PDA

View Full Version : Mouthpiece defends Carl; blames GRob


shaneo69
05-29-2007, 11:37 AM
DAWES: CALL & RESPONSE – Ready & Able
May 28, 2007, 6:21:14 AM by Rufus Dawes

Q: I hate [Carl] Peterson. I like Peterson. Peterson this and Peterson that. Don’t you [get] tired of praising him or defending him from all these attacks…? I sure get tired of hearing every day about it since it doesn’t look like he’s going anywhere….


RUFUS DAWES: This is news? Although some media in Kansas City never took to Carl Peterson for what appears to be a variety of reasons – not the least their inability to forge any sort of relationship with him – it is driven as much by cynicism and frustration. It’s become fashionable, a sign of local media respectability I would go so far as to suppose, to say you don’t like Peterson. It is a shallow gesture of opposition. It’s not about properly analyzing what Peterson or really any GM is or has done or not done, or what falls under his ability to control or not; it is simply about saying, “I blame Peterson for everything.”

Cynicism and fatalism is now expressed in the sentiment that his continuing presence in Kansas City is the cause of whatever the team’s problems happen to be at the moment. First round pick Dwayne Bowe drops a couple of passes in a rookie mini-camp and some media go so far as to say he’s a bust. The criticism has little to do with Bowe and everything to do with Peterson. A trade doesn’t happen for Trent Green in some appointed time and it’s Peterson’s fault. No one’s been a bigger cheerleader for Trent Green than this writer, but I recognize that the GM’s charge is to care for the team, not for what a player and all-around good guy may want. Besides, this matter of unhappy quarterbacks is a familiar storyline in Green Bay this year and Tennessee last. In whatever case, anti-Peterson has become an emotional spasm rather than a critique, and often is driven by media who are as arrogant and petty as they accuse him of being.

Where a lack of knowledge led many to hail Peterson as the franchise’s savior back in 1989, today the failure of Peterson to get the team a Super Bowl has led critics to demonize him. But just as they didn’t have a clue who should replace Jack Steadman way back when, they have no idea who should take Peterson’s place now.

In many ways, today’s anti-Peterson rhetoric is worse than any of the pro-Peterson sympathies then. It’s like Emerson said, “Every hero becomes a bore at last.” (Frankly, I liked the early tough Peterson better than this one who by all appearances is trying to be nice to his QB). But here’s the point – and it has always been the point: that for all the screaming and yelling and posing and posturing by his media critics, Peterson appears to be going nowhere. All indications are he has ownership’s support and has never had anything less. When he does leave, it’ll likely be on his terms and that fact is probably the reason it drives so many of his local media critics crazy. What they write or say doesn’t mean a thing on the subject. It never did.

Q: I was kinda surprised to read on [a Web site] that there are some fans who don’t like Herm Edwards because of the team’s offense and his game management and…. My goodness, he’s been here only one year.

RUFUS DAWES: Well, since we seem to be on a, “I-hate-everybody-in-leadership-with- the-Chiefs” kick, let’s address this supposed groundswell of criticism of the Chiefs head coach as to his qualifications (which were the subject on the aforementioned Web site). As for game management, I addressed that earlier last year and Edwards answered it best himself. (See Game Management-101, October 25, 2006; Herm Edwards Press Conference, October 24, 2006)).

For starters, some probably don’t like Edwards because Carl Peterson hired him. (See the above response.) Herm could be the reincarnation in record and disposition of Vince Lombardi and Chuck Noll and it wouldn’t do him any good. Just like some of these people want to see draft picks fail because Peterson picked them or suddenly care about QBs that just a few months ago they booed, they want Edwards to take a fall to bring discredit on the team’s GM for his choice of head coach.

There are plenty of coaches who rise to the top as team players but have an eye on being a head coach. All indications are that Edwards was one of those. Like most enterprising individuals, they have developed a sense of what they think they want, a dulled sense of empathy for what does not work, and frequently acquire a set of skills honed chiefly in salesmanship and leadership. Leadership does not necessarily equate to proficiency on one side of the ball or the other, as we have seen repeatedly in this league as offensive or defensive coordinators elevated to head jobs fail. Little was known publicly of Andy Reid, who although never a coordinator but who learned at the feet of Mike Holmgren, is very clear in what he wants to do and appears to have been well suited for the job as a head coach even if he was never a coordinator.

Every new head coach comes to his job with unique virtues and deficiencies. He knows some things and has a talent for finding out about others. But any head coach also does not know a lot of things and is dependent on the organizational apparatus around him, the people who fill assistant coach and other organizational roles, and his own ideas he believes it is important to know.

Coaching an NFL team in the new century is a portrait of complexity, in contrast to the streamlined and Spartan operations that prevailed in the running of professional football teams back in the ‘60s. This condition is born of the added responsibilities falling to head coaches outside of actually on-the-field coaching and the complexities of today’s offensive and defensive systems and strategies. Whereas head coaches rely upon assistants to prepare teams, they are compelled to organize schedules, devise systems, determine policy, blend personnel, and make a multitude of official pronouncements and public commentary.

Glancing through many published reports that outline the functions performed by a head coach today suggests a wide variety of activities. The key to a head coach’s success and, therefore, to an important element of a team’s success is to get the various functions to mesh together. The position has become every bit an “administrative” position, a mechanism designed to ensure responsiveness to him personally, leading people who can be relied on to act as he would wish them to do. He delegates as much as coaches.

He looks for those who can compensate and complement the strengths of his leadership. If he comes from an offensive background, he knows what he wants in a defense because he has seen enough of them in this time as an assistant. (See Get a Grip, October 18, 2006) Consequently, he brings in a defensive coordinator who fits that mold. Dick Vermeil succeeded in Philadelphia because of Marion Campbell. Is it so far fetched to say that he didn’t succeed in Kansas City because of Greg Robinson? Conversely, is it only coincidence that Bill Parcells never won another Super Bowl after Bill Belichick was no longer his defensive coordinator?

Herm Edwards as a head coach is a figure of stunning transparency in terms of his core beliefs and his work habits. Simply stated, he believes in a few things with great passion and holds to them uncompromisingly, whether media or public like it or not. (See Bob Gretz’s What Herm’s Trying to Do, May 21, 2007 for an example.) In presenting his public self, Edwards exhibits as much personal presence as Dick Vermeil, who was as well recognized a sports figure as we have seen over the past 20 years. Edwards’ work under Marty Schottenheimer and Tony Dungy, two widely successful coaches, would seem to be excellent preparation, but not every young coach has been so at ease with his script. (See Herm Edwards Press Conference, October 17, 2006, Press Conference, January 2, 2007)

To talk any further on this subject is foolish and pointless. Whether its trips to the playoffs, a philosophy of play that is widely accepted by today’s winning teams, and the qualities of leadership that are evident in his public appearances and in his organizational skills, Edwards’ position as an NFL head coach should by this time be a well accepted fact. This is his team now, as Kansas City Star columnist Joe Posnanski claimed in his column of May 20, and indeed it is. The continued notion that somehow a team is a GM’s (the Peterson-as-master-of-all-things mantra) shows just how little some critics understand about pro football or how obsessed they are with Peterson.

In the final analysis, Edwards’ rise or fall will be determined by wins and losses and likely contingent on whether he can lead the Chiefs to a Super Bowl. In today’s environment in Kansas City, nothing less will do.


The opinions offered in this column do not necessarily reflect those of Carl Peterson.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2007/05/28/dawes_call__response__ready__able/

shaneo69
05-29-2007, 11:40 AM
Yes, Carl, we get it. You won't ever be fired and you can choose how long you want to stay in your position. We're all very happy for you.

Phobia
05-29-2007, 11:50 AM
suddenly care about QBs that just a few months ago they booed

Say what you want about Dawes and all the other "mouthpieces" but this is a valid point.

Reerun_KC
05-29-2007, 11:51 AM
Yes, Carl, we get it. You won't ever be fired and you can choose how long you want to stay in your position. We're all very happy for you.


Yes , but nobody has done so much less, with more, than 90% of the other GM's in the NFL has done over the last 18 years than Carl...

Carl will always be a failure in the eyes of the Chiefs Fans... 18 years and zero superbowls, Last playoff win was in 1994.....

Mr. Laz
05-29-2007, 12:17 PM
and this is exactly why Carl choose to let his coaches make all the decisions ... at least publicly.

that way when anything goes wrong he can blame them from his silver tower.

Fruit Ninja
05-29-2007, 12:24 PM
I dont think Carl is a horrible GM, we could have been like Airizona or Detroit. Surprise they are the only 2 franchises that have less play off wins then the Chiefs since 1970.. Anyways, Carl just didnt get it done.


No one will remember the 2003 season. No one will remember how great Priest was. No one will remember how good our offense really was. They will remember Payton Mannings years, they will remember Tomlinsons season. The only thing they will remember is how bad the Chiefs defense was and that the commish made fun of the defense. lol

CupidStunt
05-29-2007, 12:41 PM
I dont think Carl is a horrible GM, we could have been like Airizona or Detroit. Surprise they are the only 2 franchises that have less play off wins then the Chiefs since 1970.. Anyways, Carl just didnt get it done.


Who told you that? Sounds like BS to me.

Chiefs've won 3 playoff games since your stated date. I know that 29 teams haven't won more than that since '70. As an example, New Orleans has won 2 playoff games in its HISTORY.

StcChief
05-29-2007, 12:44 PM
Grob was a problem, bad bad drafting, bad breaks.
DV sticking with McCleon, etal. loyality to a fault

el borracho
05-29-2007, 12:53 PM
Giving away draft picks for coaches is Carl's biggest mistake.

Bootlegged
05-29-2007, 01:43 PM
Robinson continues to work miracles at SU.

HemiEd
05-29-2007, 01:50 PM
Yes , but nobody has done so much less, with more, than 90% of the other GM's in the NFL has done over the last 18 years than Carl...

Carl will always be a failure in the eyes of the Chiefs Fans... 18 years and zero superbowls, Last playoff win was in 1994.....

Jeeezus ****ing christ do you have to spew this shit in evey post?

Skip Towne
05-29-2007, 01:58 PM
Jeeezus ****ing christ do you have to spew this shit in evey post?
Reerun is a big Jack Steadman man. That's why he whines constantly about Peterson.

HemiEd
05-29-2007, 02:04 PM
Reerun is a big Jack Steadman man. That's why he whines constantly about Peterson.

Sometimes I wish some of these Carl bashers, would have to put up with 18 years of Jack Steadman. The problem with that, I could not endure another 18 years of it.

Fruit Ninja
05-29-2007, 02:24 PM
Who told you that? Sounds like BS to me.

Chiefs've won 3 playoff games since your stated date. I know that 29 teams haven't won more than that since '70. As an example, New Orleans has won 2 playoff games in its HISTORY.
Ok, we are 28th, is that really that much of a difference? lol That's still beyond ****ing horrible.

Chiefs with 3
Saints with 2
Detroit with 2
Arizona with 1

Thats bad bad bad bad.

Reerun_KC
05-29-2007, 02:27 PM
Reerun is a big Jack Steadman man. That's why he whines constantly about Peterson.


You know me so well Skip.... You stalking me agian?

Reerun_KC
05-29-2007, 02:30 PM
Jeeezus ****ing christ do you have to spew this shit in evey post?


Nah, Usually bitching about Herm or something else...

You might find this interesting, I moved the 69 camaro from my grandparents barn to my mother - in - laws garage... I am going to start bringing pieces of home at one time and have them blasted or replaced and primered... 7 years is long enough. She is missing this 3$ gallon gas.

Motor is rocking, putting out 530+ hp... It is ready to go in, but will have to wait a few years though.

Reerun_KC
05-29-2007, 02:32 PM
Sometimes I wish some of these Carl bashers, would have to put up with 18 years of Jack Steadman. The problem with that, I could not endure another 18 years of it.


Carl or Jack? Which is worse? Whom won more playoffs and superbowls?

As pathetic as Carl is, think god I didnt care about football when Jack was running the team...

Dr. Van Halen
05-29-2007, 04:31 PM
I dont think Carl is a horrible GM, we could have been like Airizona or Detroit. Surprise they are the only 2 franchises that have less play off wins then the Chiefs since 1970.. Anyways, Carl just didnt get it done.


No one will remember the 2003 season. No one will remember how great Priest was. No one will remember how good our offense really was. They will remember Payton Mannings years, they will remember Tomlinsons season. The only thing they will remember is how bad the Chiefs defense was and that the commish made fun of the defense. lol

What does the number of playoff wins since 1970 have to do with how bad Peterson is? Wouldn't the number of playoff wins since Peterson took over as GM be the more useful stat? Hmmm.

No one will remember Priest Holmes, but they'll remember a scarcely-covered comment by the "commish"? Hmmm.

I think you, sir, are full of crap.

Chiefnj
05-29-2007, 04:38 PM
Giving away draft picks for coaches is Carl's biggest mistake.

A 4th for Herm??

CoMoChief
05-29-2007, 04:50 PM
We all know Carl has nothing to show for after 18 yrs.

Having that said it's still worth bashing the LTGMIPS.

el borracho
05-29-2007, 05:28 PM
A 4th for Herm??
A 4th for Herm
A 2nd and a 3rd for Vermeil

HemiEd
05-29-2007, 09:34 PM
. It is ready to go in, but will have to wait a few years though.

Better put it away nice, or it will need rebuilt if you wait that long.

gblowfish
05-29-2007, 11:30 PM
My, a truly impressive bucket of bilge from Rufus. As I speak fluent Rufus, let me translate this bloated diatribe, and cut through the clutter:

DAWES: CALL & RESPONSE – Ready & Able
May 28, 2007, 6:21:14 AM by Rufus Dawes
Translated by George Blowfish

Q: I hate Carl Peterson. I love Carl Peterson. Peterson this and Peterson that. Peterson high and Peterson Low. Peterson left and Peterson right. I hate him. Love him. Love to hate him. Hate to love him. Hate myself for the loving to hate the love I love to hate. Don’t you [get] tired of kissing him anytime and anywhere or using your body as a human shield from all these attacks…? I sure get tired of hearing every day about it since I don't get to control the radio stations here in the psych ward….Make it stop. Please make it stop....

RUFUS DAWES: Blame the news media, of course. Although some media in Kansas City have never kissed Carl Peterson's lemony fresh ass (excluding Bob Gretz, of course) for what appears to be a variety of reasons – not the least their inability to forge any sort of relationship with Carl...asking him out for a nice dinner and a movie...maybe sending him a FTD Pick-Me-Up Bouquet, offering him a little massage with a happy ending – it is driven as much by cynicism and frustration.

It’s become fashionable, a sign of local media respectability I would go so far as to suppose, to say "Damn It Carl!!" It is a shallow gesture of opposition. Shallow, shallow shallow. It’s not about properly analyzing what Peterson or really any GM is or has done or not done, or what falls under his ability to control or not; it is simply about saying, “I blame Peterson for everything.” What Carl has not done is simply beyond his control. You can't just "win a Super Bowl." Jesus, what do you people expect from the man? The stands are full, books are seriously in the black, case closed.

Cynicism and fatalism is now expressed in the sentiment that his continuing presence in Kansas City is the cause of whatever the team’s problems happen to be at the moment. Certainly you cannot hold the man in charge for better part of the last two decades responsible? That simply isn't fair. And who says there are any problems at the moment, anyway? Everything is same as it ever was...same as it ever was, same as it ever was. How presumptuous of you haters, and I'll wager to say, that presumption is made by non-season ticket holders. I'm quite confident of that.

First round pick Dwayne Bowe drops a couple of passes in a rookie mini-camp and some media go so far as to say he’s a bust. Certainly he is not a bust, as long as Carl can keep him from shredding a knee like Sly "Slo-Mo" Morris, or keep him off a moped in training camp such as Percy "Born to be Wild" Snow. In training camp we will smack his hand with a wooden ruler every time he drops a pass. If that doesn't work...then comes the enemas...

The criticism has little to do with Bowe and everything to do with Peterson. A trade doesn’t happen for Trent Green in some appointed time, say, oh, BEFORE the draft, for example, and it’s Peterson’s fault. As you all know, Carl is never, ever, ever at fault. Wrap your mind around that, and internalize it, as I have.

No one’s been a bigger cheerleader for Trent Green than this writer. I have dressed up as a cheerleader for him on many occasions, until Trent got that restraining order. But I recognize that the GM’s charge is to care for the team, not for what a player and all-around good guy may want. We basically despise all-around good guys.

After Brodie Croyle was appointed the mantle of leadership by Herm Edwards, Trent should have worked harder with his agent to facilitate a legitimate trade. Jim Steiner just didn't negotiate with the measured cunning and bravado that has been King Carl's trademark. You have to be able to twist an arm and force a deal. Even force the negotiations to occur over a stack of flap jacks at Denny's, or in a groundskeeper's shed in River Falls, Wisconsin. Whatever it takes, however long it takes, no matter how confrontational or how obscene the language may get, you close the deal, on your terms, period. After all, it's just business.

