HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bubba@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Gary Beason)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Smith is NOT Sanders
Date: 9 Sep 92 23:17:51 GMT
Organization: Purdue University

In article <1992Sep9.220408.16299@leland.Stanford.EDU> paladin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jason Gische) writes:
>I think the header said it all.
>Smith is the second best runner in the NFC now.  He is not Barry Sanders.
>Smith can't carry tacklers the way Sanders can.  And although Smith
>outgained Sanders last year, it took Sanders being rested on the final
>weekend for him to win the title.  And it took him many more carries to do
>it.  Sanders is the feature back in a pass-oriented offense.  Smith is the
>lone back in a balanced attack.
>He's a great player, but don't try to say he's better than Sanders.
>Jason Gische

As a couple of other posts have noted, arguing over who's the best
back is banal--there's too much else to consider, such as offensive
line, play calling, etc.

What bothers me about responses such as yours is

1) carrying tacklers is not the definition of a great runner; it's one
style.  It has its benefits AND drawbacks.

2) Dallas had a more difficult schedule than the Lions, a fact that
affects how well any skill player performs.

3) the post misses the whole point--which isn't comparing the two or
saying that Emmitt is better but is that measuring a player by another
player is asinine when done as insipidly as tv announcers and fans do.
As others have noted, there are many differences.

Even if Dallas has a balanced attack, teams still key on Emmitt; he
earned over 90% of Dallas's running yards last year.

To repeat for those who are tempted to be banal, I think that the two
backs are great, and it's pointless, and just downright silly, to try
to rank one as better than the other (which I never claimed though
people try to infer such a claim--all I said was Emmitt would probably
win the rushing title, something altogether different.)  

Sanders is a great back, but, please, the greatest back in the league?
silliness.

Now, Jim Brown's shit didn't stink.  :)

Gary Beason
bubba@mace.cc.purdue.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: Adriene_Nazaretian@QM.YCC.YALE.EDU (Evil Sheriff of Dodge City)
Subject: Re: GIANTS ........ ARRRRRGGGGHHH !!
Organization: Yale University Computing & Information Systems
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 13:22:25 GMT

In article <1170@alsys1.aecom.yu.edu> larry@aecom.yu.edu (Larry Simmons) writes:
>From: larry@aecom.yu.edu (Larry Simmons)
>Subject: Re: GIANTS ........ ARRRRRGGGGHHH !!
>Date: 8 Sep 92 21:34:18 GMT

>In article <1992Sep7.144415.25916@hellgate.utah.edu>  (Tom Wolf) writes:
>>In article <6SEP199219273412@zeus.tamu.edu>  (SHARAT SHEKHAR) writes:
>>>
>>>      is it time to fire Handley or what ??!!

>Handley has been saying all during preseason, that the "new look" Giants would
>arrive on Sept 6th.
...
tons-o-stuff-deleted.

Yeah, Everyone is right here.  The Giants do need time to adjust to the new 
defense.  In a local paper LT was quoted as saying "you think we looked 
confused, well we were, we were missing our assignments regularly."  

On a different note, although things looked pretty shabby, I was pleased to 
see them go for the TD's and not settle for field goals.  
Adriene L. Nazaretian        
Yale University              
ADRIENE@YALEADS.BITNET        
ADRIENE@YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU
From: v077mdph@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Snoopy)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Buffalo television\
Date: 8 Sep 92 00:03:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <Bu858I.CLs@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v130pwbq@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (ANTI-
CHRIST) writes...
>Well here in the Wonderous city of Buffalo :} it happened again. At 1:00
>the bills played the Rams and on the other station that was supposed to
>show the Falcons/Jets game they broadcasted some bullshit. At 4;00 the
>49ers/Giants game was supposed to be shown instead a hour of interviews 
>with every from Jim Kelly to the bottle boys mother was shown. Woopee.
>Then instead of going to the game already in progress we got to see paid 
>advertisements.

	If you want to watch the Jets games, either go to somewhere with a
satellite dish or go BACK TO FUCKING NEW YORK CITY!
	Sorry, I'm just annoyed by New Yorkers who come here to UB, only to
complain that NOTHING is as good as it is in New York.

>   |  "Life's a Bitch and then we all        * Eric Orologio " Dr. O"    |
>   |   get fucked"                           * V130pwbq @ubvms           |

Snoopy
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: brucek@Ingres.COM (Bruce Kleinman)
Subject: Re: The Battle Of The Titans!
Organization: Ingres, an ASK Company, Alameda CA 94501
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:49:33 GMT

In article <6743@lhdsy1.lahabra.chevron.com> roat@rrc.chevron.com writes:
>In article 6815@morrow.stanford.edu, GC.JAB@forsythe.stanford.edu (Tony Bechtold) writes:
>>
>>First let me congratulate the both teams for playing an outstanding
>>game!!!  Both teams were deserving of the victory.  Way to go
>>Buffalo and San Francisco!!  This could be the battle of the century
>>if these two teams make it to the Super Bowl!
>
>And NO PUNTS!!!  When was the last time this happened?  Anybody know?
>

Not quite positive, but I think there were no punts in Giants at Dallas
last year.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: mcs@fps.com (Mike Sanfratello)
Subject: Re: Buffalo Bills are underdogs
Keywords: Niners Bills
Organization: CRAY Research
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 16:11:47 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.182028.8818@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
	[ ... ]
>Point well take Russ.  However, not counting Vegas, all the sport magazines,
>sport analyst agree that the Niner's are a better team and they SHOULD win
>the game.  There are no guarantees in games.
>
HAHAHAHAHAH!!  Right, *ALL* the sport magazines agree that the Niners are
a better team than the Bills...sorry, that is just WRONG...


mike
Xref: sparky rec.sport.football.pro:16392 dc.redskins:146
From: kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)
Subject: Re: POOL - Perfect Score!
Organization: Arizona State Univ, Tempe
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 21:39:18 GMT

davewood@bruno.cs.colorado.edu (David Rex Wood) writes:
> No matter who wins tonight, we will have at least one perfect score in the
> pool this week.  We could have as many as four.
> 
> I'm sitting in about 220th and I went 10-3 so far!

     Yes, well with all due respect, David, that's
why some of us who have been around awhile wanted
a pool with point spreads.

--Ralph Kennedy      {ames,gatech,husc6,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!kennedy
                        {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,oddjob}--^
                                          ^---------------The Wrong Choice
                             internet: kennedy@asuvax.asu.edu
From: lambo@chips.com (Lambert Walsh)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Hollywood Raiders ....
Summary: If you are going to pop off about us quiet Raider fans should'nt you
	 have the guts to show who your loyalty is for????
Keywords: Hollywood Raiders fans very quiet lately...
Date: 11 Sep 92 00:41:40 GMT
Organization: Chips and Technologies, San Jose, CA

In article <1992Sep9.184307.9312@src.dec.com>, estrella@src.dec.com (John Estrella) writes:
> 
> ...another reason to thank Jay....
> 
> 
> ...Jay keep the good work....
> 
> 
>      John Estrella 

Hey John how about letting us in on your vast knowledge of the game? For some
reason I get the feeling you are a Niner fan. Hey we will always be held
down by Jay Shroeder but you got to stand by your team through the hard 
times. And we look forward to more hard times with Jay at QB. At least until
we get Marijuanovich ready to go!! I guess you don't realize how tough
it is to watch one guy single handidly lose for you?? 

    IT AINT EASY BEING A RAIDER FAN SOMETIMES BUT I WILL STAND NEXT TO THEM!!


    LAMBERT WALSH        RAIDER FAN
From: tsv@dbrus.Unify.Com (Tim Vannaman)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: New Cowboys
Keywords: Haley
Date: 10 Sep 92 21:54:26 GMT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <1992Sep09.141320.427@bnr.ca> patpower@crchh458.bnr.ca (Patrick Power) writes:
>  The Dallas newspaper stated that Haley is a free agent after this year.
>SF eliminated the final year of his contract in an effort to appease him 
>last offseason.  That's why we got him so cheap, we were leasing not buying. :)
>
>
>
>Other news:  Casillas should be available, Maryland -- maybe/maybe not.  Emmitt
>trails Terry Allen (vikings) in the race for rushing title.  Cleveland stole
>OG Myslinksi off the 'Boys practice squad.  Myslinski was the last of four
>OL drafted by Dallas this year.  2 were cut, Milstead was traded to the Browns.

How does someone get stolen off the practice squad, doesn't dallas have to
put him thru waivers first?
--
Tim Vannaman, Premium Technical Support Engineer   Phone: (916) 928-6433
Unify Corporation, Sacramento, California    Fax: (916) 928-6403
tsv@unify.Com  or  {{ucdavis,csun,lll-crg}!csusac,pyramid,sequent}!unify!tsv
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: marshall@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com (Bob Marshall)
Subject: Re: Status of 49ers Brent Jones/Jerry Rice?
Reply-To: marshall@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 21:29:56 GMT

In article <federkin.716481949@guppie19>, federkin@rtsg.mot.com (John Federkins) writes:
>Is Brent Jones even playing this year?

Yep. He dropped one pass against the Giants, and played against the Bills,
but pulled a hamstring in the 2nd quarter. He is listed as doubtful for
the Jets game, but hopefully we be back for the Saints game.

>And how bad was Rice's concussion?  Will he play next week?

Rice is listed as probable. In Rice's mind, I'm sure he is listed as definite.

=============================================================================
Bob Marshall                     \\     "It ain't age
Lockheed Missiles & Space Co.     \\     That makes me look this way
Sunnyvale, CA                      \\    It ain't the years, boys,
marshall@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com\\   It's the miles"
"I tell the truth 'cept when I lie"  \\     - Chris LeDoux
=============================================================================
From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: taunting for 15
Date: 11 Sep 92 22:46:46 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center

In article <92255.032250343VTQ2@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>, William Grant <343VTQ2@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU> writes...

>Say AGAIN??  Since when does taunting someone mean that you can't beat them
>in skill??  To me,  if a player taunts another player,  it's because he's
>better than the other player.

Ach!  It means nothing of the sort.  It simply means that on that one 
play or in that one game the player has been successful.  Even Walter 
Payton got thrown for a loss once in a while.  When some no-name LB 
tackled Payton for a loss did that mean he's a better player?

>  I've personally never played professional
>football,  but would seem to me that after a crushing sack,  in front of
>more than 10000 screaming fans,  I'd be on an emotional high.  Of course
>I'd want to live it up.  I'm sure it's the same way.  Not to mention that
>it probably fires the crowd up even more,  and gets the crowd behind your
>team.  This is always a bonus.

There's a big difference between celebrating and taunting.

>THAT'S beging unsportsman like.  Taunting is just letting out emotion when
>you're really on your game.  No different from spiking the ball after a
>25 yard interception return for a touchdown,  or throwing the game ball
>into the stands after a hard earned win.

Celebrating is natural - you can't help it in some cases.  Taunting is 
different.  You have to choose to taunt.

JGH
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: gattuso@ssd.comm.mot.com (Christopher Gattuso)
Subject: Washington Question
Organization: Motorola
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 19:43:59 GMT

Anyone out there in Redskin land, I need some help.  There is a rumor
going around here that Byner may be hurt and Ervins is going to take
the slack this week.  Is this true, in any way?????  I have Ervins on
my Fantasy Football team, but I don't want him in unless he is the 
primary back.

Email or post it....THANKS IN ADVANCE!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     __		       __    		Christopher Gattuso
    / /\	      / /\
   / / /	     / / /  		gattuso@ssd.comm.mot.com
  / / /		    / / / __ 		Motorola, Inc.
 / / /	hristopher / / / / /\ attuso    Schaumburg, Illinois
/_/ /	  __	  /_/ / /_/  \
\ \ \	 / /\	  \ \ \ \_\/\ \         "It is the hardest dive in the 
 \ \ \	/ / /	   \ \ \  / / /		 Olympics:  half-gainer, no
  \ \ \/ / /	    \ \ \/ / /		 brainer!!!"
   \ \ \/ /	     \ \ \/ /			- Jerry Seinfeld, refering
    \ \  / 	      \ \  /  			    to Greg Lougainis in 
     \_\/              \_\/  			    the 1988 Olympics 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: rege@bongo.Berkeley.EDU (Ashutosh G. Rege)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: 49er/Bills
Date: 14 Sep 92 03:42:42 GMT
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: bongo.berkeley.edu

In article <y0xnhcg.xtifr@netcom.com> xtifr@netcom.com (Chris Waters) writes:
>In <1992Sep14.003242.1493@enterprise.rdd.lmsc.lockheed.com> marshall@force.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com (Bob Marshall) writes:
>
>>In probably the most entertaining game of the day, the Buffalo Bills'
>>offense outlasted the 49ers' offense, winning the game 34-31 after
>
>Sheesh, it is just me?  Am I the only one who finds this type of
>offensive shootout, with no defense by either team, to be just as boring
>as a defensive struggle that ends in a 3-0 win?

I agree completely. It was pretty irritating to hear Trumpy/Enberg talk
about how great such a superbowl matchup would be. Great defense is
just as exciting especially when it's the other team's QB that is crumpled
down.
 
 
>Buffalo's offense earns an A, SF's offense earns an A-.  Buffalo's
>defense earns a D, and SF's defense earns a D-.  I would not be
>heartened by this game if I were a fan of either team.  (Hmm, gee, I am
>a fan of one of those teams--how 'bout that...)

