I think you have hit the salient points and I will attempt to incapsulate them.
Historically, a questioner of KF decisions has been accused of saying he doesn't want to win. IMO that is ridiculous. It's always been a question of his decision-making ability, not his desire. And most were
willing to accept the bad (decisions)with the good (other aspects of the program).
But in recent years, a new factor has been added to the equation and that is what has really shifted the fan base. Leave KF out of the picture for a moment. If one of our opponents (let's say MSU) had a defense which was annually among the nation's best and an offense that was annually among the nation's worst and tried to solve the problem by naming his unqualified son as the OC, what would you say? And then when things got even worse, that son was named the QB coach, what would you say? Ridiculous if it happened to MSU, but outrageous if it happened to us? Ya, and although the desire to win is still there, is there a another and maybe even stronger motivation?
And the discussion of "yes men" is valid. Maybe the most visible indication is clock management. It's been ridiculously bad during his entire tenure. There have to be many or maybe all on the staff that are much less clueless. But has this been delegated to them? Or is there any evidence that their input has been sought or accepted? Or has it been clearly indicated to them that constructive criticism, in general, is unwelcome or worse.
What's as scary as the groupthink among coaches is the number of yes-men on these boards and the groupthink here, the same people who call coaches "legendary" and act like questioning their policies and practices is somehow verboten, the same kind of people who worship heroes and autocrats and gobble up propaganda as fact and dismiss anything that contradicts their hardened, blinkered opinions as "fake news".
I had Stanzi as a student his junior year. What impressed me about him was that he was unafraid of making mistakes. Laughed them off, actually. Very chill guy, hilarious, but right under that, extremely intense. He worked hard. He was the same on the field. And the coaches took the good with the bad. He had so much more upside, so much more moxie, so much more creativity, than the other options. Some fans bashed him and called him "pick six ricky" or whatever. He had to work through his mistakes, but at least he was given the opportunity to do so, rather than just be rewarded for not trying and following every last command from on high.
Stanzi helped recruit Labas. Both from Cleveland. Both similarly athletic. Both often put their HS teams on their shoulders and willed them to win. Both inspired everyone around them. Both seem absolutely unafraid to make mistakes.
Let's hope the coaches have learned something from Pick Six Ricky, because from what I've read, Stanzi sees a lot of himself in Labas.
No risk. No reward.
What is most damning to me is coaches themselves sticking to their guns and refusing to admit mistakes. Like the Milgram experiment - you keep doubling down and following orders (or your own failed strategy). If they change QBs, that means they were wrong in the past, and people just rarely want to admit they were wrong. I'm tired of "that's football" abdication of responsibility.
Who on the staff has the spine and integrity to look truth in the face, admit mistakes, change course, and empower their best players to play ball and win games?