Both are coming from successful organization. Moore in Atlanta and Pioli in New England.
Both like to reach into their old stomping grounds in regards to player acquisition.
For the Chiefs in the start of the Pioli era, they were big into making sure every player was treated equally. No free rides were given because you happened to be a big name.
Will McDonald of Royals Review touched on this same topic this week:
During the early weeks of the Moore era, one of the talking points that got out was that "the days of giving guys scholarships was over". These were the days of many a story about how Moore was bringing respectability/professionalism/a culture of winning to the Royals. Like much sports jargon, the phrase wasn't particularly helpful, injecting a confusing and inaccurate analogy where it wasn't needed. Anyway, the general meaning was that nothing was going to be given, everyone was going to have to earn their jobs, earn their playing time, earn their money.
Sound familiar Chiefs fans?
Unfortunately for the Chiefs and the Royals, the "process" hasn't worked thus far.
The Chiefs won just four games in the first year of the Pioli era. While they struggled, their future appears to be brighter than the Royals. Grading football talent via the draft and free agency isn't such a crapshoot that baseball is so turning around a football team should be, in theory, easier than a baseball team.
The Royals haven't demonstrated they can consistently win under Moore. This is no surprise to anyone. The best season under Moore was seven games under .500.
It's interesting to note that both GMs appear to have similar philosophies when it comes to building a team. Neither have done well so far. The future is bright for one team while it's the big unknown for the other.