jcblanco22

As a Cowboys fan I can tell you guys that Irvin also does not particularly like Gailey or his coaching stemming back from the Gailey's tenure coaching him. Don't forget that Gailey had friction with a lot of his offense in Dallas by the end of his first season, and Irvin didn't particularly like that Gailey had him lining up in the backfield and in other unusual roles. Irvin also lost his consecutive games with at least 1 reception streak under Gailey in a game against Arizona in '98.

I think Haley and Gailey simply had too many differences between them. I guess Haley didn't take into account the lemonade Gailey had made the year before with Tyler Thigpen as his QB, or that simply wasn't good enough for him. Seems to me that until Jamaal Charles was finally given an opportunity by Haley late in the season, his team's 2009 offense with Matt Cassel was significantly behind what the 2008 squad had accomplished with Thigpen at the helm and Gailey calling the plays. Adam Teicher of the Kansas City Star seemed to concur: Gailey Will Get It Done In Buffalo Gailey will get it done in Buffalo Turns out Todd Haley did Chan Gailey a favor by running him out of Kansas City last summer. That way, Gailey didn't have the stain of the Chiefs lethargic 2009 offense on his record when the Bills came looking for a new head coach. Gailey was one of the most underappreciated coaches to have come through Arrowhead Stadium over the years. That was true at the time he was hired and certainly stayed that way to the end of his one regular season in Kansas City. The job he did with Tyler Thigpen and an otherwise mediocre cast of offensive players was truly remarkable, though that fact was lost in an otherwise miserable 2-14 season. The Bills have been a disfunctional organization since their Super Bowl years. But if that changes and Gailey gets some help from the front office, he will succeed as Buffalo's head coach. It won't be easy for him. The Bills have no quarterback to build around and there's the T.O. problem. The run defense is also horrendous (just a couple yards better than the Chiefs). After what he did in that season with the Chiefs, it wouldn't be wise to count him out.

Gailey Convenient Scapegoat for Jones Jan. 12, 2000 Gailey convenient scapegoat for Jones By NICK GHOLSON Scripps Howard News Service Is Chan Gailey a good coach? I think so, but Jerry Jones didn't ask me. He fired Gailey as head coach of the Dallas Cowboys on Tuesday. When football teams stink, like the Cowboys did for much of this past season, the owner is going to so looking for the skunk. More often than not, he never gets past the office of the head coach. They make easy and convenient fall guys. But if Jones really went skunk-searching, he just might have to exterminate half of his roster. Troy boy might have to go. Ditto for Deion. Though Jones dug deep in his pockets to pay millions out, all he bought was an 8-8 team. That's how I predicted the Cowboys to finish this year. They were an 8-8 team with 8-8 talent. It was evident all through training camp. Some people just didn't want to see that or admit it. The Cowboys and their Silver Star Network present a false picture of this football team. There are just too many writers and announcers bought and paid for by the team who keep talking about roses when all that exist are thorns. If you actually thought this team was a Super Bowl contender, then you were deceived. And if you blame this season on Gailey, well, you're just not seeing the whole picture. Troy Aikman is as much to blame for it as Chan Gailey. But when Troy whined, Jerry listened. Who are you going to fire, your $80 million quarterback or you $600,000 coach? Goodbye, Chan. You never threw an interception or dropped the ball or jumped before the snap count. But somebody has to pay for these sins. You were just convenient. Professional athletes, especially the so-called superstars, are never held accountable for losing. Surely, it must be someone else's fault. After all, Troy has three Super Bowl rings. Deion is going to the Pro Bowl. My opinion is if these players had done their job, Gailey would still have his. But they didn't, and the coach is gone. Was Chan Gailey a good coach? I say “yes,” but I also understand that a lot of you will argue that. But one thing you can't argue: Chan Gailey was a good man. In the business of professional sports, being a “good man” doesn't mean much. Coaches aren't judged by how well they quote John 3:16. Owners would rather see 16-3. Jerry Jones has bent over backwards to make sure Leon Lett keeps his job; yet, it only took two years for Chan Gailey to lose his. Isn't ironic how the headlines on Tuesday morning told us that the Mavericks are interested in bringing Dennis Rodman to Dallas, and now today we see that the Cowboys are telling Chan to leave town. Good guys do finish last. (Nick Gholson is sports editor of The Times Record News in Wichita Falls, Texas.)

Gailey Not Given Fair Chance By Cowboys Thursday, January 13, 2000 Gailey not given a fair chance by Cowboys By Clarence E; Hill Jr. Knight Ridder Newspapers FORT WORTH, Texas — Two days ago, a bloodied but unbowed Chan Gailey relinquished the reigns of the Cowboys coaching job saying he wished he had a better chance to succeed. Yesterday, Gailey cleaned out his office at the Cowboys Valley Ranch training complex knowing full well he never had a chance to be Chan the Man, as owner Jerry Jones so aptly put it when he hired him roughly 688 days ago. Gailey never did have a chance, not even from the beginning. When Jones shocked the football world with his Feb. 12, 1998, announcement that Gailey would be the man to lead his downtrodden team back to prominence, he bypassed more high-profile names such as George Seifert, Terry Donahue and Sherm Lewis. Jones said he took a chance on the unknown Gailey because he felt the team needed a radical change. “I thought we could take that risk and hit a home run,” Jones said. “I thought a fresh approach just might be the ticket. The players tried their hearts out.” At the end, Jones said talked about how Gailey's offensive philosophy didn't mesh with the talents of his star players (read quarterback Troy Aikman) and that a change was necessary to get everybody on the same page. It's almost laughable that Gailey was fired for the same reason he was hired — because his offensive philosophy was different than the one that took the Cowboys to Super Bowl titles in 1992, 1993 and 1995. Times they are a changing? How about the more things change, the more they stay the same. And actually, the only person who tried to change and eventually did change was Gailey — Aikman and Co. were resistant from beginning. The Cowboys' future Hall of Fame quarterback never missed an opportunity to tell all who would listen that he never thought anything was wrong with the old offense. A couple of assistant coaches acknowledged yesterday that over the course of Gailey's two-year tenure, he continually modified his offense to look more and more like the old offense. It began last year as Gailey changed his running game from being primarily based on a zone-blocking scheme back to the old man-to-man blocking strategy that running back Emmitt Smith stated best fit the skills of him and the Cowboys' gargantuan offensive line. This season, Gailey acquiesced to Aikman's wails about the passing game. So out went Gailey's philosophy on pass routes and route depths. In came Aikman's philosophy based on his experience with the old offense under Norv Turner and Ernie Zampese. Did the changes prompted by Smith and Aikman work? There's no question about that. Smith responded in 1999 with his best season since 1995 and has silenced critics who claimed he was over the hill. The reintroduction of the slant pass and the adjusted routes certainly played a role in Jason Tucker's emergence late in the season. But so what. That doesn't mean Gailey's offense wouldn't have worked if had gotten the full support from his players. Consider the Cowboys' hierarchy at the end, Jones controlled the front office, Dave Campo controlled the defense and Aikman controlled the offense. Nobody's confusing Gailey with legendary offensive masterminds Don Coryell and Bill Walsh. And there's no question that his play calling left a lot to be desired. And his handling of receiver Michael Irvin was wrong. However, before getting the rug yanked from under him, shouldn't Gailey have gotten a chance to do the job like he wanted to do the job — like he was hired to do the job? Gailey leaves here knowing that his first head coaching job was compromised by disloyal subjects. Gailey, however, will coach again. His belief and faith in his offense remain unconquered. He could wind up as offensive coordinator in Atlanta or maybe back in Pittsburgh, considering that he might be the only coach who can revive Kordell Stewart's career as a quarterback. And it all might be for the best. Was Gailey's offense suitable for the skills Aikman and Co.? Maybe not. Probably not. But could it be that we never got a chance to find out? That's certainly what Gailey's thinking as he looks in the rear-view mirror. © 2000, Fort Worth Star-Telegram Visit the Star-Telegram on the World Wide Web: www.star-telegram.com. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

The Dallas media actually provided him plenty of support in the wake of his dismissal. For those who want some perspective on what might have really gone on behind the scenes, and why his firing a decade ago from his only other HC gig in the NFL does not mean he's doomed for failure, read on: Aikman Bears Part Of The Blame Wednesday, January 12, 2000 Aikman bears part of blame By Jim Reeves Knight Ridder Newspapers IRVING, Texas — Jerry Jones came up with a horribly ludicrous reason for firing head coach Chan Gailey yesterday — the devil made him do it. A devil, if you read Jones' rather broad hints, named Troy Aikman. At a hurriedly called news conference to confirm what everyone knew 48 hours ago, the Cowboys' owner did everything but unfurl an Aikman poster and use a pointer to blame Gailey's demise on his quarterback and other players who either couldn't or wouldn't adjust to the head coach's offensive system. Misdirection play or not, it was another shameful chapter for an organization that has had far too many such moments over the past five years. It was a football decision, Jones stressed, but if the boys from the forensic lab had been present, I suspect they would have found that the knife in Gailey's back bore many fingerprints. Were Aikman's there? Not intentionally, I'm sure — that's just not Aikman's style — but it was clear that Jones had talked to his quarterback and other key players and assistant coaches before making this decision. Everything Jones has said since the Cowboys' tepid season ended with that 27-10 thrashing by the Vikings Sunday in Minnesota has absolved the players from all blame. What a ridiculous farce. “I decided that the energy and the compromise that it would take for Chan to go the direction that would best fit our personnel,” Jones said in his typical oratory excess and double-speak, “and the decision and the compromise and the willingness of a lot of our personnel to go in the direction Chan wanted to go, we'd burn up more energy and we'd spend more of our resources than we had to spare.” Translation: The players weren't going to change or accept Gailey's offensive philosophy, so the head coach had to go. “This decision was not done because of our personnel's wish that we make a change at head coach,” Jones said, realizing that he'd already made it abundantly clear that that's exactly what happened. “It was not done because of Chan's total unwillingness to step up and continue to work at this thing. “I had to make a decision ... that the energy that we spend building this team for next year wouldn't be spent trying to come to an agreement as to what we were going to do philosophically offensively. That we would go in a direction that everybody from the get-go was on the same page.” It never seemed to occur to Jones that if he, as owner and general manager, would make a commitment to Gailey then perhaps the players would, too. Or that if they didn't, then perhaps they should be the ones to go. Instead, the coach was fired, which will apparently please a majority of the fans who have been clamoring for his scalp, forgetting perhaps, that another couple of field goals by Richie Cunningham, or another pass or two caught by inept receivers might have turned this into a decent, if unremarkable, 10-6 season. Players who could never be counted on to make a third-and-1 play will wake up today, yawn, and head to the golf course with the knowledge that their owner and GM doesn't hold them one iota responsible for their incompetence. Gailey pays the price for all of them, including gross misjudgements and mistakes made by Jones as owner and GM (anyone remember Patrick Jeffers?). As for wasting energy getting on the same page, won't that be exactly what this team will be doing as it adjusts to its fourth head coach in the past seven years? Gailey, who only a year ago was being praised for his strong disciplinary presence and an offense that finished eighth in the league and carried the Cowboys to the NFC East championship, remained loyal to the end, refusing to point fingers at his players in return. “I can't say they undermined me,” Gailey said. “I think they said what they believed,” when Jones asked. “They were open for change here. The environment was right for that,” Gailey added. “When you come and take over a veteran team that's had a great deal of success, they believe very strongly in what they're doing. Unless you do a supreme job of winning them over immediately, it's always in the back of their minds the idea that there might be another way to do it. “I think that probably was the case and why everybody wasn't on the same page at all times.” The first hint that the owner-GM wasn't on the same page with the head coach came yesterday, when Gailey learned that he was being fired. There was no scenario offered in which he might remain as head coach, Gailey said. Jones never asked if he would make changes in his philosophy or even add an offensive coordinator. “Was there enough upside and positives if you took away some of what he believes in?” Jones asked rhetorically. “How much of that can you whittle away without whittling away Chan Gailey from the standpoint of what he is as a football coach? “How much do you want to take away from maximizing the unique skills of certain players that we have on this team? How much do you want to compromise that?” In the end, Jones decided he would do what he has always done: protect his overpaid, underachieving star players and give them what they wanted. Maybe the devil did make him do it, after all. Or a lot of devils.

Here, through the power of archives, is some corroboration of what I'd mentioned in another thread about Gailey's time in Dallas often being largely misunderstood. The link reveals an article that depicts how much praise Gailey and his system were getting when the Cowboys were 2-0 early in 1999 and Irvin had yet to get hurt: Chan Gailey's Offense and Chan Gailey Maintain Separate Identities

One guy who has not been mentioned whatsoever, and I know it's because there would have to be an "assistant head coach" type of title tagged on to him because otherwise it would be a lateral move, is Dom Capers. I know his name took somewhat of a dive after that stellar ( ) Packers defensive performance in the Wild Card round, but on the season, he did a terrific job transforming them into a very solid unit. More importantly, he is a master of the aggressive 3-4. Gailey and Capers just missed each other in Pittsburgh, as Capers had already been hired by the Panthers a year before they started play when Gailey first got to the Steelers.

Become a fan if you are so inclined!: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Chan-Gailey-...53837453?ref=ts

Well, you, and I, and the Bills fans know this is all talk until I go out and prove it on the field now.

Gailey has a toughness that his sometimes laid-back approach belies. He whipped the '98 Cowboys into shape quickly, and believe me, most of them had morphed into a bunch of complacent, rest-on-your-laurels types by the time Barry Switzer's 4 years were over. As I'd mentioned in another post, Nate Newton was close to 400 pounds after the '97 season, and Gailey basically told him he had to lose about 100 pounds if he wanted to play for him, even if he did have 3 Super Bowl rings and numerous Pro Bowls on his resume. Newton got all the way down to 293 at one point. The Cowboys had also become notorious for a lot of pre-snap stupid penalties by the time Gailey got there. One of his first orders of business was to get some post-practice penalty laps going for all the offenders, and those penalties went down pretty quickly. In reality, Gailey doesn't appear to take much crap from anyone, not even Jerry Jones. He was fired for refusing to agree to Jones's insistence he hire an offensive coordinator. He's a principled guy who will think for himself.

Just started a thread about that article, sorry, I had not seen you already had posted. Great endorsements in there.

Here is the story in its entirety: http://www.buffalobills.com/news/article-3...15-8198af616df7 Interesting endorsements:

Deion starting limping around on the toe that ultimately hobbled him starting early in Gailey's first year, Smith was supposedly on his way out of the league after needing a meaningless finale in Cincinnati at the end of '97 to make it over 1,000 yards, and Aikman and Irvin had spent the overwhelming majority of their careers in a different offensive system. It's wasn't a cakewalk for him, and especially because he was met with resistance by these guys initially, who thought there wasn't much they didn't know about offense after 3 Super Bowl rings. Gailey had big plans for Sanders on offense that were just starting to develop and were never ultimately revealed due to Deion's injury. One thing that's also forgotten is that Irvin sliced his teammate Everett McIver with scissors during Gailey's first training camp in an argument about who was ahead of who in a line to get a haircut. Irvin's mind wasn't exactly all there every day during those years.

Oh, Aikman did have that much pull, and keep in mind, at the end of the 1999 campaign, no one knew Aikman was at the end of his career. He was only 33 and was still a season away from the multiple concussions he suffered in the 2000 season. It was common knowledge at the time that he had clashed with Gailey over philosophy. Aikman wanted the Zampese/Turner system in place for the duration of his career, but had reluctantly accepted Gailey in '98 after Zampese "flamed out" in 1997 and the entire league knew what the Cowboys were going to run on every play it seemed. He even remarked multiple times in '98 how happy he was with the progress the offense made and indeed, the offense was Top 10 in both rushing and passing that first year under Chan. For whatever reason, Aikman did a 360 with his feelings the next year, even though he, Irvin (who ended up retiring), Smith, and Ernie Mills (who was a great slot guy and coach-on-the-field type with Gailey's system from his exposure to it during multiple seasons in Pittsburgh) all missed multiple games and he was having to play with Raghib Ismail as his No. 1 receiver and a 5th string rookie as his 2nd guy by the end of the year. Apparently, according to sources in Dallas at the time, Aikman went to Jerry and complained about Gailey. Jones gave Gailey the ultimatum of hiring an offensive coordinator to run a different system or leave. Gailey refused and nature took its course. Even a 33 year-old Aikman still had a direct pipeline to the owner at that time, which in and of itself was a big part of the problem in those days. That's why Jerry has that guilty conscience over Gailey's firing.

Hi everyone, lifelong Cowboys fan here who requested to join your forum today because of the Gailey hiring. I see that a lot of Bills fans are feeling a spectrum of emotions ranging from frustrated to disgusted over this move, and believe me, I would say that about 60% of Cowboys fans weren't thrilled with Gailey's tenure in Dallas from what I've read on our own message boards over the years. That being said, I was always in that 40% that thought he was great for Dallas. In fact, I was happy to see Jerry Jones own up to the mistake he made when he fired Chan, even if he just finally came out with his admission in the last year. You guys have gotten a solid coach who I am convinced will be much better in his 2nd NFL HC stint, and I'm saying that while thinking he did just fine in his 1st one as well. One thing Gailey is is a very rational guy who tries to learn from past mistakes. You guys heard it for yourself in today's PC when he went right back to the January '99 Wild Card game the Cowboys lost to the Cardinals and stated that in retrospect, he may have let the team get overconfident. He seemed to have that answer and memory right at the forefront of his mind, as if he actively gives his past shortcomings the proper amount of attention in order to avoid repeating them. Gailey rescued a Dallas team that had fallen under significant disorganization under Barry Switzer and really turned them around. He instituted post-practice penalty laps for any pre-snap penalties that occurred in practice, got Nate Newton to drop close to 100 pounds when had ballooned up close to 400 during the offseason leading into the '98 campaign, and succeeded in getting a team that had gotten very fat and happy so to speak, to refocus and make the playoffs. Skeptics always point to the fact that he inherited a team with all of these future HOFers, but that is misleading on a few fronts. To begin with, he had a very difficult proposition as a rookie HC in inheriting that type of team, because of the sense of entitlement from the veterans and the "I have 3 Super Bowl rings, why are you coming in here to change the offense we won those championships with" type of attitude he had to endure. During Chan's 2 years, all 3 future HOFers also suffered key injuries that caused them to miss stretches of games and in Michael Irvin's case, it was 12+games in '99, an injury he never returned from. Emmit Smith was also said to be on his last legs after the '97 season, and he had the last 2 great seasons of his stellar career under Chan (1,332 yards in '98 and 1,397 in '99 in 13 1/2 games). One thing that is often forgotten is that Gailey had the '99 Cowboys headed to 4-0 when Michael Irvin suffered his injury in Veteran's Stadium. He also suffered subsequent other injuries at the WR position that year, until it got to the point that he had a 5th string rookie starting in the Wild Card game that year against the Vikings. Aikman also missed time that season (as he had during Gailey's first year), and Emmit Smith even missed 2 1/2 games with a broken hand. The 8-8 record and Wild Card berth the Cowboys managed that season was actually an accomplishment considering all of the changing personnel on offense he had to deal with. Gailey is an adaptable and very creative offensive mind. He may have tried to force things a bit in Dallas as a rookie HC-- he had Michael Irvin lining up in the backfield and even out of the game on some 3rd downs back in '98 for example--, but I think he long ago learned from those mistakes. To be fair, he also had some great offensive wrinkles that he introduced, such as running the option with Emmit Smith and Ernie Mills and direct snaps to halfback Chris Warren waaaay before the Wildcat was in vogue, that opposing defenses never saw coming that year. Look for Chan to really do some creative things with guys like Fred Jackson, who is very quick in space and can do multiple things well. If Marshawn Lynch does end up being retained by the team, look for Gailey to do good things with him as well. There's no denying Gailey has a solid track record with running backs, be they mediocre ones or Hall of Famers. For example, Emmit Smith has credited Gailey in the past with having resurrected his career, and Lamar Smith, never anything to write home about before or after his time with Chan in Miami, had his most productive years when Gailey worked with him. Finally, I've seen a few challenging the idea that Gailey has developed QBs. I agree to an extent, I think the better description for what he's done is maximize a few of these guys' abilities when he's had them. I.E. Fiedler, Stewart, and Tomczak had their best seasons under Chan's tutelage. Sorry for the long post and for stepping into the Bills discussion here, but I thought I would add my .02. I am looking forward to watching your team with unprecedented interest this season and to rooting for Chan and your team to do well.