Views
133
Comments
45
  • December 31, 2007 02:08 PM ET

AFC's superiority is a myth

Favrefan (223-82-13) vs B0mb3rs (HoF) (303-203-18)
23
Votes
37
Votes
23
Votes
37
Votes


I'm sick of hearing how the AFC is the tougher conference, and the NFC is the minor leagues. This isn't like the NL vs. AL or East vs. West debates in other sports, where one side is clearly superior. The two conferences played to an equal draw in head-to-head matchups, 32-32.

I believe that the reason the AFC gets more attention is because of the perceived superiority at the top, with the Colts and Pats. Well, I clearly can't argue right now that the Pats are the best team in the NFL, but I'll throw in a little perspective by pointing out that the AFC also has the worst team in the NFL: the Miami Dolphins. As for the Colts, they finished 13-3, exact same record as the Cowboys and Packers in the NFC.

AFC is superior only at the very top, in that they have the best team. In terms of overall talent, the NFC and AFC are equal conferences. The two conferences finished with identical winning percentages, and .500 against each other. What more needs to be said?


I took this not beacuse it was open, well that and you are a top tier TDer so I will take this against you. Here's the thing about that, do both conferences have bad teams? Yes. Do both teams have really good teams? Yes. However when you get down to brass tacks and you consider that winning the big game is the only thing that matters, the AFC is supierior. Out of the last 6 SB's only one champ has come from the NFC (congrats TB). I would even go so far as to say which ever team won from the AFC would have still beaten the NFC team at that time. The superiority "myth" was not built out of a single season, it is built by looking at trends over time. Over time the best of the AFC have been better then the best from the NFC, that is why the myth exsists. If an NFC team could rise up to beat one of the premire AFC teams then the myth could go away, until that happens on a regular basis, the AFC has it.

It is however getting closer then folks think. This years trend shows that parity exsists (as if more proof was needed) and that the NFC is reversing the myth, but right now it's alive and kicking.


Winning the Super Bowl only measures the strength of the top of the conference, which I have already conceded to the AFC. I will not disagree that the Pats are favorites again, and I think the Colts are superior to both the Cowboys and the Packers.

HOWEVER, this discussion isn't about the top of the conference. It is about the ENTIRE conference. For every New England in the AFC, there is a Miami. In terms of success and talent, from top to bottom, the AFC and NFC are equals. This isn't like the NBA where the East frequently sends teams with losing records to the postseason and the West has to leave out teams with 45 wins. This isn't the MLB where the AL almost always dominates interleague play. The bottom team in the NFC playoffs is perhaps the second hottest team in the NFL, and the Giants gave the Pats all they could handle, and as I already mentioned the two conferences are .500 against each other.

I recognize that the interpreted AFC superiority existed with plenty of merit a few years ago, when the AFC left out 10-6 teams and the NFC sent 8-8 teams and the AFC dominated head-to-head matchups. But this isn't the case anymore. The conferences are equals once again.


I don't buy it. I just don't. I don't buy that GB or Dallas is better then let's say the Chargers. Is TB better then Tenn? I say no their about even. The AFC had a 10 win team not go to the playoffs. Think about that for a minute. The NFC had two teams with less wins and one team that equaled that. Yet where are the Browns? At home. GB has 13 wins as does Dallas, but does that make them better then Jax, and the Colts? I say no. Until this season it was clearly in the AFC's hands.
Check out these numbers (all will be for 10+ wins)
2007
AFC: 7
NFC: 4
2006
AFC: 5
NFC: 3
2005
AFC:7
NFC:6
2004
AFC:6
NFC:3
2003
AFC:7
NFC:6

That means in each of the last 5 seasons, the AFC has had more ten+ game winners then the NFC. They still did even this season. The AFC holds the edge, while I admit the gap is closing it still rests in the AFC.


You keep referring to years past. I'm not talking about anything other than 2007. Of course the AFC was better for the better part of this decade. They owned the NFC in head-to-head matchups, and they owned the Super Bowl. I really can't argue with that. But I am talking about 2007, and nothing else.

Furthermore, those 10 win seasons clearly can't mean too much. The AFC has more this year, but the conferences, for the last time, played to a draw against each other and in overall record.

I think what we have discovered here is in the AFC there is a greater disparity between the top six and the bottom six. Just look at this year: Patriots 16-0, Dolphins 1-15. As has been mentioned in the comments section, the AFC is stronger at the top, but weaker at the bottom. As this debate concerns each conference in its entirety, there can be no other conclusion than they are equal. NFC is slightly weaker at the top, but slightly stronger at the bottom.

While the AFC may well win the Super Bowl again, the poor play of their worst teams, coupled with the equity of interconference play, lead to one conclusion and one conclusion only: the NFC has drawn even with the AFC.

Good TD.


I agree on one thing the gap is closing. However I cannot bust a myth based off one season. Yes this season they played to a draw. I cannot base the idea of one conference being better off one season, fluky season happens, just ask Jets fans from last season. I will illustrate my point further below.

Let's look at top 5 in rushing, passing, recieving, and defense back too 2003:


Top 5 statistical finishes by conference numbers since 2003:

QB
15 AFC
10 NFC

RB
13 AFC
12 NFC

WR
10 AFC
15 NFC

DEF
14 AFC
11 NFC

Totals:
AFC: 52
NFC: 48

The only edge the NFC holds is recieving. Let's look at below .500 teams in each conference (since 2003) for a minute:

2007
AFC: 7
NFC: 7

2006
AFC: 5
NFC: 7

2005
AFC: 7
NFC: 7

2004
AFC: 6
NFC: 9

2003
AFC: 8
NFC: 8

Total:
AFC: 33 teams that have finished below .500 since 2003
NFC: 38 teams that have finished below .500 since 2003

Sure this season (like I already said) was closer then everyone thinks, however over a period of time (which is how you trend) the AFC has been the better conference. Numbers like this are why the myth lives on..

Comments (45) Add A Comment

December 31, 2007  02:21 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Hey, congrats on your Skins pulling it off. Great story.

December 31, 2007  02:24 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

yeah I am jazzed...they made me believe again.

December 31, 2007  02:29 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Will wait for another round of arguments to vote. Good job so far by both.

December 31, 2007  02:31 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Only been in a handful of TDs with Bombers, but they're always fun.

December 31, 2007  02:38 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

at this point are we 95% sure the afc will win the superbowl? td over

December 31, 2007  02:39 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

I hope you never vote in an election Frank. I don't mind the vote against me, it's your logic that bothers me.

December 31, 2007  02:41 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

at this point are we 95% sure the afc will win the superbowl? td over

Frank Pentangeli | 12/31/07

Remove the Patriots from the equation and we're talking 50% chance the "AFC" will win.

Right now it seems like neither the AFC or NFC will beat the Pats.

December 31, 2007  02:47 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

TOP 5 TEAMS
1. Pats
2. Colts
3. Cowboys
4. Jags
5. Pack

Domination

December 31, 2007  02:50 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

1: Pats
2: Colts
3: Jags
everyone else.....

December 31, 2007  02:50 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

3 out of five is as close as it can be, and remember, we're talking about the whole conference, not just the top. It's pretty clear who is and isn't reading arguments.

December 31, 2007  02:50 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

i would say hands down, jacksonville/sd/indy/ne/ and tn if vince young will stay hurt are all better teams than either hte pack or the cowboys

let me explain:

green bay is just not that good, they have been very fortunate in a lot of those games the denver game for example was 2 prayer passes that teams just dont give up in the playoffs, do they have a good record? yes, does that mean they are a legit superbowl contender? answer for yourself

romo is the luckiest player ive ever seen, period. in recent weeks it appears the luck has ran out, he just throws the ball up wildly 1 of every 5 passes, early this season they were going his way, now they are not

December 31, 2007  02:52 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

good arguments thus far by both.

delaying my vote.

December 31, 2007  02:57 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

The AFC is slightly better at the top, while the NFC is slightly better at the bottom.

Have to wait until all 3 arguments are in for both to vote. Good TD.

December 31, 2007  02:59 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

One of the better TD's I've read. Good job, gents.

December 31, 2007  02:59 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Did my previous comment post?

December 31, 2007  03:01 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Eh, apparently not.

Well, my previous comment was basically the fact that I've always thought AFC the more finesse types of teams (meaning Air game all the way) and NFC smashmouth (meaning est. Ground before attacking with Air).

And if y'all haven't forgotten, the NFC used to dominate with the dynasties in the past until now.

December 31, 2007  03:01 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

OK sorry

AFC South vs. NFC East
Colts 13-3 > 13-3 Cowboys
Jags 11-5 > G-men 10-6
Titans 10-6 > Skins 9-7
Texans 8-8< Eagles 8-8

AFC North vs. NFC North
10-6 Steelers < 13-3 Pack
10-6 Browns > 9-7 Vikings
Bungals 7-9 < 7-9 Bears
5-11 Ravens < 7-9 Lions

Divisions are 1-1

Souths
16-0 Pats >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>&g t;>>> 9-7 Bucs
7-9 Bills > 7-9 Saints
4-12 Jets < 7-9 Panthas
1-15 fins < 4-12 Falcans

Tie breaker= UNDEFEATED PATS!
2-1

Wests
11-5 Chargers > 10-6 Seahwaks
7-9 Broncos > 8-8 Cards
4-12 Cheifs > 5-11 49ers (9ers are last in alomst EVERY offensive catagorie.)
4-12 Raiders < 3-13 Rams

3-1

December 31, 2007  03:06 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Bomberrrsss. I can't believe you took the AFC side!

December 31, 2007  03:07 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Glad your subjective approach is so reliable. I especially like how the 7-9 Broncos and the 4-12 Chiefs are better than the 8-8 Cards and 5-11 49ers, respectively. The conferences are .500 against each other and .500 overall (one of course implies the other). What more could possibly display equity between the two sides?

 
December 31, 2007  03:09 PM ET
Report Abuse | QUOTE

Favre, records dont mean everything. 49ers are the second worst team in the league. You really didnt make a good comeback statement, just used stale sarcasim and inappropriate words.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Leaderboard

  Fan W L T Win %
1 YODA 51 3 2 92.9%
2 Hyped78 189 19 4 90.1%
3 FoosBall 118 12 3 89.8%
4 [The] Coach 130 21 7 84.5%
5 Argos: Lets Go Packers! 46 7 4 84.2%
6 Southern Discomfort 42 7 3 83.7%
7 BBK - Now it's all football 51 9 6 81.8%
8 BSchwar... 128 27 6 81.4%
9 BobbyOr... 46 10 3 80.5%
10 rstowe 315 79 20 78.5%

The Si.com Cover Hub Go to the Cover Hub

Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Parcells to Browns?
    Views
    63224
    Comments
    377
  2. 2
    Chivas USA to hire Sampson
    Views
    1044
    Comments
    161
  3. 3
    FSU to offer Bowden compromise?
    Views
    8331
    Comments
    133
  4. 4
    Will Weis agree to Irish exit today?
    Views
    11951
    Comments
    118
  5. 5
    Yankees, Red Sox to fight for Lackey?
    Views
    6206
    Comments
    110

Message Boards

  1. NFL > Chicago Bears

    Week 11...The Philadelphia…
    Views
    227
    Replies
    92

  2. MMA > General MMA

    thoughts on 106
    Views
    107
    Replies
    30

  3. NFL > General NFL

    Tranny stripper missing from…
    Views
    81
    Replies
    14

Blogs