PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs My Email Response to Jason Whitlock


Alphaman
01-14-2010, 01:56 PM
Subject: Weis/Crennel: Where is the National Jason Whitlock


Over and over in the LOCAL paper you have knocked the decisions of Todd Haley and his handling of the coaching staff (specifically his coordinators). It seems that you main point is that he should be hiring based on self preservation rather than what he feels is best in the long run for the team.


You criticized his firing of Chan Gailey because it left him without a scapegoat if the 2009 season went south. You criticized him for hiring Charlie Weis because you question whether Weis’ ego could coexist and ultimately not overshadow Haley’s. Finally, you criticize his hiring of Crennel because hiring him doesn’t show enough paranoia of potential back office conversations. Sure you made a veiled attempt to question Crennel’s expertise, but that was only one sentence with the extent of the analysis being that he worked for a guy who was a defensive coach.


Here’s my problem. Those arguments are relatively weak and are beneath your ability to look at a situation and point out the nuances that most people tend to overlook. That’s what THE NATIONAL JASON WHITLOCK does when he has written for ESPN and FoxSports, when he has appeared on ESPN’s The Sports Reporters. It feels like the LOCAL Jason Whitlock is reaching for any angle to be negative. In doing so it feels like you’ve reached and haven’t come to the table with any substance. Even the former Patriot you talked to told you that Crennel installed the defensive game plans and called the games in New England, yet you still question his credentials.


The NATIONAL JASON WHITLOCK would have taken the following sentences used by the LOCAL Jason Whitlock and provided interesting insight:


“Haley either has no political savvy, no interest in playing the kind of politics that enhances a coach’s longevity or zero leverage when putting together a coaching staff…My gut says Haley’s ego and gambling nature make him unaware of the ramifications of his decisions…Good coaches are paranoid. They perceive every move by ownership/management as a potential threat to their power.”


THE NATIONAL JASON WHITLOCK would have used these thoughts to call out the status quo of NFL head coaches and celebrated Haley as a breath of fresh air; a head coach who is more concerned about what is best for his team than worrying about the political moves necessary to save his job.


Is that true about Haley? If we believe your articles it is. The safe choice would have been to hold on to Gailey. However, if Haley honestly believes that Gailey’s approach to offense won’t work in the NFL or doesn’t fit the head coach’s vision for the Chiefs then why waste a season with that offense knowing you’ll have to tear it apart the next season? Why not lay the foundation for the offense you really want now? That’s what Haley did. To complete the project he brought in a guy who will employ that EXACT same philosophy which means the team is a year ahead right now instead of a year behind. Further, these are your words about that new offensive coordinator, “No one I’ve talked to doubts Weis’ ability to create innovative game plans.”


As for Crennel according to you, Haley hired a guy with questionable credentials because of who his former employer was. However, Haley went out and got the guy who was probably the best 3-4 defensive coach available at this time. Add to that the fact that he has 5 (count them 1,2,3,4,FIVE) superbowl rings in which he was the defensive coordinator for three of them. As you stated in your article and I referenced earlier, your source said he was a TRUE defensive coordinator for those three superbowls, installing the game plan and calling the games.


With these two hires Haley seemingly hired the best coaches available putting his own ego aside. Frankly, great leaders are not afraid to bring in really strong people to work for them. They are comfortable enough in their own skin to bring in other big egos and big resumes if they believe it will make the team better. I’m not saying Haley is a great leader or that he ever will be. I’m saying these hirings have the makings of helping him get there and he should be applauded for it. At least that’s what NATIONAL JASON WHITLOCK would have said.

salame
01-14-2010, 01:57 PM
http://memegenerator.net/Instances/Cool-Dog-Hey-Cool-story-bro41.jpg

Reaper16
01-14-2010, 02:01 PM
tl;dr

MoreLemonPledge
01-14-2010, 02:01 PM
I didn't read it, but I'm assuming the LOCAL WHITLOCK finally overpowered and ate the NATIONAL WHITLOCK. Get it? Because he's a large man...

Aw, fuck it.


http://cdn1.knowyourmeme.com/i/20854/original/Riveting_tale_chap.jpg

Mr. Laz
01-14-2010, 02:02 PM
hey man ... don't see you too much around her anymore.

Reerun_KC
01-14-2010, 02:04 PM
Whats the Chances that Nick or GoChiefs steal the story and post it in premium on WIPE?

Earthling
01-14-2010, 02:04 PM
Most definitely!!:thumb:

Gonzo
01-14-2010, 02:08 PM
http://i45.tinypic.com/34slzkh.gif

ClevelandBronco
01-14-2010, 02:09 PM
Folks, that was alphaman's e-mail response to Jason Whitlock.

