I think that the AFC had it's strong run over the NFC for a while now. I think in reality the NFC has caught up very well. I personally think the NFC has a slight edge over the AFC now but not by much. It is a good debate and I really think either side has it's good arguments for being the best but I think at this time it is a lot closer than either side wants to really admit. One thing is for sure...The NFC is making it's come back.
The AFC is without question superior to the NFC. They have the 3 best overall teams in the NFL (Pats, Colts, Chargers). They have won 8 of the last 11 Super Bowls. They have the best QBs (Peyton and Brady), the best RB (LT), the best offense (New England), 5 of the 6 best defenses statistically (Pitt, Indy, New England, Tennessee, Baltimore), and the best division in the NFL (AFC South).
Looking at those 3 Super Bowls won by the NFC, only the Bucs won it all in dominant fashion and they were only good for a single season. The Rams were the only ones to be consistently good, when they beat my Titans by a single yard and played another solid Super Bowl 2 years later. Even they died out. It remains to be seen what these Giants will do, but I think they've got a good shot to stay solid.
The thing that really stands out to me is that these strong AFC teams get strong and stay that way. The Colts and Pats have been dominant for the better part of the decade. And I think you could make a similar case for the Broncos in the late 90's early 00's, the Titans during that period, and a few other teams. What NFC teams have been consistent over that time? You could argue the Eagles maybe, or the Rams, but that's really it....
The whole argument between determing how good a quarterback is based on Super Bowl Rings or Stats is retarded. You determine the best Quarterback by a balance of the 2 with great intangibles. To the idiot who said stats are all that matters, is a 9 yard pass on 3rd and 10 better than a 3 yard pass on 2nd and 2? No, but the 9 yard throw will get him more pass yards, hence why a lot of the times QB's throw a ton of yards when their losing by 17+ pts. Also, the system has a lot to do with it, like Martz's system which values the QB and throwing vs. Jimmy Johnson's system which valued great running and having Troy make clutch throws when necessary... Drew Bledsoe Put up great statistics, so did Vinny Testaverde, does anyone really consider them better than Elway and his 79 career rating? Of course not. But does Trent Dilfer's ring make him better than Marino or Tarkenton? Again, of course not. I mean would anyone say Tony Romo's first 2 years starting are better than Tom Brady's first 2 years starting? He threw for more Yards, TD's, had more regular season wins, but didn't win a SB...
It is a mix between them both that makes a player truly great, also intangibles like how much that player helped/hurt the team. To determine which current QB is better simply think what would happen if they changed teams. Would dallas do better with Romo or Palmer or Brees? What about NO? What about Cincinnati?
What team BESIDES Dallas can REALLY compete with NE or IND in the NFC?
Best 2 Qb's (brady, manning)
Best RB: Tomlinson
Few top WR's: Moss, ocho cinco, harrison
can someone tell me these NFC teams that have "caught up" because if anything i see the AFC pulling away from the NFC with teams such as jacksonville and cleveland becoming legit playoff teams
2006, AFC won 40 of 64 games head to head and had 10 teams with a record of > 0.500 vs NFC versus the NFC having 1 team with a record of 0.500 vs AFC teams.
2007, AFC and NFC split 32-32. AFC had 8 teams with record of >0.500 against NFC. NFC had 7 teams with record of >0.500 vs. AFC.
It's more even than it has been in awhile.
Heres the top teams
AFC: Pats, Colts, Chargers, Jaguars, Steelers, Browns.
NFC: Cowboys, Giants, Packers, Vikings, Seahawks, Bucs.
AFC is better because they have Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Randy Moss, LaDainian Tomlinson, Chad Johnson, Reggie Wayne, and Larry Johnson.
The NFC has good players like Tony Romo and Adrian Peterson and probly better defenses but the AFC will destroy the NFC anyday.
musta been luck
you cant just compare the top teams.
there is alot of depth in the NFC, and talent is more evenly spread out.
the 7-9 bears beat the 13-3 packers twice last year.
the AFC had garbage teams like miami, NYJ, raiders, chiefs, and ravens.
first giants fans need to stop living the dream and come back to reality, that they are not the best team in the nfl
my take on this AFC has the dominant teams, but they also have the extremely crappy teams, nfc is more even with all teams being somewhat solid with a couple of very good ones
nfc QBs hasselback, romo, bulger, mcnabb, *favre*, brees, garcia, delhomme
RBs portis, barber, westbrook, jackson, gore, peterson, Grant,
WRs Steve smith, fitzgerald, boldin, holt, burress, owens, roy williams, colston, galloway
TEs, Cooley, Witten, Davis
Only argue,ents i could agree is that the afc has better qbs, and maybe better TEs, WRs are equal and i believe the nfc has better RBs
In terms if they played each other the whole time you would see that the records would be even as we saw last season
Jackie Bradley Junior.... that is all