Thoughts: Chan Gailey?

SMU2007 · Post by **SMU2007** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 2:57 pm

i see your point. just hesitant to bring some completely random assistant in. i just want us to be good again damnit!

SMU Football Blog · Post by **SMU Football Blog** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:00 pm

SMU2007 wrote:i see your point. just hesitant to bring some completely random assistant in. i just want us to be good again damnit!

So do I.

SMU Football Blog · Post by **SMU Football Blog** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:01 pm

Nacho wrote:Even the blogs have mostly given up on predicting what will happen at SMU. Now an assistant at S Fla is mentioned. I'm beginning to get the feeling that something has gone wrong and that we may not get the coach Orsini wants. Anyone else have that feeling?.

I find the silence unsettling, more than worrisome. If Orsini was truly striking out, I think we would know.

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:30 pm

There are two kinds of fired coaches available out there right now. The ones that have been fired for reasons that have nothing to do with winning and losing, and those that have been fired for losing too much. Gailey falls into the latter category.

Nacho · Post by **Nacho** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:36 pm

I'll take the former jt.

SMUMan02 · Post by **SMUMan02** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:37 pm

jtstang wrote:There are two kinds of fired coaches available out there right now. The ones that have been fired for reasons that have nothing to do with winning and losing, and those that have been fired for losing too much. Gailey falls into the latter category.

Name a coach that falls into the former category?

PonyFan · Post by **PonyFan** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:37 pm

SMU Football Blog wrote:Ted Gangi at Mustang Maniacs is saying the same thing:

http://smu.rivals.com/showmsg.asp?fid=2 ... 74&style=2

He says Gailey fits because he fits the Turner desire of "a good Christian man" and then says he shouldn't be hired because The Ticket made fun of him.
1. Orsini is choosing the coach, not Turner, and you can bet your last cent that it won't be based on religion, and
2. If the opinions of those at The Ticket factor in this (or any) decision in any way, the whole thing should be shut down.

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:42 pm

SMUMan02 wrote:
jtstang wrote:There are two kinds of fired coaches available out there right now. The ones that have been fired for reasons that have nothing to do with winning and losing, and those that have been fired for losing too much. Gailey falls into the latter category.

Name a coach that falls into the former category?

Neuheisel, Barnett, Bowden, right off the top of my head. O'Leary is an example of a prior Orsini guy in that category.

Dutch · Post by **Dutch** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:43 pm

jtstang wrote:There are two kinds of fired coaches available out there right now. The ones that have been fired for reasons that have nothing to do with winning and losing, and those that have been fired for losing too much. Gailey falls into the latter category.

i think it was really that he lost too much to one school (UGA). a friend in Atlanta said that the sports radio/media there is saying how ridiculous this is b/c he can't beat Georgia. That's like Iowa State or Michigan State going up against Iowa or Michigan. it's a big game, yes - i'm not discrediting that, but they are in different leagues (both conf & in terms of level of play)

SMUMan02 · Post by **SMUMan02** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:46 pm

jtstang wrote:
SMUMan02 wrote:
jtstang wrote:There are two kinds of fired coaches available out there right now. The ones that have been fired for reasons that have nothing to do with winning and losing, and those that have been fired for losing too much. Gailey falls into the latter category.

Name a coach that falls into the former category?

Neuheisel, Barnett, Bowden, right off the top of my head. O'Leary is an example of a prior Orsini guy in that category.

Except for O'Leary they all had on the field problems too. They all had the Fran-syndrome. Their off-the-field problems, allowed them to be fired more quickly than their on-field performance.

mustang06 · Post by **mustang06** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:55 pm

SMU Football Blog,

Why, specifically, do you and apparently everyone else in Dallas think that Chan is a joke?

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:00 pm

SMUMan02 wrote:
jtstang wrote:
SMUMan02 wrote:
jtstang wrote:There are two kinds of fired coaches available out there right now. The ones that have been fired for reasons that have nothing to do with winning and losing, and those that have been fired for losing too much. Gailey falls into the latter category.

Name a coach that falls into the former category?

Neuheisel, Barnett, Bowden, right off the top of my head. O'Leary is an example of a prior Orsini guy in that category.

Except for O'Leary they all had on the field problems too. They all had the Fran-syndrome. Their off-the-field problems, allowed them to be fired more quickly than their on-field performance.

According to you yourself, Bowden was not fired for on-field problems:

SMUMan02 wrote:I've spent significant time in Alabama and I think the universale sentiment is that Bowden is a bad guy. He lost his job for sleeping with the daughter of a member of the board...is that really what we want?

SMU Football Blog · Post by **SMU Football Blog** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:17 pm

mustang06 wrote:SMU Football Blog,

Why, specifically, do you and apparently everyone else in Dallas think that Chan is a joke?

The perception is that Chan was Jerry Jones' puppet, for one. The Cowboys players had no respect for him. Aikman explicitly wanted him gone. Not to mention he presided over probably the worst playoff defeat in Cowboys' history: losing at home to Arizona 20-7 in 1998.

Is that all deserved? Probably not, but that is the perception. I asked four people with no connection to SMU what they thought of Chan Gailey as the next coach fo SMU. All thought he would be terrible. None of them think the guy can coach.

Now that is just what some people think and I happen to agree. But at some level, I would like the next guy to be able to sell the program and I am personally convinced that Chan Gailey cannot do that.

SMUMan02 · Post by **SMUMan02** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:30 pm

jtstang wrote:
SMUMan02 wrote:
jtstang wrote:
SMUMan02 wrote:
jtstang wrote:There are two kinds of fired coaches available out there right now. The ones that have been fired for reasons that have nothing to do with winning and losing, and those that have been fired for losing too much. Gailey falls into the latter category.

Name a coach that falls into the former category?

Neuheisel, Barnett, Bowden, right off the top of my head. O'Leary is an example of a prior Orsini guy in that category.

Except for O'Leary they all had on the field problems too. They all had the Fran-syndrome. Their off-the-field problems, allowed them to be fired more quickly than their on-field performance.

According to you yourself, Bowden was not fired for on-field problems:

SMUMan02 wrote:I've spent significant time in Alabama and I think the universale sentiment is that Bowden is a bad guy. He lost his job for sleeping with the daughter of a member of the board...is that really what we want?

I don't think my post insinuates in any way that there weren't on-the-field problems. I think Bowden is an outlier because he had so many off-the-field problems. They were fortunate not to get the death penatly after he left. I think they came closer than anyone else since us.

jtstang · Post by **jtstang** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:33 pm

SMUMan02 wrote:I don't think my post insinuates in any way that there weren't on-the-field problems.

Your post does not insinuate anything. It states as fact that:

He lost his job for sleeping with the daughter of a member of the board...

Now I sincerely hope that happened off the field, or else ESPN would have had record viewers on SportCenter that night.