  You got be kidding. Buffalo's D gave up more yards to the SF offense.
  The game could have gone either way right up to the end. I guess that 
  isn't as clear to your partisan eyes.

>Still, even with lousy D, Buffalo earns a checkmark in the W column. 
>When it comes down to it, that's what really counts.  Buffalo is used to
>having lousy D, and rising above it.  SF may have to learn to do the
>same if they want to get anywhere this year.

  Sorry but the SF D is nowhere near as good as some of the other defenses
  especially in the NFC. And that is why Buffalo will lose their 3rd
  Superbowl in a row. 

>Cheers to Marv and the boys, who've proven time and again that they can
>win on offense alone.  Jeers to Seifert, who's let most of the SF
>defense move to LA to play wearing silver and black.

>Chris Waters    | the insane don't | NOBODY for President!
 
  Maybe you wanna check out the Cinci/Raiders score first before shooting
  off.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: billms@eecs.umich.edu (William Mangione-Smith)
Subject: Re: Smith is NOT Sanders is NOT Thomas is NOT...
Organization: University of Michigan
	<18njbnINNr5@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> <1992Sep10.145345.16369@bnr.ca>
	<1992Sep10.173528.5603@ticipa.pac.sc.ti.com>
	<18p16qINNoh0@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:25:25 GMT

In article <18p16qINNoh0@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> am402@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alex Canada) writes:

   I wasn't just talking about both lines, Sanders is THE man for Detroit, I
   don't see much offense coming from anywhere but Sanders.. BUT Dallas, has
   Irvin and Aikman as well as Smith. Would Smith do as well in Detroit? if
   defenses were just keying on him? and not worried about other Detroit players.
   In Dallas, you not only have to worry about Smith, but the Aikman to Irvin
   connection deep.. 

This is an excellent point.  As the Lions passing attack has pointed out so
far this year, and late last year (for example, see the bears & cowboys
games) it is absolutley *nothing* to worry about.  What did they throw for,
270+ yards on Sunday?  6'th rated passer?  ~70% completion rate?  Against the
Bears?  Sheesh, any real attack would have had three times that.  Browning
Nagle would have gone over the 1k mark, even if they brought back Micky
Schuler and made him the only receiver.

The Lions have invested heavily in receivers over the last three years, and
while they are not a top 3 unit, they may one day be.  And they certainly are
an easy top 10.  Rodney is into his fourth year and is playing pretty well.
The passing attack isn't that bad.

Bill
--
-------------------------------
	Bill Mangione-Smith
	billms@eecs.umich.edu
From: am402@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alex Canada)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Smith is NOT Sanders is NOT Thomas is NOT...
Date: 10 Sep 1992 13:42:15 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: am402@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Alex Canada)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, reams@bnr.ca (Cary Reams) says:

>In article <1992Sep9.220408.16299@leland.Stanford.EDU>, paladin@leland.Stanford.EDU (Jason Gische) writes:
>|> I think the header said it all.
>|> Smith is the second best runner in the NFC now.  He is not Barry Sanders.
>|> Smith can't carry tacklers the way Sanders can.  And although Smith
>|> outgained Sanders last year, it took Sanders being rested on the final
>|> weekend for him to win the title.  And it took him many more carries to do
>|> it.  Sanders is the feature back in a pass-oriented offense.  Smith is the
>|> lone back in a balanced attack.
>|> He's a great player, but don't try to say he's better than Sanders.
>|> Jason Gische
>
>..... mutliple followups not included
>..... noticeably absent are the TThomas-backers (thank-you.)
>
>Folks, given that there is only one SB trophy handed out (along with
>innumerable individual awards by various (self-serving?) organizations)
>
>a) Remember this is a team game (How would Sanders, Smith or Thomas 
>(listed alphabetically) perform behind Cleveland's front line ? - they
>do still have EMetcalf, right?)

I think that's the point exactly, Smith has a better supporting cast around
him, thus he outgained Sanders in yardage last year. I think if you switch
RB's, have Sanders in Dallas, and Smith in Detroit, Sanders would even
be better than he is now. IMHO.


Alex
From: gary@colossus.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand)
Subject: QB Rating -- How the NFL Does It
Organization: Climate and Global Dynamics Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 15:01:06 GMT

  This is how the NFL computes a passer's rating:

  1) First, you need the passer's completions (COMP), attempts (ATTS), his
     yardage (YRDS), interceptions (INTs) and touchdown passes (TDs.)

  2) Compute the COMP percentage, the TD percentage, the INT percentage, and
     the average gain, using the number of ATTS as the denominator:

     CMP% = COMP / ATTS * 100
     TD%  = TDs  / ATTS * 100
     INT% = INTS / ATTS * 100
     GAIN = YRDS / ATTS

  3) Now weight the above by the following formula. 
     (Note that the maximum number of "points" a passer can get for each
      category is 2.375, and the minimum is 0.)

     PTS_CMP  = 0.05 * (CMP% - 30)
     PTS_INT  = 0.25 * (9.5 - INT%)
     PTS_TDs  = 0.20 *  TD%
     PTS_GAIN = 0.25 * (GAIN - 3)

  4) Add all the "points" up, divide by 6, and muliply by 100 to get the
     rating:

     RATE = 100 * ((PTS_CMP + PTS_TDs + PTS_INT + PTS_GAIN) / 6)

  Ta da!

  Here's an example using Jim Kelly's week 8 1992 season data:

  Name            COMP ATTS YRDS INTs  TDs
  Jim Kelly         18   27  392    3    5

     CMP% = ( 18 / 27) * 100 = 66.667%
     TD%  = (  5 / 27) * 100 = 18.519%
     INT% = (  3 / 27) * 100 = 11.111%
     GAIN =  392 / 27        = 14.519

     PTS_CMP  = 0.05 * (66.667 - 30)  =  1.833

     PTS_TDs  = 0.20 *  18.519        =  3.704*
         *max is 2.375, so PTS_TD     =  2.375

     PTS_INT  = 0.25 * (9.5 - 11.111) = -0.403*
         *min is 0, so PTS_INT        =  0.000

     PTS_GAIN = 0.25 * (14.519 - 3)   =  2.880*
         *max is 2.375, so PTS_GAIN   =  2.375

     TOTAL_POINTS = 1.833 + 2.375 + 0.000 + 2.375 = 6.583

     RATE = 100 * (6.583 / 6) = 109.7 (to one decimal place)

  And another, using Mark Rypien's week 1 1991 season data:

  Name            COMP ATTS YRDS INTs  TDs
  Mark Rypien       15   19  183    1    2

     CMP% = 100 * ( 15 / 19) = 78.947%
     TD%  = 100 * (  2 / 19) = 10.526%
     INT% = 100 * (  1 / 19) =  5.263%
     GAIN =        183 / 19  =  9.631 

     PTS_CMP  = (78.947 - 30) / 20 = 2.447*
         *max is 2.375, so PTS_CMP = 2.375

     PTS_TDs  = 10.526 / 5         = 2.105
     PTS_INT  = (9.5 - 5.263) / 4  = 1.059
     PTS_GAIN = (9.631 - 3) / 4    = 1.658

     TOTAL_POINTS = 2.375 + 2.105 + 1.059 + 1.658 = 7.197

     RATE = 100 * (7.197 / 6) = 120.0 (to one decimal place)

  See? Real easy!

  You can see where the really good performances and the really bad ones get
  knocked down or raised up. If a QB has a CMP% below 30%, he gets 0 "points",
  rather than negative points. If he has a CMP% above 77.5, he only gets
  2.375 "points" (as in the above example.) The limits for GAIN are 3.0 yards
  and 12.50 yards, for TD% 0 and 11.9, and for INT%, 9.5 and 0.

  Enjoy!
--
Gary Strand                      Opinions stated herein are mine alone and are
strandwg@ncar.ucar.edu            not representative of NCAR, UCAR, or the NSF
From: johna@psdcae1.gvg.tek.com (John Abt)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: 49er's Seifert - DUMP COFER
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:43:11 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

Both Murry and Allegre are in San Francisco today (Tues).
Seifert says Cofer is still the kicker, but he`s looking.

Of course, I read it in that disreputable rag - the SF
Chronicle - so it's probably not true.

John Abt
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: scott@ods.com (Scott Harper)
Subject: Re: Dallas/Skins Wrapup + *icednotes*
Organization: Optical Data Systems, Inc.
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 22:30:42 GMT

Marcus A.Shaw (mas@aero.org) wrote:
: >>* Penalties were still fairly low, a JJ trademark,
: >
: >Yes, his teams at Miami were notorious for their low penalty totals.   
: >I assume you are only referring to his time as the Cowboys coach?
: 
: Yeah, I keep forgetting Jimmy's past as the head of the Miami crime
: family.  He probably kept the penalty totals down for those teams as
: well, we just never saw how high they COULD have been. :)

Yes, we did.  1991 Cotton Bowl, Texas vs. Miami.  Only Erickson was
the Miami coach by this time...

-- 
Scott Harper                       Optical Data Systems, Inc.
scott@ods.com                      1101 E. Arapaho Road
(214) 234-6400                     Richardson, TX  75081
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro