HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: 49ers/Cowboys :QB problems? Thoughts?
Organization: Gizmonic Institute - Home of the "Big G Burger"
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 23:41:09 GMT

<1992Dec30.064806.21142@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> marshall@NEBULA.SSD.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
><1992Dec29.230445.29399@netcom.com>, gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) :
>>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.

I thought it was always on for 9er fans. ;-)

>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".

Sorry, old boy.  The 9ers rank 6th in points allowed per game. If you are
going to woof at least get the stats right.  BTW, my stats do not include
the MNF game so it's possible that the 9ers position could move either way
a tad.

Dallas is #2 in scoring, and #4 in points allowed.  SF is #1 in scoring
and #6 in points allowed.  I'll take the team that allows fewer points.

>Woof mode off.

Aw, you're just funnin' us.


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.
From: schmke@cco.caltech.edu (Kevin Todd Schmidt)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Schmidt Computer Rankings through 29-Dec
Date: 29 Dec 1992 16:12:08 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

Here are my computers rankings through the end of the regular season.

San Francisco moves back to the #1 spot with Dallas close behind.  San Diego
represents the top AFC team at #3.

I have marked the division winners with a '**' and the wildcard teams with
a '*'.  It is interesting that the lowest ranked playoff team is Miami
and they won their division!  This has to do with their small margins of
victory over weak teams in their last few games.

I welcome comments and suggestions.

Kevin

Rank Team                      Points  Record Sch. Str.  Last Week   Change
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  **San_Francisco             77.635  14-2-0  69.478  (  2,  77.007)  +1
2  **Dallas                    77.142  13-3-0  69.585  (  1,  77.423)  -1
3  **San_Diego                 76.118  11-5-0  68.392  (  5,  75.532)  +2
4   *New_Orleans               76.083  12-4-0  69.443  (  3,  75.724)  -1
5   *Philadelphia              75.552  11-5-0  71.552  (  4,  75.665)  -1
6  **Minnesota                 74.874  11-5-0  69.843  (  7,  73.273)  +1
7   *Houston                   74.600  10-6-0  69.748  (  8,  73.165)  +1
8   *Washington                72.480   9-7-0  71.159  (  6,  73.290)  -2
9   *Kansas_City               72.256  10-6-0  69.958  ( 11,  71.119)  +2
10 **Pittsburgh                71.561  11-5-0  69.538  ( 12,  70.758)  +2
11   Green_Bay                 70.554   9-7-0  69.480  ( 10,  71.455)  -1
12  *Buffalo                   70.509  11-5-0  68.701  (  9,  72.135)  -3
13   Cleveland                 70.158   7-9-0  69.645  ( 13,  70.541)  +0
14   LA_Raiders                69.486   7-9-0  70.380  ( 17,  69.086)  +3
15 **Miami                     69.187  11-5-0  68.492  ( 15,  69.526)  +0
16   Phoenix                   68.803  4-12-0  71.903  ( 14,  69.821)  -2
17   Detroit                   68.245  5-11-0  71.263  ( 18,  68.533)  +1
18   LA_Rams                   68.198  6-10-0  70.901  ( 21,  67.395)  +3
19   NY_Giants                 68.170  6-10-0  71.484  ( 19,  68.485)  +0
20   Denver                    67.670   8-8-0  70.928  ( 16,  69.192)  -4
21   Atlanta                   67.504  6-10-0  70.759  ( 20,  68.469)  -1
22   Indianapolis              66.951   9-7-0  68.826  ( 22,  66.809)  +0
23   Chicago                   66.902  5-11-0  70.529  ( 23,  66.712)  +0
24   Tampa_Bay                 65.633  5-11-0  70.703  ( 26,  64.491)  +2
25   Cincinnati                64.629  5-11-0  69.747  ( 25,  64.743)  +0
26   NY_Jets                   64.340  4-12-0  69.022  ( 24,  65.185)  -2
27   Seattle                   63.085  2-14-0  70.784  ( 27,  63.644)  +0
28   New_England               62.760  2-14-0  68.845  ( 28,  62.879)  +0
-- 
Jet Propulsion Laboratory | schmke@cco.caltech.edu
4800 Oak Grove Dr.        | schmidt@spc5.jpl.nasa.gov
M/S 525-3684              |
Pasadena, CA  91109       |
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: fester@etorofu.island.COM ()
Subject: Congrats to vike's; kudo's to G.B.
Originator: fester@etorofu
Organization: Island Graphics, Marin County, California
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:36:59 GMT

Well, congratulations to the Minnesota Vikings. After swallowing a series of
tough losses, they finally won a tough road game, beating Pittsburgh on the
road, 6-3. So, they will represent the NFC Central in the playoffs this 
year, and I hope they do a good job; it has been a while since the Central
has had a solid representative, capable of making it to the Super Bowl.

Congratulations to the GREEN BAY PACKERS!!!!!!!!! All I wanted at the beginning 
of the season was a .500 record, and a decent draft. I thought both were
obtainable, as the Pack had a pretty good 'D last year (would have looked
better with a good 'O), and though they had a 4-12 record, they were only
outscored by about 30 points. Who can forget Majik dropping the ball in the
end zone against the Dolphins, Tomzcak throwing on 3 down, a 4 point lead and
less than 2 minutes to play against Atlanta, special teams giving up 2 TDs to 
the Rams, ad nauseum? 

So, I feel pretty good about the 'Pack next year, if they can pick up a decent
DL, and another running back. If we beat the Vike's this week, the Pack will
be 10-6, a fine turn-around, and something to build on. Even if we miss the
playoffs, it's been a GREAT year, and we can prove ourselves next year. 

Count me a well-satisfied Packer fan (now, if 'da Bears'd just fire Ditka's 
*ss ...)

Mike
-- 
Disclaimer - Oh come on! You didn't think I was serious, did you?
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: dggok@pbhyg.PacBell.COM (4E150M)
Subject: API All-Pro Team
Reply-To: dggok@PacBell.COM (David G. Gok)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 21:45:07 GMT

Copied from the SF Chronicle (12/29/92) w/o permission:

NFL All-Pro Team

The 1992 Associated Press All-Pro Team, as selected by a panel of 80
sportswriters and broadcasters:

1st Team - Offense

WR - Sterling Sharpe, GB; Jerry Rice, SF
TE - Jay Novaceck, DAL 
T  - Harris Barton, SF; Richmond Webb, MI
G  - Randall McDaniel, MN; Steve Wisniewski, LA RAIDERS
C  - Bruce Matthews, HO
QB - Steve Young, SF
RB - Emmitt Smith, DAL; Barry Foster, PITT
PK - Pete Stoyanovich, MI
KR - Deion Sanders, ATL

2nd Team - Offense

WR - Michael Irvin, DAL; Andre Rison, ATL
TE - Keith Jackson, MI
T  - Steve Wallace, SF; Paul Gruber, TB
G  - Guy McIntyre, SF; Mike Munchak, HO
C  - Mark Stepnoski, DAL
QB - (Tie) Randall Cunningham, PHIL; Jim Kelly, BUF
RB - Thurman Thomas, BUF; Barry Sanders, DET
PK - Morten Andersen, NO
KR - Mel Gray, DET

1st Team - Defense

DE - Clyde Simmons, PHIL; Chris Doleman, MINN
T  - Cortez Kennedy, SEA
NT - Ray Childress, HO
OL - Wilber Marshall, WASH; Pat Swilling, NO
IL - Junior Seau, SD; Al Smith, HO
CB - Rod Woodson, PITT; Audray McMillian, MINN
S  - Henry Jones, BUFF; Steve Atwater, DEN
P  - Rich Camarillo, PHO

2nd Team - Defense

DE - Reggie White, PHIL; Bruce Smith, BUF
T  - Pierce Holt, SF
NT - Greg Kragen, DEN
OL - Rickey Jackson, NO; Seth Joyner, PHIL
IL - Sam Mills, NO; Chris Spielman, DET
CB - Gill Byrd, SD; Deion Sanders, ATL
S  - Tim McDonald, PHO; Louis Oliver, MI
P  - Rohn Stark, IND

Notes:  Steve Young received 78 out of 80 votes cast.  Sterling Sharpe
received 76 votes at his position.  Article did not give any additional
information on any of the players.
From: skywalke@dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu (Timothy B. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: MNF announcers about Montana
Date: 29 Dec 1992 18:27:16 GMT
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Atomic Biophysics H.H.M.I.
NNTP-Posting-Host: dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <103346@netnews.upenn.edu> satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair) writes:
>In article <1992Dec29.151018.5792@mksol.dseg.ti.com> dansmith@mcopn2.dseg.ti.com writes:

[Stuff Deleted]
 >While I agree that Dan, Al and Frank were their stupid drooling self over
 >Montana's playing, I'd chalk this one to the rating-misers.  This game was
 >meaningless to the Lions and Niners (maybe Lions fans might want to see
 >how well Ware would play and maybe watch Barry in action).  The only reason
 >the mass populous would tune into this game would be to see Joe play!  The
 >MNF announcers were trying to give the audience what they wanted. 
 >
 >
 >satish nair
 >ray is gone!

Look, I don't care for King Joey but last night was beyond belief,
I didn't mind seeing him play but I hadn't planned on throwing up
on a monday night, Pleeeeese, those guys were heaving furballs over 
St. Joe, Look Montana "was" one of the best to play the QB position,
but last night was beyond belief, they should be fired.

Thanks god the wind blew rain into the ABC booth, otherwise 
their feet would have stuck to the floor when they left......

Go Cowboys !!!
Emmitt (the energizer) Smith, he just keeps going and going and going......
Thump, Thump, Thump........

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: root@intcorp.mn.org (Operator)
Subject: Re: Bad Boy Green Bay Bob
Organization: Introl Corporation
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 17:08:22 GMT

sivaram@plains.NoDak.edu (The Purple Bleeder ) writes:
> First we on rsfp witnessed the battle between Eagles fans and
> the Cowboy fans. Then it was the Bills and the fish and
> now it is the Vikes and the packers.
> 
> When pot shots are taken on each other  by rival fans, I thought
> that it is only restricted to the game and nothing personal.
> But I am starting to detect some real *animosity* here.
> 
> Come on guys let's cut it out.....
> I hereby declare a truce between Vikes and Pack fans.
> let's get on with the game.
> 

Here, here!  Imagine what it would have been like now if the Pack
had won on Sunday.

However, there is nothing unusual here.  It's part and parcel of the 
intense rivaly.  I've been to games at both the dome and at County 
Stadium.  It's the same both places - it may be a bit more intense here.  
A lot more Wisconsin fans show up at the dome than Viking fans that show 
up at either Green Bay or Milwaukee.  Minnesotans have to travel at least 
250 miles to Milwaukee.  It's only 30 miles from downtown Minneapolis to 
the Wisconsin boarder.  

I often work at one of the concession stands at the dome.  I was there
for the game on Sunday.  The fans were rude, but they were rude on both 
sides.  We also sold more beer on Sunday than any other game I've worked
this season.  I'm sure that had something to do with it. 

Never before have I had someone blow up - and I mean BLOW UP - at me 
because we don't have lids for the drink glasses.  Another person ranted 
and raved for a full minute that we didn't have Stadium Steaks.  Both of 
these people were wearing these strange cheese-wedge hats.  

On the other hand, I had a couple people with these same strange hats 
comment on how they were impressed by the dome - how they were glad to
be inside on a day like today - how clean it was etc.

And talking about rude fans... you haven't seen anything until you attend
a Minnesota Gopher / University of ND Sioux hockey game in Grand Forks, ND!  
:-)

--
Joel D. Flatt                      Introl Corporation
Work: (612) 788-9391               jdf@intcorp.mn.org 
Home: (612) 823-3390
-- 
Joel D. Flatt                      Introl Corporation
Work: (612) 788-9391               jdf@intcorp.mn.org 
Home: (612) 823-3390
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor)
Subject: MVP
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 15:56:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.214835.9201@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) writes:
>And that's what I was referring to.  There is a lot of talk about who
>should be the league's MVP and Young's name pops up.  I think he's a fine
>QB and valuable to his team, but...  If he gets hurt what happens?  Gee, I
>guess they'd have to use Bono (a qb that would a "starting QB anywhere
>else"), or <gasp> Montana (whom some believe to be the greatest QB ever).
>It doesn't even sound to me like Young is the best QB on his own team, how
>could he be the MVP of the league?
How isn't Young the best QB on his own team in 1992? You mean Bono plays
a better QB in 1992? or Montana plays the position better in 1992?

Oh, you mean since Montana is the greatest QB ever, then he has to be the
MVP in his own team every year from now on regardless of how many games
he actually plays?

-- 
                                          Edward Lor
                                          lor@cbnewsk.att.com
                                          
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: gidi@Hilbert.Stanford.EDU (Gideon Avrahami)
Subject: Re: Low SAQ play by SF 49ers + Giants!
Organization: Brotherhood Of Breath
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:40:45 GMT

kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi) writes:
>Does that means that one is never allowed to criticize any play Siefert
>and co. call?

You can criticize, and you can invent some phony all-caps expression
to make fun of them, and you can do whatever you like.

But my contention is that Seifert & Shanahan know their offense better
than you.  They probably think that a pass to Rice is a realtively
high-percentage, low risk play, which if successful will put the game
on ice.  And they also (Seifert that is) trust that the probability of
a short punt plus and a resulting Bucs TD in that period of time is
not very big.

So the pass play failed.  There's always a chance for failure.  So
what?  The fact that a play fails doesn't make the play-calling wrong.
And all I've seen from the Niners tells me that for THAT team, in THAT
situation, with THAT personnel, the pass is a very good call.

Two years ago, in the NFC title game, SF was running out the clock by
keeping it on the ground.  And yet LT was able to firce the fumble and
the Giants won the game.  So, do you call that run a "low SQL" play or
something?  With your 20-20 hindsight you can call it what you will
and criticize how much you want, but you'd be wrong.  And the proof is
that Seifert, Shanahan and Holmgren (who was offensive coordinator two
years ago) win more often in pressure situations then they lose.

Actually, it's really funny.  30 hours after the Niners game, the Jets
were trying to sit on a lead and ran the ball three times up the
middle, just like you and your "high RQS" suggested.  And they also
lost.  And the net-folk are all over Bruce Coslet's case.  So I just
wonder, is it the "low QWS" or is it just that Armchair Quarterbacking
is so easy?

>If you want to get the 1st down by a pass, try a pass play that has a 
>higher chance of working than a timing pattern like the one they tried. 

I repeat: Shanahan knows more than you about which plays have a higher
chance of succeeding.  Do you claim otherwise?

>Can't you make out the tongue-in-cheek [...] ??

Can you?


--Gidi		(go new england, buffalo, pittsburgh)


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN)
Subject: Re: Saints defensive "strategy"
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 04:43:08 GMT

In article <19921221202149CCP17BK@AUDUCADM.DUC.AUBURN.EDU> kellywh@mail.auburn.edu writes:
>Sob...
> [ text deleted  ]
>
>Yeah, I guess like all Saints fans I rely on the defense too much;
>if the offense had been able to move the ball worth a shit in the
>second half maybe things would've been different.  
>
Two key factors/plays were when the Saints marched into the 
red zone and only came up with 6 points. It should have been
14 points and these two failures lost them the game. 

The Bills O line was blowing the Saints off the line and enabling
Thermal Thomas to get big yardage. Even with the Saints failure
to stop the running game, their two offensive failures to score
two TDs was an even bigger factor IMHO.


-- 
 ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
"To be absolutely certain about something, one must know
everything or nothing about it."   Olin Miller
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: pboxrud@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Paul D Boxrud)
Subject: Re: Over-rated players???
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:19:49 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.110451.1@vaxc> accdtg@vaxa.hofstra.edu writes:
>I just had a question and I figured this would be the best place to ask it. Wh
o
>do you think is the most over-rated player in the NFL?
>
>My guess would be Deion Sanders of the Falcons, but what do you guys think?
>
>-- DTG

Deion maybe obnoxious, but I don't think he's that overrated.  He's certainly a
tremendous athlete with an ego to match.  I'm not going to start this Aikman 
thing again so I won't mention my choice.  :-)

Paul
From: kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: SD Chargers: Reg Season Stats
Date: 30 Dec 92 17:33:53 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: what.. me.. organized?



SAN DIEGO CHARGERS - Regular season statistics
[courtesy McPaper]

Passing

Humphries: 263 of 454 (57.9%), 3356 yds, 16 TDs, 18 INTs, long 67 yds
Gagliano: 19 of 42 (45.2%), 258 yds, 0 TDs, 3 INTs, long 55 yds
Opponents: 271 of 491 (55.2%), 3188 yds, 17 TDs, 25 INTs, long 83 yds

Receivers

Harmon     79 catches, 914 yds, avg 11.6 yds, 1 TD
Miller     72 cat, 1060 yds, avg 14.7 yds, 7 TD
Lewis      34 cat, 580 yds, avg 17.1 yds, 4 TD
Walker     34 cat, 393 yds, avg 11.6 yds, 2 TD
Jefferson  29 cat, 377 yds, avg 13.0 yds, 2 TD
Brennan    19 cat, 188 yds, avg  9.9 yds, 1 TD
Bernstine  12 cat, 86 yds, avg 7.2 yds, 0 TD
Butts       9 cat, 73 yds, avg 8.1 yds, 0 TD
Bienemy     5 cat, 49 yds, avg 11.3 yds, 0 TD
Young       4 cat, 45 yds, avg 11.8 yds, 0 TD

Rushers

Butts      218 attempts, 809 yds, avg 3.7, long 22, 4 TDs
Bernstine  106 att, 499 yds, avg 4.7, long 25, 4 TDs
Bienemy     74 att, 264 yds, avg 3.6, long 21, 3 TDs
Harmon      55 att, 235 yds, avg 4.3, long 33, 3 TDs
Humphries   28 att, 79 yds, avg 2.8, long 25, 4 TDs
Opponents  365 att, 1395 yds, avg 3.8, long 52, 10 TDs

Interceptions

Carrington 6
Byrd, Frank 4
Richard 3
Seau, Plummer, Blaylock 2
Vanhorse, Fields 1

Sacks (51)

O'Neal 16, Mims 10, Grossman 8, Winter 6, Seau 4.5, Thornton 2, D.Hall 1,
Rolling 1, White 1, Lee 0.5

Sacks allowed 33

Kicking

Carney: 35 of 35 extra points, 26 of 32 FGs, long 50 yds

Punting

Kidd: 68 punts, 42.6 avg, long 65 yds, 9 touch-backs, 24 Not returned,
      244 return yds, 22 inside the 20. 


_______________________________________________________
| Prashanth                    |                      |
| U. of California @ San Diego | prash@raman.ucsd.edu |
#######################################################
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: htilney@vax.clarku.edu
Subject: Steelers win, help me Houston!
Organization: Clark University
Date: 28 DEC 92 02:54:51 GMT

Someone please post a review of the Pittsburgh game, how did they score
23 points with Brister. Not that I'm complaining.

