Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15
  1. #1
    singersp's Avatar
    singersp is offline PPO Newshound
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    52,266

    Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    [size=13pt]Parity Exists … At Least in NFC [/size]

    By John Holler
    VikingUpdate.com


    Posted Jul 7, 2008



    "If at first you don't succeed, parachuting is not for you"

  2. #2
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,928

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    A very interesting read my friend.
    Thanks
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  3. #3
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    I think, that the NFC is more competitive, meaning that really, any team can come out of nowhere and win it.
    Like the article says, there is no "elite" team.
    There are top teams, but I don't think the top team has been the same 2 years i a row for many years now.
    In the AFC, the same teams always seem to be at the top of the game, so there are more elite teams, but there are also more awful teams, so the elite teams, often end up playing more terrible teams, equalling a better record.
    IMO, the interconference record should be a better indication of which conference is better, which last year was 32-32

  4. #4
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,496

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    "i_bleed_purple" wrote:
    I think, that the NFC is more competitive, meaning that really, any team can come out of nowhere and win it.
    Like the article says, there is no "elite" team.
    There are top teams, but I don't think the top team has been the same 2 years i a row for many years now.
    In the AFC, the same teams always seem to be at the top of the game, so there are more elite teams, but there are also more awful teams, so the elite teams, often end up playing more terrible teams, equalling a better record.
    IMO, the interconference record should be a better indication of which conference is better, which last year was 32-32
    I completely agree with every word, nice post.

    I couldn't understand it when people kept saying the AFC was better... sure, they have two of the best teams in the NFL, but people kept forgetting the Dolphins, Raiders, Kansas City, Jets....

    Plus the NFC won the Super Bowl and the Pro Bowl...

    Both Conferences are pretty evenly matched, there's simply more parity in the NFC.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  5. #5
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,279

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    Looked like an interesting article but I couldn't read it because their was a flashing advertisement that caused me to go into seizures.
    I do think the AFC is the stronger congerance. True the Giants won the superbowl but I think that if they played the Patriots 10 times they would lose 8. What was the interleague play records like in 04,05 and 06.(maybe the article addresses this but like I said I couldn't read it).

  6. #6
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,496

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    Looked like an interesting article but I couldn't read it because their was a flashing advertisement that caused me to go into seizures.
    I do think the AFC is the stronger congerance. True the Giants won the superbowl but I think that if they played the Patriots 10 times they would lose 8. What was the interleague play records like in 04,05 and 06.(maybe the article addresses this but like I said I couldn't read it).
    Those years don't matter, they're not relative in today's league... 90% of the teams have completely different rosters from 04...

    And you say the Patriots would win 8 out of 10 with the Giants? Why? They won one out of two, and the Giants won by a larger margin of victory.

    Super Bowl: NFC
    Pro Bowl: NFC
    Best Record: AFC
    Worst Record: AFC
    NFC vs. AFC: 32-32

    Give me a real tangible reason why the AFC is better, not just opnion, and not based on stats from 2004 or 2005... I'd love to hear it.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  7. #7
    i_bleed_purple's Avatar
    i_bleed_purple is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Canadialand
    Posts
    16,777
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    2005:
    44-20 AFC
    2006:
    40-24 AFC
    2007:
    32-32 Tie

    so 3 or 4 years ago, the AFC was certainly more dominant, but I believe taht time is over.
    Look at who the Colts lost to first last year... and NFC team.
    Who did the Pats lose to?
    an NFC team.

  8. #8
    BloodyHorns82's Avatar
    BloodyHorns82 is offline Jersey Retired Feed The Frog Champion
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    9,691

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    Yep, I would agree that their reign is over.
    Pretty evenly matched in my opinion.
    It just happens to be that the "best" two (3?) teams in the NFL both play in the AFC

  9. #9
    jmcdon00's Avatar
    jmcdon00 is offline Jersey Retired Snake Champion, Moto Trial Fest 2: Mountain Pack Champion, LL City Truck 2 Champion, Arithmetic sequence Champion, Troops Tower Defense Champion
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    8,279

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    Some could argue that the favorites to represent the NFC this year could be Dallas, New Orleans or the Vikings.
    New Orleans? really? Someone could argue it but I would argue them. I would pick Philladelphia or Seattle way before new orleans.
    (went back to the article and got a much friendlier advertisement.)

    I bleed purple came up with some good numbers. Over the last 3 seasons AFC vs NFC it is 116 to76.
    Now why do I think that more often than not the 2007 patriots would beat the 2007 giants? Well the Patriots did win 18 games in a row and are considered by many(myself included) as one of the greatest teams ever(definetly the best team to ever not win a superbowl IMHO). The patriots set all kinds of offensive records(most TD passes, points scored). And the patriots beat the Giants on the road(margin of victory in both games was 3 points).

  10. #10
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,496

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    "jmcdon00" wrote:
    Some could argue that the favorites to represent the NFC this year could be Dallas, New Orleans or the Vikings.
    New Orleans? really? Someone could argue it but I would argue them. I would pick Philladelphia or Seattle way before new orleans.
    (went back to the article and got a much friendlier advertisement.)

    I bleed purple came up with some good numbers. Over the last 3 seasons AFC vs NFC it is 116 to76.
    Now why do I think that more often than not the 2007 patriots would beat the 2007 giants? Well the Patriots did win 18 games in a row and are considered by many(myself included) as one of the greatest teams ever(definetly the best team to ever not win a superbowl IMHO). The patriots set all kinds of offensive records(most TD passes, points scored). And the patriots beat the Giants on the road(margin of victory in both games was 3 points).
    The Giants beat the Patriots on the road... in a MUCH more important game.

    Also, the Patriots have been cheating (proven) since 2001, so they're stats really don't mean a damn.

    I see what you're saying, but as it stands now... the past three season's records forgotten... there's not a "Superior" conference.

    Also, Brett Favre broke the TD record, does that make the NFC better? Does that make him the greatest QB of all time?... (since we are using stats from 4-5 seasons ago anyways, I thought this was relevant to your argument...)

    Again... the Patriots are cheaters.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Six signs parity is dead in NFL
    By Zeus in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-31-2009, 12:57 AM
  2. Trio of teams has failed to take advantage of NFL parity
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-25-2008, 11:50 AM
  3. The Parity Myth-TMQ
    By Prophet in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-24-2007, 07:15 AM
  4. Let it rain …
    By COJOMAY in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-02-2006, 02:30 AM
  5. Parity
    By Webby in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 11-26-2003, 01:08 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •