The AFC lately has dominated the NFC in the regular season and in Super Bowls.
Sunday, December 24, 2006The New England Patriots had just embarrassed the Minnesota Vikings in a Monday night game in late October when several New England players were heard chanting "N-F-C" on their way to the locker room.
It was their obvious dig at how, once again, the AFC is a step (or two) above the NFC.
The AFC has a 38-22 advantage over the NFC this season, which explains why the AFC has eight teams with a winning record and four at .500 while the NFC has just five teams with winning marks and two at .500 with two weeks left in the season.
This isn't a new development. The AFC has won five of the past six Super Bowls and hasn't lost a season series to the NFC since 1995, an 11-year stretch in which the AFC has racked up a 376-298-2 record (55.8 winning percentage).
So maybe Super Bowl XLI in Miami is a formality. Maybe the truly super matchup happens two weeks earlier in the AFC Championship game.
One thing is certain: The NFC is so mediocre that four teams with losing records still are alive for the playoffs.
"The NFC playoff picture belongs on Comedy Central instead of ESPN," TV analyst Cris Collinsworth said.
But not many teams in the NFC are laughing.
"There's been a lot of talk about how the best teams are all in the AFC, and that's the more dominant conference," former Giants quarterback and CBS announcer Phil Simms said.
"Earlier in the season, I probably believed that. But I have definitely changed my mind."
Simms said he believes the NFC can't be discounted because of the one thing that usually is the biggest key in the playoffs mdash; defense.
"That's the great equalizer when it comes to the playoffs," he said.
The problem with that theory is only three NFC teams are in the top 10 in the NFL in total defense: Chicago at No. 5, Minnesota at No.
8 and Carolina at No. 10.
Former Dallas scouting guru Gil Brandt says he thinks the reason for the AFC's dominance can be found on the other side of the football.
Specifically, with the guys calling all the shots.
"I think there are better quarterbacks in the AFC than in the NFC," Brandt said. "Guys like Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are big reasons why the AFC is so successful.
"
You know it's a down year for quarterbacks in the NFC when a guy who has made just eight career starts (Tony Romo of Dallas) is headed to Hawaii for the Pro Bowl mdash; and Brady got snubbed.
It doesn't seem like a team's ability to run the football has much bearing here. The NFC has five teams in the top 10 in run offense, but four of them likely won't make the playoffs (Atlanta, San Francisco, Washington and N.
Y. Giants).
So what's the reason for this continued dominance?
Better coaching? Better players?
Maybe it's just the AFC's time, after a stretch in which the NFC won 13 consecutive Super Bowls from 1984-96.
"When you've been in it as long as I have, you look at it and say it's cyclical, because we've seen it both ways," said Charley Casserly, former general manager in Houston and Washington. "I think that's all it is."
For whatever reason, even the bookmakers like the AFC's chances of continuing its Super Bowl success.
A check of three betting lines showed a composite picture of six AFC teams among the 10 with lowest odds (San Diego, Indianapolis, Baltimore, New England, Denver and Cincinnati) compared to four NFC teams (Chicago, Dallas, New Orleans and Seattle).
Simms, who spent his playing career in the NFC with the Giants and won a Super Bowl, isn't sold on the AFC being a slam-dunk to win it all.
"Regardless of who makes it to the Super Bowl from either conference," he said, "I think we're going to have a very competitive and interesting game.
News RSS