The original question came from reading a tweet at one time that slammed kids with potential stating that they should be in the weight room already and already be at the size and shape recruiters want; basically calling them lazy, That post was replying to someone stating they like seeing someone with height, long limbs with room to grow and Potential they can craft. In that same post someone then chimed in that they believed someone who has put almost everything they can on their frame, has probably maxed out.
Personally I felt it was a bit unfair to put that on kids who 1. grow and mature differently and at different times (seen kids graduating at 17 and some 20), also seen basketball player recruited as a senior 6'4" guard and ended up a 6'11" center) 2. also, what's wrong with the other situation where a kid works his butt off to improve upon what he can (strength vs height).
(and yes I left out any discussion of Division to not guide the discussion as much as possible)
I applied the anecdote to the existing hypothetical to address the brought up notion of "intangibles", which had reminded me of a similar situation I had witnessed once, so I used it. Probably should have just posed it independently. ... I did originally just want to get a handle on what is looked for and preferred based on the seemingly common debate of Potential vs. Existing talent. I kind of muddied that scenario.