this is NOT a criticism of the current coaching staff.
I would just like to point out that some people confuse or conflate successful results with good coaching. In the end, players have to make plays. You can coach an O-lineman on technique all day long, but he still has to go out on the field and execute that technique against an opponent. you can coach a WR on route-running, but he still has to go out on the field and run that route against a defender, get open, and catch the ball. You can coach a QB on every aspect of the game, but the QB still has to go out on the field, read the defense, call an audible if warranted, and run the play correctly - including going through progressions and finding an open receiver. How much of that is due to coaching, and how much is due to the athlete making the play?
The coaches may have indeed told Jacob Huff how to play that situation, but Huff still had to go out, time his break, make the pick and run the ball back for a TD. If he is a split-second late, that may have been a completion instead of an interception. is that 50% coaching and 50% talent? 60/40? 40/60? Hard for me to say. But almost every coach I've interviewed over the years has made a comment to the effect of "I can't go out and play the game for them."
Players are not robots. If it was all about coaching, every play would be successful. And, let's not forget, the other team has coaches, too - who have been coaching them on how to defeat the other team's plays.
Don't get me wrong. I would rather have good coaches as opposed to bad coaches. And I have seen some positive early signs from this coaching staff. But, there's a long way to go.