Who knows?? But sweeping changes with new management happen everywhere in all types of business from tme to time. sadly, thats just the way it is.

You need to have a good PR guy when you hire shit coaches and are paying almost 10 million to coaches that are elsewhere.

this.

Hopefully they axe Bob Moore too. Bob Moore is one of the most ignorant SOB's to ever exist.

One thing I am thankful for is that they got rid of the Rufus Dawes column.

They are slowly changing over to their own guys. To be expected and it's probably a good thing that they are doing it slowly so that it goes smoothly.

He doesn't do PR anymore. He's just Chiefs historian.

Kick him out of that title then too.

This was what I pulled off their site on this guy...

http://scottthong.files.wordpress.co...onminister.jpg

Are they really tremendously successful? People always complain about ticket and parking prices being poorly priced, even in their better days merchandise never flew off the shelf, and for how long did they peddle that embarrassing website? A lot of the business practices the Chiefs have used for years are obsolete. It wasn't until last year that they became really active with Twitter, etc.... The business side has benefitted off of tradition and a loyal fanbase that would buy tickets and merchandise no matter what.

I don't agree that winning alone is going to make this team marketable again. The last few weeks, we were a playoff bound team and we were still fighting blackouts.

It's a shame to talk about it this way because these are good people losing jobs. But this is business and new people generally bring new ideas. The best businesses aren't the ones who hold on to every single employee with history. The best ones are the ones that churn.

This was not a traditionally strong fan base. Arrowhead was a ghost town in the 80s. In their better days, the Chiefs were consistently in the top 3-5 in merchandise sales.

Besides, if you are firing people for business failings, why in the hell are you firing secretaries or accountants. The problems you are mentioning are issues with marketing, which would make sense for the people in sales and PR to be let go.

no no no no no.

they are just getting ready for their lockout.
these poor 11 will count as roughly $150,000 to $250,000 against the payroll.
there's no way that the chiefs can make it. must cut ties.

in all seriousness, this does suck for these guys. best wishes to them. the pussification (or should that be dickification) of america continues.

the boom in KC coincided with the advent of free agency and the boom of the NFL in general as much as it did the Chiefs front office. Carl Peterson just rode the wave.

and they already did get rid of their PR guy, bob moore.

I get that helped engineer a turnaround. But the same happened for Disney in the 1980's. The same happened to Apple. Dell. Etc... Thousands of business models that became obsolete because time changes a lot of things. The best businesses are the ones that change with the times. Isn't it also possible that maybe Denny Thum was in this org. for so long that he didn't have a fresh perspective on eliminating positions that didn't really add value? Or maybe being loyal to a fault?

The one that really threw me by surprise was the Community Relations person, since KC has always been rock solid there. But to my point, 6 of the 11 of those people let go were in sales/marketing/PR.

Thing is, this decision seems to be driven by Clark Hunt, not Pioli, given that Hunt became CEO of the Chiefs. And Hunt has been with the organization for a long time. So I don't think it's necessarily true that these are changes for the sake of change. Maybe he's trying to slash cost by eliminating positions that weren't overly important. Maybe he's holding people accountable for lackluster results. There are a million and a half business reasons for why they might make a decision like this. I think it's disingenuous for anyone to say these were moves made just to purge the organization of Peterson's staff.

Actually now that it's mentioned I do wonder if this has something to do with cutting costs for the lockout.

Without being inside the organization there is no way to know why these people were canned. They very well may not have been very good at their jobs.

You don't clean out 11 people for no reason, something was going on. That's a lot of people to replace. You don't put yourself in that position just to do it as Gretz suggest.