[discostu]

Recent SBs have been more exciting. Most of the 21st century SBs have been single score game, a far cry the Super Bore era of blowouts. Parity has its benefits.

[Alberta's Child]

I don't know if parity has as much to do with it as vastly superior coaching and football fundamentals in one conference vs. the other. In the 1970s it was Chuck Noll's Steelers, Don Shula's Dolphins, John Madden's Raiders who dominated the NFL scene. Tom Landry and his Dallas Cowboys were really the only notable competitor in the NFC.

In the 1980s it was the 49ers (Bill Walsh), Redskins (Joe Gibbs) and Giants (Bill Parcells) who were dominant, and most people can't even remember prominent AFC coaches and teams from that era.

The other problem -- at least in the 1980s -- is that the AFC often seemed to have very flawed, incomplete teams run through the playoffs. The Denver Broncos of the 1980s were very small on defense and had no real running game, so they were pushed around very easily by NFC East teams in two Super Bowls. I've often said that the Cleveland Browns would have been a much stronger opponent than the Broncos in those two Super Bowls -- simply because they played an NFC-type of game back then.

The Buffalo Bills team that lost four straight Super Bowls epitomized the flaws of those AFC teams. They had lots of talent and could beat anyone on any given day, but their "run & shoot" offense was a disaster at a time when a strong ground game that kept the opposing offense on the bench was a major weapon.

[USS Alaska]

My favorite Super Bowl was the Steelers/Vikings 1974 Season.

The score was only 16-6 but for me the best stat that indicated total dominance was Steelers had 249 rushing yards while the Vikings had 119 TOTAL YARDS, 17 rushing and 102 yards passing.

A real butt whippen.