He was at the top of the game back then and wouldn't be as attainable as he is now imo. We just need a successful coach here for 5 years to build our program. He can groom an assistant to take over once he retires.
When I look at coaching choices, I see the following:
1) Legends that are taking their teams consistently deep in the tournament. Everyone thinks we can't get any of them.
2) Mid tier coaches that have good teams but can't take their team all the way. Do people think they will suddenly take Texas all the way if hired? Most coaches underperform here, not the other way. So you have to ask, what's our goal? Do we want someone who can take us all the way or be happy with being middle of the pack?
3) Coaches that suddenly rise up and make to FF or even win it all. They are popular choices because of the recency bias. We don't really take the time to analyze if what they accomplished in one year will be sustained over the long term and at Texas. IMO these are the worst coaches to hire.
If I am the AD, I hire a consulting firm and ask them to give me 5 names from the top group and tell me what will make them consider Texas.