HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gibson@b11.b11.ingr.com (Stanley)
Subject: Re: More MSU vs. Bama info
Reply-To: gibson@b11.b11.ingr.com (Stanley Gibson)
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:35:02 GMT

In article <dkm2.721492557@Isis.MsState.Edu> dkm2@ra.msstate.edu (David K. Magee) writes:
>

>The last time Mississippi State was 7-2 at this point in the season was 1980.
>In 1980 , a then ranked #1 Alabama crimson tide went to Jackson Mississippi
>to play state.  State pulled off the upset 6-3 and finished the season 9-3.

This big win by Miss. St broke a 28 game win streak by Bama. We have
not forgotten this!!

>
>The depressing news is that we have beat Alabama once (that time) in 33 years.

Yes,  that loss is depressing to us.

>We are 0-10 vs. Bama in Starkville.  But I have a feeling that is going to      change Saturday night.

 Oh yes that WILL change Saturday night. It will become 0-11!!!!

Roll Tide! 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: lein@bae.uucp (John Leinaweaver)
Subject: Re: IA championship playoffs
Organization: Bellcore, Piscataway NJ
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 03:28:07 GMT

>| 
> 6) In the end, only one school would be celebrating.  The rest
> would be yelling "we was robbed."   That does not sound
> like fun to me.
>

Heck, if you don't want to lose maybe you should try soccer, "we were tied".

Sure a tough loss is hard to take but I'd rather lose knowing I had
a chance instead of 12-0 and no chance.                       

John L
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: landers@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Hazard Class Mage)
Subject: Re: Big Ten Review (11-7-92)
Keywords: Big Ten
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:33:25 GMT

In article <BxIoBB.2pF@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> peppler@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Randy Peppler) writes:
>
>November 14:
>
>Illinois at Michigan (ABC, 11:00 am, Central, National)
		       ^^^ Did you mean ESPN here, or is ABC 
			really picking up 2 Big 10 games, if so
			is ESPN running a Big 10 game this week?

>Penn State at Notre Dame (NBC, 12:30 pm Central, National)
>Ohio State at Indiana (ABC, 2:30 pm, Regional)
>Purdue at Michigan State
>Northwestern at Iowa
>Minnesota at Wisconsin
-- 
   <===========================><===============================>
   || Christopher Landers      ||  Stamp Out Silly Signatures! ||
   <============== landers@mentor.cc.purdue.edu ================>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: rar84@cbnewse.cb.att.com (rick.a.rockershousen)
Subject: Polls, Computer Rankings....
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:26:33 GMT

   Just a few reminders about polls and the like:

   Poll "facts":

   1) Polls are subjective, they exist because people
      probably felt that "standings" based on W's and L's
      (or some other objective criteria) weren't sufficient
      to determine if team X was better than team Y.

      For example if we didn't have polls, then today we
      would have Miami, Texas A&M and Alabama TIED for first
      Michigan in second, a host of teams tied for third etc.
      Of course at the beginning of the season - everyone is
      tied for first (or last depending on your personality).

   2) There are no "rules" for poll voters (except for
      the implied "what have you done for me lately" rule),
      otherwise they wouldn't be subjective.

   3) Computer rankings are objective - each one uses
      a different set of team measurements and assigns
      them different weights.   Most look at much more
      than W's and L's (and T's), like schedule strength,
      margin of victory and the like.  You can argue with
      the set of measurements and the weights given them,
      but you can't argue their objectivity.
     
   4) Note that as the season progresses, the polls probably
      become more and more "objective", since poll voters 
      have more data available upon which to base their decisions,
      although again, there are no rules as to which data
      (if any) the pollsters must use (whew! talk
      about your run-on sentences).  If we made everyone use
      the same set of criteria, we wouldn't need to take a poll,
      it would be like a computer ranking!

SOOOOOOO, what am I getting at?

     THE POLLS CAN'T BE WRONG - they are a collective, subjective,
     opinion.  Think of it as each team being in an election, 
     with each "running" to be the No. 1 team.   I could sit
     here and argue why H. Ross Perot should have been elected
     president, but it wouldn't do me any good - the votes have
     been cast, the people have spoken.  The voters can't be 
     wrong about their opinions - they just have different opinions
     than do I.

OK, I'll admit it can be entertaining, but lets not get too
carried away.

