No, the only point in the post I responded to was specifically that no IU coach since Knight had matched what Alford had done as a failure at UCLA. And I proved that conjecture to be incorrect.
Now your point that it's a combination of coach and program for both to reach their zenith might be correct. I'll just respond to that by saying that the best coaches make it work no matter where they are, especially at P5 programs. Knight, Williams, Self, Pitino, Huggins, etc. Dana ****ing Altman has had more success than Alford ever has. I'm pretty sure Mick Cronin didn't leave the 300 mile strip from Cincinnati to Murray, KY in his entire life until he went to UCLA and, lo and behold, he went to the Final Four in his first tournament with them. He passed Alford's success in his third season by getting them to a Final Four and Sweet Sixteen in 2 tournaments.
Now I'm not saying that Alford being hired in '08 would have been a failure but Indiana's 3 Sweet Sixteens and 2 conference titles under Crean are one less than Alford's total Sweet Sixteens (1 SW MO ST, 3 UCLA) and two less than Alford's total conference titles (4 with New Mexico). I don't think that resume is particularly impressive and I'm not convinced that his Indiana high school ties would have put him over the hump to an elite coach but hypotheticals are hypotheticals and the fun is in debating them. However, I think that launching complaints about how much better Alford would have been and dragging the whole athletic department because **you know better because of the hypothetical** is asinine. Wishing for Alford to take over as coach in '24 is even more asinine.