Chan Gailey: What Did the Chiefs Get?
![]() |
After stints with the University of Florida, Troy State and the Air Force from 1975 to 1984, Chan Gailey landed in Denver as a defensive assistant and special teams coach for the Broncos. In his five year's with the Broncos, the team was ranked in the top ten every year but his last in one of the money stats for special teams -- kick return average.
After head coaching positions with the Birmingham Fire of the World League and Samford University, Gailey made his way back to the NFL as wide receivers coach for the Pittsburgh Steelers. He held that position for two years before being promoted to Pittsburgh's offensive coordinator. In his first year as OC, the Steelers' offense was ranked 15th in the NFL. The team was ranked 27th in passing offense and 2nd in rushing offense that year as well.
In Gailey's second year as offensive coordinator, the Steeler's averaged nearly 155 yards rushing per game, good enough for #1 in the NFL. The passing offense remained stagnant and finished the 1997 season ranked 23rd overall. The offense as a whole ranked 6th that year.
In every year Gailey was a coach with the Steelers, they made the playoffs and posted 12, 11, 10 and 11 win seasons respectively. With Gailey at the offensive helm in the 1996 season, the Steelers demolished the Colts 42 to 14 in one of the AFC Wild Card games. Unfortunately, that offensive explosion was quieted the next week when they lost to the Patriots 28 to 3. The Steelers avenged the Patriots loss the next season in the playoffs by beating them 7 to 6 in the divisional round. The Steelers ended up losing the next week in the AFC Championship to the Broncos.
Gailey leveraged his success in Pittsburgh to grab the head coaching position with the Dallas Cowboys, a position he held for two years. Gailey again improved the rushing offense of his team, keeping them ranked in the top ten in the league both years he was head coach. Oddly enough, Gailey took what was in the year before he came a 20th ranked Cowboy passing offense to a 9th ranked passing offense. Then, in 1999, passing production dropped and the Cowboys finished the season ranked 20th overall in passing offense. See a pattern yet?
The 1998 Cowboys posted a 10-6 record and won the NFC East. The 1999 team went .500 but still made the playoffs. Both years Dallas lost in the first round of the playoffs.
In Gailey's two-year stay with the Miami Dolphins as their offensive coordinator, the team hovered around the bottom ten in the league in terms of offensive production. The rushing offense didn't change much -- ranked 22nd in 1999; 14th in Gailey's first year in 2000; and back down to 23rd in his final year. The Dolphins passing offense was middle of the road before Gailey came on and fell to the bottom third of the league during his tenure as offensive coordinator.
Chan Gailey and the Dolphins went to the playoffs both years he was offensive coordinator. In 2000, the Dolphins made it to the divisional round of the AFC playoffs after beating Indianapolis in the wild card game. They were subsequently shut out by the Raiders, 27 to 0. The Dolphins were handily defeated the next year by the Super Bowl Champion Baltimore Ravens in the wild card game.
Chan Gailey spent the next six years as the head coach at Georgia Tech. I'm not going to look much into his 44-32 career record and subsequent resignation last year. College football is a different beast than the NFL. A college coach can lose to his school's biggest rival each year -- like Tech did against the University of Georgia each year Gailey was head coach -- and almost nothing short of a conference or national championship will keep that coach his job. Also, can you imagine recruiting for the ACC in the heart of SEC country? Gailey more than likely got SEC table scraps for recruits.
Now that I've laid out Chan Gailey's coaching resume for you, I hope some of the positives of his coaching career are coming to light.
Gailey has held a number of coaching positions that have encompassed nearly every aspect of football. He was a defensive coach with various colleges in the mid-1970s to the early 1980s. He held the position of defensive backs coach and defensive coordinator during those years. Throughout the rest of his coaching career, he's held the position of head coach, wide receivers coach, special teams coach and offensive coordinator. His coaching career spans over thirty-years and he's had relative success nearly everywhere he's gone.
I can't put it much better than Jon at MVN did yesterday:
- None of his teams went below .500 and most of his teams won 10+ games
- His teams usually hovered around the top 15 and usually ended up in the top 10
- His teams have been very successful in the playoffs
![]() |
I'm not sure what people who wanted a high-flying spread type offensive coordinator were thinking. Does the Chiefs personnel match up to that style? Not at all in my opinion. With improvement to the offensive line, the Chiefs are built to be a run first, pass second team, which is exactly what Gailey excels in creating. And I'm perfectly fine with that. A healthy Larry Johnson and an adequate offensive line -- a big "if" at this point in the off-season -- has the potential to push our rushing offense back into the top ten. I would much rather build a team around the run than the pass. Running the ball is much more reliable, especially in the playoffs.
