Bacon Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 All season long, the NFC has been openly bashed and treated as the inferior conference. Perhaps, at the time, this was warranted. The Cowboys (LOL) were the class, and the Rams represented the bottom of the barrel. Now, months later, the Giants made a clean sweep of everyone, and the NFC thoroughly pounded on the AFC in the pro bowl game. Should the NFC continue to be treated as an inferior conference, or has that been broken over the past couple of weeks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FanboyOf91 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 NFC East > Rest of NFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WileCoyote Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 NFC will continue to be the weaker of the two,you also have to take into account the "special" rules that the pro bowl uses.....but it was nice to see us win it,seems like it has been awhile in that reguard..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StJoe4Life Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 NFC East > Rest of NFC Agree. NFC East is arguably the best division in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elkabong82 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 You know, while the NFC hasn't been the stronger conference lately, I wouldn't say it has been a joke. I think the AFC has very poor and mediocre teams, just as the NFC does. In fact, I think the biggest difference is that the handful of elite teams in the AFC are better than the ones in the NFC. I think looking at the other teams after the elite ones, that both conferences aren't that far apart. Of course this is just my perceived opinion. Besides, the Giants did beat the 18-0 Pats in the Superbowl, so maybe the AFC is a little overrated? Since 2000, the turn of the century, AFC has won most of the Superbowls ( 5 of 8) but 3 of those were the Pats, who won all 3 by a field goal each. In any case, I'm sure a shift will happen soon, if it isn't happening already. History shows that one conference can't remain dominant indefinitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointyfootball Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Should the NFC continue to be treated as an inferior conference, or has that been broken over the past couple of weeks? It's getting closer, but I still think the AFC is better, and here's why: AFC QBs: Rothlisberger Brady Manning Palmer Rivers Garard NFC QBs: Romo sits to pee McNabb Manning Brees Hasselbeck Favre I don't think it's a coincidence that Romo sits to pee's emergence, Favre's new-found youth and Manning realizing he didn't HAVE to throw to the other team, upped the level of play within the NFC. Up until this year, you essentially had Hasselbeck, Brees, Bulger and McNabb that were ProBowl QBs and that's about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Unfortunately, the pukes' playoff performances are dragging the division down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeMarco Murray 29 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Unfortunately, the pukes' playoff performances are dragging the division down. And Philly never winning it all doesn't effect it at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tr1 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 And Philly never winning it all doesn't effect it at all? Philly made it to the SB...the pukes haven't made it to then next round of the playoffs in a dozen years. I'd rate the Eagles' record better than the pukes' in the last dozen years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeMarco Murray 29 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Philly made it to the SB...the pukes haven't made it to then next round of the playoffs in a dozen years.I'd rate the Eagles' record better than the pukes' in the last dozen years. Indeed they did make it to the Super Bowl. But 3 playoff apperances in the past 8 years and it "hurts" the stock of the NFC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the burgundy and gold Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 The pro bowl doesn't really show whos a better conference. The game means literally nothing. The super bowl is a much better showing of whos the better conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozskin Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Firstly, the pro bowl means nothing, so that cant be used in evaluating the 2 conferences. I still think the AFC is a superior conference. The Giants may have beaten the Patriots, but they are not a better team than them. The Colts are also a better team. I think the Giants, Cowboys and Packers are on par with teams like Jacksonville and San Diego. The middle teams are about the same, it's the top end is where they are seperated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scyber Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Lets not forget that while the AFC had the Patriots & the Colts, they also have Miami, Jets, Oakland, & KC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy8467 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Unfortunately, the pukes' playoff performances are dragging the division down. I think the fact that the Redskins haven't won a divisional playoff game in 16 years (longer than the Cowboys) is probably dragging us down more than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozskin Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I think the fact that the Redskins haven't won a divisional playoff game in 16 years (longer than the Cowboys) is probably dragging us down more than anything. Glass houses pal.....glass houses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Unfortunately, the pukes' playoff performances are dragging the division down. lol I'm with you on this one. :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnhay Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 The AFC is way overrated. People have told me things like "any NFC team would lose in the first round in the AFC." The AFC isn't that much better than the NFC. It's a little better as of now, but it looks like the NFC is going to be a beast next year with the young Packers, Bucs getting Cadi back, and of course the NFC East looks to be the best division with Mcnabb coming back healthy. There's also a bunch of teams that were expected to be good this season, but underperformed (ex: Rams), so we'll see about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointyfootball Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 The AFC is way overrated. People have told me things like "any NFC team would lose in the first round in the AFC." The AFC isn't that much better than the NFC. It's a little better as of now, but it looks like the NFC is going to be a beast next year with the young Packers, Bucs getting Cadi back, and of course the NFC East looks to be the best division with Mcnabb coming back healthy. NFC Seeds (in order) 1. Cowboys 2. Green Bay 3. Seattle 4. Tampa Bay 5. New York 6. Washington AFC 1. New England 2. Indianapolis 3. San Diego 4. Pittsburgh 5. Jacksonville 6. Tennessee I consider Tennessee equal to Washington, but on paper, the afc's top five are much better than the NFCs. Yes, NY had a magical run, but against a healthy Brady I think it would have ended in the SB. As to the #1 and #2 seeds in the NFC, I'm still shocked, even as well as NY was playing, that they both lost at home. Almost impossible to believe. And when Brett retires, GB will become average unless Rogers (sp?) is phenomenal off the bench. pf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DGreenistheBest Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 Too early to tell, ask again after next year's SB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I don't think there is a team in the NFC that is capable of winning any division in the AFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the burgundy and gold Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I don't think there is a team in the NFC that is capable of winning any division in the AFC. i think the Packers could and although it kills me to say it, the Cowboys probably could as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonnyJ Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 NFC Seeds (in order)1. Cowboys 2. Green Bay 3. Seattle 4. Tampa Bay 5. New York 6. Washington AFC 1. New England 2. Indianapolis 3. San Diego 4. Pittsburgh 5. Jacksonville 6. Tennessee I consider Tennessee equal to Washington, but on paper, the afc's top five are much better than the NFCs. Yes, NY had a magical run, but against a healthy Brady I think it would have ended in the SB. As to the #1 and #2 seeds in the NFC, I'm still shocked, even as well as NY was playing, that they both lost at home. Almost impossible to believe. And when Brett retires, GB will become average unless Rogers (sp?) is phenomenal off the bench. pf I think your QB analysis in your previous post was more accurate. The fact is, NE and Indy are still in a class of their own. Why? Brady and Manning. You put those two QBs in the NFC and the balance of power shifts over with them. You take those two away and I'm confident that the Redskins can go toe-to-toe with any team in that conference. The same goes for all the NFC East teams, and several other NFC teams. The disparity stems from those two QBs being far beyond what other teams have playing that vital position. And it still wasn't enough for either to claim a championship this season. So, yeah, AFC supremacy is a myth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pjfootballer Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I don't think there is a team in the NFC that is capable of winning any division in the AFC. Sorry, AFC North isn't that spectacular and anyone can knock off the Chargers as long as Norv is around. Indy and NE are special. But anyway, I think the NFC has closed the gap. I don't think that the NFC is so terrible, it's just so even. The AFC has more Great teams and more Bad teams. Not alot in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 I think the fact that the Redskins haven't won a divisional playoff game in 16 years (longer than the Cowboys) is probably dragging us down more than anything. In those 8 years, the Redskins are 2-3. The Boys are 0-3. Really doesn't help your argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWUeagleMD Posted February 11, 2008 Share Posted February 11, 2008 The AFC North is the only division that an NFC team may be able to win. I still think the Steelers are better than anyone in our conference, though. I think the NFC is as bad as it's ever been, maybe worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.