A theory on Chan Gailey

[Kelly the Dog]

First of all, I think it's nonsense that Gailey is losing the locker room and the team. Surely the Evans trade shook the locker room but I doubt anyone puts that on Gailey.

 

But this is what I think may have happened with the recent series of events concerning the apparent miscommunication with Levitre, Fred, and now, to a smaller degree, Demetrius Bell.

 

Gailey is an old school football coach. He hasn't been a Head Coach in the NFL in 12 years up until last year. He talks like an old southern football coach, and he is one of the most refreshing and honest coaches you will ever hear. He doesn't ever say anything controversial, he rarely uses superlatives or exaggerates, he doesn't offer information, he simply answers reporters questions with short, succinct, but mostly honest answers. At least as honest as one can be as a coach.

 

He also, very likely, thinks a players job is to shut up and listen to the coach. Play 100% and know your assignment.

 

But in the 12 years since he has been away, the players have gotten substantially more power and money. The internet has exploded. Message boards like the greatest one on Earth, TSW, have expanded greatly. And social media has allowed players to voice their positions a lot easier, instantly, and to more fans. So these things get blown out of proportion a lot more.

 

The point is, I doubt Gailey cared what Levitre thought about starting, or Fred Jackson starting. He probably considered it motivation, knowing full well that both of them would indeed be starting when the season came. But there was a furor in the media that likely would not have played out so fast and so big 12 years ago.

 

And a day or two later, on both accounts, he quickly put the fire out by answering more questions the reporters posed to him. He said Levitre is the starter and inserted him back in but said no job is safe. yesterday he said Levitre is the starter period at LG unless he is the starter at LT. He said Fred Jackson is the starter and a little ahead of Spiller, which is exactly as it has always been and as it should be. (Plus IMO Jackson's frustration was only partly over last week).

 

I think he will probably be a little more sensitive to communication but not much. He likely still thinks it's a players job to shut up and play. But this losing the locker room or out of touch to me is no big deal at all.

 

And as soon as the Bills play well, either this Saturday or opening day against the Chiefs, all the crazies will be back on the bandwagon.

 

Until the following week, of course.

Edited August 24, 2011 by Kelly the Fair and Balanced Dog

[PS 56]

It's Gailey's job to put the best team on the field and win games where he can. The players are always in competition for their slots on the field. That is pro sports. Gailey has every right to and should move players around to see who is best playing where. He needs to be able to evaluate the talent he has. That is what he has been doing. I do not understand the controversy.

[The Wei 44]

Total non issue - This dumb story is filling a void b/c it's being reported as "news" when there's not much Bills news out there to be had.

[hondo in seattle]

First of all, I think it's nonsense that Gailey is losing the locker room and the team. Surely the Evans trade shook the locker room but I doubt anyone puts that on Gailey.

 

But this is what I think may have happened with the recent series of events concerning the apparent miscommunication with Levitre, Fred, and now, to a smaller degree, Demetrius Bell.

 

Gailey is an old school football coach. He hasn't been a Head Coach in the NFL in 12 years up until last year. He talks like an old southern football coach, and he is one of the most refreshing and honest coaches you will ever hear. He doesn't ever say anything controversial, he rarely uses superlatives or exaggerates, he doesn't offer information, he simply answers reporters questions with short, succinct, but mostly honest answers. At least as honest as one can be as a coach.

 

He also, very likely, thinks a players job is to shut up and listen to the coach. Play 100% and know your assignment.

 

But in the 12 years since he has been away, the players have gotten substantially more power and money. The internet has exploded. Message boards like the greatest one on Earth, TSW, have expanded greatly. And social media has allowed players to voice their positions a lot easier, instantly, and to more fans. So these things get blown out of proportion a lot more.

 

The point is, I doubt Gailey cared what Levitre thought about starting, or Fred Jackson starting. He probably considered it motivation, knowing full well that both of them would indeed be starting when the season came. But there was a furor in the media that likely would not have played out so fast and so big 12 years ago.

 

And a day or two later, on both accounts, he quickly put the fire out by answering more questions the reporters posed to him. He said Levitre is the starter and inserted him back in but said no job is safe. yesterday he said Levitre is the starter period at LG unless he is the starter at LT. He said Fred Jackson is the starter and a little ahead of Spiller, which is exactly as it has always been and as it should be. (Plus IMO Jackson's frustration was only partly over last week).

 

I think he will probably be a little more sensitive to communication but not much. He likely still thinks it's a players job to shut up and play. But this losing the locker room or out of touch to me is no big deal at all.

