Chiefs Whitlock- It’s OK to question Pioli and the Chiefs - Page 5

C-Mac · 03-08-2009, 08:16 AM

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.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 03-08-2009, 05:04 PM

I'm not going to necessarily question Pioli at this point and time, as it's too early in the game to do so.

That said, I will damn sure pull out the Scale of Judgment when the season is over. It's fair, it's right, and it WILL be done.

tk13 · 03-08-2009, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

His assistant coaches, I 100% agree. However, the front office people so far have been successful. Atlanta had a great season this year.

That doesn't mean everything's going to go perfect, but we're a bit different than the Weis, Saban, Crennel, or Mangini situations. We at least got a GM and coach from the same tree, not a GM trying to pick an apple off the Patriots success.

New England's personnel people seem to know what they're doing... and while Belichick's assistants haven't done well, some of Parcells assistants (Belichick, Payton, Sparano) have done well, hopefully Haley follows in their mold.

Messier · 03-08-2009, 05:41 PM

I don't think the question is, is it ok to question pioli? Of course it's ok to question Pioli, but I ask question him for what? He's been here a month and a half, he's hired a coach and made what most consider a good trade. We're still over a month away from the draft. I don't need to know it's alright to question pioli, I just how you can yet.

Whitlock questions him because he isn't talking to the media. I don't know what fans have to question yet.

Mojo Jojo · 03-08-2009, 05:45 PM

Quote:

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,

jAZ...
I really do respect most of your posts. But you must be honest the Cassel "conference call" blew up in Pioli's face. Most posters here expect better because if we don't then it is CP ver.2.0 The media also needs to hold the Chiefs to a higher level than before.

**jAZ** · 03-08-2009, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo Jojo

jAZ...
I really do respect most of your posts. But you must be honest the Cassel "conference call" blew up in Pioli's face. Most posters here expect better because if we don't then it is CP ver.2.0 The media also needs to hold the Chiefs to a higher level than before.

I miss the "conference call" reference. Maybe I'm missing something bigger. But I am certain it's far to early to judge anything.

milkman · 03-08-2009, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

I don't think the question is, is it ok to question pioli? Of course it's ok to question Pioli, but I ask question him for what? He's been here a month and a half, he's hired a coach and made what most consider a good trade. We're still over a month away from the draft. I don't need to know it's alright to question pioli, I just how you can yet.

Whitlock questions him because he isn't talking to the media. I don't know what fans have to question yet.

Here's a question.

Did he trade for Cassel because he thinks he's potentially the best QB option available, or just the safest available?

Did he hire Haley because he was the best candidate, or because he was so methodical in his evaluation of Herman ****ing Edwards that Haley was the only remaining viable candidate?

WilliamTheIrish · 03-08-2009, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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.

Nobody is questioning the vast majority of sports writers. People are questioning the motives of a guy who criticizes other "electronic" media members (of which he was once a part, and of course, quit) that he deems unworthy, while trying to maximize his importance. People question a man who doesn't really do any reporting, he makes obversations. Hell, TMZ at least tells you up front they're are sensationaists.

Good luck with the career Sammy. It's a crowded field.

Mojo Jojo · 03-08-2009, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jAZ

I miss the "conference call" reference. Maybe I'm missing something bigger. But I am certain it's far to early to judge anything.

Because you may have missed it....

The Chiefs had a media conference call with Cassel; because he couldn't be there. However, during the call Matt said he was in the same building as the reporters and wasn't allowed to meet with them. The TV cameras ran down the hall a got footage of him leaving another room where he called from.

If Carl had done the same thing this board explodes. I just hope we don't give someone a free pass because he is the new guy.

Messier · 03-08-2009, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Here's a question.

Did he trade for Cassel because he thinks he's potentially the best QB option available, or just the safest available?

Did he hire Haley because he was the best candidate, or because he was so methodical in his evaluation of Herman ****ing Edwards that Haley was the only remaining viable candidate?

I don't know. He said with the Haley hiring that he wanted him for awhile. And pioli said when he was hired how much he liked Cassel, so my guess is he thought they both were the best available. Maybe I feel that way because I agree with both moves. I don't question the reason for either move, they both make sense to me. How do you feel?

beavis · 03-08-2009, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Bad Guy

What does Pioli need to publically explain? He obviously loves Cassel - he gushed over him during the introductory press conference. He also said that the HC would be the voice of the franchise.

This article reeks of a pissed-off journalist who has been completely shut out.

This.

Whitlock D-U-N.

milkman · 03-08-2009, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Messier

I don't know. He said with the Haley hiring that he wanted him for awhile. And pioli said when he was hired how much he liked Cassel, so my guess is he thought they both were the best available. Maybe I feel that way because I agree with both moves. I don't question the reason for either move, they both make sense to me. How do you feel?

I think it is very possible that Haley is a guy he had his eye on since he has history with him, but I believe that Cassel is the "safe" option at QB.

CupidStunt · 03-08-2009, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mojo Jojo

Because you may have missed it....

The Chiefs had a media conference call with Cassel; because he couldn't be there. However, during the call Matt said he was in the same building as the reporters and wasn't allowed to meet with them. The TV cameras ran down the hall a got footage of him leaving another room where he called from.

If Carl had done the same thing this board explodes. I just hope we don't give someone a free pass because he is the new guy.

Couldn't care less what his publicity policy is. Do what Peterson couldn't -- WIN -- and he's golden.

Sweet Daddy Hate · 03-08-2009, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

I think it is very possible that Haley is a guy he had his eye on since he has history with him, but I believe that Cassel is the "safe" option at QB.

Time( and the draft )will of course tell, but I see Cassel as the stop-gap/Bledsoe.

And I've seen nor heard anything so far to make me feel otherwise.

Messier · 03-08-2009, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

I think it is very possible that Haley is a guy he had his eye on since he has history with him, but I believe that Cassel is the "safe" option at QB.

I guess Cassel is the safe pick in that it's more likely he will be a long term good starting Qb than anyone in the draft. Perhaps his ceiling isn't has high as either Sanchez or Stafford, but I'm willing to take that chance, but like I said I like the move and feel he'll be better than any QB in the draft.

Mojo Jojo · 03-08-2009, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CupidStunt

Couldn't care less what his publicity policy is. Do what Peterson couldn't -- WIN -- and he's golden.

I'm just saying...the man has never won a game without BB or TB yet if he acts like Carl he is off-limits to this board. Be willing to question!!!!

03-08-2009, 08:16 AM
C-Mac Lurker Extraordinaire Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Wally World Casino cash: $-1136301	Whitlock- It’s OK to question Pioli and the Chiefs 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.
Posts: 5,661

03-08-2009, 05:04 PM	#61
Sweet Daddy Hate Unsparing Join Date: Aug 2008 Casino cash: $10004900	I'm not going to necessarily question Pioli at this point and time, as it's too early in the game to do so. That said, I will damn sure pull out the Scale of Judgment when the season is over. It's fair, it's right, and it WILL be done. __________________ 1. Merciless, severe. 2. Given freely and generously. 100% refusal to overrate 20 year Head Coaches with ZERO **ing rings as a Head Coach. CP's Official Professor of 'Dem Blues for 2019/2020!**
Posts: 77,135

03-08-2009, 05:41 PM	#63
Messier MVP Join Date: Mar 2004 Casino cash: $10005050	I don't think the question is, is it ok to question pioli? Of course it's ok to question Pioli, but I ask question him for what? He's been here a month and a half, he's hired a coach and made what most consider a good trade. We're still over a month away from the draft. I don't need to know it's alright to question pioli, I just how you can yet. Whitlock questions him because he isn't talking to the media. I don't know what fans have to question yet.
Posts: 7,610