Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15
  1. #11
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,493

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    "BloodyHorns82" wrote:
    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
    Eh, doesn't hinder my point at all. Both were road games, except one was the Super Bowl. Giant's D was too much... I argue that Patriots would win 8 out of 10 against them.
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  2. #12
    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

    "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).
    hey 2 years ago, NO had 200:1 odds of winning a superbowl (i bet 10 on them and almost ended up with a nice chunk of change)
    and they went to the NFC CHampionship game.
    You can't discount any team, especially one that has lots of playmakers, and is just missing a couple key parts.
    Remember the Chargers about 5 years ago?
    They were awful, consistantly near the bottom of the leage.
    One year they were ranked #32, and boom! they win their division the next year.

  3. #13
    C Mac D's Avatar
    C Mac D is offline Posting to P'own
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Brooklyn, NY
    Posts
    13,493

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    "i_bleed_purple" wrote:
    "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).
    hey 2 years ago, NO had 200:1 odds of winning a superbowl (i bet 10 on them and almost ended up with a nice chunk of change)
    and they went to the NFC CHampionship game.
    You can't discount any team, especially one that has lots of playmakers, and is just missing a couple key parts.
    Remember the Chargers about 5 years ago?
    They were awful, consistantly near the bottom of the leage.
    One year they were ranked #32, and boom! they win their division the next year.
    That's not saying much... they've choked every year since.

    They're ending up in the same place at the end of every year, whether they make the playoffs or not.

    Indianapolis and NE are different, at least they have rings (albeit the Patriots cheated to get theirs).
    Disclaimer: I'm an idiot.

  4. #14
    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

    "C" wrote:
    "i_bleed_purple" wrote:
    "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).
    hey 2 years ago, NO had 200:1 odds of winning a superbowl (i bet 10 on them and almost ended up with a nice chunk of change)
    and they went to the NFC CHampionship game.
    You can't discount any team, especially one that has lots of playmakers, and is just missing a couple key parts.
    Remember the Chargers about 5 years ago?
    They were awful, consistantly near the bottom of the leage.

    One year they were ranked #32, and boom! they win their division the next year.
    That's not saying much... they've choked every year since.

    They're ending up in the same place at the end of every year, whether they make the playoffs or not.

    Indianapolis and NE are different, at least they have rings (albeit the Patriots cheated to get theirs).
    so where does that put us?
    #2 all time chokes?
    The same has been said about the Colts for a few years untill they actually finally won one.
    "Peyton manning chokes in the playoffs", "colts will never win one"
    "manning will be like Marino" etc.
    But it just goes to show taht any team can make a good run.
    Bears are a fine example.
    Who would have expected they woud be good for those 2 seasons?
    Certainly their record the year before didn't.

  5. #15
    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
    8,278

    Re: Parity Exists … At Least in NFC

    "C" wrote:
    "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.
    Hey I'm not defending the Patriots method of getting to the top(look at threads relating to that and you will see I am very harsh and believe they wouldn't be nearly as good without cheating) but they were damn good for 18 games last year. The giants lost 6 times while the Patriots only lost the one. I think it is pretty obvious why I think the Patriots were the better team last year(not taking anything from the Giants). The Giants won on Neutral field while the Patriots won on the Giants turf.(I would allow the possibility that while the Patriots are the better team the Giants matchup well and might beat them more often than not).
    As far as the AFC vs NFC as a whole I think it is pretty convenient to insist on using only 1 season head to head stat. If you look back 1 year ago it was an obvious advantage AFC. The margin is probably shrinking but I still think until the NFC puts up a lopsided number in head to head that the AFC has to be considered the better conference.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •