I think that what is interesting about this whole thing is that it just underscores what the simple and obvious truth is. Recruiting is difficult and will never be an exact science, but you have to be aware that character issues can and do derail guys and take that into consideration in a sensible manner.
It is entirely likely that Dooley would've taken Ambles last year. He wouldn't sign 5 guys in a class with Ambles red-flags, either, but some coaches would. And he wouldn't sign just any guy who is a five-star, regardless of off-the-field concerns. Some coaches will.
I personally prefer a coach who can think and strike a balance to some guy who has to oversimplify the thing to a point where character issues are largely negligible. That kind of decision-making reminds me of that dullard HC (at Wisconsin?) who went for two pts when he was up by maybe 40 in the fourth quarter because 'that's what the card said to do'. Any jackass who doesn't realize that that decision calls for more than fourth grade arithmetic skills doesn't need to be coaching at the D1 level.
Same goes for talent vs. character in recruiting. We've got a guy who 'gets it' and we are likely to wind up better in the long run for it. If a guy has questionable character, he'd better be an exceptionally talented guy and the HC also has to realize that he should limit the big chances that he takes in that regard. UF has lost at least three four star guys that they signed last February already. That may be ok for UF - they have a full roster, but it would be a disaster for us.
We need maximum stability now, so we should rightfully put a little more emphasis on character issues - we can't afford even average attrition right now. In a few years, when the cupboard isn't bare, we can take a few more chances. I think Dooley understands that, will calibrate his decisions with it in mind/adjust accordingly, and that the Vols be better off for it.