HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: statz@gagme.chi.il.us (Louis B. Del Boccio)
Subject: Immaculate Reception---NOT !!!
Originator: statz@gagme
Organization: Gagme Public Access UNIX, Chicago, Illinois.
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 07:34:42 GMT



 Could someone Please tell me why the people of Pittsburgh still
 beleave that the " Immaculate Reception " was a reception ?.
 A few years ago they interviewed an official of the game said
 that during the decission of that play .

 All the officials gathered at the side lines for a few minutes.
 The official that was interviewed was the one who went over to
 the side line phones and made a call to security and ask if they
 had enough security people to handle a riot.

 The official hung up the phone and continued to talk to the other
 officials and the call was " Touchdown " .

 If you watch it in slow-motion you can see that it was no good.
  
-- 
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
[]                                                                []
[]  *----=====*****+++++>>>>  STATZ  <<<<<++++++******======----* []
[]                                                                []
[]  statz@gagme.chi.il.us                   Louis B. Del Boccio   []
[]                                                                []
[][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][][]
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: ashley@oasis.gtefsd.com (Bob Ashley)
Subject: Broncos/Reeves: A Mistake ???
Reply-To: ashley@oasis.gtefsd.com
Organization: GTE Federal Systems Division
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 23:31:11 GMT

In article 3362@vexcel.com,  tom@vexcel.com (Tom Baltzer) writes:
>That's right, just heard on the radio that Bolen fired Dan Reeves.
>No word on new head coach yet, but look out 49ers, I'm sure we're 
>interested in Shanahan.  or maybe Wade Phillips will be moved up.
>
>This is all very interesting in light of some recent polls on the
>subject:
>
>	Bronco Players voted ~79% to keep Reeves
>	Bronco Fans voted ~59% to keep Reeves in current capacity
>			  ~30% to keep with removed responsibilities.
>
>Well, the future looks interesting!
>
>Good luck Broncos!
>

Yeah, best of luck in the next two rebuilding years ... not a good sign
when you fire someone who is consistently putting together winning
records in a tough division ...


In article 42892@sdcc12.ucsd.edu,  kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi) writes:
>
>Dan Reeves is an excellent coach who took mediocre teams (+ 1 great QB)
>to the 3 SB. Unless the Broncos management thinks that its time for a 
>change in leadership, sort of shake things up, they are making a mistake.
>
>Expect Reeves name to show up for the NYG job. The only problem there 
>might be a power struggle between Young and Reeves.
>
>

I concur here ... Reeves and Gibbs were hired by their respective teams in
the same years, and I have always felt that the pressure to win year in and
year out is very hard here in Washington.  Gibbs did miss the playoffs in
four of his twelve years, and started out 0-5 in his first season.  Gibbs
missed the playoffs in 1985, 1988 and 1989, had a losing record in '88 ...

... and with Jack Kent Cooke as volatile an owner as he is (the recent tirade
with his stadium), some would have thought Gibbs would have not survived, but
he is still around.

IMHO, I think the Broncos are making a big mistake by firing Dan Reeves ...
he has been the coach who has been able to make something out of virtually
nothing.  Granted, he does have Elway, but quite possibly, it's Reeve's
coaching style that has help Elway become the talentd "grace under pressure"
player that he is ... 


Bob - just my $0.02 here ...

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Ashley                        Internet:  Bob.Ashley@oasis.gtefsd.com

Member, Technical Staff            | Winter Bowling Leagues 1992-1993
   GTE Federal Systems Division    |    GTE FSD Mixed Secretary: Thu 17:45
   15000 Conference Center Drive   |    Thursday Mixups:         Thu 20:30
   Chantilly, VA   22021-3808      |    NFL Mixed Secretary:     Mon 21:00
   (703)-818- voice 4656  FAX 5484 |    Fantasy League Captain:  Team #1
From: daveb@Ingres.COM (Dave Brower, DBMS hack, [510] 748-3418)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Det/SF rehash, Niner prospects
Date: 29 Dec 92 21:08:00 GMT
Reply-To: daveb@lotus (Dave Brower, DBMS hack, [510] 748-3418)
Organization: Ingres, an ASK Company
Originator: daveb@lotus
In-reply-to: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)

The way I saw it, Young was a model of efficiency: 3 possessions from
the long end of the field resulting in two scores and one missed FG
following by a dropped TD pass.  Joe had five chances with three punts
and two scores.  About what I would have expected, with 20/20
hindsight.

The diff was number of possessions.  Did the defense rise in the
second half, or did the Lions lay down like sheep?  With the score
10-3 at the half, and the ball-control the Lions were showing, it
looked like the Phoenix game in progress to me.  But Detroit came out
misfiring with the pass instead of the run, giving Montana the chances
to look good.  If He'd only had three possesions and Detroit had
scraped out one TD, it would have been 10-10 into OT, where SF would
have won.

The book is definately still out on Ware.  He looked good for 30
minutes, and turned erratic after intermission.  Still, I'd keep him
and trade Kramer or Peete.

If I were playing SF in the playoffs, I'd look very closely at what
Detroit was able to do in the first half.  Of the NFC teams in the
hunt, I'd say Dallas plays an offensive style most likely to give that
kind of trouble.

The monster nightmare for SF is a mirror of 80/81.  Dallas shocks SF
for the NFC crown, Montana is gone and Young's ego never recovers.
Eddie throws in the towel after a few more years of futility, and the
new owners hire a hungry new coach from the college ranks.  Maybe from
Miami or from Stanford, where Walsh has handed the reigns to a
disciple.  You read it here first :-).

The little nightmare is running into one of those defensive teams
they've already beaten (Vikes, Eagles, Saints) and having to rely on
Cofer to win a single digit or teen-point game.  Ugh :-(.

I'm pretty sure we won't get blown out of the show this year, like
that Vikings first round loss, or the Giant thumping.  None of the
other NFC teams looks to have the guns to score the points, except
maybe Dallas.  (I'm writing the 'skins off, though maybe I shouldn't).

Who said all Niner fans were woofers or whiners?  I'm paranoid.

-dB
-- 
Windows/NT - the VMS of the 90s
From: roberto@oliveb.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Roberto Ricca)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Detailed Playoff Picture [LONG]
Date: 25 Dec 92 09:10:50 GMT
Organization: Olivetti ATC

In article <1992Dec23.020507.17052@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> danp@sabre.bellcore.com (Daniel Pomplun) writes:
>

I don't know if this is a mistake. I'm just wondering:

>Kansas City (9-6)  Denver
>
>	win & SD win & Miami loss &
>	  points(Miami-NE)+32 > points(KC-Denver)	- WC2

In this scenario, shouldn't be taken into account also the outcome
of Buffalo@Houston game? If Houston wins, shouldn't be Houston
be WC2 and Kansas City WC3?

In fact, Miami, Houston and KC will be tied at 10-6. Houston is
initially left out because of conference record and Miami gets WC1
having better net points than KC.  After that, Houston re-enters
the picture and beats out KC for WC2 (head-to-head OT win back in
September).

########################################################################
# Roberto Ricca                 Email:      roberto@oas.olivetti.com   #
#----------------------------------------------------------------------#
#           1993:   GO GIANTS  (magic number:  163)                    #
#                   Anybody but the Dodgers                            #
########################################################################
From: chf0@harvey.gte.com (Curtis Fennell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: API All-Pro Team
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:30:03 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories

In article <1992Dec29.214507.7197@pbhyg.PacBell.COM> dggok@PacBell.COM (David G. Gok) writes:
>The 1992 Associated Press All-Pro Team, as selected by a panel of 80
>sportswriters and broadcasters:
>
>1st Team - Offense
>
>WR - Sterling Sharpe, GB; Jerry Rice, SF
>TE - Jay Novaceck, DAL 
>T  - Harris Barton, SF; Richmond Webb, MI

I'm a Miami fan, but the inclusion of Richmond Webb this year is a
mystery.  Anyone who's watched the Miami games with any regularity has
seen Webb make a lot of mistakes this year.  This is not to say that I
don't think he's one of the best tackles in the league, but I don't
think he's had an All-Pro year this year.

>G  - Randall McDaniel, MN; Steve Wisniewski, LA RAIDERS
>C  - Bruce Matthews, HO
>QB - Steve Young, SF
>RB - Emmitt Smith, DAL; Barry Foster, PITT
>PK - Pete Stoyanovich, MI

Ah, at last some recognition for "Pistol Pete" Stoyanovich.

>KR - Deion Sanders, ATL

>2nd Team - Offense
>
>WR - Michael Irvin, DAL; Andre Rison, ATL
>TE - Keith Jackson, MI
>T  - Steve Wallace, SF; Paul Gruber, TB
>G  - Guy McIntyre, SF; Mike Munchak, HO
>C  - Mark Stepnoski, DAL
>QB - (Tie) Randall Cunningham, PHIL; Jim Kelly, BUF

Kelly?  Marino has had a better year.  And Cunningham has been
inconsistent at best. And what about Aikman?

>RB - Thurman Thomas, BUF; Barry Sanders, DET
>PK - Morten Andersen, NO
>KR - Mel Gray, DET
>
>1st Team - Defense
>
>DE - Clyde Simmons, PHIL; Chris Doleman, MINN
>T  - Cortez Kennedy, SEA
>NT - Ray Childress, HO
>OL - Wilber Marshall, WASH; Pat Swilling, NO
>IL - Junior Seau, SD; Al Smith, HO
>CB - Rod Woodson, PITT; Audray McMillian, MINN
>S  - Henry Jones, BUFF; Steve Atwater, DEN
>P  - Rich Camarillo, PHO
>
>2nd Team - Defense
>
>DE - Reggie White, PHIL; Bruce Smith, BUF
>T  - Pierce Holt, SF
>NT - Greg Kragen, DEN
>OL - Rickey Jackson, NO; Seth Joyner, PHIL
>IL - Sam Mills, NO; Chris Spielman, DET
>CB - Gill Byrd, SD; Deion Sanders, ATL
>S  - Tim McDonald, PHO; Louis Oliver, MI
>P  - Rohn Stark, IND
>

I was upset when Bryan Cox of the Dolphins wasn't included, but he is
up against some outstanding competition.  It would be hard to say that
he is playing better than the others who were selected.

Curt

Curt "I always pick the Dolphins - even against Buffalo!"  Fennell
			DOLFAN in New England.             
'72 Dolphins - The perfect team in the perfect season - 17-0
'92 Dolphins - AFC East Division Champions
From: kist@acsu.buffalo.edu (james e kist)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Jills had their ass kicked
Date: 28 Dec 92 14:16:59 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <1992Dec28.072502.18765@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN) writes:
>In article <BzyFJB.5zo@acsu.buffalo.edu> kist@acsu.buffalo.edu (james e kist) writes:
>>What the hell's the deal with that stupid subject line? Can't you ever say
>>anything intelligent? (that was a rhetorical question)
>
>>
>Ah HA, sounds like a whiner here! How about the Buffalo Bills
>were soundly beat by a superior Defense and a 2nd string QB?
>Or how about Machine Gun Kelly was injured and the Bills fell
>apart? No?! Hmmmm, how about Glenn has three INTs and Del Rio
>and company thoroughly beat (not kick ASS) the Bills. Anyway
>you want to interpret it, the Bill LOST! 

How about, the Oilers beat a Buffalo team without four pro bowlers
(Cornelius Bennett, Bruce Smith, Jim Kelly, and Steve Tasker)? Or, how
about the Oilers won against a second string QB?

>-- 
> ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
>"To be absolutely certain about something, one must know
>everything or nothing about it."   Olin Miller
From: dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: NFC playoff picture questions
Date: 22 Dec 92 15:49:56 GMT
Organization: Tandem Computers (MPD) Austin, TX

OK, the Cowboys have the NFC East.  If they lose next week, and the Saints
win, and the Saints win the wildcard game, then the Cowboys and Saints
will play each other in the second round.  The question is, since they
both finished with 12-4 records, who will host?

The other question is:  if the Saints lose next week and the Eagles win,
then they play each other in one of the wildcard games.  Who will host
this game, since they both finish with 11-5 records?

Daniel Welch
From: ashley@oasis.gtefsd.com (Bob Ashley)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Backing into the Playoffs ...
Date: 28 Dec 92 15:09:57 GMT
Reply-To: ashley@oasis.gtefsd.com
Organization: GTE Federal Systems Division

In article 13853@uc.msc.edu,  bob@uh.msc.edu (Robert Hanson) writes:
>
>Oh, and I must not forget to congratulate last year's Super Bowl champions who
>have gracefully backed their way into the playoffs just like everyone said the
>Vikings would.           
>
>-Bob-
>A proud VIKINGS fan.
>

The last team that I recall "backing" into the NFC playoffs were the 1987
Vikings (courtesy of Dallas), but were given no chance heading into 12-3
New Orleans ... ummm, 44-10 for the Vikes.  The next week, they were given
the same amount of chance to beat 13-2 San Francisco ... final, 36-24,
Vikings.

They finally got some respect coming into Washington, as the line was only
4 or 5 points, and nearly sent the game into overtime ...

As a Redskins fan, they really don't deserve to be there, as they have not
played like a playoff team against the Raiders.  However, now that they have
been granted that "second life", as were the 1987 Minnesota Vikings, there's
no telling what will happen.


Bob - just thankful that they are going to Minneapolis ...   :-)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Ashley                        Internet:  Bob.Ashley@oasis.gtefsd.com

Member, Technical Staff            | Winter Bowling Leagues 1992-1993
   GTE Federal Systems Division    |    GTE FSD Mixed Secretary: Thu 17:45
   15000 Conference Center Drive   |    Thursday Mixups:         Thu 20:30
   Chantilly, VA   22021-3808      |    NFL Mixed Secretary:     Mon 21:00
   (703)-818- voice 4656  FAX 5484 |    Fantasy League Captain:  Team #1
From: ereiss@ocf.berkeley.edu (Edward Reiss)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: NY Times NFL Computer Rankings
Date: 31 Dec 1992 10:30:23 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: maelstrom.berkeley.edu


Here are the NY Times Computer Rankings based on games through Dec. 28:
(published without permission from the Wed. Dec30, NY Times)

Rank    Team                    Rating
----    ---------------------   ------

1       S.F. 49ers              1.000
2       S.D. Chargers           0.899
3       Dallas Cowboys          0.879
4       N.O. Saints             0.875
5       Phil. Eagles            0.869
6       Houston Oilers          0.809
7       Minn. Vikings           0.788
8       Pitt. Steelers          0.730
9       K.C. Chiefs             0.727
10      Buffalo Bills           0.702
11      Miami Dolphins          0.677
12      Wash. Redskins          0.657
13      G.B. Packers            0.622
14      Ind. Colts              0.611
15      L.A. Raiders            0.566
16      Cleve. Browns           0.533
17      Denver Broncos          0.497 
18      L.A. Rams               0.493
19      Detroit Lions           0.490
20      Atlanta Falcons         0.474
21      Phoenix Cardinals       0.449
22      N.Y. Giants             0.448 
23      Chicago Bears           0.373
24      T.B. Buccaneers         0.347
25      Cinc. Bengals           0.342
26      N.Y. Jets               0.338
27      Seattle Seahawks        0.231
28      N.E. Patriots           0.227

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: pbf@inoms.bellcore.com (Phil Franklin)
Subject: Brister Sacks the Steelers!
Organization: Bellcore
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 14:02:54 GMT

I am really disgusted with Brister (along with every other Steelers
fan in the country!).  Apparently, so are his coaches.  With 8 seconds
to go at the end of the first half, near the Vikings' 5-yard line,
Cowher opted for the field goal, rather than letting Brister take one
more shot at the end-zone.  That choice spoke volumes.  

The game with the Vikings was an intense defensive struggle, where the
Vikes' overall better offensive performance was balanced by their
mistakes -- three fumbles and a muffed snap on a short field goal.
Pittsburgh had some reasonable drives, but couldn't generate any
offense inside the Vikings 30-yard line.  And what chances they had,
Brister chose to squander.

What really burns me up about Brister's play is his stubborn refusal
to get rid of the ball the two times the Steelers drove down inside
the Vikings 25-yard line.  Each time he was sacked back at the 35-yard
line, taking the Steelers out of field goal range (the Steelers tried
the field goal once anyway, but it was blocked).  It's as if Brister
said, "I have to be the one to win us the game," as if he had to show
everyone that's he's just as good as he thinks he is.  This selfish
play cost the Steelers a game that their defense had done everything
(except score) to win for them.

Any news on O'Donnell returning next week?  Pretty please?

- Phil
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters)
Subject: Re: It wasn't Pretty (49ers WON)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 08:20:49 GMT

In <1992Dec24.220626.10700@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:

>How many playoff victories does Young have?  

At least one, possibly more.  He beat the Vikes back in '87, and there
was a lot of "quarterback controversy" talk at the beginning of the '88
season.  Though it died out completely by the time of Montana's absolute
destruction of Denver in the SB that year.  :-)  

But this is the first year that Young has started the season as 1st
string.  So, it's a little early to expect him to have a whole heck of a
lot of playoff victories.  :-)

>Although he missed 6 games last year (his first year starting)
>they had a better win/loss percentage with Bono.  Now he's having a
>great statistical year, but he's still got to compete with Montana's
>shadow

Last year Bono had a better record, but last year Young was not playing
up to the standards that he had set in earlier years with the Niners. 
Before last year (which was *not* the first year he started games,
merely the first year he was 1st string) he had compiled a *very*
impressive record.  Like I say, there's been debates in the local media
about whether Young or Montana should start as far back as '88. 

It's true that Young hasn't won any SB's (yet).  But I think that
there's little doubt among any who've watched him since he came to SF
that he is just as capable of leading the team to victory as Joe is.  He
had a slump last year, but this year, he has merely returned to form.
-- 
Chris Waters    | the insane don't | "Imaginary guitar notes [...] exist only
xtifr@netcom.COM| need disclaimers |  in the imagination of the imaginer" --FZ
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: hans2@rpi.edu (Soo-Chul Han)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Redskins prognosis
Date: 21 Dec 92 16:56:24 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute


Looks like the Redskins might not even make the playoffs. According to the
media, they would be left out in case of three way tie at 10-6 with G.B. and
Philly. I have the tiebreaker rules right in front of me, but still can't
figure out why. The rules are very ambiguous! Can anyone confirm this?

Obviously, we have to root for Philly and Minnesota to win next week. Although
someone pointed out that these will be meaningless games for the two, this
is NOT necessarily so. If Dallas lose tonight, Philly still has a chance of
winning the NFC east with a win and another loss by Dallas. Since Dallas plays
later that Sunday, Philly would want to beat Giants to keep pressure on Dallas.
Also, Minnesota would have something to play for, since they could become the
#2 seed ahead of Cowboys if they(Dallas) lose twice and Vikes win.

Should the Cowboys win tonight, Minnesota would be in no-win situation against
Pack, but Philly still might have something to play for. New Orleans plays 
Saturday at Jets, and should they lose, then Philly would host wildcard game
if they beat the Giants. Pretty complicated, huh!?

None of this would have been necessary if Ryp had not thrown away that game in
Phoenix earlier this year. I knew that game would haunt us.

Go Falcons! (just tonight)
Go Eagles! (Never thought I'd say this)
Go Vikes! (probable Skins opponent in opening round)
From: carrato@acsu.buffalo.edu (Michael Carrato)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Hey Ed Lor, Bills 4-0 vs NFC, one more NFC team to beat
Date: 23 Dec 92 04:46:55 GMT
Organization: UB

dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch) writes:

>In article <BzMoEo.6r8@acsu.buffalo.edu> evans@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Doug Evans - CIT Network Operations) writes:
>>In article <3181@devnull.mpd.tandem.com>, dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch) writes...

>He didn't say the better defense that day, he said the better defense, period.
>Sorry for the confusion.  My point is that the Saints defense, despite the
>loss, is still miles above the Bills'.

I think your analysis of the Bills defense is a little outdated. This
is not the same defense that got eaten alive last year. The run defense
is vastly improved, with a healthy line and a new line coach. At one point
the Bills had the lowest yds/rush in the league (this may or may not be 
true now). And the pass defense has been slowly but steadily improving
since the debacle at San Francisco.

I'd give the edge to the Saints D overall, but certainly not by "miles".
Not this year.

>Besides, the Saints don't have the powerhouse offense that the Bills have,
>or are supposed to have, anyway.  It was a close game, which means the Saints'
>defense played better, since their offense isn't as good.

Actually, the last few games the Saints have had the better offense. 
I think they've average ~25 points/game the last 9 games or so. The Bills
offense (with the notable exception of Thomas) has been pretty average
for over a month.

>me with *him*.  In fact, some of the best defenses in the league are in the
>AFC this year.  But they're in Kansas City, San Diego, and Houston, not in
>Buffalo.

I don't have any stats handy, but I'm willing to bet that if you don't
consider the Niners game the Bills defense ranks right up there with
the best in the AFC. That one game severely skewed the Bills stats.

Mike
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Subject: Re: Where will Joe go?
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 23:07:59 GMT

>In article <1992Dec31.174730.24957@odin.corp.sgi.com> barnes@cowboys.esd.sgi.com (James Barnes) writes:

>   Montana sure looked good in his audition Monday night.
>   In fact, he looked GREAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>   Where is he going to be playing next year?
>
>   L. A. Raiders??

Joe Montana in a Raiders uniform.  That would almost be enough
to turn me off of pro football:  one of the classiest and most
talented players ever, on a team with a bunch of cheap-shot felons
and a poisonous toad for an owner.  The worst part about it is
that it would make them pretty decent, for a year or two anyway.

In LA no less.  Ugh.

Montana a Raider -- HAH!!  Next you'll be telling me that Wade Boggs
-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974