View Full Version : Latest Rufus Story
Truman in KC
11-03-2000, 10:22 PM
There is a new Rufus story out on kcchiefs.com. I love it when he throws whitless out like the trash that he is!
11-03-2000, 11:18 PM
"The Chiefs can't win with the receivers they have right now."
- Jason Whitlock, Kansas City Star
I couldn't help but to notice the lack of a date ascribed to this quote. I seem to remember something like this being said when the team still had Rison (who hadn't produced in 2 years) and they were playing contract games with Morris. I know that I was freaking out looking at the upcoming season with the same ol' receivers that had been less than stellar in years past...
Regarding the Pickens comment: Hasn't pickens been injured a lot this season?
Anyone have any input?
*Trying to glean some context and perspective
11-03-2000, 11:21 PM
Context? well Whitless rights what he thinks will provoke a strong reaction. regardless if it's true or not.
11-03-2000, 11:26 PM
To continue on with what JOhn said, Whitless is out for publicity, he doesn't care if it is bad or good, he just wants people talking about. He has aluded to this on the Radio.
...either that or Gloria Estefan was right and the rhythm is really gonna get you.
11-03-2000, 11:31 PM
I agree that reaction sells, but what we have to determine is WHEN to glean "truth" from a statement such as, "The Chiefs can't win with the receivers they have right now."
Apparently, Rufus has decided that now is a good time to measure the "truth" of Jason's statement. Right now, Rufus has a point. But my feeling is that, at the end of the year, Jason will be able to look back at his quote and say that he was right all along.
*Loves good arguments
11-03-2000, 11:35 PM
TFM - Kind of like Whitlocks prediction that the Chiefs would be shown how to really do things in the NFL by the Rams and that we would lose 52-10, and 62-10 if Glock didn't play. Just for the record, Glock did not play.
11-03-2000, 11:37 PM
WTF ? http://www.ChiefsPlanet.com/ubb/confused.gif
So what your saying is that by the end of the year Whitless will be proven right about our recievers?
Sorry you lost me
11-03-2000, 11:37 PM
To follow up, you also need to determine HOW you judge winning. Is it an above .500 record? Or is winning defined by the Lombardi trophy?
*Thinking that Rufus and Whitlock will choose different standards on both of these questions... and both will be right.
11-03-2000, 11:39 PM
TFM - Whitless also predicted that we would be 4-12 before the season, we already have a better record then that.
11-03-2000, 11:43 PM
OK TFM what of this ...
And while I'm on the subject of predictions, what of Mr. Whitlock's concerns regarding the team's pass rush ? He noted that "from my view, the Chiefs defense has just one hole." (Kansas City Star, July 26, 2000) Calling Duane Clemons a "Minnesota castoff" (an incorrect characterization if you know anything about unrestricted free agency), the object of his concern was pressuring the opposing team's quarterback. Well now, the Chiefs have 26 sacks at the season's midway point, the club's most after eight games since the great defensive team of '95. And this from a defense that has been hobbled by injuries. With Clemons racking up 2 ? of those sacks despite missing four games with a hip injury, the defensive line has been responsible for 20 of those sacks following a year when they only had 20.5 the entire season.
If there are two things the Chiefs have proven they can do at the midway point of this season it is pass the football and rush the passer. "
Is whitless right or wrong?
(point is, Whitless writes by the shotgun method, scatter enough BS around, and some will tick. But the majority will fall harmlessly to the ground to be forgotten, which is what he hopes)<P>
11-03-2000, 11:52 PM
The funny thing about predictions is that they change too. Vegas makes a lot of money from bad predictions.
Whitlock, being the pundit, will always have an outside-looking-in perspective because his bills are paid by selling newspapers. That's what columnists do. Rufus, being the voice of the organization, will be an eternal optimist in all things relating to the Chiefs. His paycheck comes from the Chiefs.
The best way to stop Whitlock from saying controversial things is to win football games. I've actually seen positive articles from him before.
11-03-2000, 11:57 PM
ROFLMA no this is a funny statement:
"Whitlock, being the pundit, will always have an outside-looking-in perspective"
Pundit is not a word that descripes Whitless.
As for the outside looking in, thats HIS fault, you critize a team and still get access, but when you resort to name calling and personal insults, you get left out in the cold. WHich is exactly were he is. Of course he likes to refer to himself as a martyer (sp).<P>
11-04-2000, 12:07 AM
Glad I could brighten your evening! I chose the word pundit because Whitlock, having been a college football player and being much closer to NFL action (yes, press passes can get you into a lot of places), probably has more insight than me as to the inner workings of the Chiefs organization. I've only met Carl Peterson once, and I don't know any of the players. I have to rely on others to give me insights/perspectives into my favorite team.
Whitlock is wrong about the D-line being able to put pressure on the QBs. Does that mean it will continue to be the case for the rest of the season? Will the lack of a pass rush be blamed for a loss in the future? I don't know, but Oakland has a pretty crafty QB. Let's hope he's wrong again this week!
11-04-2000, 09:19 AM
Welcome to the Planet.
Could you return our rover, please?
hoping to recycle.<BR>
11-04-2000, 09:16 PM
I believe TFM is correct, the quote came when the Chiefs and Morris were in the middle of the contract dispute.
If Rufus really wants to be the voice of truth he should acknowledge the date that the statement was written.
11-04-2000, 09:21 PM
"(yes, press passes can get you into a lot of places)"
Last I knew Whitlock doesn't have a prsee pass for the Chiefs anymore. I believe Carl tore it up http://www.ChiefsPlanet.com/ubb/smile.gif
11-04-2000, 09:43 PM
The thing I have noticed about his radio show is that the show is better without him there. They actually talk about sports and not about Hooters, Strip Clubs and food. He is completely full of crap, and he is that way on purpose. I don't think he is as stupid as he makes him self out to look, it is all about the ratings.
11-04-2000, 09:59 PM
I will continue and say that I believe that Clint or Cannibal could easily out write a "sky is falling" article, and be closer to the facts, then Whitless.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.