Why do I keep seeing on here Gailey would be good OC?

[truth on hold]

Because he overplays his philosophy and lacks judgement during games. Hes not shown management skills to run the whole thing. He's a Kevin gilbride at best

Edited November 26, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack

[Jim in Anchorage]

Because he overplays his philosophy and lacks judgement during games. Hes not shown management skills to run the whole thing. He's a Kevin gilbride at best

That still dosn't tell me why, even with a HC keeping him on a leash, he would be a good OC.

[truth on hold]

Didnt say he'd be good, said "at best". I certainly don't think hes a good HC but sometimes those with his deficiencies can succeed as subordinates

Edited November 26, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack

[Jim in Anchorage]

Didnt say he'd be good, said "at best". I certainly don't think hes a good HC but sometimes those with his deficiencies can succeed as subordinates

I say get rid of him entirely. That punt on the Indy 35 closed the deal for me on Chan.

[bbb]

I think the answer to the original post is that he seemed like he ran a good offense. Up until the AZ game - starting then until now, I have never seen stupider play calling and decision making ever!

[Sisyphean Bills]

The notion is that he might be good with the blackboard aspects, but he needs a strong leader to set a direction and reign in his overthinking the details on game day. Letting the other team dictate your offense to play to your weaknesses being the classic example.