As a former hiring manager at a company that got way more resumes than qualified candidates (Rdio), I totally disagree with this. Candidates have to be able to communicate why they are good at what they do concisely, otherwise their resume won't even make it to the hiring managers inboxes at most companies.
This is pretty similar to the elevator pitch for a startup. I'm amazed that anybody has a hard time keeping their resume to a single page when any founder can describe their startup in a paragraph. In both cases, you're just trying to get a meeting, not tell your life story.
It's not enough to be good, you have to be able to say why you're good.
I am not clear why people think a resume needs to be one page. I tend to prefer about two pages. That's enough room to list where you worked along with the highlights. One page normally means just a list of employers and almost no detail. Three pages typically feels rambling or padded.
I don't consider a resume and a CV to be equivalent, though. A CV is generally a lot more exhaustive than a resume. I would put together a CV if and only if applying for a research or academic position.
Even if he knows his stuff he'll most likely have problems getting an interview and then he needs that the people interviewing him are capable of recognizing his expertise.
If no, work on that.
There're so many unqualified job candidates out there, you can rise above the crowd just by being good at what you do.