That's why I say it needs to be first. We collectively bitch about an apparent lack of development at a number of position groups (special teams), wonder aloud about why certain players don't get on the field (Bryant because he hasn't learned to pass protect) and bitch about a variety of other very coachable issues this team struggles w at times (for many it was the overall complexity of the defense under Diaco). The replacements that get brought in had better be able to coach the position first and in a way that can be picked up by a seemingly intelligent group of young men. I think this is why some schools seem to overperform vs their recruiting talent year after year. Being a role model and good recruiter? Yes very important but damn they better be able to coach their position(s).
At least with the running backs coach, recruiting>>>>>>>>teaching
Just about any coach will tell you that the RB position is the easiest to teach, or put another way, is the least complex and is most reliant on a mixture of skill/athleticism with hard work from the players. Take a look at some of the RB coaches across the country:
Frank Wilson, LSU, 41
Johnny Nansen, USC, 40
Clarence McKinney, Texas A&M, 45
Tommie Robinson, Texas, 50
Tyrone Wheatley, Michigan, 43
Charles Huff, Penn State, 35
Tony Elliot, Clemson, 36
Jay Graham, Florida State, 42
Bryan McClendon, Georgia, 31
There are exceptions, but almost exclusively at the highest level of college football the running backs coach is in his late 30's to early 40's, without a ton of experience, black, and very good at recruiting.
The only white guys coaching the RB position that I could find at major programs following a quick search were Bo Graham at Arizona State and Jeff Lebby at Baylor. Both in their mid-30's with recruiting backgrounds and noted high impact recruiters.
Recruiting comes first at this position.