HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wyborsr@wl.com (Russ Wyborski)
Subject: Re: MSU-UM Gametime
Keywords: Time
Organization: Warner Lambert / Parke-Davis
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 14:11:43 GMT

	The UM-MSU gametime is 3:30 pm.
	And for people who complained about ND's deal with NBC, have
you noticed how every Michigan home game this year (4 after Sat.) including
those against those powerhouses Houston and Oklahoma State have been 
televised by ABC. I think there is also plans to televise the Minnesota 
game later in the year. So it isn't just ND that gets overexposed.

-- 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: crs@stein.u.washington.edu (Cliff Slaughterbeck)
Subject: Non-conference records this year
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 00:26:41 GMT

For the record, here are the current non-conference records of the major
conferences as printed in McPaper (err, I mean USAT).

Conference	Record	Percentage
ACC		15-4	.789
Pac Ten		20-7-1	.732
SEC		15-6	.714
Big East	18-9	.667
Big Eight	20-11	.645
SWC		14-13	.519
WAC		12-13-1	.481
Big Ten		13-17-1	.436
Big West	11-16	.407
MAC		5-11-2	.333

This summary includes all games played, not just those against division I-A.
Draw whatever conclusions you like from this.

****************************************************************************
Cliff Slaughterbeck           * 
Dept. of Physics, FM-15       *   Hey Matt!  The diffusion pump is full of
University of Washington      *   water again!
Seattle, WA 98195             *
****************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: gws6860@tamsun.tamu.edu (Gary Wayne 'Goober' Smith)
Subject: Re: Goober School
Keywords: clueless, expansion
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 06:24:48 GMT

In article <14OCT199223230962@tirith.carleton.edu> STEARNSS@CARLETON.EDU writes:
>                                                      ... K.S. Manu does not a
>whole school of cluelessness make.

Wanna bet?

- goober (creamed) smith
From: hjjcl@usho77.hou281.chevron.com (J.J.Clyde)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Freshman QB's....
Keywords: any impact players...
Date: 7 Oct 92 16:16:20 GMT
Organization: Chevron

(Hazard Class Mage) writes:
>In article <ld3741INN18e@cronkite> andy@misha.Central.Sun.COM writes:
>>WHen was the last TRUE frosh to play QB at a major college & play well ?
>
>Well, it certainly wasn't Jeff George, who played like aragant shit
>his freshman year at Purdue, we were glad to see him go.  Come
>to think of it, he's still playing like aragant shit at Indy....

Just curious....What exactly IS an `aragant'?  Fish? Reptile?
Boilerweenie?   


James(hey steve, boilerweenies contain BEEF tripe, don't they?) Clyde
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: chyang@langshan.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang)
Subject: Re: PENN STATE BEATS MIAMI!!!!!
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 92 15:17:01 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Originator: chyang@langshan.engin.umich.edu


In article <1992Oct13.115724.21568@mlb.semi.harris.com>, dhead@comanche.ess.harris.com (David Head) writes:
> You people at Penn State are lamenting the fact that you statistically outplayed
> Miami and lost ONE game?  How do you think we FSU fans feel?  We have statistically
> outplayed Miami most years (this year included, check the yards passing, yards
> rushing, return yards, etc.) and lost.  Has ANY other team in America lost so
> much at the hands of one opponent as FSU has to Miami?  I think not.  FSU has
> been able to regularly beat any school they have played over the past 5 years
> except Miami.  What's my point?  I don't know, I'm just frustrated.  FSU and Miami
> are the only two teams in the country to finish even in the top 15 for the past
> 5 years straight and Miami has all of the national championships.  Even the year
> we beat them (1989 in Tallahassee, 24-10) they won the national championship.
> 
> Mark Mitchell made a good point regarding the ACC.  We began the season with 5
> teams in the top 25 and still have ... 5 teams in the top 25!  Only the SEC can
> match that.
> 

	I can only offer my sympathy to the FSU fans.  You played well, but
that darn luck!  

	As far as that Conference ranking goes.  Wait till the end of the 
Season and after the bowls are done.  Then woof.  I think it will be 
easier to compile statistics and stuff then.

- Chung Yang
From: rbutera@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert John Butera)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: UT at Austin seriously???
Date: 13 Oct 92 16:27:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: rice.Bw2J17.I1F
Organization: Rice University

In article <1992Oct13.132515.4211@digi.lonestar.org> mhorbove@digi.lonestar.org (Mike) writes:

>the only ranked team left in their schedule.  the Longhorns have only
>beat Rice and UNT.  you can't take them seriously after just those wins.

