So why is the AFC more Dominant than the NFC?

[thewireman]

I was reading some other AFC team message boards and they all have one things in common, they all say no matter what NFC team goes to the superbowl the AFC team will win and the NFC is weak compared to them.

So my question is why does the AFC have the stronger teams? They seem to have the stronger QB's, stronger RB's and whatnot but I don't know that there that much above the NFC. Has the AFC won more superbowls than the NFC?

 

[03EBZ06]

It's all cyclical. The tide will turn eventually as they have in the past.

From 1976 - 1985, it was even, both conf. winning 5 SBs each.

From 1986 - 1995, the NFC dominated, winning all 10 SBs.

From 1996 - 2006, the AFC dominated, winning 8 out of 11 SBs.

NFC with 21 SBs and AFC with 20 SBs.

This year, I'd like to think an NFC team, ahem, the Cowboys will win it.

 

[bobtheflob]

It's all just a cycle, but it's pretty standard for this to happen. There's an even bigger disparity in the NBA right now.

 

[Smashmouth24]

Don't know for sure but they certainly kick the NFC's behind in the quarterback department.

 

[YosemiteSam]

Yeah, it's cyclical. It's also time for the tides to change back to the NFC and the Cowboys look to be ready to step up and start it's reign of SupeBbowl terror.

 

[thewireman]

It's all cyclical. The tide will turn eventually as they have in the past.

From 1976 - 1985, it was even, both conf. winning 5 SBs each.

From 1986 - 1995, the NFC dominated, winning all 10 SBs.

From 1996 - 2006, the AFC dominated, winning 8 out of 11 SBs.

NFC with 21 SBs and AFC with 20 SBs.

This year, I'd like to think an NFC team, ahem, the Cowboys will win it.

So the NFC is a head by 1 SB win, so that means at this time the NFC is still a head in wins.

So then why do the HOF's seem to all play for an AFC teams right now?

 

[rantanamo]

The thing is, these are close games in the last ten years, not domination. What the NFC did that previous ten years was domination. Look at those blowouts in most of the SBs. Compare that to the scores of the last 10 years. The AFC teams have simply won a few close games.

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

It's all cyclical. The tide will turn eventually as they have in the past.

From 1976 - 1985, it was even, both conf. winning 5 SBs each.

From 1986 - 1995, the NFC dominated, winning all 10 SBs.

From 1996 - 2006, the AFC dominated, winning 8 out of 11 SBs.

NFC with 21 SBs and AFC with 20 SBs.

This year, I'd like to think an NFC team, ahem, the Cowboys will win it.

Agreed, it runs the course...

Yeah I sure do hope it's the Cowboys

 

[burmafrd]

The two best QBs are in the AFC in Manning and Brady. Of the young QBs that have already showed lots of promise, You have Palmer- also AFC. Rivers- I need to see more before I put him up with Palmer. Roths, Losman, Young, Cutler, Coyle all in the AFC with some or a lot of promise. NFC: McFlabb (choker); Bulger (mired in St Louis); Hasselback- close, but just lacks that something; Brees as the only legitimate at this time top QB on a top team. Leinart has a lot of promise but he is in Arizona. Eli is innacurate and just does not seem to have it; Campbell is still virtually unproven; Favre is a shadow of what he once was; Grossman- laughable; Kitna- journeyman; Minnesota who knows; Tampa-?; Vick is all promise and no payoff; Delhomme seems to be fading; Smith in SF- we shall see this year I think. that leaves Romo as the only legitimate possible top QB on a playoff team. Brees is the established top QB in the NFC and the way he played last year only a notch below Manning and Brady. I would put him above Palmer. Bulger is stuck on a team without a good D. So in a lot of ways I see Brees and Romo dueling like Brady and Manning have in the AFC.

 

[lurkercowboy]

Look at Super Bowls 3 through 15. The AFL/AFC won them all except for 6 and 12, won by the Cowboys.

 

[burmafrd]

The Colts were a transplanted NFL team sent to the AFL. So that one should be thrown out. And then look at the Steelers- ANOTHER NFL team sent to the AFL. So that is why the first 10-15 SBs really cannot be counted with the following 25 or so.

 

[lurkercowboy]

The Colts were a transplanted NFL team sent to the AFL. So that one should be thrown out. And then look at the Steelers- ANOTHER NFL team sent to the AFL. So that is why the first 10-15 SBs really cannot be counted with the following 25 or so.

Maybe so, but it makes Dallas look good being the only NFC team to win Super Bowls during that span.

 

[CrazyCowboy]

It is the AFC's turn.......basically

 

[ThreeSportStar80]

The two best QBs are in the AFC in Manning and Brady. Of the young QBs that have already showed lots of promise, You have Palmer- also AFC. Rivers- I need to see more before I put him up with Palmer. Roths, Losman, Young, Cutler, Coyle all in the AFC with some or a lot of promise. NFC: McFlabb (choker); Bulger (mired in St Louis); Hasselback- close, but just lacks that something; Brees as the only legitimate at this time top QB on a top team. Leinart has a lot of promise but he is in Arizona. Eli is innacurate and just does not seem to have it; Campbell is still virtually unproven; Favre is a shadow of what he once was; Grossman- laughable; Kitna- journeyman; Minnesota who knows; Tampa-?; Vick is all promise and no payoff; Delhomme seems to be fading; Smith in SF- we shall see this year I think. that leaves Romo as the only legitimate possible top QB on a playoff team. Brees is the established top QB in the NFC and the way he played last year only a notch below Manning and Brady. I would put him above Palmer. Bulger is stuck on a team without a good D. So in a lot of ways I see Brees and Romo dueling like Brady and Manning have in the AFC.

Dude you hit the nail on the head with that analysis because this game is about QB play despite what anyone thinks... Dallas has been fortunate throughout it's history to have some great to good QBs. I believe Romo will be the next good or great (I'm hoping for the latter)... I also like Jason Campbell and the QB in San Fran..

 

[tunahelper]

The Boy's are poised to bring the NFC to the Top.

 

[ENGCowboy]

Ive been saying this for a while now but most divisions in the AFC are less competitive than their NFC counterparts I am not arguing that the AFC is not better on many levels however the difference in the win-loss columns is over exaggerated by the easy wins that the top teams in the AFC acheive every year. For example the Colts get 2 wins each year against the Texans wwithout even breaking a sweat. Basically IMO there is a wider gulf in class in the AFC than in the NFC.

 

[AtlCB]

Ive been saying this for a while now but most divisions in the AFC are less competitive than their NFC counterparts I am not arguing that the AFC is not better on many levels however the difference in the win-loss columns is over exaggerated by the easy wins that the top teams in the AFC acheive every year. For example the Colts get 2 wins each year against the Texans wwithout even breaking a sweat. Basically IMO there is a wider gulf in class in the AFC than in the NFC.

I'm not sure I agree with that. The NFC has some really bad teams as well - Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota, Tampa Bay, and Arizona. The AFC has Houston, Tennessee, Miami, Cleveland, and Oakland.