Besides, this matter of unhappy quarterbacks is a familiar storyline in Green Bay this year and Tennessee last. Certainly we can laugh at what Brett Favre has accomplished in Green Bay -which is nothing, lately-and everyone knows Vince Young is an all run, no throw flash in the pan. In whatever case, anti-Peterson has become an emotional spasm rather than a purple veined Carl-gasm, which I am accused of spewing every month or so. To that, I plead guilty pleasure.

The media are as arrogant and petty as they accuse him of being.

I know you are, so what am I?

Where a lack of knowledge led many to hail Peterson as the franchise’s savior back in 1989, today the failure of Peterson to get the team a Super Bowl has led critics to demonize him. He's only had 18 years to produce results, for crying out loud. But just as they didn’t have a clue who should replace Jack Steadman way back when, they have no idea who should take Peterson’s place now. Like, for example, any senior level executive with Pittsburgh, New England, San Diego, Seattle, New Orleans or Chicago. Or, if lightning should strike twice, they should look to the Arena League, the modern day equivalent to Carl's USFL back in 1989.

In many ways, today’s anti-Peterson rhetoric is worse than any of the pro-Peterson sympathies then. It’s like Yogi said, “Nobody Goes There Anymore, It's Too Crowded.” (Frankly, I liked the early tough, foul mouthed, brutal, boorish Gestapo-like Peterson better than this one who by all appearances is trying to be nice to his QB - if you call ignoring his request for a trade nice). But here’s the point – and it has always been the point: that for all the screaming and yelling and posing and posturing by his media critics, nobody, and I mean NOBODY, screams, yells, poses and postures as well as King Carl. Never, ever forget that.

As for his future, he appears to be going nowhere, much like the franchise. All indications are that he has embarassing, compromising, scatological photographs of Hunt family members and has never had any reservations about using them.

When he does leave, it’ll likely be on his terms, with literally a boat load of cash and securities. That fact is probably the reason it drives so many of his local media critics crazy. All they want is a Lombardi Trophy. Ask Green Bay what Lombardi has done for them lately! What the media writes or says doesn’t mean a thing on the subject. It never did. And if you think otherwise you're frickin' bat-chit crazy.

Q: I was kinda surprised to read on Chiefs Planet that there are some fans who don’t like Herm Edwards because of the team’s offense and his game management and….(his tendency to cow tow to management.) My goodness, he’s been here only one year, dag nab it.

RUFUS DAWES: Well, since we seem to be on a, “I-hate-everybody-who-dares-criticize-the-Chiefs” kick, let’s address this supposed groundswell of criticism of the Chiefs head coach as to his qualifications (which were the subject on the aforementioned Ignorant and Infantile Web site). As for game management, I addressed that earlier last year and Edwards answered it best himself. (See Colts-Chiefs Playoff Game 2007, no Chiefs offensive first down until the 3rd Quarter).

For starters, some probably don’t like Edwards because Carl Peterson hired him. (Carl actually made him a "Capo") Herm could be the reincarnation in disposition of Vince Lombardi, and could become fat and bald like Chuck Noll, and it wouldn’t do him any good. Just like some of these people want to see draft picks fail because Peterson picked them sixth overall in the draft to plug a gaping hole in the middle of the defensive line, and that player suddenly developed multiple injuries and an insatiable interest in Krispy Kreme Donuts. Or about QBs that just a few months ago they booed because he was trying to play with a seriously bruised brain pan. No, they want Edwards to take a fall to bring discredit on the team’s GM for his choice of head coach. To these nattering neybobs of negativity, I say, wait until the end of the 2007 season to do that, when we go 5 and 11. We'll have a perfect scapegoat, which will surely let Carl finish out the final years of his contract unscathed, and re-hire Marty Shottenheimer as Head Coach.

There are plenty of coaches who rise to the top as team players but have an eye on being a head coach. All indications are that Edwards was one of those. Like most enterprising individuals, they have developed a sense of what they think they want, a dulled sense of empathy for what does not work, a sense of ruthless blind ambition, and at a certain point in time, a stark realization that you must know when to kiss whom, and where.

Those who do frequently acquire a set of skills honed chiefly in salesmanship and passing blame. Leadership does not necessarily equate to proficiency on one side of the ball or the other, as we have seen repeatedly with this team as offensive or defensive coordinators elevated to head jobs fail... like, for example, Gunther Cunningham or Greg Robinson.

Let's once again study franchises that have been more successful than ours. Little was known publicly of Andy Reid, who although never a coordinator but who learned at the bootstraps of Mike Holmgren, is very clear in what he wants to do and appears to have been well suited for the job as a head coach even if he was never a coordinator. Too bad we weren't smart enough to hire him when we had the chance. Too bad we didn't draft or trade for Donovan McNabb, either.

Every new head coach comes to his job with unique virtues and deficiencies. He thinks he knows some things and has a talent for ignoring all the others. But any head coach who does not know a lot of things must be dependent on the organizational apparatus around him, as we dictate clearly in the language of their head coaching contract.

Coaching an NFL team in the new century is a portrait of complexity, in contrast to the spartan, absurd operations that prevailed in the running of professional football teams back in the ‘60s. You remember the 1960's? It is said the Chiefs actually won a Super Bowl in the 1960's. I continue to be amazed that they were able to do so without a highly involved, proactive front office calling the shots. Dumb luck if you ask me.

This condition is born of the added responsibilities falling to head coaches outside of actually on-the-field coaching and the complexities of today’s offensive and defensive systems and strategies. Whereas head coaches rely upon assistants to prepare teams, they are compelled to organize schedules, devise systems, procure mistresses, determine policy, obtain steroids, chaperone double DWI offenders, blend personnel, and make a multitude of official pronouncements and badger a multitude of local media figures.

Glancing through many published reports that outline the functions performed by a head coach today suggests a wide variety of activities. The key to a head coach’s success and, therefore, to an important element of a team’s success is to get the various functions to mesh together. We call this around the office a "Cluster-F*ck."

The position has become every bit an “administrative” position, a mechanism designed to ensure responsiveness to him personally, leading people who can be relied on to act as he would wish them to do. That, in painful and extreme detail, is why we can't win a playoff game or a Super Bowl. So deal with it.

A Head Coach looks for those who can compensate and complement the strengths of his leadership. If he comes from an offensive background, he knows what he wants in a defense because he has seen enough of them in this time as an assistant. In other words, he wants somebody he wasn't smart enough to move the ball against. Apparently, Herm can't figure out Gunther for the life of him, while the rest of the AFC, especially Indy, seems to have figured that BS out pretty easily.

Consequently, he brings in a defensive coordinator who fits that mold. Is it only coincidence that Bill Parcells never won another Super Bowl after Bill Belichick was no longer his defensive coordinator? I hope Bill Parcells never reads this, as he is a large and violent man, and will totally kick my skinny, critical ass for mentioning him.

Herm Edwards as a head coach is a figure of stunning transparency in terms of his core beliefs and his work habits. Simply stated, he knows how to become invisible during the most critical of times, whether media or public like it or not. The power to turn invisible during the playoffs is impressive, indeed.

In presenting his public self, Edwards exhibits as much personal presence as Dick Vermeil, who was as well recognized a sports figure as we have seen over the past 20 years. Herm just needs to learn how to burst into tears at the drop of a hat.

Edwards’ work under Marty Schottenheimer would also seem to be excellent preparation. Seems he has learned well from Marty how to choke in the first round of the playoffs. Well done, well done indeed.

To talk any further on this subject is foolish and pointless, so I will summarize now.
Whether it is trips to the playoffs, not "winning a playoff game", but trips to the playoffs-a philosophy of play that is widely accepted by today’s winning teams, and the qualities of leadership that are evident in his public appearances and in his organizational skills, Edwards’ position as an NFL head coach should by this time be a well accepted fact. This is his team now, whether you like it or not. The continued notion that somehow a team is a GM’s (the Peterson-as-master-of-all-things mantra) shows just how "King Carl" has distinguished himself among all GM's in the NFL. Because, in fact, that is exactly what you have on your hands. King Carl is, after all, the "Longest Tenured General Manager In Professional Sports." Hence, it is his right to run this team however he sees fit, and that is exactly what he does. He has no fear whatsoever of "Baby Lamar" and encourages Clarkie-poo to stay far, far away on his tropical island hideaway cracking coconuts and sleeping in the hammock.

In the final analysis, Edwards’ rise or fall will be determined by wins and losses and contingent on whether firing him after a dismal 2007 campaign will save King Carl's reign. In today’s environment in Kansas City, nothing less will do. It is, when all is said and done, all about the LTGMIPS.

The opinions offered in this column are those of Carl Peterson.

gblowfish
05-30-2007, 10:20 AM
BTW: I think Bob Moore is Rufus.