Don't thin Bob Knight fits in a "successful promotions" category - espeically one where the criteria is "becoming a dominant power". A Hall of Fame coach, no doubt. But when he was promoted from Assistant to head coach, it was for Army - where he was 18-8 with inherited talent his 1st year, but then dropped to 13 wins. He then had 3 nice years of NIT appearances, but his last year at West Point was 11-13, before leaving for Indiana...
If the criteria is becoming a dominant power then Joe B Hall doesn't fit either. If that's the criteria nearly nobody fits -- nobody who gets hired out-of-house and no assistant who gets promoted, because rarely do schools go from nowhere to superpower in a coaching generation. It was a stupid criteria, which is why I dismissed it half a dozen posts ago. Coaches who turn nothing schools into dominant powers go to the hall of fame: Jim Calhoun for example. Mike Ktryckshrinski. Johnny Clamchowder. Even the deepest of deep thinkers on this site don't sit around navel gazing about whether SJ should replace TGAPL should he leave with a hall of fame coach. Except for one or two of the really sooper genyiouses they'd all agree that was a good idea. The real question was whether an assistant can be successful when promoted and the answer is obviously yes.
Knight was 102-50 in five years at Army. That's a winning percentage of .67. That's pretty successful. It might not meet muster at UCLA but we SJ fans have lower standards. By way of contrast, TGAPL had a winning percentage of .65 at UCLA. His percentage at SJ is .52. Over the last three years of his career he's 44-50 and he should be on his knees thanking Norm Roberts for the class that got him even there. From that perspective 7 wins every 10 games looks perty good. And anyway someone will be a long in a tick to tell you how prestigious the NIT was during the Coolidge administration.