Plus, emphasizing (but first shoring up) our league worst running game is only going to help Brodie Croyle. There's no reason to ask a player who hasn't started even half of a season's worth of games to carry the load with no help. Chan Gailey's style of offensive takes pressure off of the passing game, which is exactly what Brodie needs. It will allow him to grow more into the position than baptism by fire. You saw last year what zero threat in the running game can do to a QB.
Finally, Chan Gailey's philosophy meshes well with Herm's. This means more independence for Gailey and more control over his offense. Herm can trust him. Gailey is too established to be taking orders from our head coach. Herm is no longer running the show, baby-sitting a second-year coordinator. He has a professional in the ranks now.
Chan Gailey isn't going to come out and wow us with spectacularly designed plays. But I think he's just the guy out of the other candidates to lead this particular Chiefs' offense. Much like Marty-ball, Gailey's style may not be pretty but it sure is effective. With our defense holding steady, I'm reminded of the mid-1990s when the Chiefs were a balanced, successful football team. We had a few wins during that time, didn't we?
After a night of contemplation, I think this is a great hire by the Chiefs. There was no reason to gamble with the offensive coordinator position.
Update: Warpaint Illustrated has exclusive quotes from Herm about Chan Gailey. They give some good insight on the hire.
0 recs |
63 comments
Comments
here's the thing. The Coryell offense
by sm7600 on
Jan 17, 2008 10:57 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
We've got players at the skill positions
by primetime 07 on
Jan 17, 2008 11:04 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
agreed. and no system in the world
that, to me, is the primary job for the offensive side of the ball for the Chiefs. Find a workable o-line.
by sm7600 on
Jan 17, 2008 11:05 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Definitely
by Chris on
Jan 17, 2008 11:07 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I was reading
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 11:06 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
No passing attack
If you don't have the tools you can't build the house.
What's more important though, is that his teams went to the playoffs often while he was a coordinator, meaning that even if they didn't have QBs capable of mounting huge passing attacks, he STILL was able to get it done with the running game.
I know alot of people really like the excitment of the passing game, hell I'm one of them, but what really matters in the end is that you win. I don't care whether its passing or running as long as they score enough points to win. Chan Gailey has been able to do that.
by DJ on
Jan 17, 2008 5:47 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I hate to break it to everybody
So let's look back at the last 7 SuperBowl winners.
Colts-Complex, well-developed, versatile offense.
Pittsburgh- Complex, well developed, versatile offense.
New England- Complex, well-developed, versatile offense.
New England- Complex, well-developed, versatile offense.
Tampa Bay- Complex, well-developed, versatile offense.
New England- See above.
Baltimore- Top 5 all time defense.
Note, a great line and strong running game are definitely elements of all these teams.
But it's not the only element. I'm a little frustrated that everyone, including the coach (not that he's wrong for thinking so! No criticism!) keep saying "we're just going to run the football and play football."
It's not that simple. Not anymore. Defenses are faster and stronger than ever. Meanwhile, the rules are set to favor passing. Every system above was run with a combination of short, intermediate, and deep passing, consistent running, and using backs out of the backfield (hence my earlier question about screen plays. We need them. Bad. McFadden, anyone?).
It's not that I don't think we should rebuild the o-line. But everyone seems to think that as long as we get a ProBowl o-line, it's off to the Super Bowl!
We need more than that.
by Ridiculous Matt on
Jan 17, 2008 11:26 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
I think the idea is that a good running game
Is this realistic with our offense? Yes! (IMO)
We have great talent at our skill positions. Dwayne Bowe, TG and LJ are all exceptional talents. A solid offensive line will help the running game, but also it will begin to open a lot of doors for us in the passing game.
by primetime 07 on
Jan 17, 2008 11:33 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I'm certain
My concern is that we won't try. That we'll be so focused on pounding the rock we won't be versatile. That's what I'm looking for, I guess. Balance. Let's attack with the run, with the air, let's blitz, let's mixup zone and man-to-man.
I think you need to be versatile to win in this league.
by Ridiculous Matt on
Jan 17, 2008 1:13 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Note to Above:
"We have to fix the o-line."
Yes, we know.
The only person that doesn't know that is Kyle Turley. Because he's too busy counting his money.
by Ridiculous Matt on
Jan 17, 2008 11:27 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
With even an average o-line
We have a other needs on offense -- blocking tight end, another good WR. Rebuilding our offensive line isn't going to solve all of our problems but it will go a long way towards that.
by Chris on
Jan 17, 2008 11:36 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Best reaction to this hire I've read yet:
Ever seen Apocalypse Now? Remember Charlie Steiner in the Y2K ESPN commercial? Have you expereince a bad acid trip?
