Tinman coached me in 2005. He actually lowered my mileage from what I had run in college (overtaining myself into the ground), but with a lot more emphasis on aerobic work with long tempo runs, and base periods with a decent amount of "moderate" running. Easy days were really easy, sometimes just two 5 mile runs (when I was running 85 MPW).
The repeat workouts also had a much heavier aerobic emphasis, with some of the 15k/CV pace stuff, and other workouts at other paces. Pretty much every workout ended with a handful of short reps, but there were no workouts of only short reps (for me, anyways). For awhile, my repeat workouts had fewer repeats than normal, but started with a 3-mile tempo to keep the emphasis aerobic.
In that year, I ran a 14 second 3k PR (8:17), a 12 second 5k PR (14:27) in the pouring rain, and a some good road and XC races. I haven't topped any of those times since. I lost sight of the fact that tempering myself and keeping things largely aerobic was what was leading to my success, and convinced myself that the grass was greener if I had an in-person coach (who was also a good coach), but also ran more and harder. No matter what schedule a coach writes, you still have to execute it correctly, and I stopped doing that for awhile after I left Tinman and nearly burned myself out for good.
I've returned to Tinman's principles the past two years, and am now racing longer events, but am finally getting close to the same level I achieved with him.
As for Tinman vs JK philosophies, both emphasize aerobic development (though in slightly different ways), and both seem to emphasize getting used to running fast and relaxed with long tempo runs and progression runs.