HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: atchison@tuna.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark Atchison)
Subject: Re: tOSU underclassmen in the draft
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 16:18:03 GMT

In article <DOEL.93Jan4092553@bbq.bae.bellcore.com> doel@bae.bellcore.com (Michael Doel) writes:
>This really surprises me, maybe it shouldn't.  Robert Smith has said over
>and over that medical school is what he's aiming for & although he enjoys
>playing football, he wouldn't let it get in the way of his academic goals.
>Now, he's ready to leave school early?  Either he's had a huge shift in his
>personal goals or he just can't stand being in Columbus anymore.

There is a bit of irony, I suppose, in the line "player who quit football for
school now quits school for football".  However, it's not out of line with what
he has said in the past.  As far back as his 1200+ yard freshman season, media
types were asking if he planned to go pro early.  His twist on the medical 
school thing was that while college ball would pay for the undergrad steps,
the NFL would pay for undergrad, med school, and plenty more.  Of course, the
Columbus thing could be it, too! :)

>Both losses would hurt OSU tremendously next year.  While OSU is loaded at
>running back, the early games this year showed that that there's a pretty
>significant difference between Robert Smith & the rest.  Roger Harper has
>been a great DB & his shoes will be no less difficult to fill.

I think the loss of Harper will be negligible.  I've always considered him 
somewhat overrated, and I think his coverage abililties are suspect -- the
combines and draft will either bear me out or shut me up.  Ohio State does
have a fairly strong pipeline for DB's to the NFL, but I doubt a guy who was
projected as a career backup wideout two years ago will crack the top several
rounds.

Smith's loss will definitely hurt.  I'd hoped to prolong it at least one more
year, to allow Hoying to develop with the help of a proven backfield.  Of
course, there were a couple of promising freshmen who got back-seated in Eddie
George and Travis McGuire.  George saw *very* limited action after the Illinois
fiasco, after having been a feature prior to it.  I hope the apparent coaches'
snub has no adverse effects.  McGuire was awesome in the spring game, but may
have been red-shirted (goody, goody!).  Throw in another year of "Butt-less"
By'not'e, and they ought to survive it.

The loss that may hurt the Buckeyes worst next year might not be a player...
For some reason unknown, AD Jim Jones thought next year's "no pressure" season
for Cooper and Hoying might be a great time to catch Washington off guard.
Here's hoping that the NCAA finds a lot more wrong the Huskies between now
and then.  Oh, for a home-and-home series with Bowling Green now! :)

GO BUCKS!!!
-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
 Mark Atchison, a.k.a. <atchison@cis.ohio-state.edu>; Graduate Student in the
Computer Science Dept, THE Ohio State University (NOT an Ohio State University)
		Any plagiarisms seen above are not my own...
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 12:36:31 EST
From: <JCT3@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Alabama v. Miami

FROM:  NY Athletic Club

TO:    Gino Toretta

Send the trophy back.

Just a couple of reminders for some of you . . .
                                                                               E

From: tja2f@dayhoff.med.Virginia.EDU (Timothy J. Allison)
Subject: Let the games begin!
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 04:53:22 GMT

May all this year's bowl games be as exciting as the Nevada-Bowling
Green game!

And may the 'Canes show the world what domination means and explain the
term humiliation to the Tide.

Tim Allison
tja2f@virginia.edu



Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
cis.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!boulder!
tigger!manu
From: manu@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (K. S. Manu)
Subject: Re: Bama vs Miami
Keywords: Sugar Bowl
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 06:57:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.182806.22073@b11.b11.ingr.com> gibson@b11.b11.ingr.com
(Stanley) writes:
>

Using the same argument in PAC10 (with top three teams )

UW > 30 over Stanford
Stanford > 30 over Wash. State
Wash, State > 20 over UW

so much for transitivity!

Miami over Alabama by 2 TD! You heard it here first, folks.

Njan


Do tell.


Sorry guys, but I've been holding myself back for too long.  Alabama
 showed Miami what a grade A butt-whuppin is like, and left no doubt
as to who the #1 team in the nation is.

Jim Thomas
From: mm42@prism.gatech.EDU (Mark Mitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Some thoughts on the Sugar Bowl from a Miami fan
Date: 6 Jan 93 17:00:58 GMT
Organization: Ramblin' Wrecks from Georgia Tech

tonyf@rm1.interlan.com (Tony Fernandez) wrote:
}
}And other that the crowd, what other home field advantage does the Orange
}Bowl gives the Hurricanes?

Playing on their familiar grass field, at their normal temperature,
and on their normal clock.  These are what matters for the home
field advantage.  Crowd noise is a minor, minor factor.

}I meant that Miami doesn't play in the Orange Bowl Classic every year,
}as the SEC does in the Sugar Bowl.
}
}My point is that the SEC as a whole (not just Alabama) receives as much
}of an advantage when playing in the Sugar Bowl as Miami does when playing
}in the OBC.  

I understand that that is your point, but it is baloney.  Play the
Sugar Bowl at Tuscaloosa and Birmingham and 'Bama would have the
same advantage, but not in the Superdome.  (Which is why it is unfair
for 'Bama to play the SEC championship game there.)  The only teams capable
of enjoying the same home field advantage of Miami in the Orange
Bowl would be Tulane in the Sugar Bowl, UCLA in the Rose Bowl,
Arizona State in the Fiesta Bowl, Arizona in the Copper Bowl, etc.

-- 
Mark Mitchell           Georgia Tech            mm42@prism.gatech.edu

   "Eenie weenie, chili beanie, the spirits are about to speak."
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: atchison@shaggyman.cis.ohio-state.edu (Mark Atchison)
Subject: Re: Ohio State Football - No fun, no future to it's players and recruits
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 15:19:53 GMT

In article <79071@hydra.gatech.EDU> jb118@prism.gatech.EDU (Jeffrey N. Burch) writes:

>In article <1993Jan4.231023.12529@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mzhao@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Min Zhao) writes:
>>    But ask the players on the team, ask the seniors, ask if they have won
>>anything.  Ask how they really feel in their heart. Their heart says we NEVER
>>won. And that is a disappointing feeling ! And that hurts the inside of 


>Have you personally done this, or are you just guessing?

He's guessing.  In fact, in some cases, slanderously.  He's mentioned Greg
Smith as one of his "seniors" often.  In reality, before the bowl game, Smith
was quoted as saying that *immediately* after the Michigan tie, he felt a bit
disappointed.  A week later, in perspective, he saw the Michigan tie and the
5-0-1 run to close out the Big 10 season as a great accomplishment that he
felt quite proud of.

As far as his garbage about "no future" being the reason for two underclassmen
departures, look around the country.  Should be a record year for underclassmen
leaving early.  Think it might have anything to do with the future of the NFL
draft and rookie salaries?  Nah... I suppose Marvin Jones sees no future at
Florida State - probably the best team in the country over the last 4 years,
and Garrison Hearst has lost faith in the Georgia program.  Get real.

-- 
_______________________________________________________________________________
 Mark Atchison, a.k.a. <atchison@cis.ohio-state.edu>; Graduate Student in the
Computer Science Dept, THE Ohio State University (NOT an Ohio State University)
		Any plagiarisms seen above are not my own...
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: harbison@dbsun.uucp (harbison)
Subject: Re: Smiley instructions:  Was Re: Quit pickin' on the poor 'Canes
Organization: BioMerieux-Vitek, St. Louis Mo.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:14:17 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.215900.4154@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
rowdy@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (robert.dieckmann) writes:
> I've spent the last 6 years investigating this phenomena known as the 
> "Smiley."  ...  Using an 8 for the eyes means you have big, expressive
> eyes or maybe you're bug-eyed. ...

Hmmm.  In alt.fan.dan-quayle, and possible other newsgroups, the 8-) form
is known as the "deer-in-the-headlights" gaze, i.e. the blank, wide-eyed
stare commonly exhibited by Danoe when encountering any question more
complex than "what is your handicap?".

As for the origin of smiley, I always thought it was really a wink, and
came from the snake game.  Snake was this game written at MIT (at least
our copy was obtained from an MIT student).  The player would navigate
the screen trying to reach dollar signs while pursued by a snake.  The
snake was drawn using plain characters as follows:

          ___
         (o:o)  <- head
          \-/
 OOO       O
O   O     O     <- body, grew longer each time you gobbled a '$'.
     OOOOO

If the snake caught you, it would eat you and then wink by briefly
changing its left eyeball from an 'o' to a '-' as follows:
         ___      ___       ___
	(o:o) -> (o:-) ->  (o:o)
	 \-/      \-/       \-/ 

Therefore, I assume :-) was just a wink.  It always seemed to be used
the same way a wink would be used in a face-to-face conversation, as
if to say the writer was joking or being sarcastic, or was simply not
to be taken seriously.  I guess whether you call it smiley or "winky",
it still means that to me.  Did I miss something?  There wasn't a
news.announce.new-users back in 1982. :-)

But what does all this have to do with football, barbeque, and iced tea?
Now what sauce do you s'pose would be good for barbequed snake? :-)

-- 
*realName: Phil Harbison
*mailName: harbison%dbsun.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu
*phoneList: 314-731-7475 (w) 314-272-9318 (h)
Rama-jama-yellowhamma', give `em hell, Alabama!
From: mm42@prism.gatech.EDU (Mark Mitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: A Question about the "Bear"
Date: 5 Jan 93 17:12:34 GMT
Organization: Ramblin' Wrecks from Georgia Tech

mminihan@inetg1.ARCO.COM (Mike Minihan) wrote:

}When Alabama won one of their Nat'l Championships in the 60/70's, they
}went in to the bowl ranked number 1. They had a chance to play the
}number 2 ranked team in the nation in one certain bowl but elected to
}play the number 16th(?) ranked team in another bowl. 
}
}Is their any truth to this? 

No.

For starters, Alabama was elected National Champs in the following
years in the 60's/70's:

AP:  1961, 1964, 1965, 1978, 1979
UPI: 1961, 1964, 1973, 1979

In 1961 and 1964 both polls elected the national champ prior to
the bowls.  Which team one played in a bowl was really unimportant
at this time as the bowls were just for fun.  (However, in 1961 
Alabama faced #9 Arkansas in the Sugar Bowl - #2 Ohio State was
not available - and in 1964 Alabama faced #5 Texas in the Orange
Bowl.)  In 1965, Alabama was #4 before the bowls.

In 1973, Alabama lost to #3 Notre Dame in the Sugar Bowl.  

In 1978 and 1979 Alabama was not #1 entering the bowls.  (They were
#2 both years.)

-- 
Mark Mitchell           Georgia Tech            mm42@prism.gatech.edu

   "Eenie weenie, chili beanie, the spirits are about to speak."
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: pfleming@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Patrick E Fleming)
Subject: Re: My suggestion to the NFL
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:31:48 GMT

Stephen H. Zimmerman writes:

>There will be tons who disagree (go ahead and flame), but why
>doesn't the NFL show some true grit and not hire anyone who doesn't
>graduate?  or maybe put them on "academically-injured reserve" if they
>don't finish within 2 years (or so) of leaving school.


The trouble is that a college degree does not mean squat when it comes to what 
an athlete is capable of doing in the NFL or any other pro arena.  The bottom 
line is that the NFL can not exclude kids from the draft if the kids want to be
included (of course they may not get drafted, but that's another story . . .)

I think the only solution is to somehow change the focus of major college 
athletics.  Sports is an activity which is available to keep students from 
going nuts by spending all of their time persuing accademics.  It is an outlet 
- an extracurricular if you will.  And most importantly, it should not be a 
developmental league for pro prospects (like college football and basketball 
are.)

If I were God, I would make freshmen inelligible to compete in any sport.  I 
would then allow schools the right to grant an extra year of elligibility on a 
case by case basis so that players can compete for four years if they desire.  
But to get the fourth year, they would have to be making definable progress 
toward a degree or be enrolled in a graduate program.  I'd also get rid of 
stupid prop. 48 and let institutions define their own admissions criteria.  Of 
course, I am an idealist and work on the suspicion that grade and high schools 
should be more involved int he education process rather than leaving it all up 
to the colleges and universities.

Hey, the games are over - it's the off season. :-)

     - Pat
-- 
- Patrick E. Fleming ----------------------------------------------------------
- Department of Chemistry ----------- Sometimes I see me as an old manatee ----
- Ohio Wesleyan University ---------- Heading south as the waters grow colder -
- pfleming@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu ------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: zcjm0f@wwnv67.hou.amoco.com (CJohn Mace)
Subject: Re: Florida!  THE college football state
Organization: Amoco Production
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 23:16:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.185743.13834@mlb.semi.harris.com> dhead@comanche.ess.harris.com writes:
>>Final AP Top 25
>>
>> 1. Alabama (62)     13-0-0   1,550
>> 2. Florida St.      11-1-0   1,470
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 3. Miami            11-1-0   1,410
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> 4. Notre Dame       10-1-1   1,375
>> 5. Michigan          9-0-3   1,266   (Woof!)
>> 6. Syracuse         10-2-0   1,209
>> 7. Texas A&M        12-1-0   1,167
>> 8. Georgia          10-2-0   1,159
>> 9. Stanford         10-3-0   1,058
>>10. Florida           9-4-0     931
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>11. Washington        9-3-0     892
>>12. Tennessee         9-3-0     819
>>13. Colorado          9-2-1     818
>>14. Nebraska          9-3-0     771
>>15. Washington St.    9-3-0     618
>>16. Mississippi       9-3-0     583
>>17. N. Carolina St.   9-3-1     582
>>18. Ohio St.          8-3-1     493
>>19. North Carolina    9-3-0     491
>>20. Hawaii           11-2-0     354
>>21. Boston College    8-3-1     314
>>22. Kansas            8-4-0     183
>>23. Mississippi St.   7-5-0     167
>>24. Fresno St.        9-4-0     124
>>25. Wake Forest       8-4-0     107
>
>
>As we can see, all three major colleges in Florida finished in the top 10. 
>No other state has more than one (1) school in the top 10.  Kind of gives
>a good indication of the strength of football in Florida doesn't it?

ask again when those three teams recruit all of their players from Florida
>
>The state of North Carolina gets honorable mention with 3 teams in the top 25.
From: SCHMIDT@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jon Schmidt)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: A Question about the "Bear"
Date: 5 Jan 93 23:09:29 GMT
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering

In article <1993Jan5.160712.13874@Arco.COM>
mminihan@inetg1.ARCO.COM (Mike Minihan) writes:
>
>When Alabama won one of their Nat'l Championships in the 60/70's, they
>went in to the bowl ranked number 1. They had a chance to play the
>number 2 ranked team in the nation in one certain bowl but elected to
>play the number 16th(?) ranked team in another bowl.
>
>Is their any truth to this? Can someone help me with this? There is a
>big argument in my office about this.
>
>--
>
>Mike Minihan      mminihan@arco.com
 
Alabama had five AP MNC teams prior to this year's.  Below is a list of
the bowls (and the teams' rankings prior to bowl games) that involved an
Alabama MNC team.  Note that prior to 1968 (except 1965), the results of
bowl games (and even some very late regular-season games) had no impact
on who was voted the AP MNC because the final AP poll was always taken
in late-November or early-December.
 
1961 Alabama (#1) beat Arkansas (#9) in Sugar
1964 Alabama (#1) lost to Texas (#5) in Orange
1965 Alabama (#5) beat Nebraska (#3) in Orange
1978 Alabama (#2) beat Penn St. (#1) in Sugar
1979 Alabama (#2) beat Arkansas (#6) in Sugar
 
Alabama fans will also point out that the 1973 team was UPI's MNC, even
though that team lost to undefeated (and eventual AP MNC) Notre Dame in
the Sugar Bowl.  Here's another glaring example (see also 1990 and 1991)
of how farcical the coaches' poll can be.
 
Perhaps you're thinking of last year's #1 Miami, which ducked #3 Florida
in order to play #11 Nebraska at home in the Orange Bowl.
 
Or maybe you have in mind the #1 BYU team from 1984, which beat a
Michigan team that wasn't even ranked in the Top 20.  But this mismatch
wasn't BYU's fault because they were locked into the Holiday Bowl and #4
Washington dodged them in order to pick up the bigger paycheck from the
Orange Bowl.
 
-- 
Jon_Schmidt@stortek.com  Storage Technology Corporation
(303) 673-3581 - voice   2270 South 88th Street
(303) 673-6039 - fax     Louisville, Colorado 80028-5209
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: jimf@cbnewse.cb.att.com (james.r.fehrenbacher)
Subject: Re: Southern Mississippi
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 20:33:38 GMT


On the other hand, I saw them play at Northern Illinois, a very weak
1A team this year. Northern dominated S. Miss, 24 - 10. It wasn't as
close as the score indicated. I was surprised.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: ah179@yfn.ysu.edu (Brian Wilson)
Subject: Toretta's look
Organization: Youngstown State University/Youngstown Free-Net
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 14:22:31 GMT


 I have now determined what the 'Toretta Look' was when he
was faced with eleven men on the line at the Sugar Bowl.
 
 
He was most definitely looking for the Energizer Bunny!
-- 
Brian Wilson (not from the Beach Boys)               ROLL TIDE!
 
"How come two wrongs don't make a right, yet three lefts do?"
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: garbe@jasper.phys.ucalgary.ca (Greg Garbe)
Subject: Re: Big East Review:  BOSTON COLLEGE
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 21:48:06 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: garbe@jasper.phys.ucalgary.ca (Greg Garbe)
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada

In article <1993Jan11.145838.16357@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, rowdy@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (robert.dieckmann) writes:
|> 
|> Progressing up the Big Eaat final standings, we reach the bowl
|> teams.  First, Boston College.
|> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|> 
...
|> The Eagles leveled off a bit with a tie and two narrow wins before blasting
|> hapless Temple.  And then the wheels fell off -- a pounding by Notre Dame
|> and Syracuse before the Eagles dumped Army.  Off to the Hall of Fame Bowl
|> where Tennessee won easily.  Overall, Coach Tom Coughlin has the Eagles
|> flying high at 8-3-1, and a brand new, beefed-up, long-term contract.
			^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Does this mean Coughlin is not interested in the Giants job.  Also has there been
any change in his coaching staff (i.e. anyone leaving).
|> 
|
|>                  1992*  1991*   1990    1989    1988    1987    1986
|> Boston College   8-3-1   4-7     4-7     2-9     3-8     5-6     9-3   
|> 
|> *Tom Coughlin's years (12-10-1).
|> 
|> -- 
|> "Listen up son, and pay attention.   |  Bob Dieckmann (rwd@quartet.att.com)
|> How ya' gonna learn anything if you  |  GO: Mets (& dear old Rutgers)
|> always got your head in a book?"     |  I probably should've included smileys.
|>                 -- Foghorn Leghorn   |  **usual disclaimer**
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: paladin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jason Gische)
Subject: Re: Miami should be #2
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 20:16:31 GMT

In article <f392hnd@rpi.edu> kollur@jec321.its.rpi.edu (Ramana Kolluri) writes:
>This year we have an undisputed national champion in Alabama (Roll Tide!)
>I kinda miss all those arguements about Colorado/Georgia Tech and
>Miami/Washington from previous years. 
> So how about #2. Don't you all feel that Miami deserves to be #2 ahead
>of a Florida State team that they beat. Things would be perfect then.
>Undefeated Alabama #1
>one loss Miami     #2 (only loss to #1)
>one loss FSU       #3 (only loss to #2)
>
>The polls robbed Miami of a #2 ranking that they earned by beating FSU.
>
>Ramana
>Roll Tide!
>


Personally, I thought Miami should have dropped to 4th, behind Notre
Dame at #3.  And it pains me to say it, because I can't stand the
Irish and their "holier than thou" fans and "everyone wants to
play for ND" attitude.  Miami eeked out several wins this season.
But, since winning is everything, they kept the #1 spot.  But they
were humiliated by Bama.  FSU's only loss way by 3 points, AT
Miami.  They definitely deserve the #2.  Notre Dame's only non-
wins were a tie with Michigan and a loss to Stanford, both earlier
in the season.  And they crushed the #4 team in the Cotton Bowl 
(even though A&M was incredibly overrated, and still is in the 
final polls.)

I don't have a huge problem with Miami at 3 and ND at 4, but I would
have voted it the other way.

Jason
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: zmed0b@trc.amoco.com (Michael)
Subject: Re: Final AP Poll
Originator: zmed0b@zircon
Organization: Amoco Production Company, Tulsa Research
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 19:01:06 GMT


In article <1993Jan7.185141.8139@bnlux1.bnl.gov>, niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr) writes:
> In article <1993Jan7.125048.6704@dbsun.uucp> harbison@dbsun.uucp (harbison) writes:
> >	Rank   School              Record   Points
> >	------------------------------------------
> >	  13   Colorado             9-2-1      818
> >	  14   Nebraska             9-3-0      771
> 
> How in Aunt Fannie's Corset can Nebraska be ranked lower than Colordo?
> Nebraska thoroughly beat Colorado in the regular season and both lost
> in bowl games.  In addition, there's the Buffs tie to Oklahoma.
> 
> First there was the perennial bias against the Huskers in the electronic
> media starting with ABC and Keith Jackson, now it's the voters.  I would
> have reversed the positions and possibly put the Huskers at #11.
> 
> Dave
> 
> -- 
> Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
> Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093

It's stupidity for sure.  However, the polls are notoriously forgiving for
early losses in the season and unforgiving for late losses.  Nebraska lost
2 of their last 4.  There ya go.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: niebuhr@bnlux1.bnl.gov (david niebuhr)
Subject: Re: Quit pickin' on the poor 'Canes
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 01:19:30 GMT

In article <1993Jan5.213725.5528@aio.jsc.nasa.gov> Dr. Norman J. LaFave <lafave@ial4.jsc.nasa.gov> writes:
>In article <1993Jan5.173554.20420@Princeton.EDU> Frank Bilotti,
>frank@wanda.princeton.edu writes:
>
>I am not questioning their talent, their success, their coaching,.....
>However, I am sick to death of their behavior. Being successful is
>no excuse for being obnoxious.
>
>This is my opinion. If you don't like it, stuff it.
>
>Norman
 
Absolutely true.  Thanks, Norman.

Dave

-- 
Dave Niebuhr      Internet: niebuhr@bnl.gov / Bitnet: niebuhr@bnl
Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973  (516)-282-3093
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college