<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ Jul 6 2008, 01:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Pathetic? How so? Surely, there must be some barometer you used to measure that? Other than the "ESPN said so." The NFC went 32-32 last year against the AFC. AFC Supremacy?</div> My own eyes for starters. There were some really bad teams in the AFC which skews the numbers, but the top teams in the AFC (playoff teams and the Browns) would have dominated in the NFC. San Diego is the only one of those teams that lost 2 games against the NFC.
using the Pro Bowl as a barometer for anything other than the average weight a honolulu hooker had to deal with is ridiculous....neither team is trying to win, they are all just trying not to get hurt, with the exception of the late Sean Taylor, that was trying to make a point....
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jul 6 2008, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ Jul 6 2008, 01:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Pathetic? How so? Surely, there must be some barometer you used to measure that? Other than the "ESPN said so." The NFC went 32-32 last year against the AFC. AFC Supremacy?</div> My own eyes for starters. There were some really bad teams in the AFC which skews the numbers, but the top teams in the AFC (playoff teams and the Browns) would have dominated in the NFC. San Diego is the only one of those teams that lost 2 games against the NFC. </div> Top 4 teams in NFC: 12-4 vs AFC Top 4 teams in AFC: 13-3 vs NFC So the elite teams in the NFC and AFC had similar records. I would say that's damn near comparable. Maybe the AFC was better in the 5-8 range. OK. That doesn't mean the NFC was/is pathetic. It means they (the AFC) had better mediocre teams. OK. Which leads me to a new conclusion.... you are arguing for the sake of arguing. OK. I'm done with this thread.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ Jul 6 2008, 05:00 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ Jul 6 2008, 02:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Vintage @ Jul 6 2008, 01:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Pathetic? How so? Surely, there must be some barometer you used to measure that? Other than the "ESPN said so." The NFC went 32-32 last year against the AFC. AFC Supremacy?</div> My own eyes for starters. There were some really bad teams in the AFC which skews the numbers, but the top teams in the AFC (playoff teams and the Browns) would have dominated in the NFC. San Diego is the only one of those teams that lost 2 games against the NFC. </div> Top 4 teams in NFC: 12-4 vs AFC Top 4 teams in AFC: 13-3 vs NFC So the elite teams in the NFC and AFC had similar records. I would say that's damn near comparable. Maybe the AFC was better in the 5-8 range. OK. That doesn't mean the NFC was/is pathetic. It means they (the AFC) had better mediocre teams. OK. Which leads me to a new conclusion.... you are arguing for the sake of arguing. OK. I'm done with this thread. </div> I admire your ability to toss bulls shit into a discussion, but I'm not arguing for the sake of arguing. The Cowboys went against a pathetic AFC East and the Packers went against the pathetic AFC West. That was the luck of the draw, but says nothing about how those teams would have done facing an AFC schedule. The top 7 AFC teams where better teams than the top of the West. The Giants simply had karma on their side in the Super Bowl. Bully for them.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (CelticKing @ Jul 6 2008, 09:13 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I was thinking about this last night as well. Can't wait for the season to start and the Pats to dominate. lol</div> There is only 1 way for the patsies to go & they reached the penthouse in the Conf C'ship.
