HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ronnie@uts.amdahl.com (Ronnie Townsend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Steling Sharpe is NOT better than Rice
Date: 11 Dec 92 22:21:18 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <57311@olivea.atc.olivetti.com> rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.145234.17136@macc.wisc.edu> heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:
>>Also, you are comparing the 1st 4 years of Sharpe's career to Rice's 
>>prime.  You could at least compare the 1st 4 years of Rice's career to 
>>Sharpe's 1st 4 years.
>
>I have been avoiding getting into this but, after Rice got 101 they mentioned
>that ~41 of his TD catches were under 10 yards in length. Without looking
>at stats, is this common or not? It seems to me the Niners throw the ball
>short more than anybody(except Run and shoot teams) and continue to do so
>close to the goal line, whereas the rest of the league usually tries to run
>it in from close range. This would then go along way in explaining why Rice
>has so many TD passes so quickly. This is not a criticism of Rice, just a 
>question and an observation.

The Bill Walsh offense has always emphasized the short passing game. I don't 
think that 40+ TD's of 10 yards or less is true though because there was much 
made in the papers here how seemingly even the distribution of his TD's were. 
All over the field. Short, long, left right didn't seem to matter. Rice scored
from everywhere. The cleaning people tossed my copy of Monday's sports section
which had the breakdown but I'm sure some stat-monger will post it shortly. 

The Niners have had several periods in Rice's career when their running game 
has struggled. Since GB has apparently had the same problem, one would think
Sharpe would have the same advantage. 

-- 
Ronnie
-------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not cynical... I just don't believe in anything....


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Whiners, NOT the NINERS
Organization: Gizmonic Institute - Home of the "Super G Burger"
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 07:08:27 GMT

<1992Dec14.051008.25870@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN P. GLORIA) :
>The Niners are 12-2 and lead the NFL. We now have a bunch
>of net whiners crying about bad calls, fumbles, stupid
>QBs, stupid head coaches, breaks, and luck, etc.  I can
>guarantee you that if the Niners would have lost and
>the Cowboys would have WON, the net would have been
>flooded by net.idiotic like FRANK and GORDON rubbing
>it in. Yet, when they lose, they have nothing but
>excuses. Each time the Niners lost, I, the MAN that
>I am, was one of the first on the net to say, the
>best team won today. Period.

A few comments, questions, and corrections:

First, you should really get out more and make friends.
Second, I've never "rubbed it in" when the Cowboys have won.
Third, what makes you think you're a man?

[much tantrum throwing deleted]


Gordon
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Clean-up football?
From: scott@mccall.com (Scott D. Davis)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 08:25:17 CST
Reply-To: scott@mccall.com (Scott D. Davis)
Organization: The McCall Pattern Co., Manhattan, KS, USA
Nntp-Posting-User: scott


Charles Martin shot on Jim MacMahon
Woodson and Moon
Leroy Butler and Andre Ware
are a few more talked about cases here on the net.
And now I saw Card's def line step on Chargers' RB(berstien?)
intentionally, from last night news highlights.  

I agree that Butler should have been suspended.  But if the NFL
is looking to clean up the play in football, then they need to
penalize all of it.  If you're caught, by a ref or camera, then
you should be the costs; do the crime, do the time.
--
Scott D. Davis <scott@mccall.com>       The McCall Pattern Company
(uucp: ...!widener!depot!mccall!scott)	615 McCall Road
(800)255-2762, in Kansas (913)776-4041  Manhattan, KS 66502, USA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jmd@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (joseph.m.dakes)
Subject: Re: Wilbur Marshall vs Andre Waters vs Emmitt Smith
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 18:07:58 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.150806.6094@verdix.com>, drew@verdix.com (Drew Johnson) writes:
> I think the reason is probably that while Waters got the reputation for
> trying to inflict career-ending injuries (going for the legs), Marshall
> goes for hits that hurt, but aren't permanent.  I am a big Skins fan,
> but I am as outraged as anybody by his blatant late hits.  He really seemed
> to step them up starting last year.  He has paid some for this, because
> I am pretty sure that the only reason that he didn't make the Pro-Bowl
> last year was because of this behavior.

I am not aware of Wilbur Marshall's knack for late hits myself.  But as
long as someone compared him to Andre Waters, let me bring another guy
into the discussion.

