It's been almost impossible to ignore and unless you've been living under a rock for the past couple of months you've heard Chiefs fans grumble in their demands for change at One Arrowhead Drive.
Now that we're just a couple of games away from the end of the season you have to believe that if it hasn't happened by now, pretty sure it's not coming before the season ends. That didn't stop many Chiefs fans from waking up Monday's with a Christmas morning-like giddiness and checking this site in hopes of the BIG news out of Arrowhead they so desperately wanted.
That never happened, obviously.
The question becomes what is the benefit to making this kind of move in the middle of the season?
Is it to appease the fans? I can't think that'd be the case because where do you draw the line on that one? The next time fans are unhappy about something they'll demand __________. You could be setting a precedent that would be hard to control in the future.
Is it to show that you must be held accountable for your actions?
This one I can kind of understand for a couple of reasons. The first being Stanford Routt and the second being Steve Breaston. Both of these guys have been held accountable for something. What that is we may never know. You can debate their play on the field and the original decision to bring them (mainly Routt) to KC in the first place. But they're still being held to a standard that they obviously didn't adhere to for those making the decisions, and that's where I have a problem.
Maybe they were/are cancers to the team, but some could argue that the two running the players (Crennel) and organization (Pioli) are equally as cancerous to the Chiefs. Where is their accountability? Maybe that happens at the end of the season and they're treated with a respect they didn't show a couple of players that were thought to be key contributors to the Chiefs 2012 season.
Besides just making you personally feel better, what benefits are there to mid-season firings of either of these guys by Clark Hunt?