HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tap1040@venus.tamu.edu (SPEED RACER)
Subject: Re: Cowboys aren't great (was: Re: EAGLES WILL GO 16-0 IF ANYONE DOES)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 05:17:00 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.143554.13971@midway.uchicago.edu>, epc1@midway.uchicago.edu writes...
> 
>One indication that the Eagles are a stronger team is the fact that their
>fans are announcing a perfect season possibility.  The Cowboys fans
>who are surely louder and more obnoxious and more numerous on the net
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Given the recent rantings of that lunatic Eagles fan (Lonestar) you
have got balls to get on here and say that Cowboys fans are obnoxious.

I also love your reasoning in your first sentence.  Just because some
fans woof a lot about 16 and 0 delusions does NOT mean they have the
better team.  All that means is that those fans are not living in
reality.

>have not had the courage to say the same despite their over zealous and
                  ^^^^^^^  SHOULD READ "FOOLISHNESS"
>sometimes unrealistic view of their team.  This shows that they are aware
>of their teams mortality despite living in the clouds.

Of course we know that the Cowboys could lose some games.  In fact I'll
go on record as a Cowboys fan who says that they *will* lose some games.
I just firmly believe that they will be a playoff team again, and once
you're in the playoffs, anything can happen.  (MHO)

I think everyone is aware of how both teams are playing.  Most of us
have ESPN and can watch _NFL PRIMETIME_ to get the highlights and
lowlights of all the games.  The simple fact is that either team could
win.  You don't know who.  I don't know who.  All we have is our
informed opinions.  If you don't like my opinions, fine, but don't call
Cowboys fans cowards because we don't have the stupidity to claim that
we are going to go undefeated.

>Anyone who feels that the Eagles are not a superior team than the Cowboys at
>this moment in the season is very unaware of how the Eagles are playing, blind,
>or just stupid.
>-- 
>En Pum Cho					

Now you're insulting people who have a different opinion than you do.
That's just plain idiotic. (and smells like Fascism.)

________________________________________________________________________________

                                     Tracy      
                              Texas A&M University
				       
John Madden: "There's a good sign.  Troy Aikman putting his pants back on."
Pat Summerall: "That's ALWAYS a good sign."    (RFK Stadium, Nov. 24, 1991)
________________________________________________________________________________
From: creasman@cheshire.oxy.edu (Scott Michael Creasman)
Subject: Re: Cardinal TE's
Keywords: Cardinal TE
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 02:21:31 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.230553.8240@pdn.paradyne.com> lej@pdn.paradyne.com (Leo James) writes:
>In article <1992Sep30.101049@IASTATE.EDU> s1dlr@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel L Rose) writes:
>>
>> 
>>Who are  the  Phoenix Cardinals playing at TE?
>>
>>THX,   dlr
>
>When they were here week 1 I thought that Jay Novacek was still their guy.

Jay Novacek hasn't been their guy for two years.  When Bugel came
to Phoenix, he wanted a TE that could block, and Novacek wasn't
it.  I'm sure most people know he's with Dallas now.

Scott

>--
>+---------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+
>|Leopold E. James     | "A heart, a soul, AND | AT&T Paradyne         |
>|ph: (813) 530-8425   |  a mind are terrible  | P.O. Box 2826, LG-132,|
>|lej@pdn.paradyne.com |  things to waste."    | Largo, FL 34649 (USA) |


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: Intentional Grounding
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 21:20:51 GMT

In article <4OCT92.20452420@vax.clarku.edu> htilney@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>Has this rule been altered lately?
>
>I saw it called against Marino and Kelly today, when neither seemed
>to be under pressure. Both were throwing into the end zone.

The only good about this is that the refs called it on both
QBs and the it did not effect the outcome of the game. I
think the refs are over reacting this year and are either
too quick to throw the flag or are blind.
-- 
  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@sysengr.pacbell.com	--------	
  "Fact are facts and will not disappear on account of 
   your likes."  -   Jawaharlal Nehru
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: cl129424@ulkyvx.louisville.edu
Subject: Re: Dangerous Dan
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 22:20:23 GMT
Organization: University of Louisville

In article <1992Sep29.191048.22289@dragon.acadiau.ca>, 890554h@dragon.acadiau.ca (Andrew Hoogerwerf) writes:
> Although I am Canadian and have watch Warren Moon play for the Eskimos
> there is no doubt in my mind that Dan Marino is by far the premiere
> QB in NFL no matter how many records Moon will brake.
> 

    I have to agree. In my biased opinion Dan is one of the two best
quarterbacks to ever play the game. The other? Some guy out west.


                         -doug THE dolfan-


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: kary@col.hp.com (Dan Kary)
Subject: Re: Dangerous Dan
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 22:08:05 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

dostalik@epcot.spdc.ti.com (Bill Dostalik) writes:
>                       ^^^^^^       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> Note that Marino *has* taken his team their twice also, but lost to
> the 49's and Redskins.
					^^^^^^^^
I think the Dolphins QB in the second Dolphins/Redskins superbowl was
David Woodley.  Bob Griese was the Dolphins QB the first time around.

Dan Kary

Organization: Freshman, MCS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 14:01:30 -0400 
From: Erik Karl Witte <ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Majik Favre update

Jeff Marten wrote:
> My best guess is that Favre will retain the starting job when
> Majkowski comes back.  Against the Steelers, Favre played better
> than Majkowski has since '89, and if he continues to perform well
> I see no reason to put Majik back in.  My main concern is that
> Favre is young.  Can talent and enthusiasm overcome inexperience?
> Comments?  Opinions?
I very much hope you're right.  Majkowski has not been the same since
his injury.  He has neither thrown as well as he did or posed the threat
to run - he seems to have lost the will to win that made him so good in
'89.  As a Packer fan, I never personally liked Majkowski, but Favre
really does impress me and I like him a lot.  The big question really is
whether he has the talent and the enthusiasm to overcome his
inexperience.  Talent, the answer is clearly yes.  He threw great passes
(for the first half) against one of the better secondaries in football,
burning three-time pro-bowler Woodson for both touchdown, the 76-yarder
to Sharpe and the pump fake out route to *Harris* (I think it was
Harris, but something tells me I'm wrong.)  Favre showed poise and
intelligence in throwing to secondary and tertiary receivers on a number
of plays for key gains.  As for enthusiasm, he has more than anybody
I've ever seen play the game.  I think he will gain valuable experience
and learn along with Holmgren.  The Packers, led by Favre, could become
quite an offensive threat in the next view games.  Critics may argue
that Favre's numbers were not that good.  The entire second half the
Packers played a very conservative offense, a good move for a young
quarterback in his first ever start.  

Erik Witte
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: Best Performance
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 21:47:41 GMT

In article <Adriene_Nazaretian.46.718309211@QM.YCC.YALE.EDU> Adriene_Nazaretian@QM.YCC.YALE.EDU (Go GIANTS!) writes:
>In article <1992Oct3.033956.26427@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>>From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
>>Subject: Re: Best Performance
>>Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 03:39:56 GMT
>
>>In article <91486@netnews.upenn.edu> satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair) writes:
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>The single best performance by a quarterback in a post season game (including
>>>all of Joe Montana's glory years) is by PHIL SIMMS (yay!) in the 1986 Super
>>>Bowl.  The pressed spoke of the opposing teams' great QB (Elway .. boo!) and
>>>Phil proved he belonged with the best of em going 22 for 25 for 287 yards,
>>>no interceptions.  In the second half of the game he was 10 for 10!
>>>
>>>satish nair
>>>
>>>Hey Adriene, us GIANTS fans are still here ... waiting for things to happen!
>>>
>
>>BIG DEAL! Montana has played FOUR SB's without ANY INT's; he has
>>scored the most points (total); passed for more yards; HE IS THE
>>BEST!
>
> John, can you post Joe "Party Animal" Montana's stats for his 
>superbowl performances. 
> 
>Yeah, he played in more SB's, overall giving him more yards, but were his 
>completion percentages better?
>
>I dont have the stats, but my bet is NOT!
>
>Adriene L. Nazaretian        
>Yale University              
>ADRIENE@YALEADS.BITNET        
>ADRIENE@YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU  

I will bet my orothodontist against your's. :-) Montana holds practically
ALL SB records. Why nick and pick over a couple? If you insist
though, I will try and obtain an official NFL, SB record stats for
you and post them for the world to see.

-- 
  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@sysengr.pacbell.com	--------	
  Let us be thankful for the fools; but for them the rest
  of us could not succeed.  -   Mark Twain
From: f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: NFL_1992 Scoreboard: Standings
Date: 6 Oct 92 08:28:17 GMT
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
Nntp-Posting-User: f67700241

Here are the NFL standings, as reproduced by the computer program.
===



                       AFC Standings


      AFC West          Season      Home       Away  
      -------------     W- L- T    W- L- T    W- L- T

      Denver            4- 1- 0    3- 0- 0    1- 1- 0
      Kansas City       3- 2- 0    2- 0- 0    1- 2- 0
      L.A. Raiders      1- 4- 0    1- 1- 0    0- 3- 0
      San Diego         1- 4- 0    1- 2- 0    0- 2- 0
      Seattle           1- 4- 0    0- 2- 0    1- 2- 0


      AFC Central       Season      Home       Away  
      -------------     W- L- T    W- L- T    W- L- T

      Houston           3- 1- 0    2- 1- 0    1- 0- 0
      Pittsburgh        3- 1- 0    1- 0- 0    2- 1- 0
      Cincinnati        2- 2- 0    1- 1- 0    1- 1- 0
      Cleveland         1- 3- 0    0- 2- 0    1- 1- 0


      AFC East          Season      Home       Away  
      -------------     W- L- T    W- L- T    W- L- T

      Miami             4- 0- 0    1- 0- 0    3- 0- 0
      Buffalo           4- 1- 0    2- 1- 0    2- 0- 0
      Indianapolis      2- 2- 0    1- 1- 0    1- 1- 0
      N.Y. Jets         1- 4- 0    1- 1- 0    0- 3- 0
      New England       0- 4- 0    0- 2- 0    0- 2- 0


                       NFC Standings


      NFC West          Season      Home       Away  
      -------------     W- L- T    W- L- T    W- L- T

      San Francisco     4- 1- 0    1- 1- 0    3- 0- 0
      New Orleans       3- 2- 0    1- 1- 0    2- 1- 0
      Atlanta           2- 3- 0    2- 1- 0    0- 2- 0
      L.A. Rams         2- 3- 0    2- 0- 0    0- 3- 0


      NFC Central       Season      Home       Away  
      -------------     W- L- T    W- L- T    W- L- T

      Minnesota         4- 1- 0    2- 0- 0    2- 1- 0
      Tampa Bay         3- 2- 0    2- 1- 0    1- 1- 0
      Green Bay         2- 3- 0    2- 1- 0    0- 2- 0
      Chicago           2- 3- 0    2- 1- 0    0- 2- 0
      Detroit           1- 4- 0    1- 2- 0    0- 2- 0


      NFC East          Season      Home       Away  
      -------------     W- L- T    W- L- T    W- L- T

      Philadelphia      4- 0- 0    3- 0- 0    1- 0- 0
      Dallas            3- 1- 0    2- 0- 0    1- 1- 0
      Washington        2- 2- 0    2- 0- 0    0- 2- 0
      N.Y. Giants       1- 3- 0    0- 2- 0    1- 1- 0
      Phoenix           1- 3- 0    1- 1- 0    0- 2- 0
-- 
Greg "Mockingbird" Franklin      Interviewer: "Sir, how do you spell relief?"
f67700241@ccit.arizona.edu               Dan: "R-O-L-A-I-D-S-E."

"[George Bush is] the most ruthless white man in the history of the planet."
	-- Richard Ben Cramer, author of _What It Takes_
"The President scores much better than Bill Clinton."
	-- Dan, comparing Bush's record of marital infidelity to Clinton's
Organization: Senior, Math/Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Date: Tue,  6 Oct 1992 20:10:39 -0400 
From: Vernon H Harmon <vh00+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: More Bermanisms...
Distribution: usa

Previous list from r.s.f.p.: 

 Reggie "Foghorn" Langhorne
 Vince Workman "my way back to you, babe"
 Thurman "Thermal" Thomas
 Brad "Colonel" Muster "with the football, in the endzone"
 Scott "Won't you let me take you on a" Secules
 "Who Framed" Roger Ruzek
 Steve "I Got You Babe" Bono
 Eric "Sleeping With" Bieniemy.
 Steve "A-Tisker-A" Taskers
 Toi's "In the Attic" Cook
 Andre "Bad Moon" Rison
 Barry "Never a disparaging" Word
 Todd "he's no Dan" Marinovich
 Jeff "Mick" Jaeger
 John "deep" Friez
 Dwight "and the Family" Stone
 Jeff "Boy" George
 Michael "Purple" Haynes
 JJ "the beast of" Birden
 Carl "Slim" Pickens
 Dwight "hands of" Stone

new ones from this weekend:

	Emile "Debbie" Harry
	Willie "Soviet" Drewrey
	Harry Sydney "Down Under"
	Sanjay "Muscle" Beach
	Kevin Butler "did it"
	Tony "Turn the" Page
	Ethan Horton "Hears a Who"

--Vernon.
From: chf0@harvey.gte.com (Curtis Fennell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Buffalo??  Philly??  Nope!!!
Date: 30 Sep 92 19:06:39 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories

In article <1992Sep30.154948.2987@news.stolaf.edu> alvstad@mari.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (Joel D Alvstad) writes:
> I started the rumble and now I'll settle it.  I will list the
> starting RB's (or at least who should be starting) of all NFL teams,
> and compare them with Davis. 
>AFC East
>Dolphins	Bobby Humphrey		Humphrey is better--much
>      					better.

Actually, Mark Higgs is starting for the 'Fins and is doing just fine,
thank you.  Don Shula doesn't seem to agree with you as to who should
be starting in Miami ;^).  But that's ok.  He doesn't consult me, either!

>As for the furor,I'm sorry for upsetting you fans of the Bills and
>the Eagles.  I like both teams and respect both teams.  I guess what
>I should have said is to shut up with the "Our team is 3-0, 4-0, etc."
>bullshit.  It's too early.  

Amen.

--
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
Organization: Sophomore, Civil Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Date: Thu,  1 Oct 1992 13:19:46 -0400 
From: John Wayne Weber <jw5f+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Power Ratings after week 4
	<BvEpy6.4Mq@vuse.vanderbilt.edu>

In article <16872C065.TSTEEGM3@ua1vm.ua.edu> TSTEEGM3@ua1vm.ua.edu (Tom Steegma
nn) writes:
>          OK, netters, after watching some of the power ratings here,
>my associate Jon Acker and I have devised our own.  I am in the process
>of writing a simple c program to automate this a bit. I hate the pen
>and paper method.  All statistics are from todays USA Today.  Today,
>the AFC, tommorrow the NFC and overall.
> 
>1.  Buffalo    29.1
>2.  KC         27.7
>3.  Miami      27.3
>4.  Houston    27.3
>5.  LA         27
>6.  Pittsburgh 26.9
>7.  San Diego  26.3
>8.  NY Jets    25.7
>9.  Seattle    25.1
>10. Denver     24.4
>11. Cleveland  24.4
>12. Cincinnati 24.2
>13. Indy       22.4
> 
This is a prime example of how misleading stats can be.  There is no way
an 0-4 team like the Raiders can be ranked 5th in the AFC. Stats fail to
take into account things such as inexperience, mistakes, ect.  Here is
my list based on NO  STATS:
 1.   Buffalo
 2.   KC
 3.   Miami
 4.   Pittsburgh
 5.   Houston
 6.   Denver
 7.   San Diego
 8.   Cincinnati
 9.   NY Jets
10.   LA
11.   Cleveland
12.   New England
13.   Seattle
14.   Indy

Stats have limited usefulness.  Think of the Monday Night game when
Marino drove Miami down the field in about a minute to put the Browns
away.  He would get the same stats that some rookie quarterback who
might take 5 minutes to score would get.  But who would you want
quarterbacking your team?

j.w.w.

"Reality can hit like a brick wall"  Me.
From: SFRELIAS@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Bring on the FISH
Date: 28 Sep 92 18:32:14 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo

We in Buffalo waiting for Maimi to come in and show the nation how tuna fish
is made (A la Buffalo style).
 
Anybody knows when was the last time Maimi won in Buffalo?
I hope we have old peopel on the net.
 
GO BILLS>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: pc0837@sarah.albany.edu (COHEN PAUL L)
Subject: Re: Power Ratings after week 4
Organization: State University of New York at Albany
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 14:00:53 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.220011.24726@macc.wisc.edu> heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:
>In article <16872C065.TSTEEGM3@ua1vm.ua.edu>, TSTEEGM3@ua1vm.ua.edu (Tom Steegmann) writes...
>
>>          OK, netters, after watching some of the power ratings here,
>>my associate Jon Acker and I have devised our own.  I am in the process
>>of writing a simple c program to automate this a bit. I hate the pen
>>and paper method.  All statistics are from todays USA Today.  Today,
>>the AFC, tommorrow the NFC and overall.
>
>Anybody can come up with power ratings.  How's your predictability?  
>My program is 38-14 for the year.
>
>JGH

That's a pretty good record. Maybe you would like to share some
of your predictions with us?
                                     -Paul
From: ew2r+@andrew.cmu.edu (Erik Karl Witte)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Cowboys can kick Bills Butt
Date: 28 Sep 92 03:52:29 GMT
	<!z#pgk#.gordons@netcom.com>
Organization: Freshman, MCS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

All this blabbering about NFC vs. AFC is irrelevant and boring.  Dallas
has won three games against fairly weak competition, and Buffalo has won
four games against fairly weak competition.  Take a look at some stats. 
Buffalo has the *best* offense in all of the NFL (#1 in points scored)
and this year they have a good defense.  Their defense isn't great,
admittedly, but is strong.  The defensive line is applying great
pressure, thanks mostly to the full health of Cornelius Bennett and
Bruce Smith.  They cleaned house against both Indianapolis and New
England, but that doesn't say an awful lot.  What does say a little more
are the scores:  38-0 and 41-7.  Allowing just one touchdown in two
games is good, regardless of what the teams are.  Any team in the league
can score a TD or two, or at least a couple of field goals against any
team.  The fact that they haven't indicates the effectiveness of the
Bills defense and the relatively small number of turnovers the offense
has committed.  
As for the petty NFC arguments going on, saying who beat who last year
is unimportant.  There are always upsets and there are always blowouts. 
Anybody who's really into these arguments, please go post somewhere else.
In the NFC, there are just a few teams that could go all the way.  In no
particular order, they are Washington, San Fransisco, Dallas, and
Philadelphia, and maybe even Minnesota (this isn't some fan cheering, I
hate the Vikings but they really have impressed me).  In the AFC,
Buffalo is the only really good team, followed by teams that are good
but always seem to choke like Denver, Miami and Kansas City.  Pittsburgh
looks good, but I'm not tempted to jump on their bandwagon (despite the
fact that I'm going to school here), especially after today's loss to
the Packers.  Next week will be a good indicator of how the season will
unravel.  The NFC has it's to satisfy those bickerers (Philly-Dallas),
and the AFC powers will meet (Denver-KC and Miami-Buffalo).  Let's look
after all this week's scores are in and compare PF/PA ratios and
records.  Then you'll see what teams have had the right stuff the first
four weeks.  My prediction right now is Bills beat San Fransisco in the
Super Bowl, but don't hold that against me.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: buckley@cs.tulane.edu (James Buckley)
Subject: Re: 49ers/Saints
Organization: Computer Science Dept., Tulane Univ., New Orleans, LA
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:48:10 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-15123]: amor

In article <nq+pklf.mzimmers@netcom.com> mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.032441.28570@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> marshall@nebula.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com writes:
>
>>To the refs' credit : the Saints' linebackers got called for offsides
>>several times in the game, deservedly so (i.e., even *I* screamed
>>"***O-F-F-S-I-D-E-S***" as the play started). And I think they got away
>
>I agree that the officiating sucked big time, but I wonder if those
>apparent but uncalled offsides were optical illusions on the TV viewer.
>Given that the Niners' linemen couldn't hear the snapcount, and that
>they can't watch the center as easily as a LB can, it's quite possible
>that the Aints' LBs were simply getting jumps on the ball faster than
>the Niners' line were.  To a TV viewer who can't really see the center,
>this would look like offsides, as the LB is across the line of scrimmage
>before you see the OL move.
>

"optical illusions" ... ha ha ha ... gimme a break!  I find it interesting
that the Niner's win and people (and I use that term loosely) are still
whining about this and that.  (maybe this is fallout from the Bills game :-)
I've heard of sore losers, but "sore winners"???  Oh well, till we meet
again ...


- Jim
GO SAINTS!!!
From: smorris@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Ron Morris )
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Lions News
Date: 30 Sep 92 16:11:00 GMT
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

RB Troy Stratford (sp?  Miami, KC) was signed.  RB Eric Lynch
was released along with LB Andre Jones (from the practice squad).
Dozier was officially waived goodbye (I like it.  He goes to
court to get declared a free agent, nobody wants him, then the
Lions cut him anyway.)

Injuries:  As predicted, Rodney Peete got hurt.  Has a sprained
ankle.  Word is he is very doubtfull for the Saints.  CB Ray
Crockett also has a bad leg and is also doubtful.  Official
injury lists come out later today, so their status may change.

Fontes is talking about going back more to the run and shoot.
He seemed to be indicating that they'll use the R&S to drive the
ball then switch to the two TE set inside the 20.  He wasn't too
clear about it, though.  What is clear is that the Lions just
don't have the OL personnel to play power football the way
Henning wants to.  Everybody seems to agree that going back is a
good idea.

The defense fading in the 4th quarter is a concern.  I don't think
you can just blame the offense not keeping the ball.  Fontes
talked about increasing conditioning work.  Perhaps it could be
lack of experience.  It seems it should be a correctable problem,
because I just don't see how the defense can dominate for three
quarters and then disappear time and time again.  

Ron
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro