HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tobias@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Tobias)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: AFC vs. NFC drivel
Date: 30 Dec 92 12:09:19 GMT
Reply-To: tobias@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Tobias)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.sport.football.pro, carrato@acsu.buffalo.edu (Michael Carrato) writes:
>tobias@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Tobias) writes:
>>           Any unbiased observer would have to admit that the NFC
>>(excuse me Mr Anal Retentive, make that NFL) teams who moved to the
>>AFC/AFL (are you happy now?) were basically NFC/NFL teams for several
>The thread is AFC/NFC. AFL/NFL is completely irrelevant.

    I agree. I was merely responding to the individual who raised it
as a (to him) major issue.


>>years after their move. By the early 80s, turnover being what it is
>>with players and coaches, the Browns/Steelers/Colts (if I left any out,
>>I'm sure you'll correct me!) lost whatever distinctions one could make
>>between the two leagues/conferences.
>
>So you are saying that up until 1980 those teams were NFC teams, but
>then they officially became AFC teams when they started losing. Yup,
>makes a lot of sense.
>Mike C.

    Whether they were winning or losing, for the few years after the
merger, the NFL would deserve the credit (or blame) for their quality
of play (or lack thereof). With turnover, the three teams
lost their old NFL identity. By the late 70s, the three could be considered
AFL teams, for better or worse. Along these same lines, if the 49ers
moved to the AFC next year and the Pats moved to the NFC, there would
doubtless be some cretins who would use that as an example of how good
the AFC is and how bad the NFC is. I would still consider the 49ers
as NFC and the Pats as AFC for several more years.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: root@june.cmp.rpi.edu (J.R. Ordon)
Subject: Re: Playoffs/the final answer/the Cowboys.
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 16:06:01 GMT

In article 
<1992Dec28.094901.4751@admin1.memst.edu> jasmith@admin1.memst.edu (John) writes:
>

Various drivel deleted..



                              WILD CARD GAMES
>        
>                             1ST ROUND GAMES
>
>          Philadelphia     24                 Houston          16
>       at San Francisco    28              at Pittsburgh       23
>
>
>          Minnesota        17                 Kansas City      35
>       at Dallas           34              at Miami            17
>
>       NFC Championship Game             AFC Championship Game
>          Dallas         49                 Kansas City        16
>       at San Francisco  28              at Pittsburgh         19
>

Do you really think that Dallas is going to Score 34 points on Minnesota
and then score 49 points on the niners at Candlestick??? Come on, stop
dreaming... have the 'boys scored 49 points against ANYBODY this year??



>                               SUPERBOWL
>       Dallas Cowboys      41            Pittsburgh Steelers    13
>
>       OFFENSIVE, DEFENSIVE, COWBOYS.  That's the story.  The Cowboys have done
>       great all year long against the run.  And Foster will not make the
>       grade.  The real story is NFC versus AFC.  No match this year.  If it
>       were SF-Pitts, Minnesota-Pitts, or any other team in the NFC.  The AFC
>       is too weak to contend with the NFC this year.

Now you're really reaching... The 'boys may very well get to the NFC 
Championship game, but that's where it's gonna end.. sorry....



--------------------------------------------
J.R. Ordon
GO VIKES!!!
From: hjjcl@usho77.hou281.chevron.com (J.J.Clyde)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Christmas
Keywords: montana roasting on an open fire
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:03:57 GMT
Organization: .

>All Football woofing aside,
>
>Merry Christmas to all of you !

Ditto and Heaux, Heaux, Heaux!

--J.J.
(bruce coslet makes joe gibbs look like andy gibb)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: dggok@pbhyg.PacBell.COM (4E150M)
Subject: Re: Dan Reeves has been fired!
Reply-To: dggok@PacBell.COM (David G. Gok)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 23:14:15 GMT

In article <TOMA.92Dec28170442@db.TC.Cornell.EDU> toma@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Rory Toma) writes:
>
>   That's right, just heard on the radio that Bolen fired Dan Reeves.
>   No word on new head coach yet, but look out 49ers, I'm sure we're 
>   interested in Shanahan.  or maybe Wade Phillips will be moved up.

Damn.  Are we going to lose yet another offensive coordinator?  Hey,
Broncos!  Dallas and Buffalo have good offenses too!  Why don't you
look at some of their coaches?  New Orleans, Minnesota, Philadelphia
and others have good defenses.  Why don't you look at some of their
coaches?  Give us a chance to break this Shanahan guy in :-).

>
>
>Maybe Dan Reeves would like to live in Phoenix, Arizona.
>--
 
Yeah, if they change owners as well.

>toma@tc.cornell.edu	rory@foopub.tucson.az.us
>You want me to upgrade to System what?
>


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: asj4j@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (JonaX)
Subject: Re: SKINS RULE
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 00:06:08 GMT

mlsa@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu  writes:
> RYPIEN TO SANDERS HE COULD GO ALL THE WAY
> 
> TOUCHDOWN SKINS SCORE 10-7
> 
> HAIL TO THE REDSKINS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> -- 


RYPIEN TO  N O B O D Y!!!!   Ronnie Lott with the deflection and 
a kick in the butt to the Redskins.   Maybe next year --- NOT!
From the Superbowl to ....nothing...not even the playoffs...maybe
even a loss to the Raiders!
From: spork@camelot.bradley.edu (Richard Izzo)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Dan Reeves has been fired!
Date: 30 Dec 92 20:03:29 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Bradley University

In <168CD8237.MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com> MCMASTER@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jim McMaster) writes:

>Shanahan is clearly the front-runner for the job, with Wade Phillips a
>close second.  First, Bowlen likes Shanahan a lot.  Reeves' firing
>Shanahan may be the biggest reason Reeves was canned.  At Bowlen's
>press conference after the firing, he stated that Shanahan was the one
>he wanted, but that he had not discussed the position with Shanahan,
>and was not sure Shanahan wants it (big laugh).
>Wade Phillips would probably be the better choice, but Bowlen said
>words to the effect (Oh, yeah....if Wade wants to apply I'll talk to
>him."  Too bad.  Phillips will not work for Shanahan, and Phillips is
>probably more responsible for the Broncos' wins than Reeves over the
>past few years.  Phillips is a defensive genius, and his defensive
>schemes have hidden the Broncos' personnel deficiencies for years.

Wait a minute...don't I recall Mr. Shanahan doing miserably with the
Raiders?  I also recall him not being very popular with the players.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but if I'm right, wouldn't making 
Shanahan head coach be a NEGATIVE move?

Just a thought.

rich.
From: obert@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Carl Obert)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Browns vs. Oilers
Date: 21 Dec 92 15:54:50 GMT
Organization: IBM Rochester
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

I didn't get a chance to see the end of this game, but I heard the Oilers scored twice (14 points) in the last three minutes.  Sounds like the PREVENT DEFENSE prevented another victory!  Any comments on the game?

CFO
From: jdhl@troi.cc.rochester.edu (papa_sm00sh)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Hey Ed Lor, Bills 4-0 vs NFC, one more NFC team to beat
Date: 21 Dec 92 15:58:41 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Dec21.152313.10233@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
>season? It's like somebody saying that the Eagles have already played
>their SB on Oct. 5, did the Bills play theirs yesterday?

not necessarily, but if you listened to the horrible men in the booth
for NBC you wouold believe that the Saints did...

jason
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: vxb8773@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Re: Vikings offense
Reply-To: vxb8773@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:30:34 GMT

your analysis on the way dennis handled the QB situation was accurate. i 
still think that gannon would be the QB and salisbury should come in as
a relief QB during the game. This philosophy might not work anymore because
we know gannon's confidence is gone. i dont think dennis will start gannon
against the pack but hopefully salibury will get slightly injured. This 
would settle the QB situation.

							vinnie
From: bergerson@cvdv79.mayo.edu (Chad D. Bergerson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Vikings Playoff chances/QB
Date: 28 Dec 92 21:38:06 GMT
Reply-To: bergerson@mayo.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN



In article <1992Dec28.135428.11565@hellgate.utah.edu>, twolf@cs.utah.edu (Tom Wolf) writes:
->Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
->From: twolf@cs.utah.edu (Tom Wolf)
->Subject: Re: Vikings Playoff chances/QB
->
->>In article <13773@express>, currie@Software.Mitel.COM (Kim Currie) writes:
->>->COME ON!  Buerlein???  Tomczak???  These guys are no better (possibly
->>->worse) than what the Vikings have now.  I agree the Vikings can improve
->>->themselves by upgrading the QB position, but I don't think the rest of
->>->the NFC is `shivering' at the prospect.  They still have questionable
->>->special teams, a running back who fumbles waaay too often, and an
->>->overly conservative offensive scheme.
->>->        
->>->Kim
->>->
->>Are you a guy or a gal???  Either way, you don't know what you are talking 
->>about.
->
->
->What does this person's sex have to do with their analysis? What, men can't
->discuss things rationally? Or women can't? I think you are out of line here.
->Leave a person's sex out of the discussion and just respond to the posting.
->
->Well, that is enough flaming, you will probably get more publicly on the net.
->I have to admit though, I think your posting merits a public apology.
->
->Tom Wolf
->

Sex has nothing to do with it, I just wanted to know with whom I was conversing.
why don't you mind your own business!!  I haven't gotten flamed for the
accidental chauvenistic remark yet.  I just didn't agree with what was said in
the post.  Maybe I want a hot date with some feisty gal who is a big football
fan!!!!!!


--
*******************************************************************************
Chad D. Bergerson                            Internet: bergerson@mayo.edu
Mayo Clinic                                  Voice: (507) 255-7567
200 First Street SW                          FAX: (507) 255-5484
Mail Stop 2D-334 STM            "In my dream I was drowning my sorrows  
Rochester, MN  55905             But my sorrows they learned to swim..." - U2
*******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: istre@ricevm1.rice.edu
Subject: Coach of the Year nominees
Organization: Rice University  
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 16:19:15 GMT

Well it is time for name the Coach of the Year. I will go ahead and cast
my personal choices. Some of you may agree and most of you will disagree
but what the hell, they are MY choices.
 
AFC - Bill Cowher(sp?), Pittsburgh Steelers.
 
      He took a team that many figured would be rebuilding and won the
      division. His Steeler team reminded me (an Oiler fan) of many of
      the great Steeler teams of the '70's.
 
NFC - Mike Holmgren, Green Bay Packers.
 
      His Packer team has made the playoffs, but more importantly, they
      have made many accomplishments not done since the Lombardi era.
      Packer fans have in my opinion, been a hardy, 'stand-by-their-team'
      bunch, but I am sure they must be very excited up there.
 
Well those are my choices. Anyone care to cast their votes for Coaches
of the Year?
From: joel@cs.utexas.edu (Joel Daniel Just)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: No Cowboys 'D' in Pro Bowl
Date: 27 Dec 1992 02:23:54 -0600
Organization: CS Dept, University of Texas at Austin
NNTP-Posting-Host: langtry.cs.utexas.edu

In article <Bztz8t.4ry@abode.ttank.com> eric@abode.ttank.com (Eric C. Bennett) writes:
>Does anyone feel it was right that no Dallas Cowboy players made it to the Pro
>Bowl this year? They have the #1 defense in the league. Granted their defense
>is much more a 'team' defense rather than a couple of players excelling at a
>certain position, I feel that they at least deserved one person from their
>squad on the Pro Bowl roster to represent the team. I know that the Pro Bowl
>rosters are voted on.... I just makes me mad that the Cowboys have worked so
>hard on defense this year and got the #1 ranking and no one from the team made
>it to the Pro Bowl.
>
>Eric

The Cowboys do have a great defense, but they are good because they work well
as a team.  The Pro Bowl recognizes outstanding individuals, not teams.  It
does not follow that if a defense is good it must have good individual
players (although the converse is often true).  I notice that in your article
you do not mention any Cowboys defensive players who deserve to make the Pro
Bowl.  In my opinion, the best players on the Cowboys' defense are Charles
Haley, Jim Jeffcoat, and Ken Norton.  But I doubt that these players are better
than the defensive ends and linebackers who were elected to the Pro Bowl.

A defense should not be judged by the number of players it has in the Pro
Bowl.  And, as we have seen, good defenses sometimes have few (or no) players
in the Pro Bowl.


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Subject: Re: For New York Giants & 49er Fans
Reply-To: pajerek@telstar.kodak.com (Don Pajerek)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. - Telstar
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 17:15:22 GMT

In article <103366@netnews.upenn.edu> satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair) writes:
>In article <1992Dec29.204147.9932@pony.Ingres.COM> daveb@lotus (Dave Brower, DBMS hack, [510] 748-3418) writes:
>>
>>
>>How about trading for Montana?  He'll be available, and might give the
>>Ignats time to develop someone younger.  Do the Giants have any[thing|one]
>>the Niners would want in return?
>>
>>-dB
>>
>>-- 
>>Windows/NT - the VMS of the 90s
>
>The Niners will never go for this... trading to a team that cost them
>2 shots at the Super Bowl!  That'd be like trading him to the (gasp!) Saints.
>
>The GIANTS have many players that the Niners
>would want but the Niner organizationjust waits until they become Plan B
>types and then get them (Odessa Turner, Jim Burt, etc.).
>
>satish nair
>ray is gone!
>

Of course, there is no more Plan B. What will they do now?

BTW - I agree that, after automatically eliminating the other NFC West
teams, the Giants are one of the LAST teams that the 49ers would want
to see Montana playing for.


Don Pajerek

Standard disclaimers apply.
From: marshall@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM (Bob Marshall)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: 49ers/Cowboys :QB problems? Thoughts?
Date: 30 Dec 92 06:48:06 GMT
Reply-To: marshall@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Organization: LMSC, Sunnyvale, California

In article <1992Dec29.230445.29399@netcom.com>, gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>In defensive efficiency (which is the average yards allowed per play) the
>9ers are 20th.  NO, Dallas, Minnesota, and San Diego are the top four in
>order.

Woof mode on.

In fairness, let's quote a more meaningful defensive stat : "points allowed
per game". The 49ers rank 3rd here. Add to that the fact that they are
first in the most important stat : "points scored".

Woof mode off.

=============================================================================
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: Adriene_Nazaretian@QM.cis.YALE.EDU (ALN - Go Giants!)
Subject: Re: For New York Giants Fans
Organization: Yale University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 14:48:00 GMT

In article <102922@netnews.upenn.edu> satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair) writes:
>From: satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair)
>Subject: Re: For New York Giants Fans
>Date: 22 Dec 92 03:45:34 GMT
>In article <1992Dec22.002632.25620@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> kevinlu@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Kevin Lu) writes:
>>Ray Handley and Rod Rust **must** GO!!
>>
>>End of Discussion.
>>
>>But who can we get to replace them?
>>
>>  +----------------------------------------+-------------------------------
+>>  |  Kevin Lu                              | Monash 


>Tom Coughlin, head coach of the Boston College football team.  He was with the
>GIANTS organization but left to take up head coaching job at B.C.  He has
>done tremendous things with that offense especially with Chucky Dukes and their
>QB (whose name escapes me).  All right so they got blown out by Notre Dame but
>Coughlin has made the most out of his personnel.
>
>GIANTS management has their sights on him.

Hmmm, my local news rag mentioned Coughlin also a possible replacement.  But 
management says that they have done NO TALKING at all with ANYONE, until 
the current season is OVER. 

[Hey Larry, dont you subscribe to one of those Giants magazines?  What do 
they say there?]

How could the owners not be talking about a replace-o-ray by now?  I find 
this mighty hard to believe, while fans actively chant and wear "Ray Must 
Go" T-Shirts inside and out of the stadium.

 When the season is 
officially over, they will "evaluate handley and the situation and make 
whatever personnel changes they feel necessary to change the current 
tide in NY" blah, blah, blah.  Why dont we just break out the 
guillotine and chop Rays head off during the finale in Phili.  
 
Whenever the press talks about parcells, owners deny everything because of 
the disagreements in the past over draft picks, personnel etc...

>
>Ironically, the name of the B.C. football team is... the Eagles :-)
>

Hey dont ruin a perfectly good thread by mentioning the Iggles...
-Adriene
P.S.  I publicly admit, I was WRONG!  I said the Giants would be 5-11 this 
year.  Lets see how close I am next season.  Hey I can adjust to 6-10 for 92.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: nix@aslslc43.asl.dl.nec.com (David Nix)
Subject: Superbowl Records
Organization: NEC America, Inc Irving TX
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 16:00:11 GMT

The superbowl records of the playoff teams are:
  Pittsburgh	4-0
  San Francisco	4-0
  Washington	3-1
  Dallas	2-3
  Miami		2-3
  Kansas City	1-1
  Minnesota	0-4
  Buffalo	0-2
  Philadelphia	0-1
  New Orleans	0-0
  Houston	0-0
  San Diego	0-0

As you can see, half of the playoff teams have never won a Superbowl, and
3 teams have never even been that far.  All three of the 0-0 teams are
playing well and stand more than a good chance of making it.  Eight matchups
would be repeats:
  KC vs Minn (KC)
  Buff vs Wash (Wash)
  Pitt vs Dall (Pitt both times)
  Pitt vs Minn (Pitt)
  Miami vs Wash (twice - split)
  Miami vs Dall (Dall)
  Miami vs SF (SF)
  Miami vs Minn (Miami)

Opinion:  The most likely of THESE matchups, although anything can happen, is
Pittsburgh vs Dallas.  However, there are some more likely matchups that have
never before occurred.  Of these, one of the most interesting would be
Pittsburgh vs. San Francisco, each going for title number 5.

Miami has met 4 of the 6 NFC playoff teams in past SBs.  Dallas and Pittsburgh
played two of the most thrilling SBs ever, each decided by 4 points (although
these two now rank behind SFs victory of Cincinatti 20-16 and NY Giants win
over Buffalo 20-19).

My picks, in order:

  AFC:  1. Pittsburgh
        2. San Diego
        3. Miami
        4. Houston
        5. Kansas City
        6. Buffalo

I ranked Pittsburgh number 1 if O'Donnell can come back, otherwise they drop
down.  I ranked San Diego number 2 only because they must play an additional
game to make the SB, and history says that it is difficult to play that extra
game and go all the way.  However, SD is the hottest team in the AFC.
My heart says rank Miami number 1 (I am a Dolphin fan), but my head said number
4, so I compromised at number 3.  Houston has Moon back, and he could give them
an emotional lift all the way to the SB.  KC is so hot-cold I can't imagine 
them stringing together three consecutive road victories over playoff teams.
I ranked Buffalo as the least likely because of injuries to Kelley and Thomas.
If these guys can play then Buffalo jumps up to number 3.

  NFC:  1. San Francisco
        2. Dallas
        3. New Orleans
        4. Minnesota
        5. Philadelphia
        6. Washington

San Francisco has the best record, most SB wins, Young/Montana, homefield,
etc., and thus are the team to beat.  Dallas has a bunch of young guns that
can beat anybody, anytime, anywhere (except the Vet), and homefield for one
game.  NO and Minnesota are similar: great D - mediocre O.  NO gets the nod
because they have a better D and make few mistakes.  Philadelphia is not so
good on the road, which is where they must play to make it to the SB.  
Washington could not win a must-win game against the Raiders; I don't 
think they can win three on the road against playoff teams (not this year).

My opinions; all flames accepted.

Nix

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: chrisc@cae.wisc.edu (Chris Carey)
Subject: Re: Don't do it! (was Re: The Packers still suck)
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
Distribution: usa
Date: 28 Dec 92 16:00:29 CST

In article <1h7c4kINNqt4@grapevine.EBay.Sun.COM> andy@sunloop.Sun.COM (Andy Knipp SE Andersen) writes:
>In article <1992Dec22.144117.1300@cs.wisc.edu> larrym@ssec.wisc.edu (Larry McGuire ) writes:
>>|> In article <1992Dec21.203305.12516@doug.cae.wisc.edu> chrisc@cae.wisc.edu (Chris Carey) writes:
>>|> >secured is meaningless.  Sorry, I guess I'll became a Bears fan, after all,
>>|> >rumor has it Ditka is on his way out.
>>
>>Some other symptoms that require immediate attention:
>>
>>-  Removing your favorite brand of beer from the frifge and replacing it 
>>   with Old Style
>>
>>-  Actually being able to understand Butkus' commentary during the game.
>>
>>-  Pulling maps of Door county/No. Wisconsin out and saying "Honey, were should
>>   we go this weekend?"
>>
>>-  Calling the Chamber of Commerce in Platville and asking for names of 4 star 
>>   hotels with openings this August.
>
>
>	o	Speaking in complete sentences.
I do speak in complete...
>
>	o	Resisting the desire to take you 30.06 when you
>		go see Bambi.
Sorry but I don't deer hunt
>
>	o	Wondering what kulture exists in other states ? 
I've been to enough other states to know how to spell culture at least
>
>	o	Not bragging about the 3 strikes in a row during
>		last Saturday night's bowling league.
I don't bowl


If Wisconsin is so bad then how come all you see on Friday afternoons and
nights on the interstate is people from Chicago escaping to Wisconsin?

-Chris C.  

PS Ah my broken heart, thanks anyway Raiders.