I'm Melting !!!I'm Melting !!!I have nothing personal against Carl Peterson, but that’s got nothing to do with the fact that I’m as happy as a dog with a new bone soaked in gravy. I’m happy for one reason – I’m a Chiefs fan! Peterson was a millstone around our neck for way too long and it is past time for his departure.

Earlier this season I wrote King Carl needs to go: Reason #1. I was planning Reason #2 - which included an analysis of draft picks over the years. I won’t have to do that now - fortunately. I’ve also written about the Chiefs historical failures in recent years – Lions and Tigers and Chiefs, Oh My! as well as Chiefs, 1-18. Yikes! And, of course, I’ve gone after Edwards directly with Herm vs the Field.

I haven’t had a chance to be happy about anything Chiefs related since we started this blog. I do now. I realized something was up at 4:10 p.m. yesterday when I heard fireworks and horns honking. Ok, that was just in my mind and on the radio, but I’m confident it was happening in tens of thousands of minds in KC.

Yesterday, Bradford wrote a very good piece on Peterson that was balanced and reminded the reader of the things Carl had done for the city. I can’t really argue with his points and there will be a time when I (and other fans) might look back on part of Carl’s tenure with some fondness. Perhaps that will happen in, say … oh… 2034. But, today is not that day. Today is for hammering the final nail in the coffin and that’s what I intend to do.

There is, of course, no possible way Peterson can be defended over the past couple years and almost no possible way to defend him over the past 10 years. And, although the Chiefs had regular season success in the 1990’s, it is still a fact that they have not won a playoff game since 1993 and only three of them in Peterson’s 20 seasons. I’ve dealt with those negatives in the other stories I’ve linked to. What I want to do now is to eliminate any “He was a good man.” last rites before anyone gets teary-eyed.

He is widely credited for filling Arrowhead stadium. I don’t disagree that he is responsible for converting the club into a winning team capable of drawing fans. That pretty much happened in the first two years he was here. Nevertheless, no single person can cause an NFL team to go from 4-11-1 to 11-5 in just two years. There are lots of issues that go into turnarounds in the NFL – and they happen constantly. But, I’m not going to dispute the fact that it was on his watch. What I am going to dispute is that the gains in attendance were uniquely due to him.

KC had an average attendance of only 51,000 in 1988. Two years later, it was 70K. That’s pretty fantastic except for one thing. It overlooks the fact that, at the time, the ratio of attendance to capacity level was incredibly bad at Arrowhead. I think it is fair to say… ANYTHING would have caused attendance to increase substantially. The NFL fill-capacity level has gone from 95% in the past to over 98% today. Virtually every stadium is either at capacity or extremely close – whether the team sucks or not. It was only a matter of time for Arrowhead to jump up to 70K. But, even if you refuse to dismiss the first two years as inevitable, the reality is that Kansas City has increased attendance 9.6% in the last 18 years. The NFL average is 8.7%. That’s a wash. What it means is that any legitimate good will Peterson got from increasing attendance was in the first two years. The rest is simply NFL average growth.

I also want to challenge the issue of Kansas City being fourth in attendance. So what? They have the third biggest stadium! An example of the fallacy of listing who has the highest attendance is to look at Indianapolis. In 2007, the club was listed at 103% of capacity and yet, they ranked dead last in the NFL in attendance. Simply going by raw numbers, one could argue their GM was doing a poor job. Well, maybe he should have shoe-horned in 104%. The point is that trying to eulogize Peterson based on attendance gains is an extremely weak argument – and it means nothing to me. Maybe it would have taken a few more years to get to 95% or 98% or 100%, but it would have gotten there just like it has everywhere else – including Detroit and Cincinnati.

The other issue is free-agency, coupled with the salary cap. Free-agency (Plan B) began in Peterson’s first season. It lasted four years until 1993 when Plan A took over. The salary cap began in 1994. Both of these were critical to small market teams. It leveled the playing field and allowed teams like the Chiefs to compete for, and retain, better players.

It’s just a fact that Kansas City was in a better bargaining position in the first half dozen years of Peterson than they were in the 80’s. As time went on, of course, the disparity between rich and poor began to grow because of huge local revenues which were not subject to revenue sharing. Consequently, the NFL voted against renewing the collective bargaining agreement with the player’s association as of 2010.

But, even though small markets have found they have problems competing with the Giants or Patriots, that wasn’t the case in the 90’s – a time when the Chiefs were a decent team.

Peterson benefitted from good timing in more ways than one. Most of the best players in 1990 were just entering their primes – especially on defense. He kept the group around for several more years – spackling the cracks with Marcus Allen, Joe Montana, etc. until 1997. And, except for an occasional bright spot, that was that.

So, the attendance issue, free-agency/salary cap and maturity of many of the young Chiefs at the time were all contributing factors in the success Peterson enjoyed in his first 9 years. However, in the eleven years hence, Kansas City has only made the playoffs twice – losing the first game in both. When the club went on an historic run of two wins and 21 losses, that was the kiss of death.

It’s a good day shovel some dirt.