HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jason@cray.com (Jason Parker)
Subject: Steve Jordan INJ Update
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 7 Oct 92 10:07:59 CDT

In article <1992Oct5.135820.29253@walter.cray.com>, jason@cray.com (Jason Parker) writes:
>  
> TEAM
> Minnesota Vikings (4-1 1st NFC Central)
> 
> INJURIES
> Steve Jordan (sprained knee & ankle)
> 

Dennis Green on a talk radio show said Jordan's MRI turned up negative
and the knee is fine.  His ankle was less bruised on Monday than they
expected.  Since the Vikings have an off week this week, there is 
every indication that Jordan will be 100% for the game verses Detroit.

Jason Parker
jason@cray.com
From: centry@athena.mit.edu (Jae H Nam)
Subject: Re: Cunningham's QB rating
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 20:43:16 GMT

>There are many who think it's A FLUKE that Cunningham leads the NFL in QB
>    rating. There are some that think his stats will drop. I disagree.

I'll admit it.  I didn't realize I wrote such a STUPID sentence.
As many a politician would say, "I misspoke."  I wasn't thinking
when I wrote that.

I know Cunningham's not going to pass over 70 percent for the
rest of the season.  (Although, he's the first QB ever to pass
over 70% in three consecutive games - I read it in a little
blurb in the Boston Globe). To continue to do so would be pretty
darn near impossible.

When I said "I disagree.", I meant that I disagree with the people
who think it's a fluke that Cunningham's up there at the top.  I
disagree with those who think that Cunningham can't win the big
game.  I disagree with those Cunningham detractors and doubters out
there who don't give him his just due (why do they constantly put
him down? I don't know.).

I didn't want to hype Cunningham as the greatest QB of all time.
I just wanted the man to get some respect for what he has done
under conditions that few QB's, if any, would have been able to
succeed in.

That's about it.  I hope I didn't say anything as stupid again.

(And I hope the Eagles can stick it to the Skins at RFK!
 Should be a very tough game....)


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: fish@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Eric West)
Subject: Re: Rypien:Skins golden boy is Fool's Gold
Followup-To: rec.sport.football.pro
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 00:53:00 GMT


Maybe someone already addressed this topic, I haven't checked all 500
unread articles yet...

As a resident of the DC area since 1984, it seems to me that the Redskins
organization, the Redskins' fans, and the local sports media have placed
entirely too much emhpasis on finding the "right" quarterback that will
suddenly end all their "sorrows" (If you can call 3 Super Bowl victories in
10 years "sorrows").  If the Redskins win, the quarterback is great; if
they lose, it's all the quarterback's fault, and instantly they begin
searching for another one.  If the 49ers had dumped Joe Montana just
because the team went 2-14 (or something like that) after winning Super
Bowl XVI, or just because they ran up against excellent Bears and Giants
teams in the two years following Super Bowl XIX, they would have made a
huge mistake. 

Schroeder was good for awhile, but he (read: the team) has a bad season,
and he's gone.  Williams was great in Super Bowl XXII, but then he doesn't
repeat and it's goodbye.  The quarterback is *not* the whole team.  Joe
Montana would not be as famous today as he is if not for Dwight Clark,
Freddie Solomon, Jerry Rice, John Taylor, Roger Craig, Ronnie Lott, and any
number of other team players on the 49ers.

I'm not putting down the Redskins as a team; Joe Gibbs is one of the
smartest coaches in the NFL, and it's no fluke that the team has been able
to win three Super Bowls.  But the lack of continuity caused by constantly
switching quarterbacks the minute one doesn't "work out" can't be helping
the team.  Rypien has proven that he is a good quarterback, one of the best
in the NFC if you believe last year's stats.  For once, I wish whoever
makes the decisions about quarterbacks for the Redskins would stop saying
"What Have You Done For Me In The Past Two Weeks" and hang onto someone
with promise and talent.  Maybe they could concentrate on other parts of
the team.  But that's another story...
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Subject: Re: We ARE Part of the team (was Re: HAIL THE BROWNS)
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date: 14 OCT 92 21:44:26    

In article <Adriene.82.0@Yale.EDU>, Adriene@Yale.EDU (Adriene Nazaretian - GO GIANTS) writes...

>In article <1992Oct14.180815.23889@daffy.cs.wisc.edu> jeffr@ssec.
>wisc.edu (Jeff Ramin) writes:>From: jeffr@ssec.wisc.edu (Jeff Ramin)
>>Subject: Re: HAIL THE BROWNS
>>Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 18:08:15 GMT
> 
>>In article <dn2001-131092152526@m248-103.bgsu.edu>, dn2001@andy.bgsu.edu (Dan Nolan) writes:
>>|> THE BROWNS RULE!!!!!!!!!!
>>|> 
>>|> THAT'S ALL AND NOTHING ELSE.
>>|> 
>>|> GREENBAY DOESN'T STAND A CHANCE AGAINST US.
>>                                           ^^
> 
>>Are you a member of the team?  There's very few things more annoying than fans
>>using the term "us" instead of "them".  Occasionally, I'll even hear a very
>>poor broadcaster doing this.
> 
>Sorry I completely disagree.  Yes you ARE a member of the team, when you are 
>a fan.  I always use "WE" when talking about "MY" NY Giants team.  
> 
>Good fans should consider themselves part of the team. I guess you just 
>arent in that catagory.  You are probably just a bandwagon hopper, a fair 
>weather fan who comes around when YOUR team is doing well.
> 
>We help psych the team up, we are there for them, as much as they are 
>for us.
> 
>Broadcasters are another story, because they are supposed to be impartial.


The problem is that alot of the time when someone refers to themselves
as 'we' it's a sign that they've lost touch with reality.  Many of 
the fans in the newsfroup identify a little *too* closely with their
favorite team.  Any comment against the team is taken as a personal
insult.  Not saying this is true of this particular Browns fan.

Of course, this does not apply to residents of Green Bay who really 
*are* part owners of the team.  :-)

JGH


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: killer@robin.cs.hut.fi (Kalle Kivimaa)
Subject: Re: Rules Question??
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 22:51:08 GMT

In <1992Oct16.130647.29362@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu> rhoenes@picasso.ocis.temple.edu (Richard Hoenes) writes:
>Ok, now define muff. To me it makes no sense that if the ball hits you
>in the hands and you don't catch it, you retain possession; but if the
>ball hits you someplace else like your foot, or in the back when you
>are trying to avoid the ball, the ball is up for grabs.

??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

A muff is "the touching of the ball by a player in an unsuccesful
attempt to obtain posession of a loose ball".

I don't quite understand your two examples, in both cases the
posession remains to the team that had it before the ball became
loose.

Some definitions to clarify (ha ha):
Posession, team:  a player of that team has posession or was the last
		player to do so.

Posession, player: a player has posession if he has the ball under
		control (f.ex. securely in his hands).

Loose, ball: a live ball not in player posession.

Fumble: any act other than a pass or legal kick which results in
		loss of player posession.

Muff: see above.

Touching the ball: refers to ANY contact (hands, feet, head, etc.).
--
************************************************************************
* The night sky over the planet Krikkit is the least interesting sight *
* in the entire Universe.  -- Douglas Adams, HHGTG                     *
************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: Wild cards
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:04:26 GMT

In article <oerCVlC00WB9IWfUxt@andrew.cmu.edu> cs6t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Calvin D. Swartzentruber) writes:
>Amen.  Why should 10-6 Eagles be excluded from the playoffs, just
>because they were in a tough conference, when 9-7 and even 8-8 (I think
>there were some) got in.  The system sucks!

No kidding. I remember the 49ers not making it last year,
same reason. It truly sucks, but that is life in the NFL.
-- 
  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@sysengr.pacbell.com	--------	
"I do not think that winning is the most important thing. 
I think winning is the only thing."    - Bill Veeck
From: cumminje@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.edu(James Cummings)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: scores?
Date: 11 Oct 1992 20:01:31 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Department at Rose-Hulman
Reply-To: cumminje@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.edu(James Cummings)
NNTP-Posting-Host: o233-30.nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

Could someone either post the scores or email them to me
From: dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Eagles/Cowboys Report
Keywords: Philadelphia 31, Dallas 7
Date: 7 Oct 92 14:42:34 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Tandem Computers (MPD) Austin, TX

In article <1992Oct6.180159.2764@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> jmd@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (joseph.m.dakes) writes:
>
>On offense the Eagles just wore the Cowboys down.

I think this sums up the game more than anything else.  The Cowboys just
couldn't keep up the defense as the game went on.  This isn't really too
surprising considering the inexperience of the defense.  I was pleased,
though, at the pass defense, which was royally toasted the last two games.
Cunningham was held more in check than in any other game this year.  An
INT, and several more that were just plain dropped, showed the Cowboys'
pass defense to not be as weak as I had feared.  But, in the end, the
Eagles D stood up, and the Cowboys' didn't.

Did Cunningham have a passing TD?  I fear that through the haze of a
lot of smoke and beer at my favorite MNF watching bar, I can't remember
where the last two Eagle TDs came from.  (I walked into the place, normally
almost empty on weekdays, only to be told I needed reservations (?!? In a
damn bar?) to be able to sit in the back, where the big screen was!)

Daniel Welch
From: tkelsey@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (todd.p.kelsey)
Subject: Re: Packers starting QB - Majik or Favre
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 15:47:37 GMT

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

>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.
>

Prediction #2a:  If prediction #2 comes true, the Packers will cut
Majkowski in the near future.  They won't want to pay $1.7M for a
holder.

BTW Jeff, I agree with your predictions #1 and #2.

-Todd
Xref: sparky rec.sport.football.pro:20516 dc.redskins:194
From: elm@cs.berkeley.edu (ethan miller)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro,dc.redskins
Subject: Redskins' OL woes
Followup-To: rec.sport.football.pro
Date: 15 Oct 92 11:10:33
Organization: Berkeley--Shaken, not Stirred
Reply-To: elm@cs.berkeley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: terrorism.cs.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil's message of 14 Oct 92 17:40:40 GMT

In article <26375@oasys.dt.navy.mil> swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams) writes:
=>With Lachey out, the Redskins are now down to five healthy offensive 
=>linesmen.  They are Elewonibi, Jacoby, McKenzie, Schlereth, and Simmons.  
=>Jeff Bostic is out for the season and Mark Adickes is lost for the season 
=>with a back injury.  Plan B signee Steve Gabbard was a flop.

What happened to the rookie center (Elliot, from Michigan)?  He seemed
good in pre-season, and I assume he's relatively healthy now.  Could
he play in a pinch?

ethan
--
+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+
ethan miller--cs grad student   | "Anybody not wearing 2000000 sunblock's
elm@cs.berkeley.edu             |  gonna have a REALLY bad day.  GET IT?"
#include <std/disclaimer.h>     |  -- Sarah Connor, _Terminator 2_
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: robert@landru.mtc.ti.com (Robert Treese)
Subject: Re: Dallas *ice!cream!notes*... How sweet it is!
Keywords: n
Organization: Manufacturing Technology Center, Texas Instruments, Dallas
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 17:48:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.152838.10831@kronos.arc.nasa.gov> blah@maas-neotek.arc.nasa.gov (TWF) writes:
>In article <1992Oct14.130922.11330@ticipa.pac.sc.ti.com> robert@landru.mtc.ti.com (Robert Treese) writes:
>
>>Harpers disapperance.  I have been thinking about this and toss out this
>>suggestion.  On most pass patterns Irvin is the primary receiver.  On
>>plays where Mike is not open Aikman starts moving across the field.  When
>>doing this he usually finds Jay or Kmart cutting across the middle.  Aikman
>>rarely does not find someone not open at this time.  By this time  Harper
>>should have completed his primary route and started adjusting to help
>>the quarterback.  Maybe Harper is not adjusting well.   Also when Harper is
>>the primary receiver, Aikman will not throw the ball to him unless he
>>has seperated from the DB.  Aikman will throw it to Jay and Mike without
>>this seperation because he knows they will seperate before the ball
>>gets there.  (Whether Irvin does this legally is of no concern since
>>it is not called)  
>>
>
>I disagree.  I think that Aikman has tried to hit Harper once or twice
>(at least in every game I've seen - all but 1), and Harper has dropped
>the passes.  Until Harper proves that he can make a tough catch and
>take a hit, the way Irvin and Novacek and even K-Mart do, I doubt he's
>going to see any increase in chances from Aikman.  It may be to
>Harper's and Dallas' benefit to start Martin for a game.
>
>Don't be too concerned about Haley - he's the reason that everyone
>else on the line looks so good.  His quick outside rush forces either
>a double-team, or the running back to help out, which reduces the
>blocking on the inside guys.  However, I do think that he would be
>better suited not playing on obvious running downs, since he's
>(frankly) horrible against the run.
>
>

This time I disagree with you.  Haley is not getting doubled as much
as I have heard.  I think he has been putting pressure just not quite 
getting there due to receivers being open.  I think Tolbert has just
improved as well as the rest of the D-line.  I do agree
about him against the run.

Anyway the Cowboys have improved and I now look forward to Sundays'.

Robert
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: chf0@roger.gte.com (Curtis Fennell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: UPSET PICK!!!!!!!
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:39:49 GMT
Organization: GTE Laboratories

In article <92822@netnews.upenn.edu> mckernan@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Robert L Mckernan) writes:
>
>	THE UPSET PICK OF THE COMING WEEK:
>
>
>	(0-5)NEW ENGLAND PATRIOTS... 21
>        (5-0)MIAMI DOLPHINS......... 16
>
>	PATRIOTS ALWAYS GIVE MARINO FITS AND THEY ARE DUE FOR A WIN. 

They do?  Perhaps you mean fits of laughter.  

Actually, as near as I can figure out, Marino is 9-9 vs the Patriots,
although he is 6-0 the last 3 years.  Last year when they played in
New England, Marino threw for over 200 yards in the second quarter
alone.

>THEY LET YOUNG & co. ESCAPE WITH A WIN BUT THEY WON'T LET UP THIS
>WEEK. COACH MAC WILL HAVE HIS TROOPS FIRED UP.

We'll see.  The Patriots have played some of their best games against
the Dolphins, but I don't think the Patriots can stop the Dolphin
offense this year.  

Not only that, but poor Hugh Millen will be in serious pain from the
pounding he took this weekend and unless his offensive line gets a lot
better this week, it will be one more long game for the Patriots.

Maybe in December, when the Dolphins come to New England and the
season is almost over.  But I don't think the Patriots will be able to
do it this weekend. 

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
From: rwturner@IASTATE.EDU (Richard W Turner)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Best In Tejas
Date: 16 Oct 92 19:51:19 GMT
Reply-To: rwturner@IASTATE.EDU (Richard W Turner)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Iowa State University

In article <Bw817w.1K2@rice.edu>,  () writes:
> In article <1992Oct16.033734.10322@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>,
> c164-eh@po.berkeley.edu (William Hackett) wrote:
 > 
>     Yeah, wouldn't it be interesting to see Dallas play Houston in the
> big game (O.K., a real long shot, I admit).  I suppose the networks 
> wouldn't be too happy (too 'regional' a matchup), but it would add another
> silly 'first' to the recordbooks (first intrastate Superbowl).  
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What about the Bills vs Giants?  
(or do you regard the Giants and the Jets as New Jersey teams
since they play in East Rutherford)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: martens@python.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens)
Subject: Re: Browns News - 1st qtr review - Steeler preview
Organization: Ohio State U. Dept. of Computer Science
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 18:09:44 GMT

In article <dchou.718737898@husc8> dchou@husc8.harvard.edu (David Chou) writes:
>martens@python.cis.ohio-state.edu (Jeff Martens) writes:

>>In article <1992Oct9.105248.9055@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> mocnik@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes:

	[ ... ]

>>>   - The defense MUST stop the running game and MUST pressure the QB.
>>>     O'Donnell must be forced to pass.

>>O'Donnell is easily rattled and his receivers stink.  If Cowher
>>abandons the running game prematurely (as he did when GB got a
>>small lead), the Browns will win.

>Xsquueze me?  Uh...no.  I remember a guy named Graham who isn't doing too
>badly this year.  Oh, and another guy named Stone whose hands finally seems 
>to belie his name, and always had 4.2 speed.  Oh, and I understand that this
>TE named Green is scheduled to return soon, along with his buddy Adrian
>Cooper.  They just might have a small influence on the game.  Finally, poor
>O'Donnell had a career-low performance against GB last week...makes you
>want to forget all of what he did against Houston, New York, and San Deigo.

Apparently Dave didn't see the GB/Pitt. game.  O'Donnell played
poorly, and his receivers dropped pass after pass after pass.
O'Donnell has played well most of the season, but he looked lost
and confused against the Pack.  Green Bay's defense isn't that
much tougher than Cleveland's.

Conceivably Pittsburgh's receivers are better than they looked.
But their performance against the Packers was among the worst I've
ever seen by any receiving corps, and probably contributed to
O'Donnell's poor play (why put the ball on the money if it'll only
be dropped or stripped anyway?).  As bad as the Steeler receiver's
looked two weeks ago, I have trouble believing they're any good.
We'll see tomorrow, however.

>Then again, you could be right...the plane into Cleveland might crash,
>and then since Cowher might have to abandon his running game prematurely,
>I guess the Browns would then win...

Or the Steelers' passing game could stink on its own, as has
happened at least once this season.
-- 
	Don't waste your time waving your hands
	and hoping when a rock or a club will do.

-- Jeff (martens@cis.ohio-state.edu)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: EAGLES, COWBOYS
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 06:18:10 GMT

In article <0eoYIWi00UhWM8BtkY@andrew.cmu.edu> "Calvin D. Swartzentruber" <cs6t+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>Some of us Eagles fans have more sense than to base our whole season on
>one game.  But just for your benefit:
>
>WOOF! WOOF! WOOF!
>
>Calvin
>A loyal Eagle in Pittsburgh
>
>The opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily those of my city,
>or my college, or my parents, or the guy who used to lived next door to
>me when I was a kid.

Finally, an Eagle fan with some common sense NOT to say they are the
BEST and all the previous, frivilous B.S. Hey Calvin, you are
entitlted to WOOF! Thank you for your modesty. 
-- 
  ---------  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
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson)
Subject: Reggie Rutland: Vikings CB
Originator: rja@redwood26
Organization: The 1991 World Champion Minnesota Twins!
Date: 13 Oct 92 10:15:48 CDT


For those of you are wondering what happened to the Vikings CB
Reggie Rutland, he's changed his name to Nadje Mustaffa.  Mustaffa
hurt his back at the beginning of training camp and was placed
on IR.  He is eligable to be activated, but his back continues 
to plauge him and it looks like he will be out most of the season.

-- 
Russ Anderson    |  Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
------------------              upon my employer or anyone else.  (c) 1992
EX-Twins' Jack Morris, 10 innings pitched, 0 runs (World Series MVP!)
From: apo@owlnet.rice.edu (Apolak Borthakur)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Best In Tejas
Date: 16 Oct 92 21:54:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rice University

In article <1bn6jfINNjh1@gazette.bcm.tmc.edu>, skywalke@dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu (Timothy B. Reynolds) writes:
|> In article <Bw817w.1K2@rice.edu> () writes:
|> >In article <1992Oct16.033734.10322@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>,
|> >c164-eh@po.berkeley.edu (William Hackett) wrote:
|> >> 
|> >> How many times have Oilers beaten the Boy's in a row, they did last
|> >> year in Preseason and during the regular year and also this year
|> >> not once but twice in Pre-season.. Oilers are BEST in TEJAS and
|> >> in AFC central.. and AFC and NFL.. Boy's will be Boy's but they
|> >> should come in nicely at second place a only show once again that
|> >> They aren't Best in Tejas... 
|> 
|> Excuse me "HARDHEAD !"
|> 
|> Just how many times have the Oilers been to the SB ???
|> Just how many SB's have they won ???
|> 
|> Pleeeeeeeeeeeease,
|> Until you WIN something you aint nuthin dude......
|> 
|> The only Pro Team in TEXAS !!!!!
|> The Dallas Cowboys !!!!
|> 
|

Excuse me, moron.

Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeease, don't live in the past.
Maybe the 'Boys were a better team than the Oilers in the past, but
who cares a shit about what happened ten years ago? 
Right now, the Oilers seem to be a team that is better than the
Cowboys, as their recent record indicates. They have beaten the
Cowboys in both the preseason and the regular season last year, and
have beaten the Cowboys in both the preseason games this year. Thus, it
is only fair to say that the Oilers are the #1 team in Texas.

Live in the present, not the past.