My issue with this straw-man is that everyone besides UCONN would have underachieved not just Dawn. Here are the list of schools that have had a "crapload MORE" talent than South Carolina under Dawn.
ND.
Tennessee
Kentucky
Louisville
Duke
Baylor
Stanford
North Carolina
Texas A&M
Texas
UCLA
California
Maryland
Since Dawn became coach of South Carolina in 2008 only Blair & Mulkey have won the "ultimate prize " from this list of schools . So if your definition of great is achieving the ultimate prize that would put Hatchell =Tara =Blair =Muffett=Frese=Peck (all great?) < Mulkey ?? Sorry I'm not buying that.
Dawn has built a great program in a place where Women's basketball was barely an afterthought.
Dawn will probably be the next Olympic Coach if/when Geno decides to hang it up. Only great coaches get to coach US Olympic team-except Ann Donovan in 2008 who we can surely agree was a mistake.
There is always a problem though with trying to assess the "crapload of talent" marker, as ratings services are notoriously unreliable and sometimes really biased. And I think that Staley's outstanding class of 2012 with Sessions, Mitchell, and Dozier might have been rated a lot higher than #40, #46, and #89 by Hoopgurlz if Staley had been highly successful at USCar back going into 2011-12 and not the coach who pulled in #2 Kelsey Bone to build a team around in 2009 and lost her after a season. Staley may have gotten a little boost to her 2014 class ratings of #1, #7, #32, and #35 because she was seen then as a successful coach with an eye for talent.
Sure, there are teams like UCLA that have pulled in a dozen high recruits in the last 8 years and barely been heard from, but some of those teams listed above would think that a G-c-ck team that had gotten a #1, #2, #7 and another six players in the top 50 was not exactly crappy in comparison to their own talent, but I am a little confused as to whether getting more good recruits increases your crapload or makes it smaller.