Rufus responds to Whitlock's column which was a response to Rufus' response - Page 2

shaneo69 · 12-27-2005, 05:40 PM

DAWES: FROM THE MAILBAG
Dec 27, 2005, 4:09:41 AM by Rufus Dawes

Q: Your nemesis Jason Whitlock came after you the other day in the Kansas City Star. Why does he hate the Chiefs and you personally so much? (Yeah, like that's a real question from a real person)

RUFUS DAWES: If you’ve learned anything from reading these pages since this site came online back in 1995 it’s that some media can dish it out but can’t take it. It would appear that these people are so thin-skinned that they’ve become translucent. I don’t know why I or anyone else would have to “force” Mr. Whitlock, as he contends, “to share some of my doubts,” as he writes, since he does it every day without any encouragement from me. (Kansas City Star, December 22, 2005) Moreover, why should a difference of opinion as it applies to Larry Johnson or any subject associated with the team be out of bounds, particularly if it comes from a Web site that is all-Chiefs?

Media are permitted to say all sorts of things with varying degrees of rancor and differing levels of accuracy, but when they are challenged the response is immediate. That response does not deny some truth so much as to say that nobody has the right to challenge them in the first place. Why should anyone be forced to pay homage to some local Torquemada who wants to rule the area sports world and slaughter everyone that doesn’t believe as he does?

The writer W. H. Auden penned the following hot and immediate response to some criticism he received and it appears quite appropriate in this case:

“The Ogre does what ogres can,
But one prize is beyond his reach,
The Ogre cannot master Speech.
The Ogre stalks with hands on hips
While drivel gushes from his lips.

Q: How can you say it’s not important that Larry Johnson blocks or not?

DAWES: This feckless month-long media hunt to expose Johnson’s blocking failure has no resonance beyond the Kansas City metro area. Most likely, this entire discussion has dragged on as long as it has and been blown out of proportion so some people could take another swipe at Johnson because he won’t speak to them. The trick is when something bad happens to make it fit with your original theory, or perhaps your disposition. Thus, if the Chiefs fall on hard times, it obviously must have something to do with Larry Johnson not speaking to us, or so they say.

OK, Larry Johnson missed a block. Larry Johnson wouldn’t be the first running back who didn’t block. There are guys in the Hall of Fame who wouldn’t, couldn’t, and didn’t. Barry Sanders is one. Do you think Eric Dickerson ever blocked worth a hoot? How about Tony Dorsett? What about our own Christian Okoye? Think he could hit a moving target coming at the quarterback? Walter Payton, Marcus Allen, Emmitt Smith, and Marion Motley (he was, according to NFL pioneer coach Paul Brown) were the premier blocking running backs in the history of this game; all the rest were average. Unlike my colleague Bob Gretz, who writes that LJ will improve his blocking in time, I don’t care if he does or think it’s of any importance in the long run as to the team’s success or failure.

How silly is it that for weeks now we’ve read and heard media – not all — gloating that it was so easy to get Larry Johnson to say something outrageous and foolish, then point out how wrong he was to say it. So, suddenly, they’re angry, not to mention surprised, that he’s gone quiet and doesn’t talk any more?

How many more times do we have to read or hear that Johnson is “angst-ridden” or some such babble? (Kansas City Star, December 22, 2005) Why, because he doesn’t talk to someone in the media? Yeah, he’s so “angst-ridden” he’s making travel plans for Hawaii to play in his first Pro Bowl. “The overpowering joy of the day was watching Larry Johnson run,” Kansas City Star columnist Joe Posnanski correctly exclaimed, a day after the victory over the Chargers. (December 25, 2005) That’s run, not block. The cacophony of sound emanating from the dampened throats of the Arrowhead faithful that day was not, “LA-RY, LA-RY, BLOCK!”

Listen, the next time you read or hear someone in the media say that it’s not important to him that Johnson talks, as one member of the media recently said, ask yourself why then is it mentioned in every article that appears on the guy? Maybe someone could have made better use of his time trying to talk to his dad, Larry Johnson, Sr., as Michael Lev of The Orange County Register did. (December 17, 2005) Maybe we could learn something about Johnson, Jr., other than he doesn’t talk to somebody in the media.

http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2005/12...e_mailbag_cin/

tk13 · 12-28-2005, 01:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Oh, also, I watched a couple of games this weekend. When flipping between the KC game and the Dallas game, I noticed something very interesting. On third downs, Clinton Portis was in whether it was a passing down or not. I flipped over to the KC game, and noticed that Larry Johnson could not make the same claim.

Take it for what it's worth...

We've been doing that for two weeks now. I think it really hurt us against the Giants because we didn't even throw him out there a time or two just to run that little checkdown that's so successful. We did it a few times against SD, and one of them turned into a TD.

Hammock Parties · 12-28-2005, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Oh, also, I watched a couple of games this weekend. When flipping between the KC game and the Dallas game, I noticed something very interesting. On third downs, Clinton Portis was in whether it was a passing down or not. I flipped over to the KC game, and noticed that Larry Johnson could not make the same claim.

Take it for what it's worth...

Yes, we all know LJ has not developed his blocking skills. That's the ONLY reason.

**Rausch** · 12-28-2005, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taco John

Oh, also, I watched a couple of games this weekend. When flipping between the KC game and the Dallas game, I noticed something very interesting. On third downs, Clinton Portis was in whether it was a passing down or not. I flipped over to the KC game, and noticed that Larry Johnson could not make the same claim.

Take it for what it's worth...

Oh yeah, Portis.

That guy with no probowl this year, less TD's, less rushing yards, and a worse YPT average than LJ.

Oh, and a penchant for dressing like a 14th century french pimp.

Why are we talking about him again?...

Hammock Parties · 12-28-2005, 03:10 AM

It's interesting that TJ is suddenly pimping Portis after carrying the mantra of "Portis Who?" all year on the Mane.

Too bad Tatum Bell's production dropped off dramatically in the last month or two.

**Bob Dole** · 12-28-2005, 09:00 AM

Could a moderator please restrict these two to PMs only and save us all some bandwidth?

12-27-2005, 05:40 PM
shaneo69 Smug Weasel Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Bleachers at Busch Casino cash: $10004900	Rufus responds to Whitlock's column which was a response to Rufus' response DAWES: FROM THE MAILBAG Dec 27, 2005, 4:09:41 AM by Rufus Dawes Q: Your nemesis Jason Whitlock came after you the other day in the Kansas City Star. Why does he hate the Chiefs and you personally so much? (Yeah, like that's a real question from a real person) RUFUS DAWES: If you’ve learned anything from reading these pages since this site came online back in 1995 it’s that some media can dish it out but can’t take it. It would appear that these people are so thin-skinned that they’ve become translucent. I don’t know why I or anyone else would have to “force” Mr. Whitlock, as he contends, “to share some of my doubts,” as he writes, since he does it every day without any encouragement from me. (Kansas City Star, December 22, 2005) Moreover, why should a difference of opinion as it applies to Larry Johnson or any subject associated with the team be out of bounds, particularly if it comes from a Web site that is all-Chiefs? Media are permitted to say all sorts of things with varying degrees of rancor and differing levels of accuracy, but when they are challenged the response is immediate. That response does not deny some truth so much as to say that nobody has the right to challenge them in the first place. Why should anyone be forced to pay homage to some local Torquemada who wants to rule the area sports world and slaughter everyone that doesn’t believe as he does? The writer W. H. Auden penned the following hot and immediate response to some criticism he received and it appears quite appropriate in this case: “The Ogre does what ogres can, But one prize is beyond his reach, The Ogre cannot master Speech. The Ogre stalks with hands on hips While drivel gushes from his lips. Q: How can you say it’s not important that Larry Johnson blocks or not? DAWES: This feckless month-long media hunt to expose Johnson’s blocking failure has no resonance beyond the Kansas City metro area. Most likely, this entire discussion has dragged on as long as it has and been blown out of proportion so some people could take another swipe at Johnson because he won’t speak to them. The trick is when something bad happens to make it fit with your original theory, or perhaps your disposition. Thus, if the Chiefs fall on hard times, it obviously must have something to do with Larry Johnson not speaking to us, or so they say. OK, Larry Johnson missed a block. Larry Johnson wouldn’t be the first running back who didn’t block. There are guys in the Hall of Fame who wouldn’t, couldn’t, and didn’t. Barry Sanders is one. Do you think Eric Dickerson ever blocked worth a hoot? How about Tony Dorsett? What about our own Christian Okoye? Think he could hit a moving target coming at the quarterback? Walter Payton, Marcus Allen, Emmitt Smith, and Marion Motley (he was, according to NFL pioneer coach Paul Brown) were the premier blocking running backs in the history of this game; all the rest were average. Unlike my colleague Bob Gretz, who writes that LJ will improve his blocking in time, I don’t care if he does or think it’s of any importance in the long run as to the team’s success or failure. How silly is it that for weeks now we’ve read and heard media – not all — gloating that it was so easy to get Larry Johnson to say something outrageous and foolish, then point out how wrong he was to say it. So, suddenly, they’re angry, not to mention surprised, that he’s gone quiet and doesn’t talk any more? How many more times do we have to read or hear that Johnson is “angst-ridden” or some such babble? (Kansas City Star, December 22, 2005) Why, because he doesn’t talk to someone in the media? Yeah, he’s so “angst-ridden” he’s making travel plans for Hawaii to play in his first Pro Bowl. “The overpowering joy of the day was watching Larry Johnson run,” Kansas City Star columnist Joe Posnanski correctly exclaimed, a day after the victory over the Chargers. (December 25, 2005) That’s run, not block. The cacophony of sound emanating from the dampened throats of the Arrowhead faithful that day was not, “LA-RY, LA-RY, BLOCK!” Listen, the next time you read or hear someone in the media say that it’s not important to him that Johnson talks, as one member of the media recently said, ask yourself why then is it mentioned in every article that appears on the guy? Maybe someone could have made better use of his time trying to talk to his dad, Larry Johnson, Sr., as Michael Lev of The Orange County Register did. (December 17, 2005) Maybe we could learn something about Johnson, Jr., other than he doesn’t talk to somebody in the media. http://www.kcchiefs.com/news/2005/12...e_mailbag_cin/
Posts: 4,910

12-28-2005, 03:10 AM	#19
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4750478	It's interesting that TJ is suddenly pimping Portis after carrying the mantra of "Portis Who?" all year on the Mane. Too bad Tatum Bell's production dropped off dramatically in the last month or two. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 277,667

12-28-2005, 09:00 AM	#20
Bob Dole King Shit of **** Mountain Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Texarkana, Texas Casino cash: $2624497	Could a moderator please restrict these two to PMs only and save us all some bandwidth?
Posts: 48,519