It seems to me that a good way to respond to 3...Bc5 there is to play a "Two Knights' Attack" (i.e. a Two Knights' Defence Reversed) with 4.Nf3.
In the Two Knights proper, the main line runs 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 Nf6 4.Ng5 d5 5.exd5 Na5 6.Bb5+. Obviously, with colours reversed and a pawn on a3, this line would not be available to Black.
Also, there is the option of entering much improved versions of the Fritz Variation (5...Nd4) or the Ulvestad Variation (5...b5) where in both cases it is often an issue that Black has an undefended pawn on b5.
All in all, Black would probably be best advised to meet 4.Nf3 with the quiet 4...d6, when White can try the sharp 5.d4, or just play a reversed Giuoco Piano with 5.Bc4, when it may well prove useful that he has a2 available to his bishop (and that he has control over the b4 square).
But I digress - I wouldn't want to distract attention away from Glenn's
crazy interesting idea ...
Perhaps there are some variations in Tim McGrew's analysis where it can be shown that a2-a3 (or, rather, ...a7-a6) would have been a useful move?