Was Carl standing right behind Eileen Weir when she wrote her latest article???

[CoMoChief]

Good lord. I dont think I've ever read a more "pro-Carl" article than this one.

WEIR: It's Time We Know The Real Peterson
Jan 12, 2007, 6:38:36 AM by Eileen Weir - FAQ

With Kansas City Chiefs General Manager and Head Coach Herm Edwards conducting their year-end press conference on Thursday, the 2006 football season is officially over. The day traditionally marks a whisking away the harsh memories of poor performances and is a much anticipated and welcomed catharsis for Chiefs fans and followers. In years filled with magical moments, some fine tuning is all that is expected. Most years, major changes are desired.

Certainly the winds of change are blowing in the heartland. Frustrations have reached an all-time high and those waiting for a return to perennial domination in the division have found the end of their patience. Undercurrents of dissatisfaction permeate the fan base and the press corps has offered not-so-gentle suggestions that it is time to pull the plug on the Peterson era. Newspaper columnists and editorial staffs, radio talk show hosts and interested fans who weigh in on the air and through letters to the local paper are voicing their dissatisfaction by calling for the axing of the Chiefs GM.

Erroneously some suffer under the presumption that with the passing of Chiefs Founder Lamar Hunt earlier this year that the option of firing Peterson is available as it has never been before. Known to be a man of superlative character, humility and patience, Mr. Hunt is often misrepresented as a hands-off owner who remained blissfully removed from the day to day operations of his football franchise. As long as Peterson continued to fill the Arrowhead Stadium seats, it is accused, than his job would be secure. Winning, it has been charged, has been secondary.

Those salivating over the possibility of Peterson being unceremoniously ushered out of his Executive Suite are advised not to hold their breath. Mr. Hunt hired Peterson in 1989 to build a winning franchise, to draw national attention to the Kansas City Chiefs, and to return the club to its former glory as a post-season contender. Filling seats and creating a collegiate tailgating atmosphere depended on the success of the team, not the other way around.

Witnessing the incredible Renaissance of the Kansas City Chiefs was undoubtedly one of the tremendous joys of Mr. Hunt’s football career. Peterson was rewarded by renewed contracts, which has allowed the team’s president and GM to continue to build and sustain the franchise that is among the League’s most successful both on and off the field. When Mr. Hunt’s son, Clark, penned the latest contract extension for Peterson, he demonstrated the family’s steadfast faith in the administration’s ability to keep the Chiefs at or near the top of the NFL in attendance, revenue and wins.

Since Clark Hunt orchestrated the most recent re-hire of Carl Peterson, it seems extremely unlikely that Peterson’s dismissal is eminent. What makes the scenario even less probable is the fact that the team boasts long-standing success on and off the field. I’ll repeat: On and off the field.

When success is measured in terms of Championships, only the very elite can claim triumph. As fans of and investors in the Chiefs football club, we settle for nothing less. Acquisition of high profile free agents, courting proven coaching talent, and developing Pro Bowl and Hall of Fame talent through the draft are all designed to win championships. While the Chiefs have enjoyed success in the process, the team has fallen short of its ultimate goal. And we are discouraged. And we blame the top management.

Consider this.

Since Peterson assumed control of the Chiefs fates in 1989, the team has lead the league in winning seasons with 13, tied with Green Bay, Miami and Pittsburgh. During that span of 18 years, Chiefs fans have endured only three losing seasons and watched their team advance to the playoffs nine times, which ties for seventh-most post-seasons appearances among NFL teams.

So what? It isn’t good enough for us. Putting together a winning campaign, managing a few post-season outings just to have our hearts broken doesn’t satisfy Chiefs fans. And it doesn’t satisfy Carl Peterson. Those who attest that Peterson only cares about making money and filling seats don’t know anything about him. Carl Peterson hates to lose. Hates it.

Other myths and misunderstandings about Peterson abound. He’s censured as too loyal, hanging on to people and clinging to relationships with old cronies far beyond their usefulness. Yes, he is loyal. But what he is mostly is fiercely protective. He is devoted to his colleagues, his employees, and his players. He is dedicated to recruiting only the best people to work within the Chiefs organization and is diligent about retaining talent. Capable of tremendous affection for his staff –many of whom have been with him for decades – he strives to help everyone around him succeed.

Peterson is accused of being too rigid, unwilling to admit mistakes, reluctant to adapt his style or processes to improve the team. In fact, Peterson welcomes change, seeks new technologies, desires knowledge and learning. He views change as a constant, unavoidable and exhilarating aspect of managing a professional sports franchise.

Though haunting the halls of Arrowhead Stadium and the high-end restaurants of the County Club Plaza for nearly two decades, it appears that no one in the press really understands the man who has manipulated the fortunes of our hometown team from the bottom of the NFL to the top. Or at least the middle.

Opinion purveyors who make periodic attempts to pigeonhole Peterson predominantly present one of two opposing views of Peterson: that he is a dictatorial mastermind who imposes control over every aspect of the daily operations, or that he is an aloof businessman who concerns himself only with making money and filling seats. Neither is true. Regretfully, after eighteen years on the job there is not one newspaper columnist, beat reporter, television sports director, or radio personality who has successfully unlocked the mystery of Carl Peterson, developed a relationship with him, or given the fans of the Kansas City Chiefs an accurate and reliable entrée into what makes him tick.

Following the deaths of Buck O’Neil and Lamar Hunt last year, Kansas Citians were treated to eloquent and moving tributes offered by reporters and colleagues who forged intimate and lasting relationships with these two giants of sport. When the day comes that Peterson departs this city, there will be no such tribute. There is no Joe Posnanski or Len Dawson reporting on the local sports scene who has unique insights into one of the metropolitan’s most influential, public and complex figure.

Now, there are those who will argue that the blame for the lack of familiarity lies on Peterson’s shoulders, often regarded by the media as a man who dislikes reporters and intentionally distances himself from their prying eyes. True, Peterson wearies easily of the press’ demands, treats media access largely as an obligation rather than an opportunity, and is rarely interviewed. Reluctant to award to the press time that could be better spent evaluating and acquiring players, Peterson’s acquiescence to the media has two simple purposes: to promote the team in a positive light and to communicate with the fans and ticket holders.

Attending the Chiefs final press conference of the 2006 season was an eye opener. Not particularly well attended by the media in general, it was a surprise to note the absence of some of Peterson’s biggest critics. Self-appointed as the voice of the outraged fans, the most vocal opponents of the team’s uppermost management declined the rare opportunity to question and challenge the Chiefs operational philosophy, policies and plans.

Reading the predictable condemnations of Peterson in the local newspaper and listening to routine disapproval of the GM’s abilities and attitudes have taken on a hollow tone, not just for their redundancy but through the realization that the media analysts who so thoroughly scrutinize Peterson’s motives and state of mind possess no legitimate insights into the man. The media may accurately echo the frustration and sentiments of a portion of the public sector, but that is not the limit of their duty. It is to inform and enlighten, to take fans into places they cannot go.

As a former employee of Carl Peterson and a contributor to the team’s official Web page, I have been called an apologist for the Chiefs top executive. But first and foremost, I am a fan and one who shares the aggravation of falling short of our hoped for goal year after exasperating year. Maybe I do defend Peterson too much. But it’s only because I know him.

The opinions offered in this column do not necessarily reflect those of the Kansas City Chiefs.

Hahaha, yeah right.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Manila-Chief

kcxiv is correct ... few playoff wins (is it only 1 ... that is terrible) and never even playing in a S.B.

The number of playoff wins is actually 3.

If my memory isn't faulty, I believe that 22 of the 32 teams in the NFL have made at least one SB appearence since Carl took over in KC.

At least three of those that haven't appeared have joined the league after Carl took over (Jax in '95, and the current edition of the Browns and Texans in '02), while the Panthers, who joined the League in '95 have also appeared.

Which means that of the teams that were already established in the league when Carl took over, only 5 other teams have failed to advance to the SB.

[milkman]

Also, if I added correctly, and didn't forget the correct numbers, in the 10 years since Marty left, the Chiefs are a pretty mundane 76-68 in the win-loss column, with 2 playoff berths.

[Skip Towne]

IT'S OUR TURN, DAMMIT

[Davechief]

And we enter year 19 of the five year plan.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by Davechief

And we enter year 19 of the five year plan.

We only have 16 years remaining in dog years.