PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Whitlock takes Egoli national


Pages : 1 [2]

PHOG
09-25-2009, 06:10 AM
Here are the facts, Jason. Here is what you printed last year near the END of Herm's dismal failure.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/columnists/jason_whitlock/story/882946.html

This was in November!! November! The end was NIGH!

YOU ARE FULL OF IT!

Nice. :thumb:

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 07:51 AM
Here are the facts, Jason. Here is what you printed last year near the END of Herm's dismal failure.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/columnists/jason_whitlock/story/882946.html

This was in November!! November! The end was NIGH!

YOU ARE FULL OF IT!

Yes, he is.

Keep preaching Jason. Your agenda was written long ago.

BTW, ragging on Dick Curl is not ragging on Herman Edwards.

You gave Herman Edwards 3 years of inept coaching and then you wanted to bring him back this year after a 6-26 record the last 2 years.

You rag on Pioli after roughly 9 months on the job because he has an "ego".

Hilarious.

King_Chief_Fan
09-25-2009, 07:53 AM
Guys, I am sharing what I know. That's what I've been writing in the KC Star.

Trust me, I look better if Pioli is a success. You think I can't write columns taking credit for Pioli's success? I look far worse if he's a flop. You guys don't even know how to properly criticize me. I campaigned for Jeff George and Ty Law. I got all excited when the Chiefs signed Chester McGlockton. If Pioli is a flop, I'm basically going to write the opposite of whatever my instincts tell me the Chiefs should do next.

I'm bummed by what I've seen from and learned about Pioli since his arrival in KC. I'm hoping he turns it around. It's early.

I have two AOL e-mail addresses, BallState68 and BallState0, the 0 is listed at the bottom of the FoxSports.com column where the Egoli passage was lifted.

How could you look any worse? You are pretty much a laughing stock since you make a lot of claims, opinions etc without noting your facts.
The claim that you constantly ripped Herm is laughable. See the post by GoChiefs where he already clowned you for that one. I love it when journalist, cough cough, get caught up in their own ego. I think it is your motive to run down who ever runs the Chiefs...the past it was Peterson, now Pioli and it will continue. But we get you are trying to make a living. How you can look yourself in the mirror and collect a paycheck is as egotistical as it comes.

Count Alex's Losses
09-25-2009, 08:01 AM
Here's another Whitlock gem.

When I asked Krumrie about Ron Edwards, the off-waivers defensive tackle the Chiefs signed this offseason, Krumrie broke out laughing. Krumrie coached Edwards in Buffalo last season.

“I had no idea he was on waivers,” said Krumrie, whose reaction indicated he believes Buffalo made a very foolish decision. “Don Blackmon (KC’s linebackers coach) told me, and we went ahead and got him.”

Well, if Ron Edwards is as good as Krumrie and Herm Edwards think, then that means Krumrie’s MVC award is going to come down to Ryan Sims’ play. If Sims produces, I might nominate Krumrie for NFL coach of the year.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 08:10 AM
Here's another Whitlock gem.

Honestly, when has this guy been right? He's pimped some of the worst players forever.

It amazes me the weight some people put in his columns.

Chiefnj2
09-25-2009, 08:13 AM
Honestly, when has this guy been right? He's pimped some of the worst players forever.

It amazes me the weight some people put in his columns.

His own opinion on players and coaches may never be correct. So what. He's entertaining. People love to talk about him. Even the people who hate him love to talk about him and make fat jokes. The fact that he's been wrong on dozens of predictions still doesn't mean that he fabricates things.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 08:46 AM
His own opinion on players and coaches may never be correct. So what. He's entertaining. People love to talk about him. Even the people who hate him love to talk about him and make fat jokes. The fact that he's been wrong on dozens of predictions still doesn't mean that he fabricates things.

So you think Whitlock tells the 100% truth all the time in his columns?

Chiefnj2
09-25-2009, 09:03 AM
So you think Whitlock tells the 100% truth all the time in his columns?

When he says he sat down with Haley and Pioli for dinner, I think he is telling the truth.

stevieray
09-25-2009, 09:16 AM
When he says he sat down with Haley and Pioli for dinner, I think he is telling the truth.
....the first and last time, I'd wager.

Chiefnj2
09-25-2009, 09:23 AM
....the first and last time, I'd wager.

I don't know about that. I'm sure Pioli would rather have Whitlock and other rabble rousers focus on him rather than the players and coaches.

soundmind
09-25-2009, 09:59 AM
Whitlock has a bigger ego than Pioli does and a bigger gerth and ass. Maybe he will eat himself to death.

We can only hope.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/33n-IS8a1S4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/33n-IS8a1S4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 10:02 AM
When he says he sat down with Haley and Pioli for dinner, I think he is telling the truth.

I believe he sat down with them for dinner.

I also think he completely fabricated the story about Pioli.

orange
09-25-2009, 10:11 AM
Here are the facts, Jason. Here is what you printed last year near the END of Herm's dismal failure.

http://www.kansascity.com/sports/columnists/jason_whitlock/story/882946.html

This was in November!! November! The end was NIGH!

YOU ARE FULL OF IT!

Whitlock also wrote THIS in November:

There’s no reason to blame Tyler Thigpen, Glenn Dorsey, Tamba Hali or any of the nameless, faceless jerseys masquerading as starting NFL linebackers. It’s not their fault. They didn’t assemble this team.

Carl “Moe” Peterson, Herm “Larry” Edwards and Bill “Curly” Kuharich put together the worst team in Chiefs history, a squad with a two-year, 19-of-20 losing stretch.

For a solid month, the Chiefs feigned competitiveness by avoiding turnovers and penalties. Error-free football allowed the Chiefs to keep games close and fool some of us into believing they were making real progress.

Sunday, against a Buffalo team that had lost four straight, the disgusting truth reared its head like Putin staring down Sarah Palin’s lake house. The Chiefs jumped offside, picked up a personal foul, turned the ball over five times and played like the inexperienced, talent-deficient team they truly are.

The result was a franchise-record, 54-point meltdown that all but ensured Arrowhead will be less than half filled when the Dolphins and Chargers visit later this season.

It also ends the debate about whether the Chiefs are on the right path being blazed by Moe, Larry and Curly.

No way.

Otter
09-25-2009, 10:16 AM
I don't know about that. I'm sure Pioli would rather have Whitlock and other rabble rousers focus on him rather than the players and coaches.

No offense but - you don't get Pioli.

Brock
09-25-2009, 10:18 AM
Whitlock also wrote THIS in November:


So sometime this month, there's a good chance he'll write a laudatory article about Pioli, I guess.

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 10:22 AM
Okay then, let me put this a different way:

If QB candidate X, who is currently playing in the NCAA, and who is IN FACT "not a Chief" becomes available to Kansas City after Cassel shows nothing but mediocrity or completely shits the bed for two years, I would hope to Hell that our Illustrious Leader has a little bit more ****ing foresight than he did IN HIS LAST QB TRANSACTION.

Or, if he does not, but Haley does, I hope Haley drags him by his fat ears up and down the business offices of OAD until Pioli gets the ****ing message!

I'm good with either option.

I absolutely understand that.

But that's quite a different statement than what we were talking about.

What you appear to be saying about Sanchez is more like this:

"If QB candidate X, who is currently playing in the NCAA, and who is IN FACT "not a Chief" becomes available to Kansas City after Cassel shows nothing but mediocrity or completely shits the bed for two years, I'm going to become a fan of QB candidate X and pine for him to be a Chief even though there's zero chance of it ever happening."

See what I mean?

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 10:23 AM
Nope. Never.

The decision was too important not to reflect upon. Hell, we *might* be thankful that we didn't select him.

But these decisions will never NOT be discussed or alluded to by fans.

Reflect upon?

Or whine about (by BOTH sides)?

There's a difference.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 10:32 AM
I believe he sat down with them for dinner.

I also think he completely fabricated the story about Pioli.

Do you know what happens to newspaper journalists and columnists fabricate stories?

They are fired. And 90% of the time, the corporate entity is sued.

I think it is absolutely fucking ludicrous to suggest that Jason Whitlock completely fabricated a story about Pioli. Why? Well why would he? In the grand scheme of things, who gives a flying FUCK about Scott Pioli? I mean really?

Do you actually think that Jason Whitlock would put his livelihood on the line in order to make Scott Fucking Pioli look bad?

I mean, come the fuck on. Before January, I'd bet that 90% of all Kansas Citians had never even heard of Scott Pioli and those who had could probably care less.

That's not worth ruining your reputation and career over.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 10:37 AM
....the first and last time, I'd wager.

I sincerely doubt that.

Jason Whitlock is pretty much the only guy left in town that could give Pioli the kind of access through the press that he would desire. I don't believe for one second that Pioli doesn't want people talking about him or the work he's doing with the Chiefs.

Who's he going to sit down with? Babb? Athan? Greg Hall? Bob Gretz? Is Gretz going to get an exclusive interview with Scott Pioli on his website?

The Kansas City Star is still the leading source of news and information in Kansas City and for Kansas City.

And like him or not, Jason Whitlock is their sports mouthpiece.

dirk digler
09-25-2009, 10:46 AM
The Kansas City Star is still the leading source of news and information in Kansas City and for Kansas City.



No it is not. For sports I would say 810 is and other radio outlets and TV. The Star is about to go under.

Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan
09-25-2009, 10:50 AM
I would say Chiefsplanet is a major source based on people who actually attend training camp, the games, listen to the radio and report it here, read the blogs and repost it here.

This is the first and major source of Chiefs news for me.

Kudos to AustinChief and the others who keep this place relevant.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:08 AM
Do you know what happens to newspaper journalists and columnists fabricate stories?

They are fired. And 90% of the time, the corporate entity is sued.

I think it is absolutely ****ing ludicrous to suggest that Jason Whitlock completely fabricated a story about Pioli. Why? Well why would he? In the grand scheme of things, who gives a flying **** about Scott Pioli? I mean really?

Do you actually think that Jason Whitlock would put his livelihood on the line in order to make Scott ****ing Pioli look bad?

I mean, come the **** on. Before January, I'd bet that 90% of all Kansas Citians had never even heard of Scott Pioli and those who had could probably care less.

That's not worth ruining your reputation and career over.

You tell me how many editoralists get fired over fabricating stories. You are mixing up actual reporters and guys who offer OPINION pieces.

Someone could have been at the same dinner and thought Pioli was fine. It's a he said/she said.

What grounds would Pioli have to sue? Because Whitlock thought he came across with an ego?

I mean, get freaking real here. This is the same guy who held up a sign about Drew Bledsoe. As I said before, if Whitlock isn't getting fired over that, he's not getting fired over fabricating his opinion of a dinner date with Scott Pioli.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:13 AM
The Kansas City Star is absolutely not the leading outlet for Chiefs information. Adam Schefter, the NFL Network, John Clayton and Jay Glazer are all more in tune with what happens with the Chiefs before the Star even has the information published.

This isn't 2003.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:13 AM
Someone could have been at the same dinner and thought Pioli was fine. It's a he said/she said.

No, it's not. Why?

Because NO ONE has given a counter-opinion.


I mean, get freaking real here. This is the same guy who held up a sign about Drew Bledsoe.

So? Are you stating that his journalistic credibility was gone the moment that happened?

I'd say the Star, AOL, ESPN, Fox Sports and others disagree. You know, the people that actually pay him.


As I said before, if Whitlock isn't getting fired over that, he's not getting fired over fabricating his opinion of a dinner date with Scott Pioli.

There are only TWO people that have accused Whitlock of lying about this meeting: You and Sauto.

Think about that.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:15 AM
The Kansas City Star is absolutely not the leading outlet for Chiefs information. Adam Schefter, the NFL Network, John Clayton and Jay Glazer are all more in tune with what happens with the Chiefs before the Star even has the information published.