 

And as soon as the Bills play well, either this Saturday or opening day against the Chiefs, all the crazies will be back on the bandwagon.

 

Until the following week, of course.

 

 

As someone who's never set foot in a Bills locker room, my guess is that you might be right.

 

And I have related worry. Today's players probably need more coddling than players a while ago. I noticed that Modkins was the coach to talk with Freddie when Freddie was unhappy, not Gailey. There are times to use the chain of command, but I think in this case the situation would have been best served by Gailey's personal involvement. I think if a similar situation had occurred in New York, Rex would have personally communicated to the player - make the player feel loved, wanted, respected. I wonder if Gailey is too much the CEO type who delegates things instead of getting hands-on?

[Miyagi-Do Karate]

I'm not sure what to think.

 

I don't think Chan Gailey is considered a "players' coach" in the mold of guys like Cowher. On the other hand, I wonder if his approach is all that different from Bellichick's?

[Buftex]

First of all, I think it's nonsense that Gailey is losing the locker room and the team. Surely the Evans trade shook the locker room but I doubt anyone puts that on Gailey.

 

But this is what I think may have happened with the recent series of events concerning the apparent miscommunication with Levitre, Fred, and now, to a smaller degree, Demetrius Bell.

 

Gailey is an old school football coach. He hasn't been a Head Coach in the NFL in 12 years up until last year. He talks like an old southern football coach, and he is one of the most refreshing and honest coaches you will ever hear. He doesn't ever say anything controversial, he rarely uses superlatives or exaggerates, he doesn't offer information, he simply answers reporters questions with short, succinct, but mostly honest answers. At least as honest as one can be as a coach.

 

He also, very likely, thinks a players job is to shut up and listen to the coach. Play 100% and know your assignment.

 

But in the 12 years since he has been away, the players have gotten substantially more power and money. The internet has exploded. Message boards like the greatest one on Earth, TSW, have expanded greatly. And social media has allowed players to voice their positions a lot easier, instantly, and to more fans. So these things get blown out of proportion a lot more.

 

The point is, I doubt Gailey cared what Levitre thought about starting, or Fred Jackson starting. He probably considered it motivation, knowing full well that both of them would indeed be starting when the season came. But there was a furor in the media that likely would not have played out so fast and so big 12 years ago.

 

And a day or two later, on both accounts, he quickly put the fire out by answering more questions the reporters posed to him. He said Levitre is the starter and inserted him back in but said no job is safe. yesterday he said Levitre is the starter period at LG unless he is the starter at LT. He said Fred Jackson is the starter and a little ahead of Spiller, which is exactly as it has always been and as it should be. (Plus IMO Jackson's frustration was only partly over last week).

 

I think he will probably be a little more sensitive to communication but not much. He likely still thinks it's a players job to shut up and play. But this losing the locker room or out of touch to me is no big deal at all.

 

And as soon as the Bills play well, either this Saturday or opening day against the Chiefs, all the crazies will be back on the bandwagon.

 

Until the following week, of course.

 

That is as good a take as any. But keep in mind, even before the internet had such a huge influence on sports, and the way we watch them, Gailey was not popular with vetrans when he coached the Cowboys...part of the reason he was canned. The criticism then was that Gailey wanted to change everything to his philosopy, rather than adapt to the talent on hand. Troy Aikman in particular was not a fan of Gailey. In some ways, not in a personality way, but a coaching way, I think Gailey is almost a little like Mike Martz...

 

Granted, the Bills cuppard was a lot more bare in 2010, than the Cowboys was, when he took over in 1998...but the theory sitll applies.

 

I like Gailey a lot. I too, find his honesty refreshing. But, one thing I have observed in his time here, when publically calls a players effort, or playing ability into question, they are not long for the Bills roster...always listening for those clues...I am thinking Bell is most likely the next odd-man out.

Edited August 24, 2011 by Buftex

[GG]

I think that the only thing that new media has done is given fans greater access to the sausage making factory. This issue would have been the same with out the extracurricular noise that's been generated here.

 

Gailey stumbled in his handling of the roster machinations and would have faced the same blowback from the players if this was 1960 or 1980. The only thing different is that we now have a second row seat.

 

Mark Zuckerberg was not even a thought when the revolt set it on Bullogh. He was in his diapers when Ruben Brown told Greggo to stuff it. He may have been in kindergarden when the team tuned out Mularkey. The commonality among those were crappy teams where the coach's message was completely lost.