Yes, Emmitt Smith!  After the Eagles-Cowboys game at Philly earlier in
the year Emmitt Smith made some comments about Andre Waters not being
a man.  "If he was a man, he'd hit here", Smith proclaimed pounding his
chest, "rather than the knees."

Well, being fortunate enough to have both the Philadelphia and New York
CBS affiliates on my cable, I was able to switch back and forth between
the Eagles-Seahawks and Cowboys-Redskins games.  One play in particular
caught my attention in the Cowboys-Redskins game.  After an Aikman to
Irvin completion, Roy Green stripped Irvin of the ball.  It was picked
up and returned by the Redskins.  At the tail end of the play into the
picture came Wilbur Marshall running at full speed.  And there's Emmitt
Smith going low at Marshall's knees.  Wilbur gets up and is furious, but
CBS moves to a different camera and the announcers say nothing.  Now I'm
not calling Emmitt Smith a cheap shot artist, but if he's such a MAN,
why'd he go low on the guy?

> PS to Joe Dakes: I said "got the reputation for trying", not "was always
> trying". :)

What I want to know is how you knew I was going to read an article about
Wilbur Marshall in the first place?


E-A-G-L-E-S

Joe Dakes
AT&T Microelectronics
555 Union Boulevard
Allentown, PA  18103
alux1!jmd

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: Frank Bilotti <frank@wanda.princeton.edu>
Subject: Re: Rules question: When is the ball dead, if...
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A75A9703B201700D@rambo.princeton.edu>
Originator: news@nimaster
X-Xxdate: Sun, 20 Dec 92 21:32:51 GMT
Organization: Geology Dept, Princeton Univ
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 02:31:01 GMT

In article <1992Dec20.205043.24730@nntpd.lkg.dec.com> Mike Dobosz,
dobosz_m@wfooff.enet.dec.com writes:
>Hi,
>
>I just spotted a play in the Bills-Saints game that made me
wonder...here's 
>the scenario:
>
>Kelly goes back to throw.  The pass is batted by a rushing defensive
>lineman, sending the ball flying back toward Kelly's prone offensive
>blockers.  It bounces off of at least two players laying on the field...I
>_never_ saw it hit the ground before a few players attempted to retrieve
it.
>The play was blown dead, an incomplete pass.
>
>To my way of thinking, a pass is not a dead ball until it hits the
ground.  
>If a pass is somehow kept off the ground (it miraculously lands in the 
>small of the back of a prone player), it's a free ball.
>
>What is the rule?


	I'm not sure, but I think the ref assumed that the ball had hit the
ground.  I would say that that play should have either been an illegal
foreward pass (if it hit his own lineman) or a completion to the lineman
who grabbed it off the prone player (if it hit a defender first).  Now
the rules involved may be different if his arm was hit (as I believe it
was) by a defender, but I don't think so.
	Anyway, I think you are right in that it never touched the ground, but
the ref was way too busy blowing his whistle and waving his arms to see
the play.

FRANK
__________________________________________
Go 'Canes & Cowboys
frank@wanda.princeton.edu
__________________________________________
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Subject: Re: The Play of the Day (Skins/Dallas)
Keywords: Lucky Break! Aikman
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 23:29:35 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.051738.6073@zip.eecs.umich.edu> sybesma@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Eric Sybesma) writes:

>Okay, I am an un-biased Vikings fan who could really care less who
>won the game, and this is what I saw..

Well, I'm an unbiased Niners fan (yeah, right); here's a counterpoint.

>Aikman pumped, felt pressure, and brought the ball back and had it
>knocked out.  I didn't think it was even questionable.  The ball
>was fumbled.  

If that was a pump, Aikman's got a vice grip.  I've never seen a QB pump
as hard as his arm was moving.  He was trying to pass; of this I'm 
reasonably sure.

>Then Aikman went after it, knowing he had fumbled,

He went after it because of instinct and because he had no way of
knowing how it would be called.

>and Emmitt picked it up, but then was about to be tackled and it
>looked to me that he was at the last second trying to avoid a safety
>(did anyone else think this was the case?) and he purposely tried
>to fumble the ball out of the end zone, to take the chance that a
>Cowboy could come up with it...   That is the way I saw it...

He legally could have thrown a forward pass if Aikman fumbled.  If there
was a receiver in the area (which I doubt), it would have been an 
incomplete pass; otherwise a safety.