This isn't 2003.

Are you KIDDING? The SAME ESPN that everyone here complains about? The SAME NFL Network that's given the Chiefs next to no coverage during its existence?

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:19 AM
No, it's not. Why?

Because NO ONE has given a counter-opinion.



So? Are you stating that his journalistic credibility was gone the moment that happened?

I'd say the Star, AOL, ESPN, Fox Sports and others disagree. You know, the people that actually pay him.




There are only TWO people that have accused Whitlock of lying about this meeting: You and Sauto.

Think about that.

Who honestly cares to give a counter opinion? Whitlock also states that other share his opinion, but they aren't busting out of the woodwork to defend his point. I don't know who was at this dinner. But if this dinner happened as long ago as Whitlock claims, why bring it up now?

I'm not accusing Whitlock of lying about the dinner happening I'm saying he's likely fabricating the accounts of the evening to generate buzz. Whitlock has no story if he feels Pioli was up to his standards during the dinner.

Sorry, guys who write editorials in newspapers don't follow the same "journalistic credibility" that you keep referencing.

Otter
09-25-2009, 11:19 AM
I'd say the Star, AOL, ESPN, Fox Sports and others disagree. You know, the people that actually pay him.

OK Dane, I know you're not stupid so I'll only say this one more time:

ESPN fired Whitlock which means they no longer employ or pay him.

Thank you

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:22 AM
Are you KIDDING? The SAME ESPN that everyone here complains about? The SAME NFL Network that's given the Chiefs next to no coverage during its existence?

The Star has to give the Chiefs coverage. But when you are comparing the Star to getting inside information, it's simply not there. ESPN, the NFL Network all scoop the Kansas City Star. When I want breaking news about the Chiefs, the KC Star is getting checked about 4th in pecking order. Fox Sports, ESPN, NFLN are all ahead.

You're really, really reaching here.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:24 AM
Whitlock has no story if he feels Pioli was up to his standards during the dinner.


Why not? IMO, he has MORE of a story.

If Scott Pioli is the exact or near opposite of Carl Peterson, I absolutely think it's a story. If Scott Pioli is kind, gracious, mild-mannered and polite, I absolutely believe that he could contrast that against Carl Peterson and his STFD and STFU nonsense that he became known for across the city and across the league. Hell, even my 84-year-old grandmother knew of and hated Carl Peterson and was glad to see him fired. No joke.

But apparently, it didn't play out that way. What's the big deal? Why are some people offended by the notion that Scott Pioli may be as big or bigger asshole than Carl Peterson ever dreamed of being?

Why is that so hard to believe? The head coach he hired can't get caught on camera without saying JFC and Motherfuck this and Motherfuck that.

Why do you think Pioli would be any different?

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:24 AM
OK Dane, I know you're not stupid so I'll only say this one more time:

ESPN fired Whitlock which means they no longer employ or pay him.

Thank you

Dane is constantly confusing Whitlock as being a real reporter as opposed to someone who writes editorials that generate buzz.

Wallace Matthews writes some of the worst stories ever for Newsday about his complete hatred for the New York Mets. He's made accusations that have been proven to be false, yet he's still employed at a major newspaper.

Their job is to get people talking. Whitlock does a fanastic job at that. What I'm arguing is that he fabricates his accounts. I don't understand why that's so hard to understand.

Chiefnj2
09-25-2009, 11:26 AM
OK Dane, I know you're not stupid so I'll only say this one more time:

ESPN fired Whitlock which means they no longer employ or pay him.

Thank you

He was fired because he wrote the following:

“Lupica is an insecure, mean-spirited busybody. He's upset because I put a clown suit on him on that show and in a follow-up column I wrote for ESPN.”

• “Scoop is a clown. And the publishing of his fake ghetto posturing is an insult to black intelligence, and it interferes with intelligent discussion of important racial issues.”

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:26 AM
The Star has to give the Chiefs coverage. But when you are comparing the Star to getting inside information, it's simply not there. ESPN, the NFL Network all scoop the Kansas City Star. When I want breaking news about the Chiefs, the KC Star is getting checked about 4th in pecking order. Fox Sports, ESPN, NFLN are all ahead.

You're really, really reaching here.

I'm sorry. Outside of the Pioli hiring, those news outlets rarely break any real news about the Chiefs and over the last decade, I'd say they've been fairly worthless in their Chiefs coverage.

IMO, Bob Gretz has done remarkable work since he set out on his own and for the life of me, I can't figure out why he hasn't been hired by the Star.

Kent Babb is C.E. Wendler with a press pass.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:27 AM
OK Dane, I know you're not stupid so I'll only say this one more time:

ESPN fired Whitlock which means they no longer employ or pay him.

Thank you

I was referring to his employers SINCE the Drew Bledsoe incident because The Bad Guy is intent on pronouncing Whitlock as unreliable and nothing more than a tabloid reporter.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:29 AM
I'm sorry. Outside of the Pioli hiring, those news outlets rarely break any real news about the Chiefs and over the last decade, I'd say they've been fairly worthless in their Chiefs coverage.

IMO, Bob Gretz has done remarkable work since he set out on his own and for the life of me, I can't figure out why he hasn't been hired by the Star.

Kent Babb is C.E. Wendler with a press pass.

NFLN broke the Matt Cassel trade.

What has the Star broken for the Chiefs over the last 5 years? The only thing I can think of is the LJ incident. The Haley hiring was broken by Glazer. Mike Smith had the Pioli hiring.

The last thing I remember the Star breaking was Johnnie Morton signing with the Chiefs.

Bob Gretz has done a great job. It just shows how awful the Star is when they work in the same town.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:29 AM
I was referring to his employers SINCE the Drew Bledsoe incident because The Bad Guy is intent on pronouncing Whitlock as unreliable and nothing more than a tabloid reporter.

What honest journalist is doing something like that?

