From: curtis@optima.UUCP (Curtis E. Dyreson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: AFC TEAMS STINK
Date: 17 Nov 92 02:04:26 GMT
Distribution: usa

From article <1992Nov17.003606.1281@cbnewsk.cb.att.com>, by lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor):
> Why don't we use the more precise term "xFC champs".  Do you still doubt
> the claim "NFC champs > AFC champs"?

Did I ever doubt this?  Tell you what, why don't you just email me
my position, I'll post in under my name and then you can argue against it.
A person would really have to be looney tunes to doubt that the NFC champ 
was better than the AFC champ in the last eight years.

>>Lemma2: Put the 49ers anywhere in the AFC and SuperBowls will still 
>>        result in blowouts.
>>Proof: See NFC championship evidence.
> Disproof: the 49ers are not in the AFC. Isn't that a fact? 

Warning, use of imagination required.

> So this lemma has nothing to do with the claim "NFC champs > AFC champs".

Course it don't.  See above.

>>Only you have introduced the claim that the best of the NFC taken
>>as a group (read playoff teams) is better than the best of the AFC
>>taken as a group (read playoff teams) over the past 5-8 years.  
> The best of the NFC taken as a group in the past 5-8 years were the
> past 5-8 NFC champions. 

No, just one team per year.  One superior team per year.  SuperBowl evidence
says nothing about how the 2nd place NFC teams would fare against
the AFC champ.  Which is how this thread was started.  Some yahoo posting
about how the superior teams (note plural) were in the NFC because the AFC 
always gets blown out in the Super Bowl.  It's obvious from such evidence that 
a single superior team happens to be from the NFC each year, but how one 
gets to teams (plural) each year remains a mystery.

The magnitude of the SuperBowl blowout could, it's possible, indicate that 
the 2nd place NFC team would also beat-up the AFC champ (and so on down 
the line), but only if the 2nd place NFC team proved itself to be on a par 
with the one superior team, the NFC champ.  But, one can't even argue that, 
because the NFC champ also got blown out by the one superior team.  
So then you have to split hairs over who got blown-out the worst.  
Ranking teams by magnitude of blow-out seems a specious line of 
reasoning at best.

Now, if you'd like to argue with some other evidence (e.g., like Sports 
Illustrated did), then perhaps a persuasive case can be made.  Personally
I'd group the Broncos, Bills and Browns (maybe) together with the 
`49ers, Redskins, Giants, and Bears (maybe) as the elite teams in 
the league over the past 8 years.  But, silly me, to make such a 
grouping, I'd look at the entire season, not just the SuperBowl.
And among this grouping you've got a 4/3 ratio of NFC to AFC teams.  
That can hardly be considered dominance.  (Here's your chance to 
group the teams differently, maybe you'd like to throw in the Saints,
Rams, Vikings, and Eagles? and take out the Bills and Broncos?).

>>Guess I missed it, what is special about the N preceeding an FC that
>>makes a team more likely to win a SuperBowl?
> Nothing special, just a little fact of dominance that we love to
> bring up every year to infuriate our AFC little brothers. Guess every
> year they have to come up with strawman arguments (conference as
> a whole, etc.) to rebute.

These NFC fans are just too darn smug.

Curtis Dyreson
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro