How bad is the AFC?

knownone

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
4,048
Reaction score
633
During the playoffs, I was struck by how bad AFC teams seemed compared to NFC teams. The games just seemed worse, it was like watching the MW for the first time after watching nothing but SEC games, I'm left wondering why the tackling is so bad and why everyone is so slow. Seriously, outside of NE what AFC team scares you? The Colts? a team who literally had the easiest schedule of any team in the NFL and was outscored 270 to 169 against teams with a winning record... scary.

Am I missing something? I seriously feel like Dallas, GB, and Seattle would win the AFC if they were in it. Hell, I'd make the case that Carolina and Detroit would make it to the AFC Championship game.
 

Sherman4Prez

New member
Joined
May 24, 2014
Messages
136
Reaction score
0
They're bad, man. They play softer schedules in the regular season too. It doesn't help them when they play a physical team that loves to hit in the Super Bowl. AFC is gonna get beat to a pulp for the second year in a row by SEA. There will be a different victim this time, though.
 

253hawk

Active member
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
3,321
Reaction score
13
Location
PNW
The AFC has no parity.

In the past 21 seasons, there's been 42 teams in the AFCCG. 31 have been by the same 5 teams:

Pats: 10
Colts: 5
Ravens: 4
Steelers: 8
Broncos: 4
 

LotsOfLuck

New member
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
knownone":eycuozio said:
During the playoffs, I was struck by how bad AFC teams seemed compared to NFC teams. The games just seemed worse, it was like watching the MW for the first time after watching nothing but SEC games, I'm left wondering why the tackling is so bad and why everyone is so slow. Seriously, outside of NE what AFC team scares you? The Colts? a team who literally had the easiest schedule of any team in the NFL and was outscored 270 to 169 against teams with a winning record... scary.

Am I missing something? I seriously feel like Dallas, GB, and Seattle would win the AFC if they were in it. Hell, I'd make the case that Carolina and Detroit would make it to the AFC Championship game.

I'm just glad the Colts didn't have to play Seattle last year. I'm not sure the Colts would've scored.
 

LotsOfLuck

New member
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
253hawk":25fkx5yy said:
The AFC has no parity.

In the past 21 seasons, there's been 42 teams in the AFCCG. 31 have been by the same 5 teams:

Pats: 10
Colts: 5
Ravens: 4
Steelers: 8
Broncos: 4

Those same 5 teams have won 10 of the last 17 Super Bowls.
 
OP
OP
K

knownone

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
4,048
Reaction score
633
LotsOfLuck":1pruq677 said:
knownone":1pruq677 said:
During the playoffs, I was struck by how bad AFC teams seemed compared to NFC teams. The games just seemed worse, it was like watching the MW for the first time after watching nothing but SEC games, I'm left wondering why the tackling is so bad and why everyone is so slow. Seriously, outside of NE what AFC team scares you? The Colts? a team who literally had the easiest schedule of any team in the NFL and was outscored 270 to 169 against teams with a winning record... scary.

Am I missing something? I seriously feel like Dallas, GB, and Seattle would win the AFC if they were in it. Hell, I'd make the case that Carolina and Detroit would make it to the AFC Championship game.

I'm just glad the Colts didn't have to play Seattle last year. I'm not sure the Colts would've scored.
After the 40-11 loss to the Cardinals and the 38-8 loss to the Rams last year... it's amazing Seattle didn't hold the Colts to 0.
 

BlueBlood

New member
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
1,152
Reaction score
0
They had something to prove and the teams didnt know each other last year. Seattle would have stomped mud holes in the Colts asses in the Superb Owl.
 

LotsOfLuck

New member
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
BlueBlood":1qc3l0dz said:
They had something to prove and the teams didnt know each other last year. Seattle would have stomped mud holes in the Colts asses in the Superb Owl.

Well we can speculate all day but I know what happened the day the 2 teams actually played one another. Andrew Luck made the plays to win the game and Russell Wilson, in a game his defense couldn't win for him, couldn't keep pace even though the defense Wilson was going up against wasn't nearly as good as the defense Luck was playing against.
 
OP
OP
K

knownone

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
4,048
Reaction score
633
LotsOfLuck":17t4nwoj said:
BlueBlood":17t4nwoj said:
They had something to prove and the teams didnt know each other last year. Seattle would have stomped mud holes in the Colts asses in the Superb Owl.

Well we can speculate all day but I know what happened the day the 2 teams actually played one another. Andrew Luck made the plays to win the game and Russell Wilson, in a game his defense couldn't win for him, couldn't keep pace even though the defense Wilson was going up against wasn't nearly as good as the defense Luck was playing against.
We're talking about week 5 of last year, a game that took place in Indianapolis, a game that was statistically dominated by the Seahawks. If you take out the 2 huge plays to Ty Hilton against a CB who doesn't even play for Seattle anymore the stats are even more disparaging. I'm sure it's a real feather in the Colts cap, but it means next to nothing about this year.

I'd like to see a rematch this year. Unfortunately I don't think the Colts can avoid being blown out by NE for the 4th time in 3 years. The Colts were outscored 144 to 66 in 3 games. You'd never expect that from the great team that barely beat Seattle by 6 at home in week 5... of last year.
 

253hawk

Active member
Joined
Sep 13, 2013
Messages
3,321
Reaction score
13
Location
PNW
And we were robbed of 5 points on the blocked punt 'safety' that was actually a TD.
 

LotsOfLuck

New member
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
knownone":yisysadn said:
LotsOfLuck":yisysadn said:
BlueBlood":yisysadn said:
They had something to prove and the teams didnt know each other last year. Seattle would have stomped mud holes in the Colts asses in the Superb Owl.

Well we can speculate all day but I know what happened the day the 2 teams actually played one another. Andrew Luck made the plays to win the game and Russell Wilson, in a game his defense couldn't win for him, couldn't keep pace even though the defense Wilson was going up against wasn't nearly as good as the defense Luck was playing against.
We're talking about week 5 of last year, a game that took place in Indianapolis, a game that was statistically dominated by the Seahawks. If you take out the 2 huge plays to Ty Hilton against a CB who doesn't even play for Seattle anymore the stats are even more disparaging. I'm sure it's a real feather in the Colts cap, but it means next to nothing about this year.

I'd like to see a rematch this year. Unfortunately I don't think the Colts can avoid being blown out by NE for the 4th time in 3 years. The Colts were outscored 144 to 66 in 3 games. You'd never expect that from the great team that barely beat Seattle by 6 at home in week 5... of last year.

Doesn't mean much right now but it does mean more than the hypothetical games played out in your head. And you don't need to convince me that Seattle is the better team. That's more or less my point. Russell Wilson had a far superior team around him and Luck still beat him heads up. Not every quarterback can win a Super Bowl by only throwing only 3 playoff touchdowns in 3 playoff games?!? For as bad a game as Luck had against New England in the playoffs last year (QBR of 25.0), Wilson's game against the Saints was just as bad (QBR 25.9). The difference? Seattle's defense limited the Saints to 15 points while the Patriots put up 43. Wilson could afford to suck, which he did, and still win the game. Most quarterbacks don't have that luxury.
 

Seahawk Sailor

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
22,963
Reaction score
0
Location
California via Negros Occidental, Philippines
LotsOfLuck":3ua32vyp said:
Doesn't mean much right now but it does mean more than the hypothetical games played out in your head. And you don't need to convince me that Seattle is the better team. That's more or less my point. Russell Wilson had a far superior team around him and Luck still beat him heads up. Not every quarterback can win a Super Bowl by only throwing only 3 playoff touchdowns in 3 playoff games?!? For as bad a game as Luck had against New England in the playoffs last year (QBR of 25.0), Wilson's game against the Saints was just as bad (QBR 25.9). The difference? Seattle's defense limited the Saints to 15 points while the Patriots put up 43. Wilson could afford to suck, which he did, and still win the game. Most quarterbacks don't have that luxury.

Bear in mind that, especially as a rushing team, you don't have to have a lot of passing touchdowns to win games. And even so, Luck has thrown 9 TDs and 10 INTs in the playoffs, while Wilson has thrown 9 TDs and 1 INT in one more game. Wilson also has 1 rushing TD to add to that total.

And while Wilson had a horrible QBR against the Saints, he threw zero picks that game. His lone interception was on a hail Mary pass at the end of the Falcons game in 2012. Luck threw FOUR TIMES as many interceptions as Wilson has in his entire playoff career in that one game alone.
 

LotsOfLuck

New member
Joined
Sep 29, 2013
Messages
63
Reaction score
0
Seahawk Sailor":lbv5obry said:
LotsOfLuck":lbv5obry said:
Doesn't mean much right now but it does mean more than the hypothetical games played out in your head. And you don't need to convince me that Seattle is the better team. That's more or less my point. Russell Wilson had a far superior team around him and Luck still beat him heads up. Not every quarterback can win a Super Bowl by only throwing only 3 playoff touchdowns in 3 playoff games?!? For as bad a game as Luck had against New England in the playoffs last year (QBR of 25.0), Wilson's game against the Saints was just as bad (QBR 25.9). The difference? Seattle's defense limited the Saints to 15 points while the Patriots put up 43. Wilson could afford to suck, which he did, and still win the game. Most quarterbacks don't have that luxury.

Bear in mind that, especially as a rushing team, you don't have to have a lot of passing touchdowns to win games. And even so, Luck has thrown 9 TDs and 10 INTs in the playoffs, while Wilson has thrown 9 TDs and 1 INT in one more game. Wilson also has 1 rushing TD to add to that total.

And while Wilson had a horrible QBR against the Saints, he threw zero picks that game. His lone interception was on a hail Mary pass at the end of the Falcons game in 2012. Luck threw FOUR TIMES as many interceptions as Wilson has in his entire playoff career in that one game alone.

Wilson could afford to suck and not make plays because his defense wasn't giving up 43 points. In fact, it was a shutout into the fourth quarter.

Luck has to make plays and throw down field. With increased risk there will be more mistakes. Football 101. Most QBs can't win a playoff game by throwing for only 103 yards and rushing for 16 more with no TDs.

There is no way the Colts are even a playoff team if Wilson were our quarterback.
 

EverydayImRusselin

Active member
Joined
Apr 15, 2013
Messages
1,529
Reaction score
4
B7KaBdaCYAEFrT5.png
 

Seahawk Sailor

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
22,963
Reaction score
0
Location
California via Negros Occidental, Philippines
It's only because of that big bad defense, is it? I mean, it's not like Wilson is any good himself.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zjwhitman/status/554163739033759744[/tweet]

Maybe we should compare him to another mediocre game manager quarterback who couldn't really do a thing without his defense winning games for him.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zjwhitman/status/554156728837607424[/tweet]

But of course, Wilson has a lot of superstars to work with on offense too, so they're bailing him out just as much. I mean, just look at all those offensive weapons.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zjwhitman/status/554706265163587586[/tweet]

But hey, he's not expected to put up really great numbers with those kinds of receivers and tight ends, is he? From that same game...

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Curtis_Crabtree/status/554131238252863488[/tweet]

And of course, when he had to step up and make something happen...

[tweet]https://twitter.com/johnpboyle/status/554143488913072128[/tweet]

But of course, head to head, Luck is simply a much better quarterback, right?

[tweet]https://twitter.com/hwkbgr/status/554675118824513537[/tweet]

Just which of those numbers suggests a player that sucks and just wins because of his defense? Is it this one?

[tweet]https://twitter.com/AaronRyanLA/status/554688651305967618[/tweet]
 
OP
OP
K

knownone

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
4,048
Reaction score
633
Last time NE played the Colts in the playoffs, NE scored 24 points off of Andrew Luck turnovers.
 

HawkFan72

Active member
Joined
Mar 3, 2007
Messages
16,569
Reaction score
1
Location
Antioch, CA
It was the same last year: All the AFC Playoff games looked like they were being played in slow motion. The NFC games were so much faster and the hits were so much more intense.
 

Greenhell

Active member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
3,477
Reaction score
15
Seahawk Sailor":z4aajxni said:
It's only because of that big bad defense, is it? I mean, it's not like Wilson is any good himself.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zjwhitman/status/554163739033759744[/tweet]

Maybe we should compare him to another mediocre game manager quarterback who couldn't really do a thing without his defense winning games for him.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zjwhitman/status/554156728837607424[/tweet]

But of course, Wilson has a lot of superstars to work with on offense too, so they're bailing him out just as much. I mean, just look at all those offensive weapons.

[tweet]https://twitter.com/zjwhitman/status/554706265163587586[/tweet]

But hey, he's not expected to put up really great numbers with those kinds of receivers and tight ends, is he? From that same game...

[tweet]https://twitter.com/Curtis_Crabtree/status/554131238252863488[/tweet]

And of course, when he had to step up and make something happen...

[tweet]https://twitter.com/johnpboyle/status/554143488913072128[/tweet]

But of course, head to head, Luck is simply a much better quarterback, right?

[tweet]https://twitter.com/hwkbgr/status/554675118824513537[/tweet]

Just which of those numbers suggests a player that sucks and just wins because of his defense? Is it this one?

[tweet]https://twitter.com/AaronRyanLA/status/554688651305967618[/tweet]

/thread. You won the internet. :th2thumbs:
 

WilsonMVP

New member
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
2,771
Reaction score
0
LotsOfLuck":2deliir2 said:
knownone":2deliir2 said:
LotsOfLuck":2deliir2 said:
BlueBlood":2deliir2 said:
They had something to prove and the teams didnt know each other last year. Seattle would have stomped mud holes in the Colts asses in the Superb Owl.

Well we can speculate all day but I know what happened the day the 2 teams actually played one another. Andrew Luck made the plays to win the game and Russell Wilson, in a game his defense couldn't win for him, couldn't keep pace even though the defense Wilson was going up against wasn't nearly as good as the defense Luck was playing against.
We're talking about week 5 of last year, a game that took place in Indianapolis, a game that was statistically dominated by the Seahawks. If you take out the 2 huge plays to Ty Hilton against a CB who doesn't even play for Seattle anymore the stats are even more disparaging. I'm sure it's a real feather in the Colts cap, but it means next to nothing about this year.

I'd like to see a rematch this year. Unfortunately I don't think the Colts can avoid being blown out by NE for the 4th time in 3 years. The Colts were outscored 144 to 66 in 3 games. You'd never expect that from the great team that barely beat Seattle by 6 at home in week 5... of last year.

Doesn't mean much right now but it does mean more than the hypothetical games played out in your head. And you don't need to convince me that Seattle is the better team. That's more or less my point. Russell Wilson had a far superior team around him and Luck still beat him heads up. Not every quarterback can win a Super Bowl by only throwing only 3 playoff touchdowns in 3 playoff games?!? For as bad a game as Luck had against New England in the playoffs last year (QBR of 25.0), Wilson's game against the Saints was just as bad (QBR 25.9). The difference? Seattle's defense limited the Saints to 15 points while the Patriots put up 43. Wilson could afford to suck, which he did, and still win the game. Most quarterbacks don't have that luxury.

Manning won his only freaking ring throwing 3TD and 7INT in 4 postseason games...Not every QB can go against Rex Grossman in the superbowl to get their ring either. I think you would have to go REALLY far back to find a starting superbowl QB worse than him. Dilfer might be the only one in that conversation. Im sure that was rough on Manning ;)

I think DILFER also won by throwing 3 TDs in the postseason with 1INT but he played in 4 games. Also had a 83.7 QB rating but Wilson had a 101.6 Rating.

This post is hilarious to me since you seem like a Colts fan...You are basically describing Mannings only ring except he turned it over 7 times.

Manning won a game against the ravens in his superbowl run with this statline...I mean good god. This is supposed to be the Greatest of ALL TIME QB here....
15/30 170yards 0TD 2INT 39.6rating
 
Top