Weakest AFC field in years?
 

It's been a long while since I can remember a more shallow or vulnerable-looking AFC field. This seems like a two-horse race between NE and Balt, and even those teams have chinks in their armor. I think it sets up nicely for NE, who may feast on lesser opponents at home before getting a favorable matchup (i.e., another dominant "O" / little "D" team) against either NO or GB in the Super Bowl, where the first one to 50 will win;)

But that said, overall the NFC just feels like a much stronger field, and I wonder if the balance of power isn't shifting that way. The NFC boasts a couple of heavyweights (GB, NO), dangerous up-and-comers (Detroit, Atlanta), and an elite D (SF). And even the runt of the litter (NYG) can tout a SB resume and a good QB.

The AFC field, by comparison, seems limited and vulnerable:

• Patriots. Negatives: 25th rated SoS, 0-2 vs playoff teams, 0-2 vs teams with winning records. Have looked frighteningly bad on D at times. Positives: explosive O, Brady/BB, superior coaching staff with 2 weeks to prepare, home field in a year where AFC contenders are awful on the road. Only AFC team that can trade punches with the Packers or Saints.

• Ravens. Negatives: no proven, elite QB (Flacco's not had his best year). Inconsistent team that put forth shockingly poor performances on the road this year. Positives: battle-tested, balanced team. Good D. Have beaten many quality opponents (Pitt/Cincy twice, Houston at full strength, SF). Have won many road playoff games in years past, this year's regular season notwithstanding.

• Steelers. Negatives: banged up team that may be running on fumes. Struggles to score at times. Dismal road performances against playoff teams (Balt, SF, Houston). Positives: balanced team with proven playoff QB. Good D. Battle-tested--extensive playoff/SB experience, finished with 9th toughest SoS (although only 3-4 against playoff teams, 4-4 against teams with winning records).

• Houston. Negatives: injuries to their most important players. Their starting QB is named "TJ Yates". One of the weakest SoS in the league (31st). Positives: brutal, nasty OL and run game, plus a top-flight (if unheralded) D. Yates has actually been decent, so maybe the Texans are the most AFC likely spoiler with their tough D/RBs.

• Cincy. Negatives: young team + rookie QB + all road playoff games is a not a formula for playoff success. Positives: record may have been artificially deflated by tough division schedule (4 losses to Pitt/Balt). Top 10 D. Dalton kid is good.

• Denver. Negatives: one-dimensional O that has looked putrid the past few weeks, so it's hard to imagine them scoring enough to get wins in the playoffs. Repeated, blowout losses to playoff teams take the shine off its #1 SoS ranking. Positives: good, unique run game. Pass rushers. Tough stadium to play in. And God Almighty is a Broncos fan (well, until recently anyway ;) )

Final strength of schedule data from AFC Strength of Schedule

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

It depends on Ben's health. If he's effective by round 2 and we face potentially going through both them and Baltimore, that's a very tough road to face.

Either way it's not nearly as bad as 2008 where the Steelers faced the 8-8 Chargers and then 11-5 Ravens to make it to the big dance, where btw they faced a 9-7 team. Or 2009 where the Colts beat 2 9-7 teams.

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

In my humble opinion, this is without question the weakest AFC field in years. Beyond a decade, roughly. Not to knock our own team, or the presence of the greatest QB of his era, but a team with the worst statistical D in the league is #1? And a team led by Joe Flacco, 2?? The Steelers are imo hot garbage this year. Ben is hurt, they just lost their RB, Polomalu has been relatively harmless this year, Woodley's a non-factor, and Harrison, well, he's not the same Harrison. Houston? I wont even start with them. No threat. Denver and Cinci both LOSE and get in? Weak, weak field. Weakest in years, easily. It couldnt possibly be setting up any better for the Pats this year....if our D is up to the challenge.

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

I'm not talking about a particular team's road through the AFC playoffs; I'm talking about the field as a whole before the playoffs start, how they're playing, and whether the field itself presents a good number of credible challenges to the NFC.

In '08 the AFC had *6* 11 win teams (including your patriots which I believe was the only 11 win team ever to miss?), with only the Giants really feeling like legit challengers in the NFC. Your '09 argument feels stronger, but even then you had a veteran SB team (the Colts) at 14-2, plus a seemingly strong 13-3 Chargers team, so personally I didn't think the AFC was vulnerable the way they are this year.

I think the NFC has been on the ascent for many years now (they've won 3 of the past 4 SBs after all), while the current AFC teams have plenty of issues (although I still think NE is the best bet).

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

I could actually see Houston surprising someone for a game. They have a dominant ground game and an excellent D, sort of a SF-lite with Yates.

But as legit, SB contenders who could take down the NFC participant? That's NE and maybe Balt only, in my book.

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

Not to mention a Brady recovering from the ACL.

What's really interesting the the mediot yearly fawning over the Ravens.

loyd

You could realistically be arrested by the mediots for being a heretic with your realistic assessment of the Ravens.

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

You mean Green Bay? They have the worst statistical D in the league (by yards allowed, which is what you mean when you refer to the Patriots). The NFC must be a godawful field too then, since, by that same measure, they have the #32 (GB), #27 (NYG), #24 (NO), and #23 (Det) ranked defenses. Four of the six NFC teams are ranked in the bottom 10.

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

Cincy is possibly underestimated. Yes, their record isn't great, but they've been slowly maturing with a young QB, amazing wideout & very solid defense. They have played almost everyone close, and they could make a surprise run in the playoffs.

Regardless, they're definitely a team in the AFC to look out for in years to come. Oakland made one of their worst trades ever for Palmer - very reminiscent of the Herschel Walker trade that gave Dallas its most recent SB run.

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

3 team race IMO

Balt
Pitt
Pats

Re: Weakest AFC field in years?
 

Brady
Fatboy
Flacco
Dalton
Yates
Tebow

Um, yes. This is a very weak AFC field. The drop off from Brady to Ben is huge, let alone the other 4.

No Manning, Rivers, Schaub, Sanchez, Palmer? So weak this year.
























Relax, you goons I was joking about Sanchez:p