Who Knocks Pilly Out Of The Playoffs?

[eaglesnut]

But week 4 does?

A little more. And more importantly it's not the only evidence of the AFC being a pile of trash compared to the NFC.

 

[SJ76]

I dunno. When week 16-17 get here I'll let you know

 

[Scooby-Doo]

Gonna be the Seahawks this week when one of their various head hunters goes knee hunting on Wentz.

 

[sonnyblack65]

A little more. And more importantly it's not the only evidence of the AFC being a pile of trash compared to the NFC.

It's about time the NFC came to the table with some goods

 

[northeastphillyguy]

Eagles have a rare team concept of playing. Someone is always stepping up. Plus they make adjustments
as needed. They will be in the super bowl. I do not see anyone stopping them.

 

[rmilia1]

This thread has a very "2016 Cowboys" feel to it lol

 

[VikingFan2k2]

It's about time the NFC came to the table with some goods

The NFC has been the better conference basically 75% of the history since the merger.

 

[sonnyblack65]

The NFC has been the better conference basically 75% of the history since the merger.

I just started watching it in 2001, not sure what happened before. I'm gonna give your team a new nickname, Vikings is so outdated. Purple People Devourers, kinda catchy

 

[soxfan1468927]

The NFC has been the better conference basically 75% of the history since the merger.

Then why has the AFC won the regular season head to head in 28 out of the 47 seasons? And they split the season series in another 8. So the NFC was the better conference in 75% of the seasons and yet they only won the interconference head to head in 12 out of 47 years? Seems odd.

Granted, they'll win it this year, so give them 13/48. And they've won 24/47 Super Bowls since the merger. 13 of them came from 1984-1996. So outside of that 13 year period, the NFC has won 11/34 Super Bowls.

 

[VikingFan2k2]

Then why has the AFC won the regular season head to head in 28 out of the 47 seasons? And they split the season series in another 8. So the NFC was the better conference in 75% of the seasons and yet they only won the interconference head to head in 12 out of 47 years? Seems odd.

Granted, they'll win it this year, so give them 13/48. And they've won 24/47 Super Bowls since the merger. 13 of them came from 1984-1996. So outside of that 13 year period, the NFC has won 11/34 Super Bowls.

I'm not going with head to head as a barometer. If they played more games against each other, but 4 games (25%) per year is not a large enough of a sample size.

As far as Superbowls go, If you want to cherry pick, the Patriots, Steelers and Broncos have screwed up that curve. Especially since the Patriots were handed the last 2 of theirs by stupid OCs.

The Superbowl is also one game between 2 teams. Not exactly the best barometer of judging entire conferences.

Agree to disagree.

 

[soxfan1468927]

I'm not going with head to head as a barometer. If they played more games against each other, but 4 games (25%) per year is not a large enough of a sample size.

As far as Superbowls go, If you want to cherry pick, the Patriots, Steelers and Broncos have screwed up that curve. Especially since the Patriots were handed the last 2 of theirs by stupid OCs.

The Superbowl is also one game between 2 teams. Not exactly the best barometer of judging entire conferences.

Agree to disagree.

That's why I used both head to head and Super Bowls. You can say it's a small sample size but it's 40-60 games every year. And those stupid OCs were in the NFC FWIW.

I could easily say the Cowboys, 49ers, and Packers in the NFC. Since they account for just as many Super Bowls as the 3 teams you named.

So then back up your claim that 75% of the seasons the NFC has been better.

 

[sonnyblack65]

I'm not going with head to head as a barometer. If they played more games against each other, but 4 games (25%) per year is not a large enough of a sample size.

As far as Superbowls go, If you want to cherry pick, the Patriots, Steelers and Broncos have screwed up that curve. Especially since the Patriots were handed the last 2 of theirs by stupid OCs.

The Superbowl is also one game between 2 teams. Not exactly the best barometer of judging entire conferences.

Agree to disagree.

I personally could care less if the AFC got skunked by the NFC during the regular season. Hopefully NE and Pitt could dispense of the frauds and pretenders and if NE makes it to the SB, I am hoping the NFC's team has the OC hand the Pats another one. I watched as the Pats DC almost blew the 3rd SB lead in a row late in the game, 2 with 4 point leads

 

[soxfan1468927]

I'm not going with head to head as a barometer. If they played more games against each other, but 4 games (25%) per year is not a large enough of a sample size.

As far as Superbowls go, If you want to cherry pick, the Patriots, Steelers and Broncos have screwed up that curve. Especially since the Patriots were handed the last 2 of theirs by stupid OCs.

The Superbowl is also one game between 2 teams. Not exactly the best barometer of judging entire conferences.

Agree to disagree.

I find it pretty incredible that the NFC is better in 75% of seasons played since the merger, and yet in the 2578 games played between the AFC and NFC in that timeframe, the AFC leads head to head 1328-1237-13 and have outscored the NFC 54818 to 53906.

You would think if they were better in 75% of the seasons, they would own the head to head record by a lot. Is 2578 games not a large enough sample size?

 

[CaptainStubing]

I find it pretty incredible that the NFC is better in 75% of seasons played since the merger, and yet in the 2578 games played between the AFC and NFC in that timeframe, the AFC leads head to head 1328-1237-13 and have outscored the NFC 54818 to 53906.

You would think if they were better in 75% of the seasons, they would own the head to head record by a lot. Is 2578 games not a large enough sample size?

stop using things like facts and statistics to back up your argument.

 

[VikingFan2k2]

I find it pretty incredible that the NFC is better in 75% of seasons played since the merger, and yet in the 2578 games played between the AFC and NFC in that timeframe, the AFC leads head to head 1328-1237-13 and have outscored the NFC 54818 to 53906.

You would think if they were better in 75% of the seasons, they would own the head to head record by a lot. Is 2578 games not a large enough sample size?

With how rotten the NFC was as a whole between 2000 and 2010, those numbers don't surprise me at all.

Look, I was born in the early 80s and started getting into football in the 90s. The AFC was the weaker conference in both decades. The 2000s was easily AFC, this decade is swinging back to the NFC. The 70s probably goes to the AFC and the 60s to the NFC.

Sorry. 66% of the time is a better number.

 

[soxfan1468927]

With how rotten the NFC was as a whole between 2000 and 2010, those numbers don't surprise me at all.

Look, I was born in the early 80s and started getting into football in the 90s. The AFC was the weaker conference in both decades. The 2000s was easily AFC, this decade is swinging back to the NFC. The 70s probably goes to the AFC and the 60s to the NFC.

Sorry. 66% of the time is a better number.

1. You can take out every season from 2000-2010 and the AFC still leads head to head 945-926-2.

2. Seems strange that the "weaker conference" had a winning record in the 80s and 90s over the superior conference. In 1052 interconference games played from 1980-1999 the AFC led head to head 532-517-3.

3. Why would you include the 60s if you said "since the merger"?

 

[soxfan1468927]

1970s: AFC won 214-180-6
1980s: AFC won 254-236-2
1990s: NFC won 281-278-1
2000s: AFC won 349-281-2
2010s: NFC leads 259-233-2

 

[eaglesnut]

It's about time the NFC came to the table with some goods

I do agree

 

[VikingFan2k2]

1970s: AFC won 214-180-6
1980s: AFC won 254-236-2
1990s: NFC won 281-278-1
2000s: AFC won 349-281-2
2010s: NFC leads 259-233-2

Fine. You win with your math! All hail the AFC!

I just always thought of the NFC as superior for 20+ years before the Broncos (Elway-copter was the turning point) and your team (Brady established it) showed up.

Going back to the Superbowls, look at what happened to Denver and Buffalo in their runs in the 80s and 90s. The best the AFC had to offer got clobbered every time except for the Norwood miss. Hell, from 85' to 96', the AFC was skunked.

There were also some great NFC teams that could/should have made the Superbowl in those years, but didn't. I can't say the same about the AFC.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Fine. You win with your math! All hail the AFC!

I just always thought of the NFC as superior for 20+ years before the Broncos (Elway-copter was the turning point) and your team (Brady established it) showed up.

Going back to the Superbowls, look at what happened to Denver and Buffalo in their runs in the 80s and 90s. The best the AFC had to offer got clobbered every time except for the Norwood miss. Hell, from 85' to 96', the AFC was skunked.

There were also some great NFC teams that could/should have made the Superbowl in those years, but didn't. I can't say the same about the AFC.

"The Superbowl is also one game between 2 teams. Not exactly the best barometer of judging entire conferences."

Your words. Now you flipped.