Combine all 3...now you know what my evening was like after I heard Chan Gailey had been hired. My couch is still smouldering on the front lawn and there's a decapitated water buffalo in the garage.
[Brando] The horror...the horror...[/Brando]
by Bill Grigsbys Cirrhosis on
Jan 17, 2008 12:07 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Overreaction
by Chris on
Jan 17, 2008 12:20 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree...
by Bill Grigsbys Cirrhosis on
Jan 17, 2008 12:23 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You could use that analogy
I think that quoted comment above is a typical overreaction that a certain number of fans have in response to anything the Chiefs do.
by Chris on
Jan 17, 2008 12:29 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Think of what the reaction...
by Bill Grigsbys Cirrhosis on
Jan 17, 2008 12:35 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Chan...
by c rag on
Jan 17, 2008 12:49 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
The only
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 12:26 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Why dont we
by Lanier63 on
Jan 17, 2008 12:51 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Great Idea!
by Halfbreed5050 on
Jan 17, 2008 1:28 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not risky, safe
The chances of their team not being good enough to make the playoffs is greater than the chance that their team will since only 12 teams out of 32 can go to the playoffs each year.
So its safer for people to be negative and belittle their team because theres a pretty good chance their team won't make it in the end and they can say "I told you so". And if the team does good and wins, everyones so happy that no one remembers all the negativity and they don't have to account for it.
I work in shipping and the Fed Ex driver that picks up our packages is a season ticket holder and dyed in the wool Jason Whitlock disciple. All he ever talks about is how much he hates King Carl or Herm or how he thinks we need the greates free agents or the sexiest draft pick. But no matter who is running the Chiefs, he would still have this opinion because its safe.
Its much riskier being optimistic and to hope and trust in your team.
by DJ on
Jan 17, 2008 5:56 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I do not
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 6:44 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Not really talking about you
Everyone is entitled to their opinions. I'm talking about the guy you go to sit down and watch a game with and every play he's cursing the players, even when they do something good.
by DJ on
Jan 17, 2008 6:55 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
My FedEx guy
Casual fans I would say.
by primetime 07 on
Jan 17, 2008 8:40 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
FedEx
by PVChiefsfan on
Jan 17, 2008 9:46 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Come on guys
by Tom Bahali on
Jan 18, 2008 11:33 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Clark Hunt
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 1:06 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
It almost sounded like an ultimatum
by Chris on
Jan 17, 2008 2:14 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
After looking at the transcript
Now that's not the typical response. I don't see Carl leaving before then though. Two years is a short enough time for Clark Hunt to let Carl Peterson ride out his twenty-year stint as Chiefs Pres. and GM, almost no matter what happens.
by Chris on
Jan 17, 2008 2:19 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I would
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 3:06 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It may have crossed his mind
by Chris on
Jan 17, 2008 3:12 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Did I miss something?
by primetime 07 on
Jan 17, 2008 4:29 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It could
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 3:20 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Hey I got a caption
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 4:27 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Why do I get the feeling...
If I'm right, WHY we continue babying this QB is beyond me. Sure, he's got a gun of an arm, but that doesn't give you much if you lack the brain, strategy, leadership qualities and passion for the game that good QBs have in spades.
by gritsnyc on
Jan 17, 2008 8:18 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
I think it's only fair
by primetime 07 on
Jan 17, 2008 8:42 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Full season
by Eric on
Jan 17, 2008 9:36 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
If we give him a decent o-line
by PVChiefsfan on
Jan 17, 2008 9:48 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Perhaps...
by gritsnyc on
Jan 17, 2008 10:17 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
What are we going to do?
So its either stop watching football altogether, which I have no interest in doing, or grin and bear it.
I figure I've got at least 30 or 40 more years of life left and will be watching the Chiefs each of those years. Sometimes they'll be good, sometimes they'll be bad. I'm still watching.
by DJ on
Jan 17, 2008 10:31 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Yea
by Eric on
Jan 18, 2008 8:18 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
That's the thing
I say my patience is running thin -- not because I'm going to stop being a fan (physically impossible) but because I don't think the Chiefs front office really gives two hoots about the folks who are, arguably, some of the most loyal, devoted fans in the NFL. And THAT, quite frankly, pisses me off.
The only way we as fans can show displeasure is by being vocal and, more importantly, keeping our valuable dollars away from the team. Football is, after all, a business first and foremost. Money talks and we should use that power until they shape up.
We don't have to win the Super Bowl every year. We don't even have to be at the top of the division consistently. But what we've been getting for the last 10 seasons or so (roughly) has been garbage. That, to me, is insulting and heartbreaking.
For point of comparison, I don't remember feeling this angry ever before -- even in the lowly 80s. Of course, I was a teenager then...
by gritsnyc on
Jan 18, 2008 2:20 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
just so we're clear
Yes, there are people that are negative all the time. They're called "AOL commenters."
My concern here is there's been a growing movement that any criticism of anyone is doused with "you're just negative," "You just need to be patient, little one", and "why can't you guys just get excited about a five time retread with little imagination on his resume!"
I'm not saying I don't like the hire. I still like the hire.
I just think that everything is not peachy keen in Chiefs-land just because we all know our O-line sucks. That doesn't just wipe out the season, or the horrible performances by the team as a whole.
And I think we have just as much right to be critical when our team is just out and out bad and when they make decisions that frustrate us as much as we have the right to cheer and support our players and coaches. Whatever your opinion, you get to have it.
I knew Chiefs fans during the 13-3 year that said we were going to blow it, and every game we were just "waiting for the meltdown."
I loved that year. Yeah, our defense was soft, and we didn't have the overall team play to win a Super Bowl. That was still a great year. An exciting year.
The Mid 90s? Same thing.
I can be optimistic about next season. I'm excited about the draft (though the first pick lineman is going to disappoint me), and looking forward to moving on with some new faces. And my boy Jarrad Page is going to kill it next year.
But I don't have an issue with anyone being negative about this team. We do look pretty lost at this point. A good draft and a few quality free agents will change all that.
But let's can it with the "Well, some fans just aren't as good as me." talk. It's arrogant, unfair, condescending (I know, I know, pot,kettle, etc. I'm trying to get better), and it limits the ability of some people to make their opinions known. Which, you know, is kind of what this place is about, next to Chris' fantastic news reporting.
Okay, that's all I've got.
Oh, and LJ sucks. I'm taking the gloves off on this. Until he comes back and shows some fire, desire, or (gasp) work ethic, I'm off this guy.
by Ridiculous Matt on
Jan 18, 2008 9:58 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Welcome back
by Eric on
Jan 18, 2008 10:05 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
A big part of it too
by primetime 07 on
Jan 18, 2008 10:22 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Right on, right on...
Thanks for saying that.
by gritsnyc on
Jan 18, 2008 2:23 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I agree
Those that are more optimistic can express their opinions as well and shouldn't be criticized or mocked for that either.
I'm not a big bandwagon guy and if I see a mob forming for what I personally believe is the wrong reason, I don't get out of the way.
Some people don't like Herm or LJ or whoever because of things that have nothing to do with football. That's fine if those people have that opinion, but it shouldn't cloud their perception of what really is going on with the team.
by DJ on
Jan 18, 2008 5:16 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Agree
I came to this site, 1 for information I couldn't get elsewhere and 2, for the insight each of you place into "our" team. I haven't had this much fun with the Chief's since I began following them on their arrival in 1964. Yes I was raised on DA Chiefs by my daddy, rest his soul.
So to all of you I say, although I may disagree with your opinion occasionally, I appreciate your willingness to stand up for your thoughts on the team. We have a great group of contributers here led by Chris, and I look forward to opening the site up each and every day.
Go Chiefs!
by Lanier63 on
Jan 18, 2008 10:14 AM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
That is
by Eric on
Jan 18, 2008 10:23 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I am a fireman
The mid to late seventies and early eighties were the most strenuous as a fan. But hey, we all made it through one way or another.
This team is going to be just fine and whether we go 4-12, 7-9, 10-6 or even 15-1 we are going to have fun and get excited every time that kickoff is sent to the return man.
by Lanier63 on
Jan 18, 2008 10:28 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
Unless it is Drummond!
by Eric on
Jan 18, 2008 10:31 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I hope this isn't a repeat of the 1980s
by primetime 07 on
Jan 18, 2008 11:02 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
It won't be
by PVChiefsfan on
Jan 18, 2008 12:18 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I keep hearing people say that
The Chiefs had one bad year. Year before last we were in the playoffs, year before that we should have been. Year before that we were talking about how the Chiefs might go undefeated.
Bad years happen and if you think about it. What better year to go 4-12 than the year the Patriots were 16-0?
You know who this year sucks for? San Diego Chargers. They are at their peak and sooner or later salary cap is going to hit them and they'll start declining. But they are at their peak while the Pats are at theirs.
by DJ on
Jan 18, 2008 5:20 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
I cannot wait
by Eric on
Jan 18, 2008 5:31 PM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
You might not be able to
by Tom Bahali on
Jan 18, 2008 11:12 PM CST
reply
actions
0 recs
Would Antion Gates
by PVChiefsfan on
Jan 19, 2008 12:03 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
He is
by Eric on
Jan 19, 2008 12:32 AM CST
up
reply
actions
0 recs
















