Whitlock: Two sides to sad Green story

Coogs · 05-25-2007, 07:23 AM

Another pretty good take by JW...
(Sorry if repost. Didn't see it anywhere else.)

Two sides to sad Green story
By JASON WHITLOCK
Columnist
In the interest of fairness, we should spend a day examining the Trent Green fiasco from Carl Peterson’s and the Chiefs’ perspective.

In 2001, when Peterson gave the Rams a first-round draft pick to secure Green’s services, Trent was an unproven, 30-year-old quarterback with 39 TD passes, 19 starts and a surgically repaired knee on his resume.

Based on the recommendation of Dick Vermeil, Peterson and the Chiefs took a flier on Green and made a huge, questionable commitment to a quarterback many pegged as the next Scott Mitchell, the Dan Marino backup who cashed in with the Detroit Lions and flopped.

Peterson backed up his commitment to Green in 2003, handing him a seven-year $50 million contract that included an $11 million to $12 million signing bonus. During his six-year career in Kansas City, it’s safe to assume Peterson and the Chiefs paid Green $25 million to $35 million.

During that same time span, Peterson supported Green with Priest Holmes, Larry Johnson, Tony Gonzalez, Willie Roaf, Will Shields, Tony Richardson and Brian Waters, offensive players who could argue they were the best at their positions.

With the exception of finding Green a true No. 1 receiver, Peterson can proudly say that he aided Green in every conceivable fashion.

So where is Green’s loyalty to the Chiefs and Peterson?

Listen, I enjoy beating up on King Carl as much as anyone. He’s been in power much too long, and he’s now clearly a detriment to building a Super Bowl-caliber team. It’s apparent that any success the Chiefs have in the future (and probably in the past, too) will be in spite of Peterson, not because of Peterson.

Having said that, given all that Peterson has done for Green and his family and given Green’s poor play last season, should Green really be at OTAs causing a major distraction?

You can’t turn on ESPN or the NFL Network, click on the Internet or listen to talk radio without seeing/hearing Green or one of his representatives bash Carl Peterson and Herm Edwards.

Is Green truly a victim? Or has he been studying from Vivian Stringer’s playbook?

Herm “Don’t Get It Twisted” Edwards said something very interesting Wednesday. He respectfully tried to put the Green situation in perspective.

“Remember, there was a season last year,” Don’t Get It Twisted said. “We keep forgetting that. We played a whole football season. I evaluated this team on the season — how they played, every player. We lose sight of that right now, but we did have a season.

“There are a lot of things said about a lot of people in these circles (media circles) who should be playing,” Herm continued. “Let’s get that straight, too, now. We get amnesia all of a sudden in the offseason. But we did play a whole football season. You (the media) evaluated this team as well as I did. Great thing about it is you’ve got an opinion, but you can’t make any moves. I can, and that’s what I’m trying to do. I’m trying to create competition at certain positions, and it will be fair at all positions.”

Let me translate all of that for you: Don’t forget that Trent Green stunk last season, throwing nine interceptions and seven TDs. Don’t forget that all of you in the media wanted me to play Damon Huard down the stretch, but I was loyal to Trent Green and all that he’d done for the organization the previous five years. Don’t pretend like I’m not doing exactly what I should be doing, given how poorly Trent played last season. I can’t promise Trent the job or even a fair competition given what we saw against Indianapolis. I’m not crazy.

It’s not pretty, but there’s a great deal of truth in what Herm tried to convey politely. Peterson and Herm have been loyal to Trent. They gave him market-value money, a good supporting cast, and they stuck with him over the objections of the media, many Chiefs fans and common sense last season.

Is it too much to ask of Trent Green to repay that loyalty by sitting quietly while Peterson tries to bilk the Dolphins out of a fourth-round draft pick or a veteran player who can help the Chiefs this year?

Does Green owe the Chiefs nothing?

Now, look, I’m on Trent’s side, mostly because there’s a bigger issue at stake (Peterson needs to go), but there is a side to Carl’s story. Let’s be fair here. Green is acting spoiled and petulant. He’s failing to recognize that Peterson, Herm and Kansas City have been good to him, too.

As much as he says he understands the Chiefs’ right to go in a younger direction at quarterback, it’s obvious Green is upset by the decision. He wants to take his ball, go to south Florida and get as far away from Herm’s wing-T offense as possible.

Peterson is so unlikable that Green has almost unanimous support from his teammates and the local media.

“It’s overrated,” Brian Waters said Thursday of loyalty in pro football. “I’ll be honest with you. This is a business. You can be loyal to a point, but after that point you have to do what’s best for you, because that’s what they’re (the teams) going to do.

“…. Trent Green is one of the best football players to ever play in this uniform. You want the best situation for him.”

Waters is a football player. I can understand his sentiment. As a fan, I want whatever gets Peterson fired. As a journalist, as much as it pains me today, I’m obligated to tell you both sides of the story.

Coogs · 05-25-2007, 07:26 AM

One question. I have heard Green is due a roster bonus June 1st. Is this true? And if so, how much is it?

OK, that was two questions.

StcChief · 05-25-2007, 07:26 AM

Quote:

“It’s overrated,” Brian Waters said Thursday of loyalty in pro football. “I’ll be honest with you. This is a business. You can be loyal to a point, but after that point you have to do what’s best for you, because that’s what they’re (the teams) going to do.

We learned that in IT industry a LONG TIME AGO.

Can we stop beating this dead horse.

jwhit · 05-25-2007, 07:27 AM

this is a very good column.

NewChief · 05-25-2007, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwhit

this is a very good column.

Hahahaha. Tooting your own horn. You're funny.

I think Trent's loyalty to the Chiefs went out the window the moment their loyalty to him left. Herm and Carl made it clear they wanted to get rid of him. That was the breakup. Now Herm and Carl are reconsidering because they didn't get the offers they wanted for him or because maybe they just decided they want to keep him around as a safety plan. They're trying to woo him back and want him to keep his mouth shut. Only Trent considers the breakup official and final, so he's acting as such. Sorry Carl and Herm, but you shouldn't have made it so clear to Trent, the media, fans, and general public that you were done with him if you wanted Trent to remain loyal to you.

**morphius** · 05-25-2007, 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwhit

this is a very good column.

If you were going to give both sides, why did you leave out Green's refusal to go talk to Cleveland, when they were very interested in him? While I like Trent a lot, that was a terrible move.

Coogs · 05-25-2007, 07:40 AM

I've come up with another question. Are there any FA's left out there that could/would be able to help the Chiefs if Green gets traded?

**DaFace** · 05-25-2007, 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jwhit

this is a very good column.

Actually, it is. It's nothing we haven't heard, but at least SOMEONE in the real media is taking the Chiefs' side finally.

Eleazar · 05-25-2007, 07:46 AM

It's a good column.

I'm not mad at either side. They are all doing their jobs. Carl's job is to hold out for all he can get. Green's job is to put pressure on Carl to ship him off so he can get on with his life. Miami's job is to try to get Green for little or nothing.

They're all playing a card game. I doubt there is as much animosity among the players as most people think. I think that all three sides know this is just business.

One of them will eventually blink. Either Miami will decide they can't afford to start Cleo Lemon until Green is ready to go, or Carl will decide it isn't worth it to pay Green's salary all year. (By the way, if I owned a business and someone spent $7 million just to avoid having to look like they got out-negotiated, I'd fire
him)

Someone will eventually relent and we'll all wonder why it took so long. But like everybody on the inside knows, it's just business.

**Buehler445** · 05-25-2007, 07:47 AM

I agree with a Whitlock column? Blasphemy. Really though, I do. He brought up some good points about what the Chiefs have done for him. Nice article.

Skyy God · 05-25-2007, 07:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coogs

I've come up with another question. Are there any FA's left out there that could/would be able to help the Chiefs if Green gets traded?

Not at the QB position, and I'm pretty sure the market is dried up (at least in terms of younger talent) at all other positions as well.

jidar · 05-25-2007, 07:53 AM

pretty good

**ChiTown** · 05-25-2007, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

It's a good column.

I'm not mad at either side. They are all doing their jobs. Carl's job is to hold out for all he can get. Green's job is to put pressure on Carl to ship him off so he can get on with his life. Miami's job is to try to get Green for little or nothing.

They're all playing a card game. I doubt there is as much animosity among the players as most people think. I think that all three sides know this is just business.

One of them will eventually blink. Either Miami will decide they can't afford to start Cleo Lemon until Green is ready to go, or Carl will decide it isn't worth it to pay Green's salary all year. (By the way, if I owned a business and someone spent $7 million just to avoid having to look like they got out-negotiated, I'd fire
him)

Someone will eventually relent and we'll all wonder why it took so long. But like everybody on the inside knows, it's just business.

Spot on, and my sentiments exactly.

keg in kc · 05-25-2007, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cochise

They're all playing a card game. I doubt there is as much animosity among the players as most people think. I think that all three sides know this is just business.

I agree with that. And I think it's only a distraction in the minds of the fans and media. It's business, and I doubt it has any meaningful impact on team chemistry one way or the other.

htismaqe · 05-25-2007, 08:17 AM

Now, look, I’m on Trent’s side, mostly because there’s a bigger issue at stake (Peterson needs to go),

EVERY issue with the Chiefs boil down to this.

Half the fan base, and 90% of the media talking heads in Kansas City would try to tell us the sky is RED simply because Carl Peterson espouses that it's blue.

05-25-2007, 07:23 AM
Coogs In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Northern Kansas Casino cash: $1654349	Whitlock: Two sides to sad Green story Another pretty good take by JW... (Sorry if repost. Didn't see it anywhere else.) Two sides to sad Green story By JASON WHITLOCK Columnist In the interest of fairness, we should spend a day examining the Trent Green fiasco from Carl Peterson’s and the Chiefs’ perspective. In 2001, when Peterson gave the Rams a first-round draft pick to secure Green’s services, Trent was an unproven, 30-year-old quarterback with 39 TD passes, 19 starts and a surgically repaired knee on his resume. Based on the recommendation of Dick Vermeil, Peterson and the Chiefs took a flier on Green and made a huge, questionable commitment to a quarterback many pegged as the next Scott Mitchell, the Dan Marino backup who cashed in with the Detroit Lions and flopped. Peterson backed up his commitment to Green in 2003, handing him a seven-year $50 million contract that included an $11 million to $12 million signing bonus. During his six-year career in Kansas City, it’s safe to assume Peterson and the Chiefs paid Green $25 million to $35 million. During that same time span, Peterson supported Green with Priest Holmes, Larry Johnson, Tony Gonzalez, Willie Roaf, Will Shields, Tony Richardson and Brian Waters, offensive players who could argue they were the best at their positions. With the exception of finding Green a true No. 1 receiver, Peterson can proudly say that he aided Green in every conceivable fashion. So where is Green’s loyalty to the Chiefs and Peterson? Listen, I enjoy beating up on King Carl as much as anyone. He’s been in power much too long, and he’s now clearly a detriment to building a Super Bowl-caliber team. It’s apparent that any success the Chiefs have in the future (and probably in the past, too) will be in spite of Peterson, not because of Peterson. Having said that, given all that Peterson has done for Green and his family and given Green’s poor play last season, should Green really be at OTAs causing a major distraction? You can’t turn on ESPN or the NFL Network, click on the Internet or listen to talk radio without seeing/hearing Green or one of his representatives bash Carl Peterson and Herm Edwards. Is Green truly a victim? Or has he been studying from Vivian Stringer’s playbook? Herm “Don’t Get It Twisted” Edwards said something very interesting Wednesday. He respectfully tried to put the Green situation in perspective. “Remember, there was a season last year,” Don’t Get It Twisted said. “We keep forgetting that. We played a whole football season. I evaluated this team on the season — how they played, every player. We lose sight of that right now, but we did have a season. “There are a lot of things said about a lot of people in these circles (media circles) who should be playing,” Herm continued. “Let’s get that straight, too, now. We get amnesia all of a sudden in the offseason. But we did play a whole football season. You (the media) evaluated this team as well as I did. Great thing about it is you’ve got an opinion, but you can’t make any moves. I can, and that’s what I’m trying to do. I’m trying to create competition at certain positions, and it will be fair at all positions.” Let me translate all of that for you: Don’t forget that Trent Green stunk last season, throwing nine interceptions and seven TDs. Don’t forget that all of you in the media wanted me to play Damon Huard down the stretch, but I was loyal to Trent Green and all that he’d done for the organization the previous five years. Don’t pretend like I’m not doing exactly what I should be doing, given how poorly Trent played last season. I can’t promise Trent the job or even a fair competition given what we saw against Indianapolis. I’m not crazy. It’s not pretty, but there’s a great deal of truth in what Herm tried to convey politely. Peterson and Herm have been loyal to Trent. They gave him market-value money, a good supporting cast, and they stuck with him over the objections of the media, many Chiefs fans and common sense last season. Is it too much to ask of Trent Green to repay that loyalty by sitting quietly while Peterson tries to bilk the Dolphins out of a fourth-round draft pick or a veteran player who can help the Chiefs this year? Does Green owe the Chiefs nothing? Now, look, I’m on Trent’s side, mostly because there’s a bigger issue at stake (Peterson needs to go), but there is a side to Carl’s story. Let’s be fair here. Green is acting spoiled and petulant. He’s failing to recognize that Peterson, Herm and Kansas City have been good to him, too. As much as he says he understands the Chiefs’ right to go in a younger direction at quarterback, it’s obvious Green is upset by the decision. He wants to take his ball, go to south Florida and get as far away from Herm’s wing-T offense as possible. Peterson is so unlikable that Green has almost unanimous support from his teammates and the local media. “It’s overrated,” Brian Waters said Thursday of loyalty in pro football. “I’ll be honest with you. This is a business. You can be loyal to a point, but after that point you have to do what’s best for you, because that’s what they’re (the teams) going to do. “…. Trent Green is one of the best football players to ever play in this uniform. You want the best situation for him.” Waters is a football player. I can understand his sentiment. As a fan, I want whatever gets Peterson fired. As a journalist, as much as it pains me today, I’m obligated to tell you both sides of the story.
Posts: 21,603

05-25-2007, 07:26 AM	#2
Coogs In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Northern Kansas Casino cash: $1654349	One question. I have heard Green is due a roster bonus June 1st. Is this true? And if so, how much is it? OK, that was two questions.
Posts: 21,603

05-25-2007, 07:27 AM	#4
jwhit Starter Join Date: Oct 2004 Casino cash: $9994990	this is a very good column.
Posts: 212

05-25-2007, 07:40 AM	#7
Coogs In Search of a Life Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Northern Kansas Casino cash: $1654349	I've come up with another question. Are there any FA's left out there that could/would be able to help the Chiefs if Green gets traded?
Posts: 21,603

05-25-2007, 07:46 AM	#9
Eleazar Beyond the Rapids Join Date: May 2003 Location: Langley, VA Casino cash: $-370000	It's a good column. I'm not mad at either side. They are all doing their jobs. Carl's job is to hold out for all he can get. Green's job is to put pressure on Carl to ship him off so he can get on with his life. Miami's job is to try to get Green for little or nothing. They're all playing a card game. I doubt there is as much animosity among the players as most people think. I think that all three sides know this is just business. One of them will eventually blink. Either Miami will decide they can't afford to start Cleo Lemon until Green is ready to go, or Carl will decide it isn't worth it to pay Green's salary all year. (By the way, if I owned a business and someone spent $7 million just to avoid having to look like they got out-negotiated, I'd fire him) Someone will eventually relent and we'll all wonder why it took so long. But like everybody on the inside knows, it's just business.
Posts: 80,659

05-25-2007, 07:47 AM	#10
Buehler445 Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Scott City KS Casino cash: $2364734	I agree with a Whitlock column? Blasphemy. Really though, I do. He brought up some good points about what the Chiefs have done for him. Nice article.
Posts: 56,764

05-25-2007, 07:53 AM	#12
jidar MVP Join Date: May 2005 Location: a Casino cash: $10004900	pretty good
Posts: 5,502

05-25-2007, 08:17 AM	#15
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	Now, look, I’m on Trent’s side, mostly because there’s a bigger issue at stake (Peterson needs to go), EVERY issue with the Chiefs boil down to this. Half the fan base, and 90% of the media talking heads in Kansas City would try to tell us the sky is RED simply because Carl Peterson espouses that it's blue.
Posts: 100,022