Conferences

[Boatdrinks]

Although I have offered up facts in this thread, I understand their purpose is to back up an opinion. Some of the AFC fans/homers on here have stated as fact that the AFC is better. Somtimes they did so quite rudely.

 

I offer a bet to each of you and anyone else interested. Although there is no way to tell for sure, I am willing to call the AFC the better conference if they win the Pro Bowl. I will come into this thread and admit I was wrong if they do. I will only do this if some of the rude people from this thread reciprocate. Will you?

 

Look, no football analyst on TV including former players would argue the fact that the AFC is stronger right now. And seriously, you want to base anything at all on the freakin' pro bowl? That game(and I use the term very loosely) is a complete joke. There is no blitzing or strategy of any kind , much less hitting. Worse than preseason, I think.

[ieatcrayonz]

I noticed a bunch of excuses but nobody took me up on my apology bet based on the Pro Bowl.

 

The offer is still open.

[Ozymandius]

And seriously, you want to base anything at all on the freakin' pro bowl? That game(and I use the term very loosely) is a complete joke. There is no blitzing or strategy of any kind , much less hitting. Worse than preseason, I think.

The rules apply equally to both teams, don't it?

[ieatcrayonz]

The rules apply equally to both teams, don't it?

Actually, I agree with him that the game setup is not perfect, but it is the only game that is a cross section of the conferences. The AFC is a bit top heavy with stars where the NFC is deeper, but I'm willing to take the bet anyway. The silence of my critics is telling.

[X. Benedict]

Actually, I agree with him that the game setup is not perfect, but it is the only game that is a cross section of the conferences. The AFC is a bit top heavy with stars where the NFC is deeper, but I'm willing to take the bet anyway. The silence of my critics is telling.

 

Didn't one of the networks have a prediction Monkey?

I think it is time Sammy the Hamster starts making Playoff predictions.

[ieatcrayonz]

Now that I'm being proven right I want to gloat a little.

 

I was right about the Cardinals, everyone laughed at me, and they won.

 

I was right about the Kentucky Derby.

 

I was right when I said the Raiders were stupid to pick a guy with the nickname "Mr. Irrelevant". People really argued with me on that one, but the loser got cut and the Raiders ended up 2-14.

 

The playoffs have begun to show the NFC's slight advantage.

 

If any of you know about Horse Racing, you know that the better quality horses are more consistent or "true to form". If you are betting at Santa Anita or Saratoga or Keeneland, you can be pretty confident there will not be wild fluctuations in horses form. It doesn't make it easy to predict, but more reliable. If you go to smaller tracks, horses form changes wildly. That's why when I go to Hoosier Park, I bet more money on the Simulcast races. It is a better investment.

 

With that in mind, look at the playoffs. The "horses" in the NFC are holding true to form with the home team winning every game. The "nags" in the AFC have been unpredictable like nags at Hoosier Park.

 

I'll still offer my Pro Bowl bet but if no one has taken me up on it yet, I doubt anyone will.

[BBach04]

you convinced me man, all along i thought that baltimore and their dynamic offense were going to smoke the best qb of all time, and i also thought that the chargers and their rookie qb (starting wise) were goign to handle the 3x champion pats. It just doesn't make sense, the sky is falling, my balls are shrinking, the world is over and the afc blows because of these namath-like upsets, clearly the cream of the crop in the afc is insufficient to possibly the pop warner team in my home town. Nothing like letting a former 3-13 team into the conference title game. That would never show weakness for a conference, or letting grossman into the title game. Those two teams can't be stopped and i'm gonna ride the gravy train all the way to south beach baby, i'll also challenege anyone to a bet that thinks their manly afc can hang with the big boys of the national conference. Screw your heads on straight guys!!!its effin obvious!!

[ieatcrayonz]

you convinced me man, all along i thought that baltimore and their dynamic offense were going to smoke the best qb of all time, and i also thought that the chargers and their rookie qb (starting wise) were goign to handle the 3x champion pats. It just doesn't make sense, the sky is falling, my balls are shrinking, the world is over and the afc blows because of these namath-like upsets, clearly the cream of the crop in the afc is insufficient to possibly the pop warner team in my home town. Nothing like letting a former 3-13 team into the conference title game. That would never show weakness for a conference, or letting grossman into the title game. Those two teams can't be stopped and i'm gonna ride the gravy train all the way to south beach baby, i'll also challenege anyone to a bet that thinks their manly afc can hang with the big boys of the national conference. Screw your heads on straight guys!!!its effin obvious!!

This seems sarcastic and angry. People sometimes react this way when they realize they are wrong. It's not that big a deal, just football. It's ok to be wrong once in a while.

 

The 3x champion Pats were champs in the past but struggled all year THIS year. Even with all their weaknesses they beat the Chargers because the Chargers were soft from playing 12 games against the somewhat weaker AFC. You are right to say that the Ravens are a one dimensional defensive team. That was enough for a great record in the AFC. The NFC required a team to be more well rounded. Grossman had some bad games but some great ones. Their defense is great. NO is pretty well rounded but their offense certainly shines. The cream is rising to the top.

[BBach04]

This seems sarcastic and angry. People sometimes react this way when they realize they are wrong. It's not that big a deal, just football. It's ok to be wrong once in a while.

 

The 3x champion Pats were champs in the past but struggled all year THIS year. Even with all their weaknesses they beat the Chargers because the Chargers were soft from playing 12 games against the somewhat weaker AFC. You are right to say that the Ravens are a one dimensional defensive team. That was enough for a great record in the AFC. The NFC required a team to be more well rounded. Grossman had some bad games but some great ones. Their defense is great. NO is pretty well rounded but their offense certainly shines. The cream is rising to the top.

 

the chargers were soft because they played 4 games against the nfc west jack@ss. They beat the bag out of sf, arizona, seattle, and st. louis. Thats 4-0, and only one was close. You are completely retarded. Last year the lowest seed ever in the afc went in and beat the sh-- outta the nfc, I almost wish the pats would have won so we could see it again this year. go eat dog sh--.

[truth on hold]

I am getting to the point of anger at reading article after article taking as fact that the AFC is better than the NFC. I watch a lot of football and I see the NFC overall as slightly better than the AFC. It is close, but top to bottom the NFC is better.

 

I have no problem if someone has a difference of opinion but I am perturbed at the reasoning in the articles of the football "experts". Over and over again they state that AFC teams have a better W-L record.

 

What does that prove? Each team plays 12 games within their own conference and only 4 against the other conference. OF COURSE AFC teams would have better records. The get to play teams from the slightly weaker AFC 75% of the time. The NFC teams by contrast have 75% of their games against the tougher teams. What are these geniuses thinking? How can they go by W-L records? There are not level schedules.

 

 

Maybe these football reporters should actually watch some games and form their own opinions.

AFC is better. I can see it with my own 2 eyes watching all the playoff games and the stats back it up. Not only overall conference vs conference but at the top too: NFC finalists Bears and Saints had combined losing record of 3 & 5 against the AFC (bears 2 & 2, saints 1 & 3.)

[DrDawkinstein]

oh man, who bumped this? guys, dont argue with the gimmick.

[ieatcrayonz]

the chargers were soft because they played 4 games against the nfc west jack@ss. They beat the bag out of sf, arizona, seattle, and st. louis. Thats 4-0, and only one was close. You are completely retarded. Last year the lowest seed ever in the afc went in and beat the sh-- outta the nfc, I almost wish the pats would have won so we could see it again this year. go eat dog sh--.

Denial is the first step in recovery.

[ieatcrayonz]

AFC is better. I can see it with my own 2 eyes watching all the playoff games and the stats back it up. Not only overall conference vs conference but at the top too: NFC finalists Bears and Saints had combined losing record of 3 & 5 against the AFC (bears 2 & 2, saints 1 & 3.)

Yeah, Caldwell dropping those balls really proved the AFC superiority.

 

Is it possible the Bears and Saints focused their regular season energies on winning the NFC games which mean more to tie-breaker scenarios?

 

Next time you go to the races, bet on a Hossier Park horse against a Santa Anita horse. You might win once in a while but the class eventually shows like it will in the Pro Bowl.

 

The Super Bowl is important but it is also important to remember that is not really AFC vs NFC but just team vs team.

 

Overall, the NFC is better.

[ganesh]

the chargers were soft because they played 4 games against the nfc west jack@ss. They beat the bag out of sf, arizona, seattle, and st. louis. Thats 4-0, and only one was close. You are completely retarded. Last year the lowest seed ever in the afc went in and beat the sh-- outta the nfc, I almost wish the pats would have won so we could see it again this year. go eat dog sh--.

 

It can happen again....The Colts are the 3rd seed in the AFC and the Bears are the top seeded in the NFC....and the Colts are favored....

[Dan]

Yeah, Caldwell dropping those balls really proved the AFC superiority.

 

Is it possible the Bears and Saints focused their regular season energies on winning the NFC games which mean more to tie-breaker scenarios?

 

Next time you go to the races, bet on a Hossier Park horse against a Santa Anita horse. You might win once in a while but the class eventually shows like it will in the Pro Bowl.

 

The Super Bowl is important but it is also important to remember that is not really AFC vs NFC but just team vs team.

 

Overall, the NFC is better.

God, I hate doing this, but here goes....

 

The Probowl is by no means a measure of each conferences strength. It's well known that most plays (offensive and defensive) are watered down to prevent injury and most players are just out there to relax and have fun. When was the last time you saw an all out blitz in the Probowl? If you ever watch the game, it's blatantly obvious from player interviews and the like that the guys are just there having fun and not seriously trying to win.

 

With that being said, the winners and losers over the last few years:

2006 - NFC 23 - AFC 17

2005 - AFC 38 - NFC 27

2004 - NFC 55 - AFC 52

2003 - AFC 45 - NFC 20

2002 - AFC 38 - NFC 30

2001 - AFC 38 - NFC 17

2000 - NFC 51 - AFC 31

 

So, if you take this decade as an arbitrary cut off, the record is AFC 4 wins, NFC 3 wins. So, how is the NFC superior based on Probowl wins? Clearly, they're not.

 

The whole point of the Superbowl is to determine which conference is better. That's why they played the game in the beginning. It's a true playoff scenario with seeding and brackets, supposedly to get the best AFC team to play the best NFC team; and then ultimately they play each other to see which is best - AFC or NFC. So, to say the Superbowl doesn't matter is not undersanding what you're talking about. To say the Probowl, a game everyone involved with readily admits they don't play their best, is the only game that truly guages conference strength further illustrates a fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject.

 

OK... So that's all I have to say about that.

[ieatcrayonz]

God, I hate doing this, but here goes....

 

The Probowl is by no means a measure of each conferences strength. It's well known that most plays (offensive and defensive) are watered down to prevent injury and most players are just out there to relax and have fun. When was the last time you saw an all out blitz in the Probowl? If you ever watch the game, it's blatantly obvious from player interviews and the like that the guys are just there having fun and not seriously trying to win.

 

With that being said, the winners and losers over the last few years:

2006 - NFC 23 - AFC 17

2005 - AFC 38 - NFC 27

2004 - NFC 55 - AFC 52

2003 - AFC 45 - NFC 20

2002 - AFC 38 - NFC 30

2001 - AFC 38 - NFC 17

2000 - NFC 51 - AFC 31

 

So, if you take this decade as an arbitrary cut off, the record is AFC 4 wins, NFC 3 wins. So, how is the NFC superior based on Probowl wins? Clearly, they're not.

 

The whole point of the Superbowl is to determine which conference is better. That's why they played the game in the beginning. It's a true playoff scenario with seeding and brackets, supposedly to get the best AFC team to play the best NFC team; and then ultimately they play each other to see which is best - AFC or NFC. So, to say the Superbowl doesn't matter is not undersanding what you're talking about. To say the Probowl, a game everyone involved with readily admits they don't play their best, is the only game that truly guages conference strength further illustrates a fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject.

 

OK... So that's all I have to say about that.

How many times do I have to say I am talking about the 06 season only? How does the 2000 Pro Bowl relate at all in the free agency era?

 

I realize the Pro Bowl is not perfect but it is the best we have. There are players from all teams in it. It is as close as the NFL gets to conference versus conference.

 

I put up a bet of an apology for the winner because it is the only thing we have. It is very clear by the silence of the AFC homers that they realize the NFC is better.

 

The Super Bowl is clearly more important than the Pro Bowl but it is between two TEAMS, not two CONFERENCES.

[McGill Bill]

You folks have it all wrong. Crayonz has the right logic; he just came to the wrong conclusion. You see, given the fact that the total in-conference record of all the teams in each conference was exactly .500, and this is the best criterion by which to compare the quality of the two conferences (NOT, of course, the games actually played between teams in the two conferences), the AFC and NFC were exactly as good as each other last year. If you do the number crunching (and believe me, I did, and it took a long long time), it turns out that the two conferences were IDENTICALLY good for every single year in the history of the NFL. Also, by consulting my crystal ball and the crazy cat-lady who lives down the street, I have determined that for every single year in the future, the two conferences will be EXACTLY as good as each other.

 

As we all know, the NFL started off millions (if not billions) of years ago as a single large league, played thousands of feet under the Earth's surface. One fateful day, the Gods of football, from their palace on Mount Olympus, cast a lightning bolt that shattered the league into two conferences. The Gods decided that exactly half of the talent would be allocated to each conference. From that point on, the conferences have been exactly as good as each other.

 

See? What's all this arguing about? The facts are there, plain and simple.

[Nanker]

You folks have it all wrong. Crayonz has the right logic; he just came to the wrong conclusion. You see, given the fact that the total in-conference record of all the teams in each conference was exactly .500, and this is the best criterion by which to compare the quality of the two conferences (NOT, of course, the games actually played between teams in the two conferences), the AFC and NFC were exactly as good as each other last year. If you do the number crunching (and believe me, I did, and it took a long long time), it turns out that the two conferences were IDENTICALLY good for every single year in the history of the NFL. Also, by consulting my crystal ball and the crazy cat-lady who lives down the street, I have determined that for every single year in the future, the two conferences will be EXACTLY as good as each other.

 

As we all know, the NFL started off millions (if not billions) of years ago as a single large league, played thousands of feet under the Earth's surface. One fateful day, the Gods of football, from their palace on Mount Olympus, cast a lightning bolt that shattered the league into two conferences. The Gods decided that exactly half of the talent would be allocated to each conference. From that point on, the conferences have been exactly as good as each other.

 

See? What's all this arguing about? The facts are there, plain and simple.

 

Finally, someone's beginning to make sense. Brilliant.

Now we can await Fake-Fat-Sunny's 47 page dissertation in response arguing point-by-point both sides of the issue while drawing inescapable contradictory conclusions.

I'm going to get some beer and get comfortable while I wait.

[zow2]

The bottom line is the AFC was about 8 teams deep in terms of quality this season....the NFC had maybe 3 good teams. The season was filled with so called mediocre to bad AFC teams going on the road and beating decent NFC teams (i.e. Miami over Chicago, Cleveland over Atlanta). There are tons of examples.

 

On the flip side when Buffalo was dominating the AFC in the early 90's, they would routinely trounce NFC teams during the regular season. The Bills record was ridiculous against NFC teams. All it takes though is one NFC team to be very good and have a great Superbowl (as we know too well). Chicago can definitely beat Indy but in no way was the NFC better than the AFC this season.

[ieatcrayonz]

On the flip side when Buffalo was dominating the AFC in the early 90's, they would routinely trounce NFC teams during the regular season. The Bills record was ridiculous against NFC teams. All it takes though is one NFC team to be very good and have a great Superbowl (as we know too well). Chicago can definitely beat Indy but in no way was the NFC better than the AFC this season.

For the 300th time, the Super Bowl is between two teams, not two conferences. The Pro Bowl is simply the best yardstick.