NFC vs AFC

After reading Neeraj's post, I had to respond to two incredibly poor comments amongst an otherwise solid post. First of all, the Niners are done. I'm a big fan of Frank Gore, but you need a passing game in this year's league, and they don't have it. As bad as Arizona and Seattle are, both are better than the Niners. Its ok Neeraj, my Eagles are saving a spot for your Niners in the first half of the draft. The other big thing is this whole concept that the AFC is sooo much better than the NFC. I just don't get this. While New England and Indy are obviously far and away the best two teams in the league, there is a huge falloff after that. The Steelers are good, but obviously not great with losses to Denver and Arizona. Who else is good in the AFC? Jacksonvillle? Again, you need a passing game to win this year. Baltimore? Got dismantled by a rookie-led Bills team. San Diego? Maybe, but they managed to find a worse playoff coach than Marty, so no thanks. Meanwhile the NFC might not have a superstar team like the Pats or Colts, but good luck figuring out who the 6 playoff teams are going to be. Any of the non-Eagles teams from the NFC East could make it, you've got Detroit and GB brining respectability back to the North, and the South is always a dogfight. If you look at interconference games, the AFC has won 14 and the NFC has won 12, so while they clearly have an advantage, don't sell me this "The NFC is terrible" nonsense anymore.