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:30 AM
The Star has to give the Chiefs coverage. But when you are comparing the Star to getting inside information, it's simply not there. ESPN, the NFL Network all scoop the Kansas City Star. When I want breaking news about the Chiefs, the KC Star is getting checked about 4th in pecking order. Fox Sports, ESPN, NFLN are all ahead.

You're really, really reaching here.

Answer me this: Do you have Schefter, Peter King, et al on Twitter?

I do.

Do you know how many Chiefs items have been tweeted in the past month? About 4, all concerning Cassel's recovery.

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy the idea that the national press covers the Chiefs better than Gretz or the Star.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:32 AM
What honest journalist is doing something like that?

As I've stated numerous times, AOL, ESPN, the Star and Fox haven't had issue with it because he's been employed by all of those news organizations since that incident.

Do I condone it? Absolutely not.

But that certainly hasn't made him unemployable.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-25-2009, 11:33 AM
Sorry, guys who write editorials in newspapers don't follow the same "journalistic credibility" that you keep referencing.

Coming from someone who had a journalism minor in college, I feel completely free in saying this:

You have absolutely no fucking idea what you are talking about.

LaChapelle
09-25-2009, 11:34 AM
Someone posted or listed the list of places Whitlock has been fired from, it's a long ass list.

dirk digler
09-25-2009, 11:34 AM
I'm sorry. Outside of the Pioli hiring, those news outlets rarely break any real news about the Chiefs and over the last decade, I'd say they've been fairly worthless in their Chiefs coverage.

IMO, Bob Gretz has done remarkable work since he set out on his own and for the life of me, I can't figure out why he hasn't been hired by the Star.

Kent Babb is C.E. Wendler with a press pass.

Which I pointed out the radio stations are the ones that actually break the news not the Star.

Like most newspapers now the Star is irrelevant.

And I agree with Bad Guy. This is just a he said/she said type of thing. It is Jason's opinion and he is welcome to it but it doesn't mean it is the absolute truth.

FAX
09-25-2009, 11:34 AM
I see that Whittles jumped in on this thread to defend himself. Good job avoiding the White Coaters, Whittles! It's amazing what you can learn from CSI.

Meanwhile, and upon serious reflection, I've realized that Whittles is, perhaps, doing us a huge favor. Everybody knows that KC gets little or no respect or attention from the national press. And when we do, it's usually bad press. In fact, we have fielded one of the few defenses in the league that the commissioner uses as a laugh line in his speeches. So, if, by chance, a Chiefs story is submitted when edit time rolls around, it's probably going to be pulled in favor of a feel-good piece on Michael Vick's new "Save The Cats" foundation.

It's understandable. We are the turds of the NFL. Floating in the league turd bowl. And since Pioli holds such disdain for the media, we need someone who will bring attention to us ... an attention-seeking turd, if you will ... a turd who will raise his turdy little hand out of the bowl and shout in his turdy little voice, "Look at me and all us turds down here! There's a story in this bowl, guys! A hot turd story!"

So, since you're here, I want to thank you, Whittles. Most sincerely. For going national with another story about how the Chiefs are still turds with just another turd in charge. Chiefs pride ... catch the aroma.

FAX

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:34 AM
Answer me this: Do you have Schefter, Peter King, et al on Twitter?

I do.

Do you know how many Chiefs items have been tweeted in the past month? About 4, all concerning Cassel's recovery.

I'm sorry, but I just don't buy the idea that the national press covers the Chiefs better than Gretz or the Star.

I think we are arguing different points. I'm saying the other outlets break more Chiefs info than the Star. I think you are saying the coverage they provide.

Of course the local outlet is going to produce more content on the Chiefs.

I do not use Twitter.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:36 AM
Coming from someone who had a journalism minor in college, I feel completely free in saying this:

You have absolutely no ****ing idea what you are talking about.

I have an English undergrad and a journalism minor as well.

Different rules apply for people who write editorials as opposed to an actual reporter.

If you can't differentiate the two then I don't see a point in continuing this discussion.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 11:37 AM
As I've stated numerous times, AOL, ESPN, the Star and Fox haven't had issue with it because he's been employed by all of those news organizations since that incident.

Do I condone it? Absolutely not.

But that certainly hasn't made him unemployable.

He's employable because he generates a buzz.

dirk digler
09-25-2009, 11:39 AM
I think we are arguing different points. I'm saying the other outlets break more Chiefs info than the Star. I think you are saying the coverage they provide.

Of course the local outlet is going to produce more content on the Chiefs.

I do not use Twitter.

Yep.

The Star provides more overall coverage though not nearly as much as they used to.

The radio stations and the Internet break a gillion more stories than the Star does.

The Star is irrelevant and lost their best writer because they are about to go under.

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:40 AM
He's employable because he generates a buzz.

If that's all it took, TMZ would be the leader in news information worldwide.

I think there's much more to his success than just "buzz".

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 11:41 AM
I do not use Twitter.

You should. I use UberTwitter on my Blackberry and TwitterFox in my browser. The amount of information that's broadcast directly from the source in real-time is astounding.

dirk digler
09-25-2009, 11:42 AM
If that's all it took, TMZ would be the leader in news information worldwide.

I think there's much more to his success than just "buzz".

When it comes to celebs who says there not? In fact who is better? They have been great on alot of stories

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-25-2009, 11:49 AM
I have an English undergrad and a journalism minor as well.

Different rules apply for people who write editorials as opposed to an actual reporter.

If you can't differentiate the two then I don't see a point in continuing this discussion.

Different rules apply in how you can present your opinion about the individual or entity that you are writing about, but that's it.

You cannot simply fabricate information in order to create a point.

Now, Whitlock could not, and would not be fired, or reprimanded for saying that Pioli had a huge ego, it's a subjective opinion, and you can't really prove that one way or another.

He also can't be reprimanded/suspended/or sued for libel unless he shows, and this is important, malice and reckless disregard for the truth. That's why he can get away with "Egoli", because Pioli is a public figure, it does afford him more leeway with what he says.

However, he would be promptly shitcanned, or at the very least, suspended, if he "invented" the concept of this dinner for the purposes of a column bashing Pioli, or if he was inventing sources and situations to burnish this opinion of Pioli.

A columnist gets extra creative and argumentative license as a part of their job. The use and protection of sources and the accumulation of facts and data. But they cannot make false claims without serious reprimand. They can have shoddy opinions, sure, but that's as much rope as they are afforded to hang themselves.

That's why Mitch Albom got his shit pushed in by the Detroit Free Press.

The Bad Guy
09-25-2009, 12:04 PM
Different rules apply in how you can present your opinion about the individual or entity that you are writing about, but that's it.

You cannot simply fabricate information in order to create a point.

Now, Whitlock could not, and would not be fired, or reprimanded for saying that Pioli had a huge ego, it's a subjective opinion, and you can't really prove that one way or another.

He also can't be reprimanded/suspended/or sued for libel unless he shows, and this is important, malice and reckless disregard for the truth. That's why he can get away with "Egoli", because Pioli is a public figure, it does afford him more leeway with what he says.

However, he would be promptly shitcanned, or at the very least, suspended, if he "invented" the concept of this dinner for the purposes of a column bashing Pioli, or if he was inventing sources and situations to burnish this opinion of Pioli.

A columnist gets extra creative and argumentative license as a part of their job. The use and protection of sources and the accumulation of facts and data. But they cannot make false claims without serious reprimand. They can have shoddy opinions, sure, but that's as much rope as they are afforded to hang themselves.

That's why Mitch Albom got his shit pushed in by the Detroit Free Press.

Good post.

I'm not disputing the dinner date. I'm saying that I believe Whitlock fabricated the actual interpretation of it to create a buzz.

It makes no sense to me if Whitlock was friendly with Pioli before, why he would be a jerkoff to him in a private setting.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-25-2009, 12:20 PM
Good post.

I'm not disputing the dinner date. I'm saying that I believe Whitlock fabricated the actual interpretation of it to create a buzz.

It makes no sense to me if Whitlock was friendly with Pioli before, why he would be a jerkoff to him in a private setting.

Now, I'm not necessarily accusing you of this, but I have seen a pretty big sliding scale that I want to make sure people understand.

Before jwhit logged on here and specifically mentioned dinner at Garozzo's, there were a ton of people who just said outright that he invented it. The way that narratives get created on this place is really dangerous, because one person says it, and others want to believe it, so it automatically becomes bronzed in fact.

If Whitlock invented the dinner, he'd be fired. I think most of us who have followed this story, you included, know this, but I also think there are others who hate him who want to say that he's inventing this dinner just because they want it to be true.

As far as being a jerkoff...well, maybe they were just politely BS'ing before about relatively unimportant stuff because they only had a passing knowledge of one another. I'm sure that you've met people who seem fine on the first or second meeting, but once you sit down with them to pick their brains, they come off as complete cockbags. It's entirely possible that this happened. Maybe once they got to talking about football, Pioli came off as an ideologue who felt his way was the only way, and he was belittling anyone else who didn't hold the same opinion.

Now, I'm not saying any of this happened, but it is a possible explanation for what could have happened. None of us know, and our own angles of vision will ultimately influence what we want to believe happened in this situation.

I can't say I'm going to totally dismiss it, or totally believe it. It gets filed under "things to consider" for me. If more of this comes out in the future, perhaps its veracity will increase. If not, well then it could easily fall under the category of "spurned journalist stirs shit for attention".

DaneMcCloud
09-25-2009, 12:22 PM
Before jwhit logged on here and specifically mentioned dinner at Garozzo's, there were a ton of people who just said outright that he invented it. The way that narratives get created on this place is really dangerous, because one person says it, and others want to believe it, so it automatically becomes bronzed in fact.

Sauto still doesn't believe it.

Raised On Riots
09-25-2009, 01:13 PM
I absolutely understand that.

But that's quite a different statement than what we were talking about.

What you appear to be saying about Sanchez is more like this:

"If QB candidate X, who is currently playing in the NCAA, and who is IN FACT "not a Chief" becomes available to Kansas City after Cassel shows nothing but mediocrity or completely shits the bed for two years, I'm going to become a fan of QB candidate X and pine for him to be a Chief even though there's zero chance of it ever happening."

See what I mean?

I see what you mean, but if there's "zero chance" in reality or hypothetically, we might as well pull the plug, call it a run, and bury the motherfucker for good.

philfree
09-25-2009, 01:43 PM
I'm sure Whitlock enjoys seeing a thread this long concerning him. I don't think it's worth this much attention. I wasn't there but in short it seems Whitlock wanted to get at Haley the inexperienced first time HC to find something to use as material to write about the Chiefs. Pioli the experienced one obviously cock blocked Jason and Jason got his panties in a bunch. BFD!

PhilFree:arrow:

ChiefsCountry
09-25-2009, 01:48 PM
Sauto still doesn't believe it.

If people like Sauto don't like what Whitlock has written, then you know what he has said is true.

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 01:49 PM
I see what you mean, but if there's "zero chance" in reality or hypothetically, we might as well pull the plug, call it a run, and bury the mother****er for good.

Why?

Is Sanchez the ONLY QB that has the ability to win it all?

Just Passin' By
09-25-2009, 01:53 PM
Why?

Is Sanchez the ONLY QB that has the ability to win it all?

Demonstrably not. But the Sanchez/Cassel comparison has set up a slew of false, or unprovable, arguments and asseritions on both 'sides' of the issue.

ThunderChief
09-25-2009, 03:29 PM
I'm not sure what to think. It would be a copout to say, it's too early and let's see? Going on only this past draft, Whitlock gains some cred because while I was thinking we'd see an AC/DC concert performance from Pioli, we got a Jonas Brothers appearance instead.

Meantime, Belichik was doing his standard wheeling and dealing on draft day. So far, the early returns have been uneven on the Pioli era and I'll leave it there....for now.

Brock
09-25-2009, 03:33 PM
I'm not sure what to think. It would be a copout to say, it's too early and let's see? Going on only this past draft, Whitlock gains some cred because while I was thinking we'd see an AC/DC concert performance from Pioli, we got a Jonas Brothers appearance instead.

Meantime, Belichik was doing his standard wheeling and dealing on draft day. So far, the early returns have been uneven on the Pioli era and I'll leave it there....for now.

So in other words, it's too early and let's see.

ThunderChief
09-25-2009, 03:40 PM
So in other words, it's too early and let's see.

That's good. My compliments:clap: Okay, let's just say that I'm LEANING toward there being inconsistency and an over rated Pioli at this point? Leaning.

Saccopoo
09-25-2009, 03:43 PM
Why?

Is Sanchez the ONLY QB that has the ability to win it all?

http://www.occa.biz/images/sanchez_q389.jpg

Raised On Riots
09-25-2009, 04:16 PM
Why?

Is Sanchez the ONLY QB that has the ability to win it all?

What?!?!? I thought we had moved this debate beyond Mark Sanchez because he's "not a Chief"?

Where are you going now?

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 05:29 PM
What?!?!? I thought we had moved this debate beyond Mark Sanchez because he's "not a Chief"?

Where are you going now?

I said there was zero chance Sanchez would ever be a Chief, to which you replied we "might as well pull the plug, call it a run, and bury the mother****er for good".

What does that look like to you? It looks to me like you're suggesting there's no hope. And at least implying that it's because Sanchez isn't the Chiefs QB.

Raised On Riots
09-25-2009, 05:36 PM
I said there was zero chance Sanchez would ever be a Chief, to which you replied we "might as well pull the plug, call it a run, and bury the mother****er for good".

What does that look like to you? It looks to me like you're suggesting there's no hope. And at least implying that it's because Sanchez isn't the Chiefs QB.

:doh!: Wow.

Okay, one more time in the simple, non-hyperbolic way:

1) Cassel has shown nothing by the end of the second year of his contract, and the Chiefs are still picking high as a result.

2) Hot shit QB "X" is on the board, and we're in a position to grab.

3) We blow the candidate off, and continue to suck ballz with Cassel, knowing FULL WELL we will continue to suck ballz with Cassel.

4)
http://i689.photobucket.com/albums/vv252/raisedonriots/GIF_saftey_guy_suicide.gif

Can ya' hear me know?:shrug:

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 06:37 PM
:doh!: Wow.

Okay, one more time in the simple, non-hyperbolic way:

1) Cassel has shown nothing by the end of the second year of his contract, and the Chiefs are still picking high as a result.

2) Hot shit QB "X" is on the board, and we're in a position to grab.

3) We blow the candidate off, and continue to suck ballz with Cassel, knowing FULL WELL we will continue to suck ballz with Cassel.

4)
http://i689.photobucket.com/albums/vv252/raisedonriots/GIF_saftey_guy_suicide.gif

Can ya' hear me know?:shrug:

I understood this whole hypothetical the first time you posted it.

But it has absolutely NOTHING to do with what we were talking about.

This whole exchange started with BigChiefFan saying:

I get it. Sanchez was a good prospect and we passed on drafting him. I've moved on.

To which you replied:

Fair enough. I'll move on when Cassel proves he's the better man. Until then, not so much.

This isn't about some hypothetical QB we might pass on in the future - this is about SANCHEZ. You said you'd move on when Cassel proved he was better than SANCHEZ.

You're a Chiefs fan, right? That's why I said it doesn't make sense to hold such a standard - if Cassel NEVER proves to be the better man, you implicitly won't move on.

It really doesn't make any sense. That's like lamenting that your head hurts all the time and then proceeding to bang your head against the wall incessantly.

Count Alex's Losses
09-25-2009, 06:41 PM
IMO, Bob Gretz has done remarkable work since he set out on his own and for the life of me, I can't figure out why he hasn't been hired by the Star.

Gretz used to work for the Star, I think.

I wonder if a bridge wasn't burned.

Count Alex's Losses
09-25-2009, 06:46 PM
Whitlock also wrote THIS in November:
There’s no reason to blame Tyler Thigpen, Glenn Dorsey, Tamba Hali or any of the nameless, faceless jerseys masquerading as starting NFL linebackers. It’s not their fault. They didn’t assemble this team.

Carl “Moe” Peterson, Herm “Larry” Edwards and Bill “Curly” Kuharich put together the worst team in Chiefs history, a squad with a two-year, 19-of-20 losing stretch.

For a solid month, the Chiefs feigned competitiveness by avoiding turnovers and penalties. Error-free football allowed the Chiefs to keep games close and fool some of us into believing they were making real progress.

Sunday, against a Buffalo team that had lost four straight, the disgusting truth reared its head like Putin staring down Sarah Palin’s lake house. The Chiefs jumped offside, picked up a personal foul, turned the ball over five times and played like the inexperienced, talent-deficient team they truly are.

The result was a franchise-record, 54-point meltdown that all but ensured Arrowhead will be less than half filled when the Dolphins and Chargers visit later this season.

It also ends the debate about whether the Chiefs are on the right path being blazed by Moe, Larry and Curly.

No way.

Yeah, he flip-flopped pretty quickly.

But the fact that he was supporting Herm at ALL that late in the year shows he had it in for the guy. He supported him for the better part of the first two years blindly. After the beginning of the 2008 season (following the Carolina the Tennessee games) anyone that cast any vote of confidence in Herm's direction was INSANE.

Raised On Riots
09-25-2009, 08:08 PM
I understood this whole hypothetical the first time you posted it.

But it has absolutely NOTHING to do with what we were talking about.

This whole exchange started with BigChiefFan saying:

I get it. Sanchez was a good prospect and we passed on drafting him. I've moved on.

To which you replied:

Fair enough. I'll move on when Cassel proves he's the better man. Until then, not so much.

This isn't about some hypothetical QB we might pass on in the future - this is about SANCHEZ. You said you'd move on when Cassel proved he was better than SANCHEZ.

You're a Chiefs fan, right? That's why I said it doesn't make sense to hold such a standard - if Cassel NEVER proves to be the better man, you implicitly won't move on.

It really doesn't make any sense. That's like lamenting that your head hurts all the time and then proceeding to bang your head against the wall incessantly.

You know what? Whatever. If you want to buy in to this "Right 53" horseshit instead of results, be my guest.
I've got a football game to watch.

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 08:11 PM
You know what? Whatever. If you want to buy in to this "Right 53" horseshit instead of results, be my guest.
I've got a football game to watch.

ROFL

Is this where you take your ball and go home?

See, I haven't bought into anything. I absolutely expect results, but guess what? You can't determine the results of an event that hasn't yet happened.

Besides, don't pretend that you're interested in results, because it's entirely possible the path the team is on now could net them. It's only results to you if they do it the way you want them to.

Raised On Riots
09-25-2009, 08:18 PM
ROFL

Is this where you take your ball and go home?

See, I haven't bought into anything. I absolutely expect results, but guess what? You can't determine the results of an event that hasn't yet happened.

Besides, don't pretend that you're interested in results, because it's entirely possible the path the team is on now could net them. It's only results to you if they do it the way you want them to.

There exactly two results:

1) Win.

2) Lose.

And you're right; I think the path thus far is a pretty fucking stupid one.

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 08:29 PM
There exactly two results:

1) Win.

2) Lose.

And you're right; I think the path thus far is a pretty ****ing stupid one.

If the results are binary, what is the event? Is it ONE GAME? ONE SEASON? ONE SUPERBOWL?

You are trying to determine, or have determined, an answer when you don't yet know what the question is. The "results", whether we're talking about Cassel, Pioli, or Haley, are ALL in the future. Most likely 2 to 3 years or more in the future.

And I know you think the path thus far is a stupid one. As a matter of fact, I'm not real enthused about it either. However, I'm very keen to the fact that I, myself, have ABSOLUTELY ZERO INFLUENCE over the course of events. I'm merely along for the ride.

Why ride the rollercoaster if you're convinced that it's going to crash at the end and the only emotion you're going to experience during the ride is fear?

Von Dumbass
09-25-2009, 08:34 PM
Sounds like Bill Simmons is listening to Whitlock. :hmmm:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmonsnflpicks/090925

OK, let's talk about Todd Haley, who broke the unofficial record for "worst body language in the history of professional sports" during last week's collapse against Oakland. I made a mental note to write about this on Sunday, then Jason Whitlock and Mike Lombardi tackled it before I could get there. I will only add this: It's impossible -- repeat: impossible -- for a football team to succeed when its coach is acting like a complete ass on the sidelines and selling out 20 different players. There's a zero percent chance it can work.

Now, I don't think this is a case of Haley needing to "calm down" because you can't change who you are. The players will see right through any attempt to suddenly be more supportive, which basically comes down to the "That's OK, that's all right!" clap after every bad play even as he's gritting his teeth. Basically, he's screwed. If this were a dating situation, and Haley was a dude and the Chiefs were the girl, that Raiders game was the equivalent of the dude getting in a screaming match with two waiters and a bus boy at dinner, snapping at the girl when she didn't order fast enough, then telling her at the end of the night, "I don't know, do you REALLY need dessert?" You think she's calling him back? I am proceeding with my 2009 picks as if Haley already lost the Chiefs. Because I think he did. You had to see it.

OnTheWarpath58
09-25-2009, 08:35 PM
Sounds like Bill Simmons is listening to Whitlock. :hmmm:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmonsnflpicks/090925

OK, let's talk about Todd Haley, who broke the unofficial record for "worst body language in the history of professional sports" during last week's collapse against Oakland. I made a mental note to write about this on Sunday, then Jason Whitlock and Mike Lombardi tackled it before I could get there. I will only add this: It's impossible -- repeat: impossible -- for a football team to succeed when its coach is acting like a complete ass on the sidelines and selling out 20 different players. There's a zero percent chance it can work.

Now, I don't think this is a case of Haley needing to "calm down" because you can't change who you are. The players will see right through any attempt to suddenly be more supportive, which basically comes down to the "That's OK, that's all right!" clap after every bad play even as he's gritting his teeth. Basically, he's screwed. If this were a dating situation, and Haley was a dude and the Chiefs were the girl, that Raiders game was the equivalent of the dude getting in a screaming match with two waiters and a bus boy at dinner, snapping at the girl when she didn't order fast enough, then telling her at the end of the night, "I don't know, do you REALLY need dessert?" You think she's calling him back? I am proceeding with my 2009 picks as if Haley already lost the Chiefs. Because I think he did. You had to see it.

Repost for the 4th time.

And mods, can we do something about the half-page sig this mouthbreather has?

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 08:36 PM
Repost for the 4th time.

And mods, can we do something about the half-page sig this mouthbreather has?

ROFL

Von Dumbass
09-25-2009, 08:38 PM
Repost for the 4th time.

And mods, can we do something about the half-page sig this mouthbreather has?

Sorry. I even put Bill Simmons into "search this thread" and nothing came up.

OnTheWarpath58
09-25-2009, 08:40 PM
Sorry. I even put Bill Simmons into "search this thread" and nothing came up.

This forum has more than one thread, Simple Jack.

Raised On Riots
09-25-2009, 08:51 PM
If the results are binary, what is the event? Is it ONE GAME? ONE SEASON? ONE SUPERBOWL?

You are trying to determine, or have determined, an answer when you don't yet know what the question is. The "results", whether we're talking about Cassel, Pioli, or Haley, are ALL in the future. Most likely 2 to 3 years or more in the future.

And I know you think the path thus far is a stupid one. As a matter of fact, I'm not real enthused about it either. However, I'm very keen to the fact that I, myself, have ABSOLUTELY ZERO INFLUENCE over the course of events. I'm merely along for the ride.

Why ride the rollercoaster if you're convinced that it's going to crash at the end and the only emotion you're going to experience during the ride is fear?

Because it's the Kansas City Chiefs, that's why.

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 09:02 PM
This forum has more than one thread, Simple Jack.

ROFL

htismaqe
09-25-2009, 09:03 PM
Because it's the Kansas City Chiefs, that's why.

It's the Kansas City Chiefs as in, they're cursed?

Or it's the Kansas City Chiefs as in, you know they suck but you just can't help but love them?

Either way, I know what you mean! :)

Guru
09-25-2009, 11:03 PM
Whitlock just misses Carl.

Saccopoo
09-25-2009, 11:41 PM
There exactly two results:

1) Win.

2) Lose.

And you're right; I think the path thus far is a pretty ****ing stupid one.

There are two results, but the paths to get there are completely different. The Jets have what might be the best offensive line in the NFL. The Chiefs have what might be the worst offensive line in football. Switch the two quarterbacks on the teams and seriously think about what the results would be. Having a rookie quarterback behind this line would be an unmitigated disaster. Cassel gives this team the best chance to win now. He gives this team the best chance to win next season. Maybe even the season after that. It's going to take more than one season to fix all the problems associated with this team personnel wise, especially on the offensive line.

Let him go Riots. Just let him go.

Raised On Riots
09-25-2009, 11:52 PM
There are two results, but the paths to get there are completely different. The Jets have what might be the best offensive line in the NFL. The Chiefs have what might be the worst offensive line in football. Switch the two quarterbacks on the teams and seriously think about what the results would be. Having a rookie quarterback behind this line would be an unmitigated disaster. Cassel gives this team the best chance to win now. He gives this team the best chance to win next season. Maybe even the season after that. It's going to take more than one season to fix all the problems associated with this team personnel wise, especially on the offensive line.

Let him go Riots. Just let him go.

FAIL.

milkman
09-26-2009, 07:17 AM
this

i'm even more embarrassed for whitlock after reading these posts


all he has ever said is "pioli is an asshole because i say so"


besides the fact that it doesn't matter - whitlock's childish opinion of pioli is relevant to absolutely nothing (except to the usual miserable chiefs fans who have already made up their minds) - we still don't have a single piece of evidence to verify the claim, which is in reality a simple grudge-carrying for brian waters....

I don't know that I'm a "miserable" Chief fan that has already made up my mind.

But I do know that I haven't been happy with most of the moves that Pioli has made since taking control of this franchise, and the only thing I take away from Whitlock's useless drivel is the sure and certain knowledge that he (Whitlock) is a useless ****ing moron.

Even if he did have anything of substance to support his ramblings, his writing over the years, his interviews on sports talk radio and his guest spots as host of Jim Rome's show have destroyed his credibility with me.

milkman
09-26-2009, 07:26 AM
http://www.nflgoddess.com/images/2008_nyg_eli_manning.jpg

What's your point?

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/giants/docs/images/63g00k1m.jpg

milkman
09-26-2009, 07:45 AM
Fair enough. I'll move on when Cassel proves he's the better man. Until then, not so much.

You're the one Sanchez supporter who really didn't move on after the the Cassel trade, along with Hamas.

I even told you to move on at one time.

I tried to move on myself, and watched the NFL Network replays of some of the Patriot games over the summer.

I saw some things I really liked from Cassel, particurlaly in the Jet game, when he showed some grit and moxy in keeping the Pats in the game when the Pats defense was just sucking ass.

I also saw in the Pittsburg game a QB who made plays against one of the best defenses in the league, only to have Randy Moss make two huge drops that completely changed the complexion and momentum of that game.

That being said, the people who argued vehemently against drafting Sanchez are, by and large, the group that haven't moved on, constantly poking and prodding.

So, as I said to mecca a couple of days ago, **** it.

Those guys don't want to move on, I'm going to jump right in.

htismaqe
09-26-2009, 07:58 AM
I don't know that I'm a "miserable" Chief fan that has already made up my mind.

You're obviously not.

But I do know that I haven't been happy with most of the moves that Pioli has made since taking control of this franchise

Nothing at all wrong with that.

htismaqe
09-26-2009, 08:02 AM
You're the one Sanchez supporter who really didn't move on after the the Cassel trade

I've been trying to say the same thing to him.

That being said, the people who argued vehemently against drafting Sanchez are, by and large, the group that haven't moved on, constantly poking and prodding.

So, as I said to mecca a couple of days ago, **** it.

Those guys don't want to move on, I'm going to jump right in.

Dude, I told Mecca to ignore them. I understand the compulsion to go all verbal jihad on people. But it's just not worth it. And it brings the overall tenor of the board down.

The reason I left was because *I* was becoming too confrontational. That's not me, and I really don't think that's alot of us.

There's too much football knowledge here, including ROR, to be picking and fighting all the time.

milkman
09-26-2009, 08:15 AM
That's good. My compliments:clap: Okay, let's just say that I'm LEANING toward there being inconsistency and an over rated Pioli at this point? Leaning.

I think the Chiefs draft position really hamstrung Pioli.

No one wants to move up into the top 5 anymore because of the money and risk involved.

milkman
09-26-2009, 08:23 AM
I've been trying to say the same thing to him.



Dude, I told Mecca to ignore them. I understand the compulsion to go all verbal jihad on people. But it's just not worth it. And it brings the overall tenor of the board down.

The reason I left was because *I* was becoming too confrontational. That's not me, and I really don't think that's alot of us.

There's too much football knowledge here, including ROR, to be picking and fighting all the time.

I'm not going to go all jihad on them.

I'm just going to talk about his positives and post stats.

I guess it would be considered a passive-aggressive response.

orange
09-26-2009, 01:11 PM
$60 million for a QB ain't all that. What'd Eli get 95?

Eli is a hell alot more proven though...

http://www.nflgoddess.com/images/2008_nyg_eli_manning.jpg

What's your point?

I bet you can figure it out for yourself.

http://www.clarion-call.org/yeshua/pudding/pudding.gif