One of these gentlemen is offered money in exchange for his opinions. The other gets casino cash.

Alphaman
01-14-2010, 02:57 PM
Folks, that was alphaman's e-mail response to Jason Whitlock.

One of these gentlemen is offered money in exchange for his opinions. The other gets casino cash.

ROFL:clap::doh!:

LOL!!! Sad but true!


:deevee:

beach tribe
01-14-2010, 02:57 PM
Good write up. Nice points.

beach tribe
01-14-2010, 02:58 PM
Folks, that was alphaman's e-mail response to Jason Whitlock.

One of these gentlemen is offered money in exchange for his opinions. The other gets casino cash.

One is genuine, the other is not.

Take a guess which is which.

Reaper16
01-14-2010, 03:01 PM
Folks, that was alphaman's e-mail response to Jason Whitlock.

One of these gentlemen is offered money in exchange for his opinions. The other gets casino cash.
Yes. That is how it should be too.

blaise
01-14-2010, 03:30 PM
If you really want Whitlock to read that you should have gone back and cut about 40% of it.

patteeu
01-14-2010, 03:35 PM
Excellent response, Alphaman. :thumb:

Otter
01-14-2010, 03:38 PM
Jason "Jerry Springer" Whitlock

Reerun_KC
01-14-2010, 03:41 PM
Jason "Jerry Springer" Whitlock

Jason "Stephen A Smith Racists wannabe" Whitlock

gblowfish
01-14-2010, 03:42 PM
Not sure why you chose to YELL AT HIM so often...

patteeu
01-14-2010, 03:42 PM
Jason "Stephen A Smith Racists wannabe" Whitlock

Isn't there some history between Jason and Stephen A Smith that would argue against that characterization?

Pants
01-14-2010, 03:44 PM
Very nice. It was actually a lot more interesting to read than the abortion of a piece Whitlock wrote.

Alphaman
01-14-2010, 03:50 PM
If you really want Whitlock to read that you should have gone back and cut about 40% of it.

Yeah I agree with that.

CosmicPal
01-14-2010, 03:51 PM
I agree with what you said for I too feel the same sentiment. Sh*tlock is a cynic with an over-inflated ego. Unfortunately, I very much doubt he reads it.

I don't mind writers being controversial and Sh*tlock used to be just that. Lately though, he's come off as a major f*cking whiner. And that's just sad- 'cause while some people like controversy, almost nobody likes a whiner.

Saulbadguy
01-14-2010, 03:54 PM
tl;dr

this

GoHuge
01-14-2010, 04:09 PM
I emailed him after some hate column he wrote saying I was done reading his shit. To my surpise he emailed me back in like ten minutes saying "sorry to see you go. God bless, J" Fucker is out there...
Posted via Mobile Device

38yrsfan
01-14-2010, 04:24 PM
Surprised that he responded

kc rush
01-14-2010, 05:01 PM
If you really want Whitlock to read that you should have gone back and cut about 40% of it.

or slipped it into a Gates menu.

MahiMike
01-14-2010, 05:10 PM
atsa verry nicea.

Halfcan
01-14-2010, 05:31 PM
good one!

Micjones
01-14-2010, 05:48 PM
GREAT work sir. Excellent piece.

Deberg_1990
01-14-2010, 05:52 PM
What do you guys want him to write???

Its just his opinion. No better than mine or yours. Who cares if i dont always agree with him??

Extra Point
01-14-2010, 05:52 PM
Good points, but I think Whitlock was drowning himself in those distractive Cheetos after the third paragraph.

OnTheWarpath15
01-14-2010, 06:13 PM
What do you guys want him to write???

Its just his opinion. No better than mine or yours. Who cares if i dont always agree with him??

People don't get it, and they choose not to get it.

Whitlock's job isn't to report facts. He's not a reporter.

Honestly, it's really not even to promote his own opinion, though people think it is.

His job is to get people to read. And the best way to do that is incite a reaction.

And by the looks of things around here - people who supposedly have "tuned him out" yet KEEP READING - he's doing a damn good job.

DeezNutz
01-14-2010, 06:16 PM
People don't get it, and they choose not to get it.

Whitlock's job isn't to report facts. He's not a reporter.

Honestly, it's really not even to promote his own opinion, though people think it is.

His job is to get people to read. And the best way to do that is incite a reaction.

And by the looks of things around here - people who supposedly have "tuned him out" yet KEEP READING - he's doing a damn good job.

While true, The Star certainly wants readers (and thus advertising dollars). I don't agree that Whitlock is typically trying for a reaction.

I think he gives his opinion. Nothing more, most of the time.

The catch is that the newspaper has to hire someone interesting enough in the first place who will generate an audience.