Whitlock: If Royals stopped losing, Chiefs wouldn't be winners

tk13 · 04-10-2005, 01:07 AM

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansas...s/11356107.htm

If the Royals stopped losing, Chiefs wouldn't be winners

JASON WHITLOCK

Carl Peterson mouthpiece Bob Gretz made an interesting point on the Kansas City Chiefs' official Web site last week.

Gretz expressed the sentiment that the men and women working inside Arrowhead Stadium would love nothing more than to see their Sports Complex neighbors, the Kansas City Royals, experience on-field success this season.

The Chiefs are tired of baking under media and fan scrutiny all by themselves. Peterson would like a little relief.

You know, I'm halfway sympathetic toward Peterson. OK, not really. But Gretz does have a point.

Kansas City has turned into a unique pro sports market. The reality is we have one major professional sports franchise, the Chiefs, and a team that participates in a major sports league that is treated by its fan base and media as a nonprofit charity group, the Royals.

In terms of pro sports, you could argue we're Jacksonville, the only other NFL market that doesn't have an NBA, MLB or NHL franchise. I consider Green Bay part of the Milwaukee market.

What separates us from Jacksonville is we've created a big-league sports media market. Seriously. We have a nationally respected newspaper sports section, a cable TV network dedicated to sports, two all-sports talk radio stations and Jack Harry melting down every Sunday night about the escalating prices of Chiefs tickets, prune juice and cigarettes.

I know many of you think the Kansas City media market is soft compared with “major” cities. You're wrong. I travel the country quite extensively. Yes, New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia and Boston have a more in-your-face brand of media and fans. But other than that, our media are as consistently tough on teams as any market.

The difference is we only have one professional sports team we whip on. The Division I football and basketball programs in our coverage area — Missouri, Kansas and Kansas State — get scrutinized and criticized more heavily than the Kansas City Royals.

The Royals get treated like UMKC basketball.

Is it fair and appropriate? Probably not.

But it's also not a cause to have sympathy for Peterson and the Chiefs.

The main reason Peterson and the Chiefs are perceived as “successful” right now is because of the Royals' incompetence. If the Royals were consistently average — just like the Chiefs of the last eight years — Peterson wouldn't have a waiting list for season tickets, nor would they be selling out Arrowhead Stadium.

The Chiefs are a hot item in this town because that's all we have to talk about in terms of professional sports. Arrowhead isn't sold out because of Peterson's brilliance. It's not sold out because fans believe the Chiefs are going to the Super Bowl every year.

You see, the Chiefs should be careful of what they wish. Sports fans here have given up on the Royals. For years, in order to excuse their ineptness, the Royals have sold fans the small-market mentality that the team can't field a legitimate product because of baseball economics. Fans bought the message and quit being overly passionate about the team.

For a different reason — primarily because Peterson has stayed too long as general manager — Chiefs fans are ready to abandon some of their passion. They've eaten enough barbecue and drank enough beer at the Arrowhead Stadium parking lot for two lifetimes. They've contemplated life without the Chiefs. Taking their season ticket money and buying a big screen and the NFL cable TV package has crossed their minds.

What has stopped them?

Nonstop, year-round media coverage of the Chiefs in the newspaper, on TV and on the radio. The Chiefs are shoved down Kansas Citians' ear passages. You have to be up on Chiefs gossip in order to converse comfortably at any KC social gathering.

Rather than whine about the media spotlight, Peterson should send members of the media and the Kansas City Royals thank-you cards. We cover the Chiefs like they're the New England Patriots, winners of three of the last four Super Bowls. And the truth is that since Marty Schottenheimer left seven years ago, the Chiefs have only been slightly better than the Royals.

A couple of decent seasons by the Royals would allow KC sports fans to view the Peterson-led Chiefs objectively. That wouldn't be a good thing for King Carl.

Hammock Parties · 04-10-2005, 01:30 AM

Logical · 04-10-2005, 01:30 AM

Excellent article by Jason other than his promoting of the Star Sports section. Pretty much absolutely correct.

Hammock Parties · 04-10-2005, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlad Logicslav

Excellent article by Jason other than his promoting of the Star Sports section. Pretty much absolutely correct.

And extremely depressing.

VonneMarie · 04-10-2005, 02:08 AM

That's completely sad.

Hammock Parties · 04-10-2005, 02:11 AM

We're going to win the Super Bowl.

Sure-Oz · 04-10-2005, 02:19 AM

Extremely sad and true, that really sucks.

beer bacon · 04-10-2005, 02:24 AM

Why does he have to bash on the Roos. They were quite good this year in men's basketball

RedDread · 04-10-2005, 02:30 AM

yeah, he should have used mizzou as an example

Priestgets30TDs · 04-10-2005, 03:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vlad Logicslav

Excellent article by Jason other than his promoting of the Star Sports section. Pretty much absolutely correct.

That's exactly what I thought when I read the article.

mcan · 04-10-2005, 04:04 AM

More BS.

You want to know why professional football is huge? It's because it's a well run league with people in charge that make decisions that positively effect the way the game is played and watched...

