Supported by what?

If you just look at records, the 2010 team went 8-5, with some catastrophic losses to Navy and Tulsa. The 2022 team is 8-4, with catastrophic losses to Marshall and Stanford. I'm not sure that records tell us much of anything.

So let's look at position groups and make a subjective evaluation. Here's which group I think I'd take:
QB - 2010, not close
RB - 2010, close
WR - 2010, not close
TE - 2022, but really close. Mayer is *really* good, but Rudolph and Eifert were both on that 2010 team.
Oline - 2022
D-line - 2022, close
Linebackers - 2010, not close
DBs - 2022, close
Kickers - Push.

There's three spots where the 2010 roster was clearly better than 2022. The 2022 roster has no such advantages over the 2010 roster, though you might make a case on o-line.

Why is QB "not close"?

I didn't think the QB situation in 2010 was necessarily any better on paper than what we have now.

Fair question

On second consideration, I'd temper that, though still award it to the 2010 team, but it's probably not a "not close" scenario when Buchner's pre-season potential is taken into consideration.

Withdrawn *

I apologize.

It wasn't kind and I edited it. But the post I responded to made it tricky to defend our current crop of QBs. I think Pyne, Buchner and Angeli are, as a group, just as good as the crop in 2010.

I disagree.

Dayne was a top 25 recruit who had enormous potential but was irretrievably ruined by Kelly. I think we jumped the gun early on Buchner who had some bad luck in HS and never had the opportunity to grow or develop. I think we jumped the gun on Angeli too. I hope both prove me wrong

Crap offensive system

We can go back and forth on this and I agree with a lot of what you said. However, when you look at the big picture, here is what you objectively see :

1. A team that has gone to the College Playoffs a few times and in the finals once (before the new system). That was not the case under Weis or Willingham;
2. A team with a composite talent that was better than any team under Weis or Willingham.

Let's not forget that the origin of the post is that it was contested that Kelly left the team in a much better place than when he inherited it, which is objectively true.

I don’t think you’re correct on #2 re 2010 vs 2022.

And I know for a fact you wouldn’t be if you weighted junior and senior classes as more important than freshman and sophomore classes in a talent analysis. But even weighing all 4 classes evenly, 2010 and 2022 are about even.

You seem to be glossing over this fact, when it’s a huge crux of your argument. If you want to bring up “culture” or “facilities” or “players that are experienced at winning” or any other number of intangible things as to why the program was better in Dec. 2021 compared to Dec. 2009 then go ahead. But you continuing to bring up talent composite via recruiting rankings as an example of why Freeman inherited a better program than Kelly is completely incorrect.

Thanks for your analysis...

...which has some reliable foundation, as opposed to the conclusory flags being waved by NDQuebec and ND74KJS.