He removes Gailey, but is he spreading himself too thin? Matt Bowen
Head coaches in this league should act like it, and delegating responsibilities to assistants is part of that job. Yes, you have to relinquish some control on both sides of the football, but in the end, the entire team benefits — offense, defense and special teams.
That’s why I am not a fan of the recent move by new Chiefs head coach Todd Haley, who today released offensive coordinator Chan Gailey of his play-calling duties.
APDid Todd Haley jump the gun in removing Chan Gailey as offensive coordinator?
Haley is now doing what he did in the past for the Cardinals — calling plays -- and I’m wondering what the effect will be.
First, we have to understand that every coach in this league comes from one side of the football as they work their way up the ladder. Haley is an offensive guy, and that is why it’s crucial for him to hire defensive coaches he can trust and can count on — because it isn’t his area of expertise.
But I have always been in favor of head coaches being head coaches. That way they coach the “entire” team. They sit in on special teams meetings and defensive meetings, and they do the same when the offense comes together as a unit. Plus, it carries over to practice, because they know what all three phases of the game are doing in terms of preparation and game planning.
And they should, because it’s their team.
But Haley has given that up, because if he’s calling the plays, well, then he’s going to be in offensive meetings — and I worry that the rest of the team will suffer.
Just as I worry with Lovie Smith and Wade Phillips running their respective defenses in Chicago and Dallas, along with Josh McDaniels running the offense in Denver.
I experienced both sides when I was in Washington with the Redskins. Under Steve Spurrier, we were an offensive football team, and the Old Ball Coach dedicated all of his time to the that side of the ball. We struggled as a defense and as a special teams unit because so much emphasis was directed at the offense.
APSteve Spurrier dedicated his time to the offensive side of the ball in Washington.
When head coach Joe Gibbs — an offensive guy — came in, Gregg Williams took over the defense. But although Gibbs had an offensive background, he still knew what was going on in our meeting room, and he treated special teams with monumental respect.
The result: the whole team benefited.
But can it work in K.C., Chicago, Dallas and Denver? That remains to be seen, but as a head coach, when you remove one of your assistants, you’re sending a message to the team — good and bad.
The good is that you’re willing to step in and take control; the bad is that you’re showing your team that you don’t have faith in the coaching staff — which you hired.
But that’s part of being a head coach, and for a rookie like Haley, this is a very bold move, something that could be looked back on as a great decision -- or something that could be looked at as a monumental mistake.
We can’t answer that yet, but we can say that this move is made with some desperation attached to it. The Chiefs are struggling on offense, and Haley is stepping in to save it.
Will he?
Follow me on Twitter: MattBowen41
Can't wait for Haley to self destruct. Bill Cowher we need you.
I have 2 points: first is Haley didn't hire Gailey, he inherited him.
Second, I am a die hard Georgia Tech fan so I have a lot of experience with Gailey. He comes up with a few good game plans a year but overall he is overly conservative and doesn't seem to understand the talents of his players. His offensive philosophy is defintely different than what Haley followed in Arizona. This move will benefit the Chiefs.
Not every great coordiantor has the skills to be a head coach. Some are great at X's and O's but lack leadership or motivational ability. Others find it difficult to delegate, because no one will be the kind of coordinator they were. This problem is exacerbated because often the team really wanted to hire them as a coordinator but had to give them the headcoach title to lure them away. Sometimes you get both problems.
It's such an obvious risk, that you wonder why so many teams take it when proven headcoaches are available.
@ Slugs60 - way to support your club. The Chefs have a ways to go, but at least they're willing to make a change instead of hiring whoever just lost his job somewhere else.
In general, why shouldn't he call plays. I thought the play-calling in Arizona was superb. What I always look for in a play-caller is that he makes adjustments at half time. That the game plan changes just enough to get a bit of an edge after seeing what the defense is going to do. From what I could see (including the Stupid Bowl last year, when they were down 13 points at halftime and came back to lead the game in the 4th quarter), Haley seemed to do the job uncommonly well. If he can strike a balance with his time, and Matt cautions that it's not easy to do so, smart play calling might give the Chefs a bit of an edge, and heaven knows they'll be needing it.
Latest Haley quote.
"you aren't going to wear me out
you'll have to kill me"
He's losing his mind. Opening game I'll wear my bag that says fire Haley.
I don't care if Yogi Bear calls the plays.
I was 13 when the Chiefs won the SB and I sat in Arrowhead for decades waiting to win again.
I moved west 10 years ago but still watch them always, TY NFL Sunday Ticket.
JUST WIN DAMMIT!!!!! I'm gettin old!!!
Hell, bring in Schottenheimer to call the plays, I don't care, WIN!!!
| powered by TheSeats.com |
How Brees won the MVP, plus more...
How the Saints and Colts can hoist...
Age, hard hits not kind to RB...
Giants defensive end says he'll...
Breaking down Brees to Meachem...
Aug 31, 2009
06:46 PM
After Charlie Weiss left the Pats Belichick just didn't tell anyone who was calling the plays. What's wrong with doing that? "We all have a hand it" He'd say.
I'm sure Chan Gailey is a pro and will do his best; but shouldn't a leader go to any lengths to avoid embarrassing someone? Gailey has to be humiliated and his stock down in the eyes of his charges.
Not good IMO.