BUT. There is one GIGANTIC reason that pro football is giant right now, and pro baseball is not, and it's not because the Royals suck... That wouldn't explain the NATIONAL mentality that mirrors the KC market.

That reason is this:
VIDEO GAMES.

Since the early ninties, an entire generation of football fans have grown up knowing more about the game and knowing more about their teams because of games like Tecmo Super Bowl and later Madden football. Anybody 26 years old or younger played these games right when they were first discovering sports on TV, and that's where the (age group) market for football fans is right now. My Dad is a football fan, but not like me and my friends (all of us grew up with Nintendo and Sega and Playstation). The Chiefs could suck for 12 years, and we'd all still love them because we fell in love with the game and the team BEFORE we started watching real games regularly...

Jason's argument is this, the coverage creates the interest... That argument doesn't make any sense at all, and the moment we lose interest, they'll stop they're coverage. That will happen in about 15 years, when the new youngsters step up with a different pass-time. I guarentee it will have something to do with what video game is popular RIGHT NOW...

htismaqe · 04-10-2005, 05:11 AM

The main reason Peterson and the Chiefs are perceived as “successful” right now is because of the Royals' incompetence.

I'd like to know who Jason is talking about. I listen to the radio and read message boards. I don't hear/read anyone there calling the Chiefs "successful" - quite the opposite.

I mean, I'm often told I'm one of the biggest homers here, and even I don't consider the Chiefs successful.

**Nzoner** · 04-10-2005, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rufusmaqe

The main reason Peterson and the Chiefs are perceived as “successful” right now is because of the Royals' incompetence.

I'd like to know who Jason is talking about. I listen to the radio and read message boards. I don't hear/read anyone there calling the Chiefs "successful" - quite the opposite.

I mean, I'm often told I'm one of the biggest homers here, and even I don't consider the Chiefs successful.

I took the successful part as meaning in terms of dollars.

**HemiEd** · 04-10-2005, 05:52 AM

Once again Sh#tlock is trying to take the credit for the Chiefs success! Fug Him! The NFL is Successful because they make small market teams able to compete, MLB does not. Maybe if EK was still here he could afford the $200,000,000.00 salaries to keep up. The Twins have been successful and the Royals are trying to follow the model. Screw Whitlock, once again he had to find something to write about IMO.

RedDread · 04-10-2005, 10:44 AM

That's true mcan, one reason I'm glad the chiefs are making some serious offseason moves this year is that our D in madden would be rated in the 60's otherwise...maybe we can shoot for mid 70's...or dare I say it..80?

It's always fun to pick up madden before the season starts and play with all our offseason FA acquisitions before they ever take the field

04-10-2005, 01:07 AM
tk13 ... Join Date: Nov 2001 Casino cash: $1642500	Whitlock: If Royals stopped losing, Chiefs wouldn't be winners http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansas...s/11356107.htm If the Royals stopped losing, Chiefs wouldn't be winners JASON WHITLOCK Carl Peterson mouthpiece Bob Gretz made an interesting point on the Kansas City Chiefs' official Web site last week. Gretz expressed the sentiment that the men and women working inside Arrowhead Stadium would love nothing more than to see their Sports Complex neighbors, the Kansas City Royals, experience on-field success this season. The Chiefs are tired of baking under media and fan scrutiny all by themselves. Peterson would like a little relief. You know, I'm halfway sympathetic toward Peterson. OK, not really. But Gretz does have a point. Kansas City has turned into a unique pro sports market. The reality is we have one major professional sports franchise, the Chiefs, and a team that participates in a major sports league that is treated by its fan base and media as a nonprofit charity group, the Royals. In terms of pro sports, you could argue we're Jacksonville, the only other NFL market that doesn't have an NBA, MLB or NHL franchise. I consider Green Bay part of the Milwaukee market. What separates us from Jacksonville is we've created a big-league sports media market. Seriously. We have a nationally respected newspaper sports section, a cable TV network dedicated to sports, two all-sports talk radio stations and Jack Harry melting down every Sunday night about the escalating prices of Chiefs tickets, prune juice and cigarettes. I know many of you think the Kansas City media market is soft compared with “major” cities. You're wrong. I travel the country quite extensively. Yes, New York, New Jersey, Philadelphia and Boston have a more in-your-face brand of media and fans. But other than that, our media are as consistently tough on teams as any market. The difference is we only have one professional sports team we whip on. The Division I football and basketball programs in our coverage area — Missouri, Kansas and Kansas State — get scrutinized and criticized more heavily than the Kansas City Royals. The Royals get treated like UMKC basketball. Is it fair and appropriate? Probably not. But it's also not a cause to have sympathy for Peterson and the Chiefs. The main reason Peterson and the Chiefs are perceived as “successful” right now is because of the Royals' incompetence. If the Royals were consistently average — just like the Chiefs of the last eight years — Peterson wouldn't have a waiting list for season tickets, nor would they be selling out Arrowhead Stadium. The Chiefs are a hot item in this town because that's all we have to talk about in terms of professional sports. Arrowhead isn't sold out because of Peterson's brilliance. It's not sold out because fans believe the Chiefs are going to the Super Bowl every year. You see, the Chiefs should be careful of what they wish. Sports fans here have given up on the Royals. For years, in order to excuse their ineptness, the Royals have sold fans the small-market mentality that the team can't field a legitimate product because of baseball economics. Fans bought the message and quit being overly passionate about the team. For a different reason — primarily because Peterson has stayed too long as general manager — Chiefs fans are ready to abandon some of their passion. They've eaten enough barbecue and drank enough beer at the Arrowhead Stadium parking lot for two lifetimes. They've contemplated life without the Chiefs. Taking their season ticket money and buying a big screen and the NFL cable TV package has crossed their minds. What has stopped them? Nonstop, year-round media coverage of the Chiefs in the newspaper, on TV and on the radio. The Chiefs are shoved down Kansas Citians' ear passages. You have to be up on Chiefs gossip in order to converse comfortably at any KC social gathering. Rather than whine about the media spotlight, Peterson should send members of the media and the Kansas City Royals thank-you cards. We cover the Chiefs like they're the New England Patriots, winners of three of the last four Super Bowls. And the truth is that since Marty Schottenheimer left seven years ago, the Chiefs have only been slightly better than the Royals. A couple of decent seasons by the Royals would allow KC sports fans to view the Peterson-led Chiefs objectively. That wouldn't be a good thing for King Carl.
Posts: 55,016

04-10-2005, 01:30 AM	#2
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4350478	__________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,935

04-10-2005, 01:30 AM	#3
Logical Screw U if U can't take a joke Join Date: Aug 2000 Casino cash: $10004900	Excellent article by Jason other than his promoting of the Star Sports section. Pretty much absolutely correct.
Posts: 31,579

04-10-2005, 02:08 AM	#5
VonneMarie Don't look over here Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Kansas City, MO Casino cash: $10008987	That's completely sad.
Posts: 17,644

04-10-2005, 02:11 AM	#6
Hammock Parties I'll be back. Join Date: Nov 2002 Casino cash: $4350478	We're going to win the Super Bowl. __________________ Chiefs game films
Posts: 278,935

04-10-2005, 02:24 AM	#8
beer bacon WHAT Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Kansas City, MO Casino cash: $10019545	Why does he have to bash on the Roos. They were quite good this year in men's basketball
Posts: 9,301

04-10-2005, 02:30 AM	#9
RedDread Veteran Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Back in KC Casino cash: $10007771	yeah, he should have used mizzou as an example
Posts: 4,167

04-10-2005, 04:04 AM	#11
mcan Apr 13,1949 – Dec 15, 2011 Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Kansas City, MO Casino cash: $9996085	More BS. You want to know why professional football is huge? It's because it's a well run league with people in charge that make decisions that positively effect the way the game is played and watched... BUT. There is one GIGANTIC reason that pro football is giant right now, and pro baseball is not, and it's not because the Royals suck... That wouldn't explain the NATIONAL mentality that mirrors the KC market. That reason is this: VIDEO GAMES. Since the early ninties, an entire generation of football fans have grown up knowing more about the game and knowing more about their teams because of games like Tecmo Super Bowl and later Madden football. Anybody 26 years old or younger played these games right when they were first discovering sports on TV, and that's where the (age group) market for football fans is right now. My Dad is a football fan, but not like me and my friends (all of us grew up with Nintendo and Sega and Playstation). The Chiefs could suck for 12 years, and we'd all still love them because we fell in love with the game and the team BEFORE we started watching real games regularly... Jason's argument is this, the coverage creates the interest... That argument doesn't make any sense at all, and the moment we lose interest, they'll stop they're coverage. That will happen in about 15 years, when the new youngsters step up with a different pass-time. I guarentee it will have something to do with what video game is popular RIGHT NOW...
Posts: 3,761

04-10-2005, 05:11 AM	#12
htismaqe 'Tis my eye! Join Date: Aug 2000 Location: Chiefsplanet Casino cash: $10269900	The main reason Peterson and the Chiefs are perceived as “successful” right now is because of the Royals' incompetence. I'd like to know who Jason is talking about. I listen to the radio and read message boards. I don't hear/read anyone there calling the Chiefs "successful" - quite the opposite. I mean, I'm often told I'm one of the biggest homers here, and even I don't consider the Chiefs successful.
Posts: 100,022

04-10-2005, 05:52 AM	#14
HemiEd Supporter Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Ozarks Casino cash: $2920564	Once again Sh#tlock is trying to take the credit for the Chiefs success! Fug Him! The NFL is Successful because they make small market teams able to compete, MLB does not. Maybe if EK was still here he could afford the $200,000,000.00 salaries to keep up. The Twins have been successful and the Royals are trying to follow the model. Screw Whitlock, once again he had to find something to write about IMO.
Posts: 33,562

04-10-2005, 10:44 AM	#15
RedDread Veteran Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Back in KC Casino cash: $10007771	That's true mcan, one reason I'm glad the chiefs are making some serious offseason moves this year is that our D in madden would be rated in the 60's otherwise...maybe we can shoot for mid 70's...or dare I say it..80? It's always fun to pick up madden before the season starts and play with all our offseason FA acquisitions before they ever take the field
Posts: 4,167