Skip to content

Pioli’s limbo status is keeping him from playing musical chairs

Scott Pioli, Clark Hunt AP

If the Chiefs fire G.M. Scott Pioli, it’s unknown whether he’d draw interest for any of the current G.M. vacancies.  But until the Chiefs terminate him, the question remains moot.

And if, of course, he’s terminated once the music stops elsewhere, it will be too late for him to transition from one G.M. job to another — if another team is interested in hiring him.

He arguably would be better off if he’s fired later instead of sooner.  Then, he could get paid by the Chiefs for 2013 and lay the foundation for a return to a front office in 2014, instead of rushing toward any chair that may be open.

In contrast, it would be better for the Chiefs to make a move while the music is still playing.  This would increase the possibility of his buyout being reduced, if he ends up with a new job in the current hiring cycle.

Maybe that’s what the Chiefs are hoping to do.  By making it clear that Pioli could be fired, perhaps owner Clark Hunt hopes other teams will request permission to interview Pioli, in the hopes that someone will take his contract off Hunt’s hands.  If so, it would be a more subtle example of what the Jets did last year with offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer, clumsily hyping him for head-coaching jobs while having no intention of bringing him back.

Either way, Pioli is getting paid in 2013.  The question is whether he’ll be working for the Chiefs, for someone else, or not at all.

Permalink 16 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Arizona Cardinals, Carolina Panthers, Home, Jacksonville Jaguars, Kansas City Chiefs, New York Jets, Rumor Mill, San Diego Chargers
16 Responses to “Pioli’s limbo status is keeping him from playing musical chairs”
  1. yelix says: Jan 1, 2013 11:19 AM

    Clark’s strategy here is strange, but I love his attitude. Taking it upon himself to find a head coach who reports directly to him really goes against the “absentee owner” that most people think he is. I could tell in his interviews yesterday that he genuinely cares about the future of the franchise.

  2. gbatap says: Jan 1, 2013 11:34 AM

    Or maybe Clark Hunt has absolutely no intention of firing him.

  3. tednancy says: Jan 1, 2013 11:39 AM

    Don’t the Chiefs think they should be in the game for Pioli’s replacement if they are in fact planning to get rid of him??

    That Clark Hunt would jeopardize the future of the franchise in the hopes that someone else will pay Pioli is a bush-league move.

    Any NFL owner worth his weight in gold would simply doi what is best for his team, and not put what is (to him at least) chump change ahead of winning.

    The Chiefs? More like “The Cheaps”

  4. coachhowi says: Jan 1, 2013 11:42 AM

    just get rid of the guy he has been stripped of duties so fire him geez!!!

  5. rajbais says: Jan 1, 2013 11:42 AM

    Let him out of his misery Clark!! Then we’ll be out of ours!!!

  6. txxxchief says: Jan 1, 2013 11:46 AM

    Clark needs to axe Pioli now, end the pain for the team and fans and get to work rebuilding the organization. It’s time to get serious about winning!

  7. blogatron2000 says: Jan 1, 2013 11:52 AM

    Pioli has essentially been demoted from GM to player personnel guy for right now. If Clark’s coaching search turns up someone who wants full control (Cowher anyone?) then Pioli will get axed. Otherwise Pioli and the new coach will both report to Owner/GM Clark Hunt.

    Absolutely love what Clark is doing here.

  8. kattykathy says: Jan 1, 2013 12:13 PM

    Maybe Hunt has his eye on a coach in whom he will give control of personnel decisions??? Then he can keep Pioli on just for salary cap issues.

    Or maybe he is just hoping to reduce Pioli to irrelevent status, thus hoping he will ask to be released from his contract

  9. borisbulldog says: Jan 1, 2013 12:23 PM

    When will ownership and mgmt realize that the only fruit coming from the Belichick tree is Belichick himself?

  10. jr4real says: Jan 1, 2013 12:51 PM

    Please keep him in the AFC. One more team he can ruin will help AFC contenders.

  11. gvbulldogs says: Jan 1, 2013 1:06 PM

    Chiefs fan since 1970, fire everyone down to the janitors, the whole organization sucks.

  12. richabbs says: Jan 1, 2013 1:10 PM

    Pioli is friends with Belichick. Chip Kelly is friends with Belichick. Maybe Hunt is keeping Pioli around to see if he can land Kelly.

  13. macker1283 says: Jan 1, 2013 1:26 PM

    Chiefs fans lay blame on everything and anyone except the reason that is obvious to every other fanbase in the league, they dont have a QB. When you don’t have a QB, you can’t win in the league these days. Sure you can blame Pioli for not making it a bigger priority, but to say Pioli is a disaster as a GM is a bit misleading. Especially since they had a successful season just two years ago, in Pioli’s second season. They have virtually the same roster as back then. So at what point do you put it on the players? Pioli isn’t coaching the team. If anyone, look at Todd Haley’s who ego forced out Charlie Weis, which was the start of the downswing.

  14. vols84 says: Jan 1, 2013 3:06 PM

    A lot of people suspect that they are negotiating a buyout but Clark is focused on hiring a head coach. It’s a numbers game. Pioli has left the franchise a mess, including several personnel lawsuits, one involving not paying Todd Haley.

  15. gooboy6 says: Jan 1, 2013 3:55 PM

    Somebody else wants this guy ???? Plzzzzzz take him

  16. jgedgar70 says: Jan 2, 2013 3:05 PM

    tednancy says:
    Jan 1, 2013 11:39 AM
    That Clark Hunt would jeopardize the future of the franchise in the hopes that someone else will pay Pioli is a bush-league move.

    Any NFL owner worth his weight in gold would simply doi what is best for his team, and not put what is (to him at least) chump change ahead of winning.

    The Chiefs? More like “The Cheaps”
    _____
    That sounds good, but it isn’t happening. None of these owners are willing to pay 2 people to do one job. It would have been “for the good of the organization” if Jerry Richardson had fired Marty Hurney and John Fox at the end of the ’09 season. But he admitted out loud last year he wasn’t willing to pay the $10 million-plus to buy out the contracts of Hurney, Fox and the assistant coaches. So he left Fox with his butt hanging in the breeze, and with the lockout looming he told Hurney to field a team for $50 million. So we went 2-14 and were completely unwatchable. (Of course it took another year and a half for Richardson to come to his senses and fire Hurney, but that’s another sermon for another post.)

    Whether we like it or not, the bottom line will always trump the win/loss record for sports team owners.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!