You're harshing his mellow, brah.

I think using the word "poor" is using the term carelessly. The Chiefs didn't have a poor preseason. Their #1's played very well against Tampa, Philly, and Green Bay. They should have won against Tampa and Philly, but lost because their 2nd and 3rd team sucks--that should be expected from a team that's largely rebuilding. From a defensive standpoint, you take away a few ridiculously careless offensive turnovers, and their first team defense practically shut out Philly, Tampa, and Green Bay.

The running game has been phenomenal. And I don't think you give nearly enough credit to how much better our o-line looks blocking in space. Yesterday, they looked incredible blocking for Jones/Charles against Green Bay.

The problem is that your article focuses on wins/losses and total stats. That stuff means jackshit in the preseason. What I saw was our defense tackling better, a LOT less defensive players out of position, our D-line while not moving blockers doing a better job at knowing their assignments, a defense that overall plays with much more discipline. On offense, I saw much better yards-after-catch from our receivers, great play by our RBs, and superb run blocking by our offensive line. And our return game on special teams is miles ahead of last year.

We suck at QB, our 2009 draft sucked, and we have shitty depth. But to say that the entire team has laid a goose egg is just not true to reality.

Proof positive that you don't have a ****ing clue.

Are you Josh Looney or some other shill for the Chiefs?

Again, why do you keep saying that the defense looked average?

The first team defense gave up 10 first half points against Tampa
The first team defense gave up 10 first half points against Philly.
Arguably 10 of those points were due to careless offensive turnovers that pinned the team to terrible field position.

20 points in those two games is NOT what I call domination. Especially when you factor in that two of those drives were due to offensive carelessness.

I'm heading out for the night, but this is the closing thought. When Clay uses "poor", this is why I ahve a problem with the assessment. Because the whole post is about how we didn't get any better. THe problem is it harps on the stuff we were already bad at in 2009, but doesn't call out ways we got better.

Better:
Run blocking was very good this preseason
Running game -- excellent this preseason
Return game -- excellent this preseason
Defensive line-- average, but much improved from last season--less mistakes, more discipline
LBs -- same. Seeing more consistent play from Demorrio Williams / DJ. A LOT less mistakes.
CBs/Safeties -- HUGE improvements. Our last line of defense limited and broke up numerous big plays this preseason
WRs -- were great this preseason at YAC. Bowe's playing much better. McCluster has been good in the screen game

Just as bad/worse:
-2009 draft
-Matt Cassel is horrendous and is holding our pass offense back big time

So while you talk about the pair... this team got much better in 2010, especially with the addition of Romeo and Weis. Having a shitty QB sucks, is frustrating, and sucks and Pioli should get grilled to all hell for it. But let's not ignore that we're getting better in a lot of different areas. So when you say that we haven't had many questions answered this preseason, I fundamentally disagree. It just so happens that a few big questions we had last year remain big questions.

The Patriots, Colts, Eagles. Should I continue?

I think the problem is when you suck like KC has for so long you expect to see more out of preseason to give you hope.

The reality is compared to last year they looked much better in preseason in most areas. We have an easier schedule considerably more talent, better coaches on both sides of the ball, and yet people are predicting a worse or no better record.

That's funny, irritating, and depressing all at the same time.

The only area where I did not see marked improvement from the 2009 preseason was quarterback.

The offensive line (which I continue to have some concern about) was much better than I saw last preseason, particularly the last two weeks. The running game looks better than it did at any time in the '09 preseason (and teams know it''s coming now). Bowe looks engaged and like he belongs on the field, whereas last year he was playing with the 2s and 3s. They've gradually worked McCluster in with the starting unit and he's clearly a weapon. The starting unit has had some sustained drives and has actually scored touchdowns.

The starting defense has forced a number of 3 and outs. I don't see the line getting pushed around the way they were in the '09 preseason. The linebackers are active and seem free to make plays, which they were not a year ago. The secondary play, Flower's failed gamble aside, has been better than anything I've ever seen in Kansas City (keep in mind I got here in '99, so I missed the so-called "glory years"), and Barry is a goddamn rookie. That guy blows my mind. And it's for little things, like in last night's game where he just stones a WR screen - nobody on the '09 Chiefs at safety makes that play. I still have front 7 concerns, but that's more from conditioning I had from watching last year's games rather than anything I saw this preseason.

The one thing they really need to figure out (and they seem to know this) is how to start better. The template seemed to be offensive turnover early, defense gives up short field TD, then everybody starts to play better. And they need to start the games at the "play better" point.

And sure, maybe the opponents weren't playing at full speed, or maybe gameplanning would have killed us - and I do think Rodgers would have made some kind of a difference last night - but reality is that they have to play who they line up against, and what I saw from the starters in the preseason was a team that was competitive. Something I most assuredly did not see in the 2009 preseason. I saw what appeared to be a more aggressive team, what was definitely a faster and more athletic team, and what I thought was clearly a better team than I saw play in a preseason a year ago, albeit a team that just as clearly has more work to do.

What I don't see is a reason to be discouraged by anything, aside from Cassel's part Jekyll, primarily Hyde performance. That's worrisome, but not something that caught me by surprise.

What?

You're telling me that the Patriots and Colts first team looked like shit this preseason? QB's throwing INT's right and left, defenses giving up TD's to backup QB's?

I don't know about you, but I expected the Eagles to struggle with a first time starting QB. Anyone that considers them a contender for anything is highly optimistic, especially in a division that features the Cowboys, Giants and an improving Redskins team.

Who's ahead of him at G? When we drafted him you said there's our new starting G? I didn't, I said there's Waters replacement. You're acting like 3rd round=1st.

From a team that let Offenses do what they wanted last year, yes, it's good that our starters made their starter look uncomfortable, and not get into a rhythm. I didn't see that last year, and neither did you.

First off, guards rarely go in the first round. Secondly, he was a right guard in college. If the Chiefs were going to draft a right guard, why sign Lilja to play right guard?

And which team was that? It certainly wasn't Atlanta. It certainly wasn't Tampa Bay. Green Bay didn't play their starters on offense and Philly has a young first year starting QB.

Teams ran at will when they chose to run against the Chiefs first team. Hell, Tampa Bay of all teams moved the ball up and down the first in the first quarter and a half against the Chiefs first teamers.

You are seeing things that just aren't there. Either that, or you're unfamiliar with the opposing starters.

That young first year starter in Philly made this defense his bitch last year. He had enough time to make a sandwich in the pocket. This year they disrupt and get some pressure on him and *gasp* he looks bad.

DeSean Jackson barely played. Brent Celek barely played. The guys that ripped up the Chiefs last year were barely on the field.

But go ahead and pretend it was the same team. It apparently makes a bunch of you feel much better.

I don't think the Eagles are very good anyway.

Nope.