Who will be the next team to debut in the superbowl?

[Bellsprout]

Quote: Originally Posted by mKoz26

The Lions. I think the NFC North's traditional leaders are on the decline, with the exception of (maybe) the Packers. The Lions have a lot of young talent in place, and with a good draft this year, they would have a very solid foundation to build on. If they make the playoffs, they have a decent shot at the Superbowl because they play in the NFC.

I don't think going 11-5 with the youngest team in the league puts the Packers on the decline at all.

Just my opinion, though.

[jnofx]

Quote: Originally Posted by WeAreAllWitnesses

I don't think going 11-5 with the youngest team in the league puts the Packers on the decline at all. Just my opinion, though.

The fact that Rodgers puts up Madden-Like stats without any protection at all is going to be really scary for the rest of that division for a long time.

[ODogg]

Cleveland Browns baby! WOOT!

[PantherBeast_OS]

Out of all 4 of those 4 teams. Jags have the highest chances of making the SB with the right coaching. Jack del rio is a ok coach but does not have the skills to lead the team to a winning record every year. The jags has good talent. They just need a coach who can motivate them to get it done. The other three are not SB ready yet. Texans can not get enough talent to get the job done. The other 2 are far from been near the chances of going to the SB.

[TheWatcher]

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

That's irrelevant.

No, actually it's 100% relevant because it shows that even the best team the AFC has produced in this era could still be beaten, and by a 10-6 Wild Card team no less. It shows us just how thin the line to success is between teams in this era, regardless of conference.

And...

Quote: Originally Posted by Cebby

Anybody can beat anybody in one game...

^^^ Exactly. You said it yourself.

If the AFC had just been blowing the NFC out every year then I'd concede. But nothing close to that has happened. The games have been competitive. The AFC is not as dominant as the NFC was during its run.

It's apparent that the balance is always going to shift from time to time. This is the AFC's time right now. But to think that the NFC has no shot or even a good shot is taking it too far, and it ignores what's been happening in these Super Bowls since '97.

[Cebby]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

No, actually it's 100% relevant because it shows that even the best team the AFC has produced in this era could still be beaten, and by a 10-6 Wild Card team no less. It shows us just how thin the line to success is between teams in this era, regardless of conference. And... ^^^ Exactly. You said it yourself. If the AFC had just been blowing the NFC out every year then I'd concede. But nothing close to that has happened. The games have been competitive. The AFC is not as dominant as the NFC was during its run. It's apparent that the balance is always going to shift from time to time. This is the AFC's time right now. But to think that the NFC has no shot or even a good shot is taking it too far, and it ignores what's been happening in these Super Bowls since '97.

As usual, you completely miss the point.

The Super Bowl is a single game.

Getting into the Super Bowl as a wild card (which is the best the Texans can do for the foreseeable future) requires three road games against the best AFC teams which is much more difficult than 1-2 home games against NFC teams and one road game against the NFC.

Can the Texans beat any one team? Sure. Can they do it three years in a row on the road? No.

[z Revis]

Quote: Originally Posted by TheWatcher

No, actually it's 100% relevant because it shows that even the best team the AFC has produced in this era could still be beaten, and by a 10-6 Wild Card team no less. It shows us just how thin the line to success is between teams in this era, regardless of conference. And... ^^^ Exactly. You said it yourself. If the AFC had just been blowing the NFC out every year then I'd concede. But nothing close to that has happened. The games have been competitive. The AFC is not as dominant as the NFC was during its run. It's apparent that the balance is always going to shift from time to time. This is the AFC's time right now. But to think that the NFC has no shot or even a good shot is taking it too far, and it ignores what's been happening in these Super Bowls since '97.

The point of bringing up the fact that the AFC has won 9 of the last 12 Super Bowls was to show that the AFC is the better conference; which in turn makes it harder for the Texans to get into the Playoffs/Super Bowl than it would be for an Arizona Cardinals team that plays in an inferior conference and easily the worst division in the entire NFL. That was the point. Not to argue whether the AFC has been more dominate the NFC was during it's run. Now if you're arguing whether or not the AFC is even better than the NFC right now, then fine by me, but that would still be incorrect. It's a fact that the AFC is the superior conference; which again, would make it tougher for a team such as the Texans to make the Playoffs/Super Bowl than a team like the Cardinals, would it not?

[mKoz26]

Quote: Originally Posted by WeAreAllWitnesses

I don't think going 11-5 with the youngest team in the league puts the Packers on the decline at all. Just my opinion, though.

Notice I said maybe. I'm not sure how much of a difference Woodson makes. He is certainly the best player on their team, and he doesn't have many years left in him.