Rick Rockershousen
Go Blue!  <- Of course an occasional woof can't hurt either
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: jfrederi@encore.com (Justin Frederich)
Subject: Re: Washington vs. Arizona
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:29:04 GMT

sfm@manduca.neurobio.arizona.edu (Stephen Matheson) writes:

***** stuff deleted *****

>I hope that doesn't happen.  I don't get the impression that the
>infraction was that severe, and I'd hate to see something like
>that happen to a great team that is still the class of the
>greatest football conference in the solar system.  We are
>proud of our team because we believe they beat the 2 best:
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Miami and Washington.
>--
Do they have newspapers out there ? Maybe you should check the
score again. Usually if the other team gets more points - they win !!!

>Steve Matheson   Program in Neuroscience   University of Arizona
>sfm@neurobio.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: mcconnel@b11.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell)
Subject: Re: UA (and Miami)
Reply-To: mcconnel@b11.b11.ingr.com (Guy McConnell)
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 19:01:46 GMT

In article <QeyhRWS00WB3FGLnEX@andrew.cmu.edu> "Mark J. Bearden" <mb7t+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>In an earlier post,
>
>> What's the revenge factor with Miami, here?  Did I forget some historic
>> drubbing that Alabama has been mulling over for years?
>
>No, the '90 Sugar Bowl, Miami beat Bama.  Or rather, local Alabama opinion
>was strongly that Bama did it to themselves again.

    I don't think any rational person could say that Alabama beat
themselves in the '90 Sugar Bowl.  A team playing inspired football
managed to stay in a game that they should have lost handily.  A
brilliant offensive strategy by Homer Smith kept Miami's line tired
from rushing the shotgun all night and allowed Hollingsworth to rack
up impressive passing yardage.  This against a team who admittedly
had gotten access to Alabama's audibles and knew where the ball was
going on each play.

>If I am correct, Bama was ranked #2 in 89, heading into the final stretch
>against Auburn.  They went into that game heavily favored, and should have
>won, but the offensive coaching staff decided to abandon the passing
>strategy that had worked all year (and won David Hollingsworth SEC QB-of-
                                            ^^^^^

    That should be "Gary".  Gary had an interesting quote after his
picture appeared on the front of Sports Illustrated.  He said
something like:  "I always thought I'd have really accomplished
something if my picture got hung on the wall of a Hardee's in (?) my
hometown."  Sorry, I forgot what small Alabama town he's from and I
don't have the article in front of me.

>the-year honors), and allowed Auburn the win.  The Miami game looked much the
>same, to Bama fans who expected better.

    Well, I'm an Alabama fan who expected us to be massacred in that
one.  I felt that the '89 season was one in which all of the breaks
went our way and our record was better than it should have been. 
Still, I'll take it!

--
Guy McConnell  guy@mspe5.b11.ingr.com  or  ...uunet!ingr!b11!mspe5!guy
   ***  A hurricane is a seasonal thing.  The Tide is forever.  ***
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: tomscud@ruf.rice.edu (Thomas Reid Scudder)
Subject: Re: Trevor Cobb 6, Lloyd Hill 0
Organization: Rice University
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:01:06 GMT

In article <1992Nov8.223449.18415@nsisrv.gsfc.nasa.gov> oday@lobster.gsfc.nasa.gov  (Orin Day) writes:
>In article <BxDD6G.E4s@rice.edu> tomscud@ruf.rice.edu (Thomas Reid Scudder)  
>writes:
>> After the extensive woofing on the part of these two individuals before
>> the Rice-Texas Tech, neither of them scored as much as predicted.
>
>Thus, the woofing theorem is again validated.  And Rice wins!
>
>>  Trevor Cobb had 110 yards rushing in the first half.  I dont know
>>  what his total rushing yardage was.
>
>Though I can't call this performance a disappointment...
>
>> WOOF!  WOOF!  GO RICE!  RUN UP THE SCORE!  SHOW NO MERCY!  TRIPLE DIGITS!
>
>..and beware, the season is not yet over...
Heh.  Well, Rice plays Baylor next week.  Rice-Baylor games have, for the
last few years anyway, been pretty close.  I doubt Cobb will be able to run
over the Bears defense the way he did the Tech D (161 yards total, needing
400 more to pass Darren Lewis for the all-time SWC rushing lead.)
I'd give the edge to the Bears, as it IS Grant Teaff's last year, and
anyway, its their turn this year.

(Orin, does this make up for the post-Tech woof?)

ObCobb:  Trevor Cobb is the only player in NCAA history to carry the ball
1000 times.

-- 
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."
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Koontz Computer Predictions 11-14
From: bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken)
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:58:56 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson
Keywords: NCAA, Computer Predictions

In article <1277@fozzy.UUCP> ckoontz@aud.alcatel.com writes:
>Here are the predictions by my computer algorithm.  This is my first try
>at using the algorithm on college games.  I am about 75% against the spread
>in NFL games.  I have tested my algorithm on college games and made a few
>minor adjustments and seem to be doing fairly well.

Three of your more interesting picks:

>Arizona     51
>USC         20

>Oregon St.  23
>Washington  24

>Temple       8
>Miami        9

This is a joke, right?
--
Dave Bakken                               Internet: bakken@cs.arizona.edu
Dept. of Computer Science; U of Arizona   Voice:    +1 602 621 4098      
Tucson, AZ 85721; USA                     FAX:      +1 602 621 4246
The fact that you're paranoid doesn't prove they're *not* out to get you.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: skipb@cwis.unomaha.edu (Skip Burrell)
Subject: Apologies <Was: Nebraska defeats Colorado>
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:12:17 GMT

pranav@evolving.com (Pranav Vakil) writes:

>manu@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (K. S. Manu) writes:

>To all netters (especially Marty and Skip), I apologize on behalf of semi-
>rational (you have to be semi-rational when it comes to NU  :-)  ) CU fans for
>the postings by Njan.  Not all CU fans are like him. 

>Personally, I hope Nebraska wins its remaining games.  It would be nice to see
>a Big 8 school in the top five at the end of the year.  As for playing Miami 
>in the Orange Bowl, its not going to happen. Miami will probably end up playing 
>Alabama in the Sugar Bowl to decide the National Championship (sorry TAMU). 

>--Pranav 
>  (GO BUFFS!)

>PS: This does not mean that my personal opinion of NU has changed. Its just 
>    that you have to give credit to the Cornhuskers for beating CU and KU in 
>    consecutive weeks. 

  Pranav, this post is a breath of fresh air. I don't mind you or anyone 
rooting for your team and even rooting against mine. What ticks me off is 
when someone either outright or through implication makes a personal attack on 
my pro-Nebraska posts. I also react when my fellow Husker rooters are attacked 
in a message. 

  But then, I'm also guilty of reacting with attacks of my own. For that I
apologize to any Colorado fans or any other fans who were insulted. I was 
wrong to do that. It only creates a vicious circle of ugly insults that makes 
everyone uncomfortable. Again, I'm sorry for propagating this kind of nonsense.

  So lets put this year's feud behind us and look forward to a great game next
year. In the meantime, GO BIG RED!!  ;-)

--
Skip Burrell				Internet:	skipb@unomaha.edu
Comp. Sci. Graduate Student		compuserve: 	76146,2323
University of Nebraska at Omaha		AOL:		skipb
My Disclaimer: Any opinion I may have stated was purely unintentional!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: jfrederi@encore.com (Justin Frederich)
Subject: Re: WAR OVER!!!! MIAMI WINS !!!!!!
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:58:33 GMT

>| Well for all you over-footballed, under-educated Miami folks
>| out there, I only have two words for you.
>| 
>| CRIMSON TIDE!
>| 
>| I think you hear me knocking
>| and I think I'm coming in.
>| 
>| And I'm bringing the Alabama football team, and their
>| smashmouth, 3 yards and a cloud of dust style with me, and
>| we're gonna see how your overpaid, overconfident, over-rated,
>| under-educated football players stand up against them.

In another thread someone brought up an article about a former Alabama
player saying he was bribed/payed whatever. My reaction is that that type
of crap shouldn't even be posted because anyone can make accusations.

Your last sentence fits that desciption also .  


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: acdendy@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (ROGER DENDY)
Subject: Re: Roger's Top 25--9 Nov
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 12 Nov 1992 08:51 EST  

In article <10NOV199218545074@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov>, acdendy@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (ROGER DENDY) writes...
> 
>At the other end, Pacific climbed out of the bottom ten by achieving its 
>3rd win, even though it was against Cal St Fullerton.  Fullerton, meanwhile
>, fell as far as they could without surpassing hapless Ohio U, who lost to 
>I-AA Youngstown St.  Navy managed the upset over Tulane, leaving no teams 
>in Div I-A winless.
> 
>98 Missouri (1-8)	0.2
>99 UTEP (1-8)		0.2
>100 Temple (1-8)	0.2
>101 Navy (1-7)		0.2
>102 SW Louisiana (2-8)	0.1
>103 Ark St (1-7)	0.0
>104 Kent (2-8)		0.0
>105 E Michigan (1-9)	-0.0
>106 Cal St Fultn (2-7)	-0.0
>107 Ohio (1-9)		-0.2
> 

I forgot to put in the Crummy Game of the Week: 92 New Mexico State
						   vs
						106 Cal St Fullerton

R Dendy


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: tsau@cae.wisc.edu (Johne Tsau)
Subject: Re: Minnesota Wins in Mad City
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin--Madison
Date: 13 Nov 92 14:10:05 CST

In article <1e0vt0INNmcm@early-bird.think.com> krall@Think.COM (Tom Krall) writes:
>
>The cheeseheads have be a little quiet out there SO...
>
> My prediction for Sat.'s game is:
>
> Minnesota 28 - Wisconsin 17
>
>Bring the Axe Home !!!!!!
>
>Tom
>Go Gophs !  Beat Wisconsin and Iowa !
>

God?  Does that count as a woof??

--
Johne...   Kariel the Margrave
"The question the truly scientific ask is 'Did God make man,
 or did man make God?'"

UNIX Address            : tsau@cae.wisc.edu
Real World Address      : 5348 Brummel St, Skokie, IL 60077
Real World Phone        : (708) 674-2947
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: jli@bingham.utah.edu (Jianliang Li)
Subject: Re: CFPOOL: Week #10 Results
Organization: University of Utah
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 21:46:39 GMT

>+---------+------------+----------+----------+--------------+-----------------+
>|        Score This Week          |     Year To Date        | Entrant         |
>|  score  | percentage |by thirds |   score  | percentage   |    Name         |
>+---------+------------+----------+----------+--------------+-----------------+
>| 1000.00 | 18/18 100% | 06-06-06 | 10000.00 | 175/179  98% | PERFECT SCORE   |
>+---------+------------+----------+----------+--------------+-----------------+
>|@ 793.65 | 13/18  72% | 05-03-05 |  6432.19 | 098/179  54% | Quang Lee       |
>|  722.35 | 12/18  66% | 05-04-03 |  6159.62 | 105/179  58% | Sekhar Darbha   |
>|  693.72 | 11/18  61% | 05-03-03 |  6731.43 | 109/179  60% | Al Sorhaindo    |
>|  674.50 | 12/18  66% | 05-03-04 |  7012.32 | 116/179  64% | Paul Krueger    |
>|  672.51 | 11/18  61% | 04-05-02 |  2320.76 | 040/072  55% | Jianliang Li    |
>--


	Thank you!  I finally got some respect.  Two weeks ago, my name was at
the bottom line.


Jianliang  Li
================================================================================
      	 	       ******* RULES OF LIFE ******* 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	     RULE NO. 1:  YOUR BOSS IS ALWAYS RIGHT!
	     RULE NO. 2:  IF YOUR BOSS IS WRONG, GO TO RULE NO. 1.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        JLI@MINES.UTAH.EDU (Jianliang Li)    PENN STATE '90  UTAH '2000
================================================================================
From: gln@cs.arizona.edu (Gary L. Newell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: USC Arizona
Date: 8 Nov 92 22:23:13 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson


 So how much is USC favored by to beat the Cats at home? Hopefully
the Cats will be underdogs as they have done well of late in that
position. Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that Arizona was
an underdog against UCLA, Stanford, CAL and WAshington. Granted they
were favored against NMSU but that really doesn't count. 

 USC has to have revenge for the past two seasons on their mind. They
are hot and this seems the likely game for Arizona to drop if they are
going to go 1-1 in their last two games. They need the win, if they take it
they still have the outside shot at the Rose Bowl and can guarantee
themselves a New Year's Day bowl if they follow it up with a win over
ASU.

 These kids have to be kicking themselves in the ass for the way they
played against OSU and WSU....

			gln
From: sfm@manduca.neurobio.arizona.edu (Stephen Matheson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Washington vs. Arizona
Date: 8 Nov 92 19:34:57 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona UNIX Users Group

From article <1992Nov8.183431.16716@asuvax.eas.asu.edu>, by kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy):
> chyang@simile.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang) writes:
>> Despite the loss, the Huskies will go to the Rose Bowl if they
>> win their last two games and that should be easy.  
> 
>      What a foolish thing to say.  I remember
> one year (was it '84?) when Washington said the
> same thing, only to go on to get upset in the
> Apple Cup and lose the Rose Bowl.

I think you're talking about 1985.

>      That put Arizona State in, since all they
> had to do was beat lowly Arizona.  Arizona State
> then copped the same piss poor attitude and
> proceeded to go down to Tucson and get whipped.

Actually the poor Devils had to endure the wrath
of the woofing gods before about 70,000 weeping
ASU fans in Tempe.  My family wouldn't speak to
me for weeks.

> UCLA wound up backing into the Rose Bowl with two
> Pac-10 losses, including a loss to Ted Tollner's
> hapless Southern Cal team which had also risen to
> the occasion to beat a favored rival.
> 
>      You have no doubt offended the woofing gods.
> Repent and pray for forgiveness.

If history teaches us anything, it's that we don't
learn from history.  I'd like to provide an attribution
for this quote, but I can't.  Oh well, at least I'm
not woofing.

> --Ralph Kennedy      {ames,gatech,husc6,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!kennedy
>                         {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,oddjob}--^
>                                           ^---------------The Wrong Choice
>                              internet: kennedy@asuvax.asu.edu

My Nightmare:

On Nov. 21, 1992, in the early afternoon, the announcement
is made in Tucson that Wash. St. has upset heavily-favored
Washingon, 5-4 (3 safeties is Apple Bowl record, as are
19 UW turnovers).  Tucson goes wild, and radio stations
immediately start playing "Run for the Roses" by Dan (gag)
Fogelberg.  Local florists are instantly scrambling for roses,
and the groceries run out of champagne.  The ASU Sun Devils
practice quietly at a local high school.

The game kicks off at 7:07 p.m., nearly ten years to the day
after Arizona's fabled upset of ASU that knocked the Devils
out of the Rose Bowl the first time.  The Cats are favored
by 13, and ASU's offense is expected to collapse under the
pressure of "Desert Swarm".  In various corners of Arizona
Stadium, grim-faced ASU fans sit with clenched teeth and 
white knuckles, with a single murderous intent...

I don't want to go on with this.  Suffice it to say that
I was in Phoenix ten years ago, observing quietly as all
of the above occurred.  I sat quietly and exulted over
the heartbreak endured by my family and friends when
Arizona led 26-0.  The woofing gods had spoken.  I hope
they aren't awakened again...

--

Steve Matheson   Program in Neuroscience   University of Arizona
sfm@neurobio.arizona.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: kevink@fugitive.soac.bellcore.com (Kevin Klinge)
Subject: Re: Big East Contest (Week 10 tally).
Organization: Bell Communications Research
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 13:28:27 GMT

In article <TROCH.92Nov9180132@gandalf.Rutgers.EDU>, troch@gandalf.Rutgers.EDU (Rod Troch) writes:
|> >>>>> On 9 Nov 92 16:31:57 GMT,
|> >>>>> robert.dieckmann 
|> >>>>> had this to say in article <1992Nov9.163157.19268@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>
|> 
|> [text deleted]
|> 	robert.dieckmann> Homer Simpson were upset by Cincinnati's
|> 	robert.dieckmann> last second field goal to nip the Dear Old
|> 	robert.dieckmann> Rutgers Knights in Scarlet (DORKS).  Some
|> [text deleted]
|> 	robert.dieckmann> ("DORKS" is a Trademark, created by Mark Mitchell.)
|> 
|> Do you feel particularly proud of the above name calling?
|> It is a nice service that you are doing, posting the status of
|> the Big East.  Would it be possible to keep your opinions on a 
|> professional (if not semi-professional) level?

I don't think I've ever heard the mention of Bob's opinions and the 
word "professional" used in the same sentence on the net.  Fascinating.

I'd personally try to dock him a couple points in this contest thingy 
for mentioning the above joke in reference to his own alma-mater, but 
he'd never let me get away with that now that he's crept up in the 
standings and tied me.  Nope, not even a chance.

|> Thank you.
|> Rod Troch

Take it less seriously.  Most of us try to in such circumstances.
But if you're still really concerned, I'd try to just "Reply" via 
e-mail to his post and write out a long letter to vent out your 
frustrations.  I don't think Bob has EVER ignored a direct reply to 
his post that ever made it to his mail system.  And that's a pretty 
good track record to have if you ask me.

-- 

Kevin H. Klinge
Bell Communications Research
kevink@soac.bellcore.com

 \\\\    ////////////////////////      ||||\\      //||||
  \\\\  ////////////////////////        |||\\\    ///|||
   \\\\////       /////                 ||| \\\  /// |||
    \\\///       /////                  |||  \\\///  |||
     \\//       /////                  |||||  \\//  |||||