...
For LC, the goal is more nuanced, but it's generally: Winning consistently at a pace that puts Ohio at or near the top of the MAC. LC considers the other necessities a value in assessing a coach, but those necessities are somewhat secondary to the overall goal.
That's my take of their individual points of view. I could be wrong.
That's fairly close. In my opinion few other MAC coaches have accomplished the bulk of the things on the list, therefore it strike me as odd to consider them as "bare minimums". Thus I consider each of them as adding some value. Furthermore, because of the things he has accomplished, with each passing year I consider the possibility of a quick return to the bottom of the MAC as less likely.
In addition to what you have said, I like to see ongoing progress, too. Again, there is disagreement on this. Certainly 2013-15 was not as good as 2009-2012, but is that the proper comparison? For some, yes. For me, no. I believe 2013-5 was a down period that should more properly be compared to 2007-8. Thus, for me the comparison looks like this:
Good part of the cycle:
2009-2012 > 2006
Bad part of the cycle:
2013-5>2007-9>2005
We will soon add another data point, as we are now entering the next good part of the cycle. How will 2016-2018 look, a few years from now? Will it be true that 2016-18>2009-2012>2006? If so, then we are still seeing progress. If not, then we are seeing stagnation.