Whitlock- It’s OK to question Pioli and the Chiefs

[C-Mac]

It’s OK to question Pioli and the Chiefs

Wednesday afternoon, on my drive on I-70 to watch the Tigers and the Sooners tangle, I passed the time listening to sports-talk radio.

I find one of our local stations unlisten-Neal-able, so you can assume which station and which show entertained me along the highway. And you can guess which host nearly made me drive off the highway.

The New Don Fortune expressed his disinterest in needing access and information from our New Carl Peterson, Chiefs general manager Scott Pioli. The New Don and his trusty sidekick, Mad Jack Harry, spent several minutes telling their listeners that we should trust Pioli implicitly and not waste emotion or energy worrying whether Pioli reveals himself, his plans or his players to the media.

Having worked in sports-talk radio, I’m aware the discipline requires a dramatic and healthy loosening of journalistic standards. But basic common sense and backbone are allowed and occasionally encouraged when hosting a radio show.

Supporting the new regime does not equate to rejecting the primary (and redeeming) role of the media.

It’s our job to acquire information and pass it along to you. Based on what we’ve seen from the Bill Belichick era in New England and our first two months with Pioli, gathering pertinent and enlightening information about the Chiefs is going to be rather difficult.

The Patriots, under Belichick and Pioli, reached the conclusion that too much media access disrupts locker-room chemistry and undermines the voice of the head coach. In New England, Belichick has turned the Boston media into an easy-to-play foil for his players.

He’s brainwashed his players into believing the media are evil, incompetent and stirrers of chaos. Obviously, we are not perfect. A collection of human beings cannot be flawless. There are instances when individual moments of incompetence make the media appear wicked or solely interested in controversy.

But overall, we attempt to be a watchdog of those with power. When we fail to play that role, generally speaking, terrible things happen. The Iraq War is a worst-case scenario. We trusted our president implicitly, led the cheers when we declared war on Iraq and declined to demand answers to difficult questions. Hundreds of billions of dollars later, and with our economy in collapse, we now blame poor, minority homeowners for the fall of our society.

I apologize. I digress.

Let me give you a worst-case scenario in the sports world.

If, in an attempt to duplicate New England’s three-Super Bowls dynasty, we neglect our journalistic, democracy-ensuring duty to challenge Pioli, there’s a far better chance that he replicates Carl Peterson’s Kansas City era than Belichick’s New England one.

Unchallenged leaders are dictators and quickly turn unethical.

For years, Kevin Kietzman and Jack Harry whined on radio that Peterson, in attempts to have them fired, harassed their former television bosses. Kietzman and Harry complained about Peterson’s heavy-handed tactics with players, their agents and their families.

Peterson acquired his nickname, King Carl, the old-fashioned way. We rolled over and gave him a kingdom. When he ushered in an era of winning after years of mediocrity, he treated the media as though his decisions and actions were above question. He became complacent and stale.

Scott Pioli is a human being. He’s capable of making the same mistakes as you, I or King Carl.

Sometimes people misidentify why they’re successful. Belichick and Pioli think the New England locker room is special partly because Belichick and the players have made the local media irrelevant. Belichick and Pioli believe in CIA-like secrets.

I’m sure there’s some value in all of it. But football isn’t all that hard to figure out. Find yourself a tough, talented quarterback who is willing to stand in the pocket and deliver the football under pressure, pray that he doesn’t get injured, and you’ll win a lot of games.

The Sixburgh Steelers won four titles with Terry Bradshaw and two with Ben Roethlisberger. They’ve had three different young coaches lead them to those six titles. John Elway took the Broncos to five Super Bowls and won two. Kurt Warner has played in three Super Bowls. Brett Favre played in two. Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb win a lot of football games. Did I mention Joe Montana, Troy Aikman and Tom Brady?

In his first big decision as general manager of the Kansas City Chiefs, Scott Pioli traded the 34th pick in the draft for Matt Cassel, a backup in college and in the pros. Because New England slapped Cassel with the franchise tag, Clark Hunt is going to pay Cassel a lot of money in 2009 or give him a big-ticket, long-term contract.

Everyone pretty much agrees the move makes sense for the Chiefs. Pioli still needs to publicly explain it, and it’s our job to seek a detailed explanation. We shouldn’t accept a brief statement on a press release.

It is fun and fashionable to beat up on the media. In our arrogance, we have refused to adequately police, examine and reshape ourselves. We’re paying a heavy price for our failure. We’re losing credibility.

It’s in your best interest to demand better from us. Don’t be fooled into believing we should go away or act as a propaganda machine for some newly-elected, popular-in-comparison-to-Peterson (or Bush) leader.

[StcChief]

Whitlock is slowly leaving town. a welcome change. his King Carl meal ticket is over.

[RealSNR]

Whitlock is saying I CAN question Pioli?

NO SHIT SHERLOCK.

Should I question Pioli at this point, after his new team hasn't even taken an offseason snap in PRACTICE?

Whitlock is obviously hurt by all this. It's also hilarious that he doesn't bring up the fact that Clark Hunt was doing the exact same shit when/before he hired Pioli. Didn't leak out ANYTHING about any possible hires or how the deals were coming... NOTHING. And yet Pioli is the one responsible for Whitlock having nothing to report?

Whitlock is obviously crying because he can't bitch about Carl, LJ, or race relations right now. And he won't get a chance to for awhile. He won't have any decent column with any pertinent information until the ****ing draft. He's upset by this, and this where the article came from. He really needs to stop being a fat crybaby.

[Bowser]

What a crybaby article.

[Brock]

Waaah, lack of access

[wild1]

i remember reading that article Whitlock wrote after Carl was canned, where he downplayed Carl and he's nemesis relationship, calling Carl nothing more than "a handy foil". Bullcrap... he's lost half his material. He'll have to go back to criticizing NBA players for acting like thugs, in a city that cares nothing about the NBA.

Having him lined up aside a real writer like Posnanski is a stark contrast

[htismaqe]

Originally Posted by C-Mac

Having worked in sports-talk radio, I’m aware the discipline requires a dramatic and healthy loosening of journalistic standards.

It all sounds well and good, Jason. Until one considers that you're a COLUMNIST, not a reporter. You get paid to do the SAME THING you're accusing Keitzman of doing.

[whoman69]

I think Whitlock has only made part of a point. It is the media's job to question things that are going on. However when they are questioning only to question they lose relevance.

I can see the need for secrecy to keep our opponents in the dark, but our fans too? Why won't they tell us which coaches are going where. Why can't they tell us what the situation is with hiring a DC? Are they protecting our coaches? I'd have to say no, they probably already know what their roles will be. Are we hiding our scheme? Wow that will work until we take our first snaps in practice.

Any organization that lacks the confidence to stand up to a little media criticism probably are doing things they shouldn't be doing. If they feel that their decisions can't stand up to scrutiny they must not have too much confidence in those decisions. Any coach or GM who wakes up and questions what they are doing because of an article in the KC Star or on talk radio probably shouldn't be in the position they are in.

[jAZ]

Originally Posted by Mojo Jojo

There is a difference between question and criticize. I don't think most people want to criticize Pioli at this point, but they may to to question the way he goes about doing things. We question the way Sprint is run...we question elected officials all the time, so why can't fans, ticket holders, media question the way the Chiefs are being run?

To be honest they blew that whole Cassel phone call, and got busted doing it. If Carl had done the same thing people would demand he be fired.

There is a difference, but we are getting a lot of criticism, not questioning around here.

Questioning is "I have no idea what he's doing, but it's not fair to judge yet because he's just getting started and he's got a great record".

Criticism is any form of "Pioli = Carl Peterson" at this point. Whether it's masked as "Cassel = Bono" or "our New Carl Peterson" or "it is the same old song" or whatever.

And criticism at this point is un-fugging-reasonable.

I don't know your intentions,

[Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan]

As soon as I saw it was a Fatlock article I didn't even bother reading it.

How that guy still has a job still fascinates me.

[ChiefsCountry]

Actually I think its perfectly okay to question Pioli, judging by the other teams hires from the Pats it looks like Belichick was the reason for the success. I'm still skeptical on him.

[Basileus777]

Embarrassing article. It's nothing more than self-indulgent whining.

[RealSNR]

Originally Posted by jAZ

There is a difference, but we are getting a lot of criticism, not questioning around here.

Questioning is "I have no idea what he's doing, but it's not fair to judge yet because he's just getting started and he's got a great record".

Criticism is any form of "Pioli = Carl Peterson" at this point. Whether it's masked as "Cassel = Bono" or "our New Carl Peterson" or "it is the same old song" or whatever.

And criticism at this point is un-fugging-reasonable.

I don't know your intentions,

This.

Like I said before, we haven't seen this team even take a snap of offseason practice. No way you can make judgments on the type of team that will be fielded during Pioli's tenure here based on one trade and the re-signing of a couple cheap players from last year.

[Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan]

Questioning a GM of a 2-14 team and wondering what he's doing to improve it = fine

Whining and coming across as a self-indulgent 4 year old girl = Embarrassing

You can ask any question in the world. Unless you have subpoena power, no one has to answer you or go into any depth if they do.

Get used to it.

[Hammock Parties]

Awesome. In so many ways.

[Sam Hall]

I can't believe I agree with Whitlock. Yes, I'm a sports writer. People can rip the media all they want, but those same people enjoy reading the stories. The KC media is trying to fulfill your daily Chiefs fix. I don't like some of the people on ESPN, but the vast majority of sports writers do a good job.