I would like to examine some statements made to see what they really mean.
It was stated the seniors had no respect for Gailey last year. It was stated they liked the relaxed practices, but then wondered at the end if it was practical. They also stated the discipline was not as strict under Gailey.
It is not surprising to take the kids from a previous coach who stressed discipline, place them under a coach with less strict discipline, and have them make comments about the new methods.
The comments would have been made by the same players, but would have been completely reversed had Gailey coached the previous year and O'Leary had coached last year.
It is common for players who are trained in one method to question the next coach with a different method. That is typical and has nothing to do with Gailey's coaching ability. It just means it is a different style than O'Leary's
Now, the players liked the idea of a relaxed practice, but used it as an excuse when things did not go well. That is also normal, but has nothing to do with the ability of the coach to win games.
The most relaxed coach I have ever seen, and was criticized in his day for not practicing physically, was one of the best, Bobby Dodd. Can we judge him as an inferior coach because his discipline and practices were not as tough as the other teams in his day?
Every coach has to be judged on his wins and losses, not how he matches up with another coach in his discipline or practices.
So, the poster here has admitted there were morale problems. It is hinted most of them were caused by the seniors.
Can it be, many of the seniors were some of the same group who fought the administration and wanted to use the bowl game to blackmail the AD into hiring Mac instead of Gailey?
Can it be that O'Brien and some of these seniors were part of the problem for last years lay downs in the UGA and Fresno State games? Was it a ploy by them hoping Gailey would be fired after the season? It is a possibility.
Was there even the possibility some of those players thought Gailey would be canned and O'Brien would be retained?
Since we know all coaches have different styles (Dodd versus hard core disciplined coaches of his time), it all comes down to wins and losses for a coach.
The truth of the matter is Gailey went 7-6 his first year. I have already compared it with O'Leary's record of 11-14 for his first 2 1/3 years. So it seems the whole truth of the matter is the wins and losses. Gailey has this year to see if his wins and losses improve or falls.
The truth of fairness and high morals speaks out to give Gailey the same fair chance as the other coaches, wins and losses. We will be able to judge him better after this year. It will then be fair and the moral thing to do.
If we go 8-5, improvement will have been made and we can look forward to the next year with more improvement.
I will be willing to bet, if we go 8-5, the same ones will still be calling for Gailey to be fired for some other reason.