Agreed. BUT - I still think Rice is underrated.  A Channel 11
cameraman has footage of the onside kick that Rice made that the ref
said Rice recovered out of bounds.  The ball was shown to be in
bounds.  Had that happened, Rice had 1:30 left (and was already close to
field goal range) and the score could have been 24-23.

UT's performance against Rice leads me to believe that either Rice is
underrated or the entire SWC just plain sucks (minus A&M).  I tend to
lean more towards the latter :)


This season:  ACC 2  SWC 0

(actually, omitting A&M, the SWC's nonconference record as a whole
 seems prety dismal)

-- 
Rob Butera - ECE grad student   Rice University, Houston, TX   rbutera@rice.edu

Posing nude in _Playboy_ was "probably the best time of my life - except for
when I found God." - Jessica Hahn
From: mm42@prism.gatech.EDU (Mark Mitchell)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: The Bowl Coalition
Date: 15 Oct 92 21:53:22 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Ramblin' Wrecks from Georgia Tech

reiher@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Peter Reiher) wrote:
}
}I think it's something else, and I don't think I'm kidding myself.
}I think it's a plot by the bowl committees, Notre Dame, *and* a bunch of
}college football conferences.  Nobody forced the Big East and ACC to 
}participate ...

In fact, if the bowl coalition had a ring leader it was certainly
ACC comissioner Gene Corrigan, who initiated all of the key components
of the deal.

Notre Dame did some minor "plotting" to assure a BC spot with only
7 wins, but they've been to the Sugar and Cotton already with as
few as 8, so it's not an enormous jump.

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

       "Death wears a big hat, 'cause he's a big bloke."    
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: tshannon@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (Timothy J. Shannon)
Subject: UNI vs. Iowa in '94???????
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 16:53:55 GMT

	Iowa could play the University as early as 1994, according to 
Hayden Fry.  He said that he would be willing to play them and Iowa 
State in the same year.  He origanally suggested that they only play
one instate school a year.  But he said to quit playing Iowa State
"..would be silly."  There is an opening in Iowa's '94 schedule for one
more non-conference game.
	When Terry Allen (head coach at UNI) was asked, he replied," I've said 
that if they are going to play Northern Illinois, I'd love for them to play
us,  But if they are going to play Maimi, they should play Miami."  It would
also make more sense for the state of Iowa, because Iowa paid NIU $200,000
to play here last year, and are going to pay them $250,000 at least next
year.  
	So who knows, maybe the Iowa Legislature will get it's wish, and all
three schools will play each other in the same year, creating a mythical state
tital, or state champ.

-- 
	Timothy J. Shannon    	e-mail -  timothy-shannon@uiowa.edu
"I certainly don't want to quit playing Iowa State. Not at all.  I mean we're
10-and-0 (vs.ISU in the last 10 years) That would be silly" - Hayden Fry when
asked if he would prefer to play Div.I-AA Northern Iowa instead of Iowa State.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: maxwellar@cc.uvcc.edu
Subject: Re: Quarterback Rating Formula
Organization: Utah Valley Community College
Date: 7 Oct 92 17:00:42 -0700

In article <$garyf.31.0@SASB.BYU.EDU>, $garyf@SASB.BYU.EDU (Gary B. Fitzgerald) writes:
> Could someone please enlighten me on the formula used to get the quarterback 
> rating or quarterback efficiency number.  Thanks so much.
> 
> Gary

((COMPLETIONS + (3.3 * TD'S) - (2.0 * INT'S)) * 100) + (8.4 * YARDS)) / ATTMPTS

Simple enough?

arthur
From: kmartin@dogwood.cray.com (Kenneth B. Martin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Miami #1
Keywords: They do deserve it!
Date: 12 Oct 92 18:21:17 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

In article <1992Oct12.074802.26651@leland.Stanford.EDU> tremblay@leland.Stanford.EDU (Marc Tremblay) writes:
>In article <70885@hydra.gatech.EDU> gt6390a@prism.gatech.EDU (BERNSTEIN,AVRON P) writes:
>Did it occur to you that they are PAC 10 teams and Washington *must*
>play them?  Washington did schedule Nebraska. Miami, on the other
>hand, schedules all their oponents.  Also, Oregon and Arizona St.
>aren't pushovers and would have a field day against FAMU and TCU. You
>seem to forget that playing in the PAC 10 means that they will face
>Stanford, USC, Cal, Washington St. and Arizona. All these teams were
>AP top 25 at one point this season, except for Arizona.
> 
>>goose....  Just because Miami didn't beat FSU or PSU by 20 points
>>doesn't mean that they didn't win big enough.  Hey, they beat them
>>didn't they.  Also, with the Arizona game, teams don't play well EVERY
>>week.  At least some don't.
>
>Well, #1 teams are supposed to...
>
>
>========================================================
>| Marc Tremblay                  |  Stanford Cardinal  |
>| tremblay@sunrise.stanford.edu  |  1993 Rose Bowl     |
>========================================================

Washington hasn't!!  And BTW, Miami has to schedule Big East opponents now 
don't they?  Or does that start next season?  Anyway, using your logic, 
Washington shouldn't be #1 either since they haven't played well EVERY week.
I don't recall them scoring BLOWOUTS every week either.  Miami, so far, should
be #1!  They have played a tough schedule and have won!

*Not a Canes fan, just give them their due*

--Ken

--
===========================================================================
Ken Martin, Sales Analyst                   Phone:  (404) 631-2244
Cray Research South Government District     EMAIL:  kmartin@sedist.cray.com
=========================================================================== 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Subject: Re: ACC Preview
Reply-To: jbc4m@holmes.acc.Virginia.EDU (John B. Carr)
Organization: University of Virginia
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 19:53:36 GMT

In article <Bvr1uu.94A@news.larc.nasa.gov>, cockrel@shab06.larc.nasa.gov
(Charlie Cockrell) writes:
|> 
|> CLEMSON AT VIRGINIA: Virginia's offense has been scoring an average
of
|> 45 points per game this season. Although the passing game looked
flat
|> last week against Wake, Goodman has been putting up good numbers
this
|> season and UVa has a talented corps of receivers. Terry Kirby has
been
|> mentioned as an outside Heisman candidate after rushing for
|> over 200 yards two games in a row. Virginia's defense has been shaky
|> against the run, which could cause them problems against the Tigers.
|> Also, Clemson has never been 0-3 in the ACC, so they will be playing
|> with a lot of emotion. I'd look for a close, relatively low scoring
game
|> with UVa pulling it out in the end. Virginia 24 Clemson 21
|> 

GOOD SCENARIO:
	UVa Offense: Welsh establishes the run with the pass, preventing 8 or 9
man fronts, UVa line is able to create holes in Clemson defense. 
Receivers don't drop balls, Goodman stops overthrowing and throwing INTs
(and fumbling).

	UVa Defense: Clemson is truely as one-dimensional as they appeared
against FSU and especially Ga Tech, allowing UVa to concentrate on the
run and go with 9 men up front.  UVa defense is actually able to stop a
quality running game.

	Clemson: Moncrief is quarterback, Hatfield calls only running plays.

SCORE: UVa 27  Clemson 21

BAD SCENARIO:
	UVa Offense: Welsh attempts to establish the run first.  Clemson shuts
it down, Goodman is forced to pass all day, many INTs are thrown.

	UVa Defense: Proves as unable to stop the run as they did last week
against Wake.  Clemson amasses 400+ yards on the ground and time of
possession is something like Clemson 45:00  UVa 15:00.

	Clemson: Moncrief is not quarterback, Hatfield mixes up the
play-calling.

SCORE: Clemson 28  UVa 13

Pick your favorite.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 John Carr                           UNIX Support Specialist
 jbc4m@virginia.edu                  Academic Computing, Gilmer Hall
 804/982-4710                        University of Virginia
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: manu@tigger.cs.Colorado.EDU (K. S. Manu)
Subject: Re: AP Top 25 (Was Re: Miami Can Not Be Denied!!!)
Keywords: #1 Huskies Vs. #2 Wolverines in the Rose Bowl!!!!!
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 03:52:11 GMT

In article <92537@netnews.upenn.edu> taoc@gradient.cis.upenn.edu (Chi-Chih Tao) writes:
>Here's the AP Top 25 teams with records through Oct. 11.
>
>                   Record
> 1. Washington      5-0-0
> 2. Miami, Fla      5-0-0
> 3. Michigan        4-0-1
> 4. Alabama         6-0-0
> 5. Texas A&M       5-0-0
> 6. Florida St.     5-1-0
> 7. Colorado        5-0-0
> 8. Stanford        5-1-0
> 9. Penn St.        5-1-
>10. Georgia         5-1-0
>11. Nebraska        4-1-0
>12. Notre Dame      4-1-1
>13. Tennessee       5-1-0
>14. Syracuse        4-1-0
>15. Mississippi St. 4-1-0
>16. Georgia Tech    4-1-0
>17. Virginia        5-1-0
>18. Southern Cal    2-1-1
>19. Clemson         3-2-0
>20. Boston College  4-0-1
>21. N. Carolina St. 5-2-0
>22. Washington St.  5-0-0
>23. Florida         2-2-0
>24. West Virginia   3-0-2
>25. Kansas          4-1-0
>
>
>My God.  There is *JUSTICE*.  I don't think Miami deserves to be #1 this year.
>Miami wins simply because of sheer lucks (wow, how come so many guys missed
>so much field goals against Miami?)
>
>And playing high school girl football teams most of the time and sneak by
>two top 10 teams by sheer luck DO NOT qualify as #1!
>

On the other hand, if playing school girl football teams ALL the time
will qualify as #1?!?

You cannot call Miami's wins as lucky... winner is always the better team.
If Miami's opponents have problem scoring, that's the greatness of Miami's
defense!

The double standard is obvious here.. If UW had done the same, PAC10 weenies
will be crying how great the UW defense is.. but when Miami does it (remember
blocked field goal and another one hurried against penn state ) it's the
fault of the kicking team!

Using similar argument, it was USC's offense which lost the game against
UW ( the last sec int in the endzone ). What does that say about UW being #1?

BTW, in the CNN/coaches poll, Miami is #1. Now the weenies will start
crying how bad CNN/coaches poll is (ECCB) or something... (last year
the same weenies were crying how bad AP poll is!!!)

Njan
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: toma@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Rory Toma)
Subject: Re: AP Top 25 (Was Re: Miami Can Not Be Denied!!!)
Organization: Not bloody likely around here!
	<1992Oct12.152049.33301@uvmark.uucp>
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 19:23:45 GMT


  As opposed to Washington, who has played high school football teams and 
  no top ten teams.  Yes, they have played 3 teams that are or were in the top
  25, but so has Miami (Iowa was ranked much like Cal. was...) Victories over
  #3 and #5/7, as well as #23 (or whatever Iowa was ranked) is much more 
  impressive than victories over #11 #18, and #23 (Whatever Cal. was ranked when
  they played Washington).  And, looking at who they both have left, Miami
  still has 3 more ranked opponents to play (Boston College #20, WVirginia#24,
  and #14 Syracuse) as opposed to Washington and their 2 more(#22 WSU, and
  #8 Stanford).  Say they both go undefeated..  What sounds better
  Miami with it's 6 ranked opponents, at least 2 of which were top 7 teams,
  or Washington with it's 5 ranked opponents??  And, if we look at only
  right now, Miami has beaten PSU/FSU which were ranked at the time, and still
  are, and Iowa who was ranked, but isn't any longer.  They also have to 
  play Boston COllege this week, another ranked team (though if they get beat,
  they probably won't be any longer either).  Out of 6 games, that would be
  6 ranked opponents, two in the top 7.  Washington has played 3 ranked teams,
  one of which is no longer ranked, and none in the top 10.  
  Seems to me that Washington is playing the patsies here...
  -- 
  David T. Meeks                    ||" We are jigsaw pieces, aligned on the 
  VMark Software, Inc.              ||  perimeter edge, 
  uvmark!davem@merk.com             ||  interlocked through a missing piece"
  davem%uvmark@merk.com             ||" ...This world is totally Fugazi"


Miami and Wash play a common opponent, Arizona. If Arizona goes up to
Washington, and doesn't do as well as they did against Miami, then you
have your answer. Wash #1. If they do better than they did against Miami,
then Miami #1. Who has FSU, Penn St and Iowa played? Clemson? Piddly. Miami
just isn't in the Pac-10, and doesn;t have to face the level of 
competition that the Pac-10 provides year in and year out.
--
toma@tc.cornell.edu - Rory Toma

Opinionated and tunnel-visioned? Darn right. But then, my employer really
doesn't know what I'm talking about anyway...
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: gws6860@tamsun.tamu.edu (Gary Wayne 'Goober' Smith)
Subject: Re: tu at Austin football
Organization: Texas A&M University, College Station
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 22:46:23 GMT

In article <1992Oct13.191808.6577@bnr.ca> ped@BNR.CA (Pedro Luna) writes:
>Mike, damn it, you know what, you are absolutely right, the steers do
>have a winning record against everyone else in the SWC.  It's also a
>fact that Texas Tech has a winning record against us (Fightin' Texas
>Aggies), but it sure as hell didn't do them any good a couple of weeks
>ago, now did it?  ;-)

[I think this is right, but I've been wrong before]
Texas Tech doesn't have a winning record against A&M.  Up until this year,
they had a winning SWC record against us, but it is now tied at 16-16.  When
you consider games played before Texas Tech joined the SWC, the series is more
like (this is a guess) 24-18 in A&M's favor.

- goober (now what in the hell did i do with that book that had the overall
          a&m records in it) smith
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: shittle@ms20.mis.semi.harris.com (Steven C. Hittle)
Subject: MSU-UM Gametime
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 11:58:44 GMT
Reply-To: shittle@ms20.mis.semi.harris.com (Steven C. Hittle)
Organization: Harris Semiconductor
Keywords: Time


Just a quick question, since the local newspaper doesn't have a clue about
college sports period:  Is the MSU vs UM game at noon or 3:30?

Thanks for the info.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
                                                ______       _____
                                               |\_____\     /\____\
Steve Hittle                                   | |     \   / /     |
Harris Semiconductor                           | |      \ / /      |
1700 Fostoria Rd.                              | | HAIL  \ / TO THE|
Findlay, Ohio 45840                            | |     VICTOR!     |
                                               | |    |\     /|    |
Internet: shittle@m1fin.mis.semi.harris.com    | |    | \   / |    |
Phonenet: (419) 425-6585                       | |    |  \ /\ |    |
Faxnet  : (419) 424-4434                        \|____|      \|____|
                                                   GO MAIZE & BLUE

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: tsau@cae.wisc.edu (Johne Tsau)
Subject: Iowa 23, Wisconsin 22 and other ramblings
Date: 10 Oct 92 17:22:34 CDT

Well, the final score is Iowa 23, Wisconsin 22...
Iowa made a come from behind victory, and Wisconsin failed in a 
53 yard field goal attempt...  For the second year in a row,
Wisconsin falls 1 play short (this year the 2 point conversion,
last year the TD on 4th and 5 with 44 seconds).

Isn't it interesting also that the Big10 has Michigan in first place,
and Northwestern, Minnesota, Purdue, Illinois, Iowa, (soon to lose, game
not over yet) Michigan State, Wisconsin, and Indiana tied for second
place, and Ohio State all alone at the bottom... This will NOT
boost Cooper's career.

Well, what does everyone think Wisconsin's loss to Iowa do to Wisconsin?
Will it decrease their confidence? Increase it (they did almost beat
them)?  Can they play well enough to beat the rest of their schedule...
I do believe that even with Iowa's lousy record, they are still the
2nd best team in the Big10 (Only Michigan will be ranked now, w/o PSU).

Purdue is at Wisconsin next week.  They just had a boosting
win over Minnesota, so Purdue will be more emotional next week...
Will Wisconsin be burned out after two emotional games?  I personally
think yes, but they will put enough together to still manage to
beat Purdue. 

My current predictions for the final Big10 standings:
  1. Michigan (by far the best in the conference)
  2. Iowa (Not very good nationally, but still better than most in B10)
  3. Wisconsin (We can do it!  I may be a little biased, but I guarantee
                we'll make a good showing.  Predicted to burst into the
                upper division next year? Nah... we'll do it this year)
  4. Indiana (A fair, solid team)
  5. Ohio State (Overated, and falling fast!)
  6. Michigan State (Will beat all the little guys, who would probably
                     also lose to MAC teams)
  7. Illinois (They will falter down the stretch)
  8. Purdue (On the edge to the next B10 cellar dwellar)
  9. Northwestern (they still have an upset or two left)
 10. Minnesota (They won't stay down here though)


Oh well, thats all for now I guess.... Go Badgers! Bowl this year!
Rose in 3 years (c'mon, we have to overcome Michigan and Penn State)!!

--
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: tannerg@carson.u.washington.edu (Glenn Tanner)
Subject: Re: gators in the poll:  why?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 16:32:53 GMT

In article 6363@npri6.npri.com, murphy@npri6.npri.com (David P. Murphy) writes:
>
>>The thing that bugs me the most is to see Clemson (2-2) and Florida (1-2)
>>still in the poll . . . 
>
>
>much as it pains me to admit it, the team sucks:
>UF shouldn't even be ranked in the top 250.
>

David, the Woof Gods will never believe this one.  If you're trying to anti-
woof, you'll have to make it more believable than saying that the Gators are
no better than a Division II team.  Try something like :

	"much as it pains me to admit it, the team sucks:
	 UF isn't even as good as [insert forthcoming opponent here]"

GT