Like I said, a shaky call.  Glad it didn't happen to the team I root
for (though we've all been there before).


-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: marshall@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM (Bob Marshall)
Subject: Re: Another Football Joke
Reply-To: marshall@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 92 00:59:59 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.164334.22554@asl.dl.nec.com>, nix@aslslc43.asl.dl.nec.com (David Nix) writes:
>There was a joke I heard last year when Bubby Brister was quarterbacking the
>Steelers that went like this:
>
>  When the US invaded Iraq, instead of sending in the Marines they should 
>  have sent in Bubby Brister, because he can overthrow anyone.

This is an old one; I first heard it in reference to James Harris of
the Rams, with respect to Ayatollah Khomeni.

=============================================================================
Bob Marshall                     \\     "Women aren't as smart as they
Lockheed Missiles & Space Co.     \\     think they are; they think we
Sunnyvale, CA                      \\    men know a lot more than we
marshall@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com\\   really do."
"I tell the truth 'cept when I lie"  \\     - Tim the Toolman
=============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: loffit@wam.umd.edu (Dixie Cup)
Subject: Aikman admits to fumble?
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 01:50:50 GMT

Can anyone in Dallas confirm this?  I heard on the radio that a Dallas
TV station interviewed Aikman and when asked about the fumble Aikman said
he was jerking his arm back and the ball was knocked out of his hand.  Can
anyone confirm this?  I just think it's kind of odd that Aikman didn't argue
with the refs about the call even if he thought it was a fumble.  By not
arguing, he may have inadvertently made the refs think he really fumbled
when they were unsure.  Also, anyone see the KC game?  Something similar
happened.  The Patriots knocked the ball out of Craig's hand while it looked
like he started moving his arm forward.  It was ruled a fumble.  What is
the exact rule anyway?  Does the QB have to simply be moving his arm forward,
or does his arm have to pass his head, or does the ball have to leave his hand
for it to be an incomplete pass when the ball is knocked away by a defender?
I've heard all three so far.  It's not really important, but I just want to
know if the refs are calling these things consistently.  Thanks for any
answers folks.


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: hariharn@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ramesh Hariharan)
Subject: Re: `Redskins Repeat !!!
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: To all non-Redskin fans, after the Redskins beat up on the Cowboys this 
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 05:00:07 GMT

In article <XaR=Y4-@engin.umich.edu> sudhama@engin.umich.edu (Sudhama Gopalan) writes:
>In article <Bz43LI.Cuv@andy.bgsu.edu> dlingle@orchestra.bgsu.edu (Donald Lingle) writes:
>>Sunday, Beware Of The Super Bowl Champs!
>>    I will agree that the Skins are having an up and down season thus far.  But 
>>if we beat the Cowboys this Sunday, you must agree that the Redskins will look 
>>pretty good for repeating as Super Bowl Champs.
>>    The skins have had a bunch of injuries, combined with the late pre-season 
>>start of Mark Rypien.  Some of our players are now returning, (Darrell Green,
>>Jim Lachey), and Rypien's coming out of his slump.
>>    I'm happy to see the Cowboys and Redskins games now mean something.  Before
>>last year, Cowboy fans would hide the week before a Redskin vs. Cowboys game. 
>>As for the 49ers, Vikings, Eagles, Packers, & Saints, I know you would love to 
>>go get a easy Super Bowl victory against an AFC team, but you'll have to wait 
>>for Joe Gibbs to retire or better yet, coach your team.
>>    Well, good luck to all NFL fans.  I am just "touring" the user group.  This
>>id actually belongs to a Pittsburgh Steeler's Fan.
>
>
>Well, I too hope the 'Skins thrash the Cowpokes. Personally, I don't care for/
>hate either. All I'm concerned about is the 49ers - more specifically Montana.
>I'm one of those weirdos who has never seen Montana in action - here's hoping
>the 49ers secure home field advantage before their last game so that I can have
>the pleasure of watching Joe for the first time.
>

Joe who ?

:-) 
-- 
**************************************************************************
Ramesh Hariharan , Chem Engg. Dept., Princeton Univ. 
Research topic : Stabilization of Colloids using diblock copolymers.
Research baap : Bill Russel (no ! not the Celtic legend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: sivaram@plains.NoDak.edu (The Purple Bleeder )
Subject: Re: Vikes cannot hope for a wild card.
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:47:37 GMT
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computing Network

If Minnesota wins one more they will win the Division irrespective
of what they do against the Pack.

They cannot be a wild card team as both Phily and Washington are
already having the same number of wins as the Vikes. So even if
either of washington or Phily loses both their remaining games,
which is unlikely, the Vikes will not get in as the Vikes have
lost to both these teams in the regular season.

That should put this thread to rest.

S.H

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Subject: Re: The Dynasty Continues..........
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Distribution: usa
Date: 18 DEC 92 10:08:37    

In article <1992Dec16.204948.25749@cbnewsk.cb.att.com>, lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes...

>In article <1992Dec16.112625.19297@hellgate.utah.edu> twolf@cs.utah.edu (Tom Wolf) writes:
>>Seems to me, you helped prove his point, Ed. He's saying that it can't be
>>proven that the 49ers were the best of all time, 
>That's NOT the point he was trying to prove. He point was
> 
>  "It's easier to win a championship in the 80s than in the 60s".
> 
>and went on to give numbers on how difficult it was to make the playoffs
>(only one of out seven teams) back in the 60s.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You are truly insane!  I NEVER said it was easier to win a 
championship in the 80s.  My point has *always* been that while it's 
true that a team has to win more games to be the champion now, this is 
only because so many teams get into the playoffs.  So it's only a
matter of personal opinion whether it's harder to win a championship 
now than in the 60s.

This argument was a direct result of attempts by people like you to 
DIMINISH the accomplishments of the 60s Packers on the basis that it 
was easier to win a championship 60s.  My point is that you can't 
prove that.

JGH
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: hariharn@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ramesh Hariharan)
Subject: Re: `Redskins Repeat !!!
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: To all non-Redskin fans, after the Redskins beat up on the Cowboys this 
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 12:00:07 GMT

In article <XaR=Y4-@engin.umich.edu> sudhama@engin.umich.edu (Sudhama Gopalan) writes:
>In article <Bz43LI.Cuv@andy.bgsu.edu> dlingle@orchestra.bgsu.edu (Donald Lingle) writes:
>>Sunday, Beware Of The Super Bowl Champs!
>>    I will agree that the Skins are having an up and down season thus far.  But 
>>if we beat the Cowboys this Sunday, you must agree that the Redskins will look 
>>pretty good for repeating as Super Bowl Champs.
>>    The skins have had a bunch of injuries, combined with the late pre-season 
>>start of Mark Rypien.  Some of our players are now returning, (Darrell Green,
>>Jim Lachey), and Rypien's coming out of his slump.
>>    I'm happy to see the Cowboys and Redskins games now mean something.  Before
>>last year, Cowboy fans would hide the week before a Redskin vs. Cowboys game. 
>>As for the 49ers, Vikings, Eagles, Packers, & Saints, I know you would love to 
>>go get a easy Super Bowl victory against an AFC team, but you'll have to wait 
>>for Joe Gibbs to retire or better yet, coach your team.
>>    Well, good luck to all NFL fans.  I am just "touring" the user group.  This
>>id actually belongs to a Pittsburgh Steeler's Fan.
>
>
>Well, I too hope the 'Skins thrash the Cowpokes. Personally, I don't care for/
>hate either. All I'm concerned about is the 49ers - more specifically Montana.
>I'm one of those weirdos who has never seen Montana in action - here's hoping
>the 49ers secure home field advantage before their last game so that I can have
>the pleasure of watching Joe for the first time.
>

Joe who ?

:-) 
-- 
**************************************************************************
Ramesh Hariharan , Chem Engg. Dept., Princeton Univ. 
Research topic : Stabilization of Colloids using diblock copolymers.
Research baap : Bill Russel (no ! not the Celtic legend)
From: garyr@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Gary Rosen)
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 04:55:20 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Dominant Teams of the Nineties (add one more)
Organization: HP Stanford Park - Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro

>Bill Perry) /  3:09 pm  Dec 17, 1992 /
>You forgot the Bills, who have the best record in the 90s so far (and they are
>heading for their fifth straight division title, I believe).  The most
>important thing needed to be a Dominant team over the long haul is a great GM

Winning a league championship now and then wouldn't hurt.

