Has little to do with "potential." He's already a better defensive coach than Odom and Narduzzi. He's also a better recruiter. So it seems like a stretch to say those coaches are better simply because they either (a) inherited better situations or (b) have had more time to establish themselves.
Be honest: if you could trade Pruitt today for Narduzz, Odom, or Mason, would you? I wouldn't.
If you think that, then you're not a "Pruitt guy."
Either you'd hire Narduzzi or Odom over Pruitt, or Pruitt should be ranked higher. I wouldn't take Pruitt over more proven coaches such as Saban, Dabo, and Mullen until he proves otherwise, but I'd take him in a heartbeat over Narduzzi and Odom, simply based on what I've seen thus far.
And that's how they should be ranked.
I don't claim to know how Pruitt will turn out in the long-run, but as of today, I'd pick him over Narduzzi, Odom, Mason, Mark Stoops, Ed Orgeron, Dave Doeren, and Steve Addazio.
By the same token, Chad Morris is also underrated on that list. I'd take Morris over many of those coaches as well. For that matter, I'd take Willie Taggert over many of them, too.
But it's silly to say "Joe Moorhead is a better coach than Jeremy Pruitt" based off 1 season where Joe Moorhead inherited a great situation and Pruitt inherited a terrible one.