The Chargers did not have a better divisional record. Both teams were 3-3 in the division.
The tiebreakers are head-to-head results, followed by divisional record, and then record against common opponents. That's where the Broncos were slightly better.
well obviously the denver broncos because they have won more superbowls then the chargers.
because the chargers have a better AFC west division record than the broncos, and will have tied the head to head matchup.
The chargers are way better because there 12-3 and kickass broncos suck bad
Broncos
According to bleacherreport.com, "The Ravens won the (AFC) North (division) by virtue of the tiebreaker against the Steelers, so the Steelers will have to travel to Denver even though they won four games more than the Broncos this season.
WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT?! no they are not. not at all
It's an opinional question. I like the Texans better though
This is an answer that will change with time. It depends on when the two teams play each other.
The Chargers.
the chargers
The Chargers are "better" because they have a better record than the Baltimore Ravens. The Chargers have the second seed and have a bye the first week of the playoffs.
According to Pro Football Reference, the Raiders and Browns have met 17 times, as of the 2007 season, and the Raiders lead the series 10-7.