- Gary Rosen
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: hariharn@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ramesh Hariharan)
Subject: Re: `Redskins Repeat !!!
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: To all non-Redskin fans, after the Redskins beat up on the Cowboys this 
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 01:10:08 GMT

In article <XaR=Y4-@engin.umich.edu> sudhama@engin.umich.edu (Sudhama Gopalan) writes:
>In article <Bz43LI.Cuv@andy.bgsu.edu> dlingle@orchestra.bgsu.edu (Donald Lingle) writes:
>>Sunday, Beware Of The Super Bowl Champs!
>>    I will agree that the Skins are having an up and down season thus far.  But 
>>if we beat the Cowboys this Sunday, you must agree that the Redskins will look 
>>pretty good for repeating as Super Bowl Champs.
>>    The skins have had a bunch of injuries, combined with the late pre-season 
>>start of Mark Rypien.  Some of our players are now returning, (Darrell Green,
>>Jim Lachey), and Rypien's coming out of his slump.
>>    I'm happy to see the Cowboys and Redskins games now mean something.  Before
>>last year, Cowboy fans would hide the week before a Redskin vs. Cowboys game. 
>>As for the 49ers, Vikings, Eagles, Packers, & Saints, I know you would love to 
>>go get a easy Super Bowl victory against an AFC team, but you'll have to wait 
>>for Joe Gibbs to retire or better yet, coach your team.
>>    Well, good luck to all NFL fans.  I am just "touring" the user group.  This
>>id actually belongs to a Pittsburgh Steeler's Fan.
>
>
>Well, I too hope the 'Skins thrash the Cowpokes. Personally, I don't care for/
>hate either. All I'm concerned about is the 49ers - more specifically Montana.
>I'm one of those weirdos who has never seen Montana in action - here's hoping
>the 49ers secure home field advantage before their last game so that I can have
>the pleasure of watching Joe for the first time.
>

Joe who ?

:-) 
-- 
**************************************************************************
Ramesh Hariharan , Chem Engg. Dept., Princeton Univ. 
Research topic : Stabilization of Colloids using diblock copolymers.
Research baap : Bill Russel (no ! not the Celtic legend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: drew@verdix.com (Drew Johnson)
Subject: Re: Redskins over Cowboys
Organization: VERDIX Corporation
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:25:44 GMT

In article <1gibbeINN9sa@rodan.UU.NET> smm@rodan.UU.NET (Steve Mansfield) writes:
>In article <101904@netnews.upenn.edu> satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair) writes:
>>
>>They were outplayed, outgained and nearly outscored for most of the game
>>but the Skins came up big on a recovery of a fumble in the end zone by 
>>Danny Copeland.  

This game reminds me a lot of several of the Skins-Giants games in the
85-90 era.  While many of these games were staightforward dominations by
the Giants, a few of them were games where the Skins led in all the stats,
but 1 or 2 strange plays gave the game to the Giants.  The Skins did not
dominate these games, they just had more yards/first-downs, etc.  The Giants
just ended up making things happen.

>>
>>Michael Irvin burned Darrel Green for some big gains.
>
>Yes, but Irvin also let Green force him to fumble....  After hearing
>verification that Irvin said he was going to go for Green's arm, he has
>no sympathy, or respect from me, any more.  I find it amusing that Green
>used his "bad" arm to pin Irvin's right arm to his body so he couldn't
>hold onto the ball.

I think this stuff about 'going for the arm' was way overblown.  When he
said this, the press made it out to be, "I am going to take any chance I
get to snap his arm like a dry twig."  What he probably meant was that he
was going to try to put Green into positions where he would have to rely
on using that arm.  He *did* this in the game by turning many of his routes
inside, forcing Green to come up and make a hit and/or tackle.  This is
where Green needs his arms the most.  He probably shouldn't have said it,
but I doubt that he meant it the way it was portrayed.

>>Aikman's INT near the Washington end zone cost them big!
>>
>
>Definitely, plus to add insult to injury Copeland turned the interception
>into *great* field position with his runback.  He did a great job of
>staying inbounds.  Too bad the Redskins offense was only able to turn it
>into a field goal.

It was Collins that ran back the INT, not Copeland.  Copeland ran the Irvin
fumble back, I believe.  It should not be too surprising that Copeland made
a good return;  he came to the Skins because he was told he would have a chance
to try out for running back.  He was tired of playing part-time in the
secondary for KC.  The Skins payed him lip-service to sign him, put him
in at strong safety early last season, and he has been a solid starter
ever since.

Drew
drew@verdix.com
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro