Stealers are AFC: So what?

I've seen this argument that the Stealers are going to be the better team because they are in the AFC.
What is that supposed to mean?
That the NFC plays touch football?
That the Stealers played tougher teams?
ROFLMAO :Heristical:

Every single team in the NFL all have the same shot at making it to the Super Bowl and winning.
Doesn't matter which division they are in.
The Packers are tough and should be feared.
Not trailing any game by 7 points all season long.
Can the Stealers make that claim? Nope.

Oh, and last time I checked AFC teams play against NFC teams a few times each season.
(I don't know what it was this season of Packers/Stealers since it's just too much for me to keep track of.)
So to say one division is better is irrelevant.

ok...nice rant...and classy of you to stoop to the level of Ravens fans and misspell our name.

Well, that's just part of being a Steeler fan. THey are the best team in the league, the best team in the AFC, the best team in the AFC North, the best team that ever played the game, the best team that... blah blah blah...

It gets annoying after a while.

Well, to be fair, he didn't call them the Stoolers.

:tease:

You make too much sense. Stop that. Please.

It's because of what the NFC West was this year. People think that because that division was so weak, the whole NFC had it easy.

I have a lot of friends who are Bills fans. One of them in particular always tries to argue that of the Bills were in the Packers division, then they would make the playoffs and would have a better record overall. I just laugh in his face.

Saying the AFC is stronger than the NFC is just plain stupid.

You wouldn't complain if you hadn't seen it.
And you wouldn't have seen it if you hadn't signed up here.
Ignorance is bliss my friend.

the fact there have only been 3 different AFC teams in the superbowl sums it up: not enough great teams in the AFC. thats EXACTLY what is says, no matter how they try to defend it.

You're going to ignore the whole point of his post and go off topic...just because he accidentally* misspelled your team's name?

Haha.

*probably not

Well, there's a reason we call them Squealer fans. :snack:

I'm thinking we won't hear too much from them after tomorrow night.

I hope not. Plus, some of the Steeler boards go into lock-down after games when they lose, so you can't enjoy the misery. So make sure you have an account now to be able to read them, in case the Steelers lose.

/Just friendly advice from the AFC

Especially considering the fact that the AFC West was nowhere near being a powerhouse.

Oh yeah, I get tired of this "The worst team in the AFC is better than the best team in the NFC" crap. Sorry, but it's just that- Crap.

A comment I heard: "Any of the AFC's final four would beat you." Ugh, it just gets old. Tomorrow can't get here soon enough.

Well, in the 00's, the NFC has won 3 Superbowls - 2003 Tampa, 2007 Giants, & 2010 Saints. The AFC is ahead 8-3, and the other thing the AFC has is consistency. Indy, New England, Pittsburgh and Baltimore have been in the playoffs a lot over the last decade. The NFC is nowhere near consistent. There's been 10 different Superbowl contenders over the last 10 years. That's just showing that the NFC has a lot of parity.

To me, that just means that the AFC teams that suck, do a good job of making sure they continue to suck.

Okay, I give up. The AFC is obviously subservient to the NFC. The Fudge Packers are the best team in the world. Their defense sacks the QB on every play and their offense can't be stopped.

The Steelers shouldn't even take the field against the Fudge Packers on Sunday.

:happy0005:

Well I can only speak for myself, but win or lose I'll stop by to say congratulations :handshake: or gloat :tease:

Then why do the Steelers, Patriots, and Colts consistently in it every year, AND HAVE won superbowls?

The AFC has some consistency in it's better teams. In the past decade, the Jets, Dolphins, Browns, Bengals, Raiders, Chargers, Chiefs, Jaguars, Titans and Broncos have all made the playoffs. Only Houston never qualified during the decade. But Indy, Pittsburgh, New England and Baltimore have been good consistently, and all won at least one superbowl over the last 11 years. That is the difference.

The NFC, I believe every team made the playoffs last decade except the Lions. But, not a single team can really be seen as dominant in the decade in the NFC. Philadelphia has been to the most NFC conference games, but they've only been to one Superbowl as part of a string of 10 different teams in the game, of which only 3 of them have won (Bucs, Giants, and Saints). But, even the teams that won the Superbowl have so far only done it once. Although, I do think the Saints have a shot over the next few years to add to their total. Green Bay gets props... i'm not underestimating them in this game, but i'm just stating facts to why the AFC has been better over the last decade.

Finally the brainwashing has set in! Whoo!!

And not a single bit of that matters tomorrow.

Yes it does. Especially if the Steelers win their 3rd Superbowl in 6 years.

Well, then why even play the game?


And get back to me when it's 3 out of 4. Then I'll be impressed. :tease:

NFC 23 and AFC 21 all time in SBs which is pretty much means with a larger sample the conferences are pretty much equal as far as producing SB winning teams.

We'll find out which team is better tomorrow. I'm not the kind to extrapolate that to mean X conference is better. Seriously, who cares.

That could be next year, chief.... next year.