So i am looking at the divisions in the NFL. The NFC is much more competitive division wise compared to the AFC. In the NFC East you have 4 equally competitive teams in the Cowboys, Eagles, Skins, and Giants. Then you have the NFC North where you have the Packers, Bears, and Vikings. In the South you have the Falcons, Bucs, Saints, and Panthers. Then in the West you have the Rams, 9ers, and Seahawks. This division is debatable but it still can be competitive. Then in the AFC all you really have is the AFC East and i guess the West somewhat.

---

I disagree to a point...

In the AFC north you have the Ravens and Steelers..

In the South you have the Jags, Colts, Titans and don't sleep on the Texans.. I think the boys from Texas are going to surprise alot of people this season.. and not the ones from Dallas..

---

I am basing most of it off of last season. Jags went 5-11 and texans went 8-8. Not very competitive with the 13-3 titans and the 12-4 colts. Then in the AFC North thats only 2 competitive teams. In each division in the NFC there are at least 3 teams that can win the division title.

---

Now the real question is are the teams in the NFC that much worse than the teams in the AFC? How would the likes of the Texans, Browns, and Bungles fair if they were in the nfc north for example? Look at last year alone the wildcard teams were 12-4 and 11-5 from the AFC and the NFC has 11-5 and 9-6 with the 9-6-1 and the 9-6-1 team made the NFC championship game.

---

If the Texans, Browns, and Bengals were in the NFC last season they still wouldn't of made the playoffs. And what do you mean by the NFC is that much worse then the AFC? Record wise the nfc had 11 teams .500 or above. afc had 10. So its pretty close.

---

I look at it this way. The NFC seems to be closer across the board, when you look at each division by them self, it is almost impossible to say which team will be on top and which on the bottom, with a few exceptions like the Lions, and even they should make a decent recovery.

Looking at the AFC, it always seems that there are 3 or 4 that are out in front of the rest.

---

I agree with the NFC being more well balanced, but the elite teams still sit in the AFC in my view and those are New England, Indianapolis, and Pittsburgh.

I do like the Texans as well and actually I'm picking them to make the playoffs, but I think Indy is still a 11 to 13 win team whereas Houston is kind of a 9 or 10 win team in my view.

I think that is a solid division. I would call that one 3-deep. Not a believer in the Jags.

I would call AFC North 2-deep.

I think San Diego despite Norv Turner will continue to win in the AFC West and I think New England takes the AFC East quite easily.

On the flip side in the NFC you have so much competition.

I think the NFC East is a 4-deep division. I think the North is 3-deep. I think the West is 3-deep as I like San Francisco and Seattle to push Arizona. I also think the South is 3-deep with Atlanta, Carolina, and New Orleans.

So once again while the elite teams are in the AFC, the NFC is probably going to have the closest races this season and might be more fun to watch.

---

Completely agree. The NFC seems to be more competitive because the teams are on a even keel, wheras in the AFC there are a lot of teams clearly ahead of the pack.

I think last year's NFC playoff teams had a winning record against AFC playoff teams in head to head.

---

Actually, I think the interconference record was virtually tied most of the season, with the AFC pulling out a slight edge at the end.

---