 

I totally see what Gailey is trying to do. But it's been obvious that he's not very good in telegraphing his intentions to the team, as they should not be surprised at the movements. When they express the same puzzlement as the fans do, it's not the media that's blowing things out of proportion, it's a coach learning to communicate.

[Buftex]

I'm not sure what to think.

 

I don't think Chan Gailey is considered a "players' coach" in the mold of guys like Cowher. On the other hand, I wonder if his approach is all that different from Bellichick's?

 

 

From what I have heard, Bellichik is very personable with his players, just not the media. I know, he has had some ex-players (Drew Beldsoe, and Drew's best Pats freind, Ted Johnson? Linebacker...) slam him, but I think they were the alienated vetrans...that is a Parcell's tree characteristic...take the most popular player on the team, when you get there, and make an example of them...let them know you are in charge.

[Kelly the Dog]

That is as good a take as any. But keep in mind, even before the internet had such a huge influence on sports, and the way we watch them, Gailey was not popular with vetrans when he coached the Cowboys...part of the reason he was canned. The criticism then was that Gailey wanted to change everything to his philosopy, rather than adapt to the talent on hand. Troy Aikman in particular was not a fan of Gailey. In some ways, not in a personality way, but a coaching way, I think Gailey is almost a little like Mike Martz...

I honestly don't know much about his time in Dallas. I don't know if he had a problem with Aikman or not, but I will take your word for it.

 

The thing is, he is known, and I've seen it evidenced, that he is just the opposite of Martz, and just the opposite of the intransient coach who makes his players fit his system. He builds his offenses around the strengths and weaknesses of his players at hand. He did it in Pitt, Miami, Kansas City, and he did it last year here. So I would take exception with the fact that he is like Martz at all. It's possible, I guess, that he learned from the Dallas thing if it happened. But his history suggests he builds around his players. That is one of the things I like the very most about him.

[ThurmasThoman]

it's the nfl, there's no guaranteed contracts. you can't "lose" a locker room - not like the nba.

 

in the nba, players openly quit on their coach.

there's tmac, a player with an albatross of a contract, openly laughing at his coach. tmacs getting his millions, he can do whatever he wants. hell, detroit could cut him, trade him, whatever, he'll still get paid.

 

if fred jackson acts up, fred jackson gets cut. it's as simple as that in the nfl.

 

so no, i wouldn't worry about what gaily does during the preseason. and if the players care that much, guess what? we've been GARBAGE since every single one of them has put on a bills jersey. cut them all and sign practice squad players in their place - who cares? what are we, going to be worse than 4-12? oh no! the horror!

 

if you don't like it, play better.

 

or join trent edwards in oakland.

 

it's that simple.

 

accountability is the first step to success. there's no such thing as job security at one bills drive, it all depends on your play on the field.

 

for an example of how this philosophy plays out, see the patriots, new england, and their promotion of brady to starting qb over drew bledsoe based on his performance on the field.

[Kelly the Dog]

I think that the only thing that new media has done is given fans greater access to the sausage making factory. This issue would have been the same with out the extracurricular noise that's been generated here.

 

Gailey stumbled in his handling of the roster machinations and would have faced the same blowback from the players if this was 1960 or 1980. The only thing different is that we now have a second row seat.

 

Mark Zuckerberg was not even a thought when the revolt set it on Bullogh. He was in his diapers when Ruben Brown told Greggo to stuff it. He may have been in kindergarden when the team tuned out Mularkey. The commonality among those were crappy teams where the coach's message was completely lost.

 

I totally see what Gailey is trying to do. But it's been obvious that he's not very good in telegraphing his intentions to the team, as they should not be surprised at the movements. When they express the same puzzlement as the fans do, it's not the media that's blowing things out of proportion, it's a coach learning to communicate.

I don't see any indication whatsoever that Fred Jackson took his gripe to the locker room. I don't see any wild blowback at all from the players. Levitre posed rather calm explanations to the media as far as his quotes go (perhaps he was different in person. He basically said "I don't know what is going on, no one told me. I'm just going to play harder because I had a bad game." It didn't at all sound like a blow up. Fred's frustrations, as you well know, didn't really come from Saturday, that was a symptom. And still, his response was that he's frustrated by the front office and his standing on the team.

 

I don't think the issue would have been the same earlier because of your sausage factory comment I agree with. 12 years ago it would have been a little blurb in the Buff News, spoke about here a little in the early years of TBD and around the watercoolers then would have disappeared the next day when the coach told Fred or Levitre he was the still the starter. Now, because of social media and all the outlets, there is turmoil in the locker room and Gailey is in danger of losing his team.

 

I don't think he's in danger of losing his team at all, although without being there, I could be wrong.

 

The coach may need to communicate better, which he seemed to have done immediately. The first thing he said was I feel bad that a player would believe what Levitre did, that was not the case. And he nipped the Fred thing in the bud within a day, as far as the starter goes. Which was the point of the thread. He probably wouldn't have had to come out and do that 12 years ago. He could have just told his RB coach "Tell Fred he is our starting back and will start the season opener."

[Buftex]

I honestly don't know much about his time in Dallas. I don't know if he had a problem with Aikman or not, but I will take your word for it.

 

The thing is, he is known, and I've seen it evidenced, that he is just the opposite of Martz, and just the opposite of the intransient coach who makes his players fit his system. He builds his offenses around the strengths and weaknesses of his players at hand. He did it in Pitt, Miami, Kansas City, and he did it last year here. So I would take exception with the fact that he is like Martz at all. It's possible, I guess, that he learned from the Dallas thing if it happened. But his history suggests he builds around his players. That is one of the things I like the very most about him.

 

 

Yeah, on second thought, I think you are mostly right...at least with the offense...I think the Bills had better talent on defense last year (maybe only marginally) than what they showed. I think they adapted a scheme they were not fit to run...but your point is taken. My bad...

[Bufcomments]

You maybe right Kelly but the Bills organization has made the Vets question were the team is going.

 

Maybe Fred's beef is more than who is starting or who isn't. He wants to talk to coach about the shakeup on the line, letting Lee go for nothing, Brad Smith taking away some of his carries, etc. chan has to let him know thing straight up, not by letting coach Modkins handle it.

 

Listen I don't think Chan has handled either situation properly. Your right on point when you said Fat Rex would have handled it differently. Rex is a cool dude, and Chan IS old school.

 

If I were Chan I would tell Fred hey your our guy until CJ is ready, then we are going to start CJ. Be honest and let Fred make a decision that's best for him.

 

But if I were Fred I would chill because the more carries CJ gets, the less wear and tear Fred has on his body and extend his career.

[Bob in STL]

First of all, I think it's nonsense that Gailey is losing the locker room and the team. Surely the Evans trade shook the locker room but I doubt anyone puts that on Gailey.

 

But this is what I think may have happened with the recent series of events concerning the apparent miscommunication with Levitre, Fred, and now, to a smaller degree, Demetrius Bell.

 

Gailey is an old school football coach. He hasn't been a Head Coach in the NFL in 12 years up until last year. He talks like an old southern football coach, and he is one of the most refreshing and honest coaches you will ever hear. He doesn't ever say anything controversial, he rarely uses superlatives or exaggerates, he doesn't offer information, he simply answers reporters questions with short, succinct, but mostly honest answers. At least as honest as one can be as a coach.

 

He also, very likely, thinks a players job is to shut up and listen to the coach. Play 100% and know your assignment.

 

But in the 12 years since he has been away, the players have gotten substantially more power and money. The internet has exploded. Message boards like the greatest one on Earth, TSW, have expanded greatly. And social media has allowed players to voice their positions a lot easier, instantly, and to more fans. So these things get blown out of proportion a lot more.

 

The point is, I doubt Gailey cared what Levitre thought about starting, or Fred Jackson starting. He probably considered it motivation, knowing full well that both of them would indeed be starting when the season came. But there was a furor in the media that likely would not have played out so fast and so big 12 years ago.

 

And a day or two later, on both accounts, he quickly put the fire out by answering more questions the reporters posed to him. He said Levitre is the starter and inserted him back in but said no job is safe. yesterday he said Levitre is the starter period at LG unless he is the starter at LT. He said Fred Jackson is the starter and a little ahead of Spiller, which is exactly as it has always been and as it should be. (Plus IMO Jackson's frustration was only partly over last week).

 

I think he will probably be a little more sensitive to communication but not much. He likely still thinks it's a players job to shut up and play. But this losing the locker room or out of touch to me is no big deal at all.

 

And as soon as the Bills play well, either this Saturday or opening day against the Chiefs, all the crazies will be back on the bandwagon.

 

Until the following week, of course.

 

Gailey was out of the NFL for 12 years but he coached and ran a NCAA Div 1 program. He saw first hand how todays players are turned into coddled prima donnas. Hew knows what they are all about. He knows that the leadership and accountability has to come from the players. Gailey is not out there missing blocks and tackles.

 

If there is a problem in the locker room it is because of a lack of veteran leadership by the players. We have no leaders like the glory days with Jim Kelly, Kent Hull, or Darryl Talley. This is easy to understand since we change coaches and GMs every 3-4 years. The players we draft we often fail to develop. When they do develop they leave because a new coach comes in and brings in "his players".

 

We are in a viscous cycle of change and all it is doing is breeding a losing mentality.

 

Who are the core veteran players on this team? Evans (now gone)? Jackson? K. Williams? Wilson?

Edited August 25, 2011 by Bob in STL

[4BillsintheBurgh]

Gailey was out of the NFL for 12 years but he coached and ran a NCAA Div 1 program. He saw first hand how todays players are turned into coddled prima donnas. Hew knows what they are all about. He knows that the leadership and accountability has to come from the players. Gailey is not out there missing blocks and tackles.

 

If there is a problem in the locker room it is because of a lack of veteran leadership by the players. We have no leaders like the glory days with Jim Kelly, Kent Hull, or Darryl Talley. This is easy to understand since we change coaches and GMs every 3-4 years. The players we draft we often fail to develop. When they do develop they leave because a new coach comes in and brings in "his players".

 

We are in a viscous cycle of change and all it is doing is breeding a losing mentality.

 

Who are the core veteran players on this team? Evans (now gone)? Jackson? K. Williams? Wilson?

Agree. The funny (not haha) thing is that Fred has seen so much of the come and go. I would also say you don't give FJ the chance to be a leader if the rest of the team doesn't know if the coaching staff is committed to him or not. 1a and 1b is bs too. CJ needs to take the belt away, not be given the title.

 

Maybe there's something going on behind the scenes, but if Chan and Buddy are going to talk about production being the measuring stick, they better use it all the time with all players. Or yes, he will lose the locker room and they will not play as hard for him.

[sarmanuscg07]

(Plus IMO Jackson's frustration was only partly over last week).

 

The charity i volunteer for brought a bunch of inner city Rochester kids to camp, one of the ungreatful cocky 12 yr olds, they all seemed that way, said to Freddy, "you ain't even the starter."

 

Freddy replied to him matter of factly that he was. He appeared to be upset but he signed for the kid and all of his friends. You could cut the tension with a knife but he kept his composure and his class. Fast Freddy

 

Good post fair and balanced

[billsfan714]

Agree. The funny (not haha) thing is that Fred has seen so much of the come and go. I would also say you don't give FJ the chance to be a leader if the rest of the team doesn't know if the coaching staff is committed to him or not. 1a and 1b is bs too. CJ needs to take the belt away, not be given the title.

 

Maybe there's something going on behind the scenes, but if Chan and Buddy are going to talk about production being the measuring stick, they better use it all the time with all players. Or yes, he will lose the locker room and they will not play as hard for him.

 

Well you can't sum it up better than that. Well done.

[thewildrabbit]

Gailey was out of the NFL for 12 years but he coached and ran a NCAA Div 1 program. He saw first hand how todays players are turned into coddled prima donnas. Hew knows what they are all about. He knows that the leadership and accountability has to come from the players. Gailey is not out there missing blocks and tackles.

 

If there is a problem in the locker room it is because of a lack of veteran leadership by the players. We have no leaders like the glory days with Jim Kelly, Kent Hull, or Darryl Talley. This is easy to understand since we change coaches and GMs every 3-4 years. The players we draft we often fail to develop. When they do develop they leave because a new coach comes in and brings in "his players".

 

We are in a viscous cycle of change and all it is doing is breeding a losing mentality.

 

Who are the core veteran players on this team? Evans (now gone)? Jackson? K. Williams? Wilson?

 

Good point, one of the things that Chuck Knox did to help make the young players believe they can win was to bring in some very experienced "rah rah" type players. Guys like Phil Villapiano- Conrad Dobler-Isiah Robinson to bring in veteran leadership to the team

 

Gailey also mentioned he was going to bring toughness to the team, what he failed to realize is that the players loved jauron and played their hearts out for him, the team didn't lack toughness. It lacked a progressive passing offense and a run stuffing defense. what Jauron's problem was his crappy schemes, Tampa 2 and Martz passing offense both were out dated and stunk. What gets me is that key piece to run the Tampa 2 was that stud OLB that Jauron never drafted, he was always to busy drafting DB's

[BillsObserver]

I love Kelly the fair and balanced dog. You've been rock solid lately. Good stuff, dawg.

[switz1610]

The difference between Chan and the Rex/Bellicheats of the world is that the latter can say "you don't want to be here? fine we'll trade you to buffalo"