Well, I don't like having to root for the Oilers, but at least they're
coming through so far (20-3 at the half). After tonight I will continue
to stick pins in my Warren Moon doll.

Bart
Xref: sparky rec.sport.football.pro:29788 dc.redskins:290
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Jills had their ass kicked
Date: 28 Dec 92 03:45:21 EST
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics

In article <1992Dec28.072502.18765@PacBell.COM>, jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN) writes:
> In article <BzyFJB.5zo@acsu.buffalo.edu> kist@acsu.buffalo.edu (james e kist) writes:
>>What the hell's the deal with that stupid subject line? Can't you ever say
>>anything intelligent? (that was a rhetorical question)
> 
>>
> Ah HA, sounds like a whiner here! How about the Buffalo Bills
> were soundly beat by a superior Defense and a 2nd string QB?
> Or how about Machine Gun Kelly was injured and the Bills fell
> apart? No?! Hmmmm, how about Glenn has three INTs and Del Rio
> and company thoroughly beat (not kick ASS) the Bills. Anyway
> you want to interpret it, the Bill LOST! 
> -- 

The scary part of this is that the Oilers have to play the Bills in Buffalo
next week! With Kelly and Thomas out this might throw all of the pre-playoff
predictions out the window...

>  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
> "To be absolutely certain about something, one must know
> everything or nothing about it."   Olin Miller

Show a little more respect for people John. Thanks!


-Garrett



Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: kennedy@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Ralph Kennedy)
Subject: Re: A sad farewell to Denver
Organization: Arizona State Univ, Tempe
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 18:32:33 GMT

dward@scf.nmsu.edu (Dan Ward) writes:
>     I will miss Denver in the play offs.

     So will the NFC conference champion, whoever
it turns out to be.

--Ralph Kennedy      {ames,gatech,husc6,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!kennedy
                        {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,oddjob}--^
                                          ^---------------The Wrong Choice
                             internet: kennedy@asuvax.asu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: dggok@pbhyg.PacBell.COM (4E150M)
Subject: Re: Stats for stat freaks
Reply-To: dggok@PacBell.COM (David G. Gok)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 17:45:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.153241.24500@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN) writes:
>The 49ers three possible playoff foes all fit a certain
>statistical profile: In the take away-give-away differential,
>Washington (plus 10), New Orleans (plus 9) and Philadelphia (plus 9)
>are at the top of the league. The 49ers are a plus 7...In total
>yards per game yielded by the defense, New Orleans is second best
>in the NFL, the Eagles are sixth and Washington is seventh. The
>49ers say they give up yardage but not many scores, and the
>statistics bear them out. The 49ers are 15th in yardage surrendered
>but are third best in points per game.  (source S.F. Chronicle)
>
>I have always been a believer that stats do not mean squat, except
>to the Monday QBs and the stat freaks. I still say, stats will
>never win you a game. The most important factor is the win-loss column.

Actually, I think the most important factor as far as most fans are
concerned is how well their team does relative to how the fan THINKS
they should do.  For example, anything less than ring #5 to Bay Area
fans will be a disappointing season.  Probably the same thing holds
true for many Buffalo fans.  Would Cowboys or Redskins fans be content
with anything other than a SB ring?  Don't know.

On the other hand, Vikings and Packers fans seem to be very pleased
with their teams, and an early playoff loss (by the Vikings) would
not be seen as disaster.  It all depends on the expectations.

>To wit: Niners 14-2....that is all the numbers/stats that really count.

Would you like 14-2 and an NFC Championship loss?  Or a 10-6 and a SB
win?  Oh, you mean a 14-2 and a SB win!  We've done all of these in
the past five years. :-) :-) :-)

>-- 
> ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
>"To be absolutely certain about something, one must know
>everything or nothing about it."   Olin Miller


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro