convince them to come get the A+ level coaching?
If you can't convince the kids to come get the A level coaching, then it doesn't matter how well you can coach because without the talent, your ceiling is capped.
Clemson is the only school thus far to win the CFP that we could argue had superior coaching over superior talent AND THEY STILL averaged out to about a Top 9-12 recruiting class range during their run, which means they still had to recruit at a very high level, fringe elite level, just to do what they did....which is nothing to sneeze at.
If I had to vote on this debate, it's close, I do value coaching, however, I'd say Jimmy's and Joe's 53% vs X's and O's 47%