Content coverage is frequently identified by faculty as a barrier to the implementation of student-centered instructional strategies. This need to cover content may be a personal belief faculty hold and/or an external requirement imposed (or perceived to be) on them ("e.g.," by their department, institution, accreditors, "etc."). Studies have shown improved learning outcomes for instructors that adhere to depth (as opposed to breadth) approaches. This study sought to characterize chemistry assistant professors' perspectives on content coverage and the reasoning supporting these perspectives. Nine chemistry assistant professors were interviewed, and constant comparative analysis was used to reveal patterns in faculty thinking. Most of the faculty participants appeared to lean to one side in "the debate" of content coverage and generally expressed that they were acting in the best interests of their students. For some their personal beliefs mainly drove their preference while for others, contextual factors contributed to their choice.