Who really knows? I think there is another possibility, one I've seen professionally in several different ways. CPJ was hands-off with the defense unless they screwed up -- at which point his feedback was likely harsh. Thus, although his public comments and individual philosophy is aggressive, getting out of the way of the DC, etc., the biggest impact of his coaching style was to cause DCs to be fearful of him. That could work differently in many ways. It might discourage them from being proactive about advocating for changes to how practice is done to accommodate better teaching, installing schemes more applicable to other offenses, etc. To avoid his criticism, they might have chosen less aggressive schemes. Even though results may have been poor, and he might make negative comments about performance and approach, if it is not specific, they'll avoid the most fear-inducing confrontations and further entrench an attitude that he's not actually there to help.
This might contrast sharply with CPJs beliefs about things, and to some degree responsibility rests on grown adults to tolerate someone getting on their arses and to advocate for what they think is best regardless, but realistically most people will avoid overt conflict if they are able to, seek to do the best they can, and take personal responsibility for failings of their unit completely missing attention to opportunity to improve working conditions.
Ultimately, program culture is big time HC responsibility. I think CPJ was somewhat of a mixed bag. I'm deeply proud of his integrity and straightforwardness and successes as our coach and throughout his career. I'm deeply proud of the individual bonds he made with his players and how he helped shaped them into finer people as well as players. I respect his keen football mind and ability to outfox other coaches on gameday. I also think we are seeing how a more involved and constructively minded HC can change things for our culture. We don't know how CGC stacks up against CPJ in all those other areas.
