HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tomscud@ruf.rice.edu (Thomas Reid Scudder)
Subject: Re: Who the hell was Al Michaels?
Organization: Rice University
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 16:43:18 GMT

In article <y+ppmca@lynx.unm.edu>, kbos@carina.unm.edu (Kurt "Some Guy" Bose) writes:
|> In article <1bfvbaINNjo3@shirley.cs.widener.edu> austin@cs.widener.edu (Jeff Austin) writes:
|> >
|> >	OK, I know who Gifford was, and not that I care, I know who Dierdork
|> >	was.  But can someone clue me in on Al Michaels?  Does he have anything
|> >	even remotely related to football in his past?  The only thing people
|> >	seem to be able to tell me about him is that his left eye is crooked.
|> >
|> >					Jeff
|> >
|> Well, he first came to national recognition in the mid-70's as the radio man for
|> the Big Red Machine in Cincinnati, having accepted the position in 1971 after
|> working in Hawaii, running play-by-play in the PCL.  He joined ABC in 1976,
|> working on ABC's baseball telecasts.  In 1986, he joined MNF as the play-by-play
|> man, with Gifford moving to color commentary.
|> 
|> (OK, I admit it...I didn't know this, but Michaels was on Letterman fifteen 
|> minutes ago or so...)
|>
You left out probably his single most famous quote (from when he was doing
hockey play by play for the 1980 Olympics:  "Do you believe in miracles?  I do!"
-- 
Tom Scudder                    tomscud@ruf.rice.edu
"It's 106 miles to Chicago, we have a full tank of gas, a half pack of
cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses."
"Hit it."
-The Blues Brothers
From: un032221@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Rating the QBs
Date: 12 Oct 92 19:34:23 GMT
Organization: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing

In article <1992Oct6.213534.8468@macc.wisc.edu>, heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:
> In article <BvpsM9.LAL@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v130pwbq@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (ANTI-CHRIST) writes...
> 
>>Athlon has devised a system that is not only fair but more realistic.
>>It works like so: If a QB is first lifetime in total yds he recieves a rating
>>of 1. If he is third in lifetime total yds he recieves a rating of 3.
>>The remaining criteria afterwards count only half. So if a QB is eighth 
>>lifetime in total yds he recieves 8 x .5 = 4 rating. If he is third in 
>>percentage of completions, he recieves 3 x .5 = 1.5 rating. Finally if his
>>interception total is second least among all-time greats he recieves a 
>>2 x .5 = 1 rating. Now add his five numbers, the lower the number the 
>                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Greater the quarterback.Here is their list of the Top 20 all-time Greats:
>  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> [List deleted.]
> 
> I think this should say "the lower the number the Greater the passer" 
> because it doesn't take into account things like leadership, play 
> calling, scrambling ability, etc.

What system does?  If I had access to all the stats of the NFL, on every game
etc.  I'll bet I could sit down and bang out a decent QB rating, not passer
rating system.
> 
> Actually, I don't think you can even draw any conclusions about who's
> the better passer from this because rule changes make things like Pct. 
> Comp. incomparable within different eras.
> 
> JGH

	Not only does that argument make it invalid, but if a QB plays 10
years, and racks up phenom numbers and retires by choice for whatever reason,
 then an ok QB plays 20 years, and breaks the gross stats for that player,
then the ok QB gets a better rating thanthe 10 year phenom, simply because he
chose to stay longer.  Tarkenton leads many passer categories because he played
for so damned long.  any passer rating should reflect averages, yet not overly
reward the passer that comes in, throws two passes, and leaves.
	-Skins fan that finds it hilarious that Rypien has such a low rating.
From: johndoe@squid.inmet (johndoe)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: John Elway's Comebacks.
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:51:20 GMT
	<1992Oct7.194732.15731@PacBell.COM>
	<b7Tl03xoa11300@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>
Organization: Intermetrics, Inc.

In article <b7Tl03xoa11300@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> ronnie@uts.amdahl.com (Ronnie Townsend) writes:
>spanking title by a large margin unless you count the Patriots' 45-10
>ass-kickin they took in their only appearance. 

again, i hate to be the one who does this, being a patriots fan (as well as
an avid broncos fan), but the score was 46-10.  easy to remember, since it
was the bears' "46" defense that helped produce that score.

>-- 
>Ronnie

-johndoe
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: NFL_1992 Scoreboard: Predictions for Week 7
From: f67700241@violet.ccit.arizona.edu (Greg Franklin)
Date: 12 Oct 92 23:09:16 MST
Distribution: world,local
Organization: University of Arizona
Nntp-Posting-User: f67700241

Here are the computer program's Week 7 predictions.  All woofers please
note the Eagles-Redskins prediction.




        
                     Week #7 Game Predictions


       Tampa Bay      ___   21          Kansas City    ___   25

     @ Chicago        ___   26        @ Dallas         ___   21



       N.Y. Giants    ___   24          Detroit        ___   26

     @ L.A. Rams      ___   19        @ Minnesota      ___   24



       New Orleans    ___   25          Atlanta        ___   24

     @ Phoenix        ___   11        @ San Francisco  ___   31



       Philadelphia   ___   21          Green Bay      ___   17

     @ Washington     ___   24        @ Cleveland      ___   20



       Houston        ___   25          San Diego      ___   18

     @ Denver         ___   18        @ Indianapolis   ___   12



       Cincinnati     ___   19          L.A. Raiders   ___   19

     @ Pittsburgh     ___   25        @ Seattle        ___   11
-- 
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
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jag@unislc.uucp (John Ganske)
Subject: Re: Telecast of Lions-Vikings game
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 18:41:30 GMT

>>Can anybody tell me which TV-network carries the live
>>telecast of today's game between the Lions and the Vikes.
>>
>>Thanx
>>S.H
>>
>I believe it's TNT (turner network television)
Lucky for me the game is also on channel 4 here in the Minneapolis,
St. Paul area.  I'm lucky for these reasons:

   1. Gotta see the Vikes
   2. No cable to our farm
   3. Couldn't afford cable anyway (used to have it in the city - boy, do I   
      miss Berman and Primetime)
   4. (need I say) Can't afford a dish
   5. Can't take the kids to a sports bar

   Are all (non-blacked-out) ESPN and TNT games also on local channels?
   I didn't notice since I was living in an NFL desert for the past 4 years.

   John Ganske
From: 00h@pnet16.cts.com (Rmc{Sw} Brooks)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Call For Votes: Painful Death to All Premature Woofers
Date: 13 Oct 92 03:16:03 GMT
Organization: People-Net [pnet16], NCTAMS EASTPAC

You have my vote, for this proposal of death to woofers and for becoming a
Saturday Night Live cast member. That is to say you gave me the best laugh I
have had in a while. 

  PLEASE folks, can we talk football and not rant about how it reflects on
your mother if your favorite team loses?

Walt

UUCP: humu!nctams1!pnet16!00h
ARPA: humu!nctams1!pnet16!00h@nosc.mil
INET: 00h@pnet16.cts.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: johndoe@squid.inmet (johndoe)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Rating the QBs
Date: 8 Oct 92 21:09:15 GMT
Organization: Intermetrics, Inc.

In article <29710092@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM> garyr@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Gary Rosen) writes:
>>gary@colossus.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand) /  2:43 pm  Oct  6, 1992 /
>>Take away Rice, Taylor, and Craig, and I bet Joe Montana would
>>  not have had such a spectacular career.
>
>[ possible evidence not included ]
>There is plenty of evidence that Joe made others look good as there is
>for the opposite contention.

i would have to agree with this assessment.  even a couple of years ago,
during the 49ers last super bowl appearance, only five players were listed
among those participating in all four 49ers super bowl appearances, one
being joe montana.  i've stayed out of most of these qb debates, because
trying to say "sammy baugh was the greatest of all time" is hard to do and
properly back up, but to say that joe montana is only good because for half
of his career he has had stellar support is ludicrous.  joe montana helped
take a perennial loser (witness back-to-back 2-14 seasons in the late 70s)
and turn them into a super bowl winner.  joe montana would have had a pretty
spectacular career playing for any half-decent organization, just as john
elway, dan marino, bernie kosar, and jim kelly have had spectacular careers
in the same time frame playing for teams that have shelled out the bucks to
only a lesser degree than the 49ers during the same time-frame.

>- Gary Rosen

-johndoe
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: Adriene_Nazaretian@QM.YCC.YALE.EDU (Go GIANTS!)
Subject: Re: Best postseason QB performance (was Re: Best Performance)
Organization: Yale University Computing & Information Systems
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 11:57:52 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.003846.23341@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Michael.P.Colburn@dartmouth.edu (Michael P. Colburn) writes:
>From: Michael.P.Colburn@dartmouth.edu (Michael P. Colburn)
>Subject: Re: Best postseason QB performance (was Re: Best Performance)
>Date: 13 Oct 92 00:38:46 GMT

>'Scuse me folks...all these stats are way cool, but I do recall at the
>beginning of this thread, we were discussing the best SINGLE game
>postseason QB performance...and as pointed out earlier, that honor goes
>to Phil Simms in SB XXI!  

>- Mike

Thank you VERY MUCH MIKE !
YESSS!!!  The HONOR does go to Phil Simms!  

Anyway, its obviously the last honor he'll have, because the more I hear 
from the press about his injury the more I'm convinced it was the career 
ending one.  :-(   
Adriene L. Nazaretian        
Yale University              
ADRIENE@YALEADS.BITNET        
ADRIENE@YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU
From: un032221@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Free Agency
Date: 16 Oct 92 12:33:39 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing

In article <1992Oct5.085434.661@totaltec.com>, mark@totaltec.com writes:
> In article <1992Oct2.152935.1623@macc.wisc.edu>, heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:
>> In article <1992Oct1.125700.21926@hemlock.cray.com>, rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes...
>> 
>>> 
>>>Why not have a draft for C-Sci majors?
>>> 
>>>In article <0emUe0200WB2QIlnwj@andrew.cmu.edu>, Christopher Glenn Huegle <ch44+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>>>> Well, so far we have Jackson going to Marino and slaughter going
>>>> to Moon. Obviously, any reciever in hi right mind would go to a
>>>> good quaterback, so teams with bad QB's will have no passing attack
>>>> at all (Bad QB+Bad WR=0)  Of course these teams will score a lot,
>>>> which will attract the good defensive free agents and the good teams
>>>> will get better.

Actually, this can only last so long.  What ends up happening, is that one team
get to much talent, cannot pay it, and either cuts back, allowing all it's big
namers to jump teams, or has to sell to a new owner right out.  Either way, you
might have some 5-10-maybe even 15 year power teams, but they can't keep it up
for to long, or they go bankrupt.  Also, there will be fewer players per team. 
As the cream of the crop's salaries go up, the owners will search for a way to
keep total salary down to a manageable level.  That means the lower half of the
players are cut loose, because owners still want the big $$$ from ticket sales.

>>>And C-Sci majors will want to go to the most advanced, highest paying
>>>companies... (no one will want to write COBOL...)
>> [Analogy between drafting NFL players and CS majors deleted for 
>> brevity.]
>> 
>> Companies *compete* against each other.  NFL teams, in reality, do not
> What REALITY are you refering to? I watched some games yesterday and the
> teams were definitily competing against each other!

No, he's right.  The only way teams compete finacially, is to get hteir home
area fans to flood to the stadium, and that means winning.  So they do compete
a little, but the NFL cuts it's TV revenue, the bulk of it's income, evenly.
So th Washington Redskins, win the SB, but in reality they made not much more
money than did the Colts at 1-15 (not much of course being proportional.  When
talking in billions, millions is not that big a deal.)
	-Skins fan with just one thing to say: "WAY TO GO MONK!!!"
From: jwc@netx.com (Jeff Comer)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Intolerable all-caps Eagles woofing
Date: 13 Oct 92 15:48:56 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Chaos Bobs

aperkins@lonestar.utsa.edu (Aaron B. Perkins) writes:
>SO HERE ARE THIS WEEKS PREDICTIONS OF THE K.C. GAME.......
>                                EAGLES 27
>                                K.C.   10

You should have stopped while you were ahead. But ah, I see, you are
an Eagles fan.

-jc
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: logan@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Richard Scott)
Subject: 2nd string qb for Rams in 1990
Summary: name needed
Keywords: who was he
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:09:45 GMT

Would someone be able to tell me the name of the Rams second string
quaterback in 1990 please?

Thanks,
        Richard  

-- 
AussieVamp 
AussieMan, Neophyte Vampire and DarkWolf
(Eric Clapton is God!!!)   [ and there is Bobby Fischer... ;-) ]
(Walter Payton, Mike Singletary and Neal Anderson form the Holy Trinity!)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: brian@intercon.com (Brian Lichorowic)
Subject: Re: Colts and Bills
Reply-To: brian@intercon.com (Brian Lichorowic)
Organization: InterCon Systems Corp
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 13:11:52 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.200516.8109@sarah.albany.edu>, pc0837@sarah.albany.edu 
(COHEN PAUL L) writes:
> 
> In article <Bw4Fxu.L60@acsu.buffalo.edu> v130pwbq@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu 
(ANTI-
> CHRIST) writes:
> >I don't know how many of you out there have noticed but after this sunday's
> >game, at home against I believe Cleveland, the Indianapolis Colts could be
> >4-2. This would put them in a tie with the Bills. When you think about it,
> >it's kinda funny how a team that went 1-15 last year could be tied with a
> >team that went 13-3 and to the Super Bowl the same year.  
> >  
>   

> 
> Wow, I didn't really think about that untill your posting. The Colts
> probably will win this week, and be in a tie with the Bills. However,
> look for the Bills to come back from their off week stronger than ever.
> The Colts on the other hand will probably start to sway away from
> victories.


The Colts play San Diego this week then they play them again in 2 weeks... 
for the rest of the season, they play New England twice,Phoenix,Cincinnati, 
the Jets again and Pittsburg,, These are all winable game for the Colts.. the 
real challange is when they play some high caliber teams. the Dolphins twice 
in three weeks, and Buffalo again .

Don't count them out their last place schudule along with Ted M having them 
believe they can win in any situtation, (pretty or Ugly) just might surprise 
and the skeptics....

Brian Lichorowic
From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Packers starting QB - Majik or Favre
Date: 13 Oct 92 15:44:59 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center

In article <1992Oct13.141618.29189@cis.ohio-state.edu>, martens@python.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) writes...

>Based on what I've seen, I'd say Favre is the better QB and I'd
>start him.  The argument for starting Majkowski, as I see it, is
>twofold:
> 
>(1) The "you don't lose your job due to an injury" argument.
> 
>(2) If we don't give Majkowski a chance now, we may never know if
>he can recapture his old form.
> 
>(1) is a crock.  Players lose their jobs all the time due to
>injury, and (as Todd pointed out) Holmgren has already said that
>this isn't a solid policy.

Yeah, usually coaches in this situation just say "He didn't lose his 
job because of the injury.  He lost it because player XXXX is better."

>(2) is maybe worth some consideration.  But Majkowski looks lost
>on the field, and wasn't performing.  How many chances do you give
>him?

One more.

>Humorous aside:  last week's "Sporting News" says that Favre is
>more elusive than Majkowski.

They gotta be kidding.  I'd say the probability of Majkowski regaining 
his old form are pretty slim.  But I don't think one more shot is 
going to hurt anything.  It's not like the Packers are going to make 
the playoffs anyway.

I don't think the Majik is missing much if anything physically from 
where he was in 1989.  I think his problem is between his ears.

>  Favre is certainly sufficiently
>mobile, but I think the perception that he's more elusive than
>Majkowski may come from the fact that he really unloads the ball
>quickly (and on target) when under a heavy rush.  Majkowski (and
>Tomczak and Kiel) hold it until just after the last second.

This is entirely true.  Majik used to have just about the fastest 
release north of Miami.  What happened to that?

>Prediction #1:  Favre starts Sunday and Green Bay squeaks out a
>win in Cleveland.
> 
>Prediction #2:  Majkowski starts Sunday and the Browns blow the
>Packers off the field, Tomczak being the winning QB.  Expect
>fumbles at key moments by Majkowski.

I don't think one player is going to make that much difference.  I 
think the Packers are more likely to win with Favre at QB but I expect 
it to be a close game either way.

JGH
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: rlopez@loanstar.tamu.edu (Robert Lopez)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Denver (and a Montana note)
Keywords: eat more moose
Date: 14 Oct 92 14:38:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: tamsun.1992Oct14.143828.17891
Organization: The Hosequarium South

In article <1992Oct13.174850.20621@kronos.arc.nasa.gov>, blah@maas-neotek.arc.nasa.gov (TWF) writes:
|> 
|> Just a quick note from today's (10/13/92) Boston Globe:
|> 
|> Joe Montana is reported to have lost feeling in the "lower two
|> fingers" of his throwing hand (not really sure which fingers are the
|> "lower two").
|>  

That would be his pinkie and his ring finger, and indicates a
problem with his ulnar nerve - possibly in his elbow or wrist.

uh oh.

as has been stated previously, poke him with a stick, he's done.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------
Robert E. L\'{o}pez       |       Internet:
Texas LoanSTAR Program    |       rlopez@loanstar.tamu.edu
The Hosequarium South     |       rlopez@cs.tamu.edu
----------------------------------------------------------
                 Texas A&M University 
                   boohoo.onyou.edu
----------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: thaddeus@vuse.vanderbilt.edu (Thaddeus R. Crews)
Subject: Re: Dallas got lucky on MNF!! Eagles should've won 100 - 0.
Organization: Vanderbilt University School of Engineering, Nashville, TN, USA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 15:30:08 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.144109.455@midway.uchicago.edu> epc1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.185154.14315@coe.montana.edu> icsu0182@cs.montana.edu (Sean) writes:
>>In article <1992Oct9.190957.21425@midway.uchicago.edu> epc1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>
>>>Damn those Cowboys got really lucky on Monday Night Football.
>>>
>>>Third, Seth Joyner hurt his knee and had trouble defensively in the first
>>>	half.  If he hadn't hurt himself, he would have caused 3
>>>	fumbles instead of just one that night and had two interceptions,
>>>	running both of them for touchdowns!!  Freak injury
>>>	helped Lucky Dallas again.
>...
>>>Eighth, the Cowboys were lucky that the game wasn't played in Dallas or
>>>	the Eagles would have had 11 sacks like last year.  But in Philly,
>>>	the only had four sacks.
>>>
>>>Man, those Cowboys got so lucky.  I saw 14 touchdowns the Eagles could have
>>>	had if the Cowboys hadn't gotten so lucky.
>>>Well, there's always the game in Dallas.  The Cowboys will definitely not
>>>	get so lucky there!!!
>>
>>What did you have for breakfast?  Holy cow!  This is the biggest bunch of  
>>miscellaneous babble that I have ever seen...Go post this crap else where.
>>I am not flaming the guy for being an Eagles fan, as I have always
>>respected the Eagles for the great team that they are, but all of these ifs
>>don't amount to a hill of shit because of the fact that none of these 
>>happened, and 100 pts?  Come on! The Eagles are good, but not that good.
>>-- 
>>  =========================================================================
>>     Sean Reid                  ||   "F...You're a gimp." 
>
>When I posted this, I never expected to see a response like this.
>People need to understand what is serious in life and what isn't.
>-- 
>En Pum Cho					epc1@midway.uchicago.edu

I'm telling you people, you have got to use the smiley.   :-) 
Poor SEAN had no idea you were being funny.  :-(    <-- poor SEAN -- 

Now SEAN has this reaction   :-0   <--- "Ooooh"  as in surprise and alarm

-- 
-- Thad Crews                              (email thaddeus@vuse.vanderbilt.edu)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The past three presidents have been elected by a total margin of approximately
3 million votes.  There are 10+ million students currently attending college
From: bittle@niktow.canisius.edu (Jason Bittle)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: * MNF Phil 31 Dal 7
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:13:10 GMT
Organization: Canisius College, Buffalo NY. 14208

well, Dallas got beat not by luck, but by a Eagles team.

Believe me, I am one of the biggest Cowboys fans there is (I used to live
there, then moved north).. and sorry, but they lost.

I'm not going to go crying to mommie cause they lost, it's a football games,
there has to be a winner and a loser.  And right now, the Cowboys lost.

Be prepared, Eagles, for when the series moves to Texas, we won't have those
"big hearts".. :)



-- 
ciao,                             
Jason Bittle (bittle@canisius.edu) 
(a.k.a. Pillsbury Dough Boy )
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Subject: Re: Two Different Games Eagles/Cowboys
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date:  8 OCT 92 14:51:42    

In article <1992Oct7.201456.22710@csc.ti.com>, rscott@ra.csc.ti.com (Roderick Scott) writes...

>Let's Hear From Some Non-Cowboys/Eagles Fans On Which Game They Saw..

I definately got the impression that the Eagles dominated.  In fact, 
when somebody posted a message saying that bad luck beat the Cowboys, 
I asked "Is this a joke?"  I meant it - I couldn't believe someone 
would have gotten that impression from the game.  Being able to force 
errors and to take advantage of them the way the Eagles did is one 
sure sign of a dominant team.

And there's no excuse for making all those mistakes the way the 
Cowboys did.  Mistakes are part of the game.  It's simple - you make 
mistakes, you lose ballgames.  Luck is not a factor.  I could just 
as legitimately say that it's just bad luck that the Packers won just 
10 games the past 2 seasons because they led the league in fumbles 
over that time.

The Eagles were the better team that night.  No doubt about it.

>This Should Settle The Argument.... 

You gotta be kiddin' me.

JGH
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro