You read that correctly, Addicts. Mike Lombardi of the National Football Post has an interesting article up about the Buffalo Bills decision to hire Chan Gaily as their new had coach.
He begin the article by stating that Chiefs GM Scott Pioli, nearly hired Gailey last season to be the teams head coach.
Gailey was almost hired last year by Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli to be the head coach, but because Pioli didn’t think he could sell Gailey to the media or the Kansas City fan base as the man to rebuild the team’s fortunes, he passed, opting to keep him as offensive coordinator. We know how that worked out; Gailey was fired after the third preseason game, not for his lack of offensive acumen, but because of philosophical differences between him and head coach Todd Haley.
Interesting, yeah? If you had asked me at the time I would have probably said that hiring Chan Gailey would be good for the Chiefs. He had turned the Chiefs horrid 2008 defense into a respectable threat and made Tyler Thigpen appear to be starting QB material.
Now I don’t know how much validity this Lombardi report has. Pioli doesn’ seem like a man who cares about what the fans and media think. However, it is interesting to think about what would have happened had Gailey been named the coach.
You’ve got to believe that Tyler Thigpen would have opened the year as the starting QB. The Chiefs likely would have continued to build on the “Arrowspread” offense. Tony Gonzalez would probably still be a Chief. Being an offensive guy, Chan might have opted for more firepower in the draft. Can you imagine a Chiefs offense with Tyler Thigpen, Dwayne Bow, Tony Gonzalez and Michael Crabtree?
What do you think Addicts? Would you rather have had Chan Gailey over Todd Haley?