HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Brett Favre vs. Eagles defense
Date: 17 Nov 92 15:08:25 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center

In article <97851@netnews.upenn.edu>, satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair) writes...

>I didn't want to say this last week 'cause he was picking apart my GIANTS'
>defense at will (not a hard thing to do considering Rod Rust-heads read and
>reflect scheme) but Brett Favre is one HELL of a QB!  I think the guy is gonna
>make a real name for himself in the NFL pretty soon.
> 
>The way he tore into the Eagles vaunted GAG-GREEN defense to the tune of 400+
>yards!  I'm quickly becoming a real fan of this dude (and real jealous that
>the Jets didn't get him in the draft). Any Packer fans have more info on
>Favre and how well he's done through the season??  More importantly, how

Attempts: 299   Comps: 189   Pct: 63.2   Yards: 2051   Ints: 8   TDs: 10

His QB rating was 8th in the NFL last week, should move up this week.  
I think the thing that most impresses me is that he makes so few 
mistakes for a young guy.  (Mike Holmgren keeps calling him a rookie 
but he's not.  In case you're not aware of it, the Packers traded for 
him from the Falcons on the day after the NFL combined college player 
workouts.)  You expect a young QB to take most of a season to learn 
not to telegraph his passes and to find the open man.  Sure, he still 
telegraphs occasionally, and he occasionally misses an open receiver 
but even the most experienced veteran does that.

In addition, he's got one heckova strong arm and he throws a very 
accurate pass.  And he's tuff as you saw this week.  He played most of 
the game with a partially separated left sholder.  He's been 
everything the Packers could ask for in a essentially rookie QB.  

I just hope he can keep it up for the next, ohh, 15 years.

>could someone who looked so impressive against the Eagles lose to a
>sputtering Chicago team (adding fuel to the fire).

The whole Packers team is not that good.  They're 4-6 which is a 
pleasant surprize.  But they've got some real weaknesses in the D.  
The pass rush has been better lately but for the first 5-6 games it 
stunk - I mean really stunk.  The defensive backs play has been 
spotty.  They cover the receiver well but have trouble making plays.  
ie. They can stay with the receivers but when the QB throws the ball 
they're in trouble.  They have very few INTs mostly because they never 
know where the ball is.

Also on offense, until a couple of weeks ago Sterling Sharpe was the 
only pass receiving threat.  Vince Workman had lots of catches but 
averaged around 4.5 yds per catch.  The WR opposite Sharpe is different 
almost every play but all together they've caught maybe 15 passes.

JGH
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: kowalski@crim.ca (Allan Kowalski)
Subject: rules - tackle eligible
Organization: CRIM
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:10:01 GMT

at the cost of exposing some of my football ignorance exactly
what does it mean when a team, before a particular play,
declares a tackle as eligible. I know they refer
to his being eligible to catch a pass but why do they have to declare
it. Isn't it automatic if there is no wr or TE on his side

??????????????????????????????????????/

agk
Organization: Central Michigan University
Date: Monday, 23 Nov 1992 15:28:04 EST
From: Nathan Owen <32BFPQ3@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Eagle fan commits suicide (Re: 'Gang Green')
Distribution: na
 <1992Nov23.133144.12650@cbnewsm.cb.att.com>
 <1992Nov23.120719.15080@doug.cae.wisc.edu>
 <Nov.23.14.25.24.1992.27146@andromeda.rutgers.edu>

In article <Nov.23.14.25.24.1992.27146@andromeda.rutgers.edu>,
dowzycki@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Ken Dowzycki) says:
>
>chrisc@cae.wisc.edu (Chris Carey) writes:
>
>>If .300 is the Packers winning percentage over the last twenty years it's
>>certainly higher than the Eagles.  Plus, have you already forgotten the
>>manhandling the Pack gave you last week?  Hey, what have the Eagles done for s
>u
>>lately?  Except screw up every season.
>
>Manhandling?  I thought it was a field goal at :00, not to mention deemed
>an upset.
>
>When was the last time Green Bay was .500?
>When was the last time Green Bay was a Wild Card?
>When was the last time Green Bay was the division winner?
>When was the last time Green Bay was the NFC champion?
>When was the last time Green Bay was in the Super Bowl?
>
>It would seem every season is a screw up for "Da Pack."

When was the last time Philadelphia won a Super Bowl?
When was the last time Philadelphia won a playoff game?

All I remember is Philadelpha playing an extremely pitiful game against
the Raiders a long time ago in the Super Bowl.  Ever since then the Eagles
have been one of the most annual chokers in the league.  Every year they
start talking about the Super Bowl and all that happens is that they
get eliminated in the first round.  When was the last time the Eagle
won a playoff game anyhow?  I know the Pack did it in 82.  I don't
remember the Eagles winning one since then.
From: sajja@gradient.cis.upenn.edu (Rajeev  Sajja)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Wanted: Eagles-Giants game report
Date: 23 Nov 92 16:53:42 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1epfv0INN9fg@sal-sun64.usc.edu> tehyang@sal-sun64.usc.edu (Teh Kao Yang) writes:
>Could one of you lucky people who got to see the game please post some 
>information about it?  Like stats, how well Randall and Herschel played, and

Randall's stats are 10 of 21 completions for 209 yds, 2 TDs and 3 INTs. Not a
good game by any standards. One of the interception was a hail mary
with 2 seconds to go at the half. 

herschel had close to 100 yards (i think around 90) with 2 TDs. But he did
fumble when the giants were up 17 - 6. It was at 23 yard line of philly. 

>other stuff. A brief summary of what happened will be nice too. I'm especially
>curious as to how the Eagles managed to score 34 unanswered points when they
>were down 20-6. I thought they were goners at that point. What started the
>comeback? I suppose the defense on both sides were terrible?

The comeback started with Giants QB Jeff Hoss.. throwing an interception to
LB seth joyner on a blitz by safety Wes hopkins and joyner returned it
43 yards for a TD. The best part was Dave Meggett was chasing him (the fastest
runner on the Giants ??!!) and could not get him before he got into the end
zone.

then came the walker TD on a 11 yard run... and then a shovel pass th keith
byars for a 41 yard TD, then vai sikahema returned a punt 87 yards for a TD
and then a blocked punt by Ken Rose for a TD and on and on.

I am not sure on the order on the last two....

I think the giants are done for this year. I would think thy will finish 6-10
this season. They have a brutal schedule coming up with dallas on turkey day
at dallas Now what do u expect from them !!!!!

maybe they will be a force in 1995.

>-Teh Kao

-Rajeev
A Scrambling Eagle Fan

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jimarcey@eos.ncsu.edu (JOEL IAN MARCEY)
Subject: Re: AFC TEAMS STINK
Originator: jimarcey@c00569-1403br.eos.ncsu.edu
Reply-To: jimarcey@eos.ncsu.edu (JOEL IAN MARCEY)
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:02:17 GMT


Whoever you are who posted this, you are looking very foolish right now.

As you said.....any given day. Maybe that given day just happened to fall on
Super Bowl Sunday.......look at Buffalo beating the 49ers.....hmmmmm.....
any given day is the KEY.....so take your opinion of the AFC and shove it up 
your ass.In article <1992Nov13.173610.4203@wam.umd.edu>, emdynle@next01wor.wam.umd.edu (Em Dyn chi co' em trong tim anh) writes:
|> Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
|> Path: taco!gatech!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!ni.umd.edu!wam.umd.edu!usenet
|> From: emdynle@next01wor.wam.umd.edu (Em Dyn chi co' em trong tim anh)
|> Subject: AFC TEAMS STINK
|> Message-ID: <1992Nov13.173610.4203@wam.umd.edu>
|> Sender: usenet@wam.umd.edu (USENET News system)
|> Nntp-Posting-Host: next04wor.wam.umd.edu
|> Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
|> Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 12:36:10 EST
|> Lines: 6
|> 
|> I'm afraid to wake up all you people whose favorite team is in the AFC  
|> because I just realized how weak the AFC is.  Hmmmmmm.  On any given day  
|> an NFC team (the worst) can beat the best AFC team.  For years now the Afc  
|> have whoooped the NFC in the probowl but that doesn't matter.  The NFC has  
|> dominated the Superbowl for years no.  I don't see any change either.   
|> Call me biased because the Cowboys are in the NFC.  AFC sucks!
|>
From: mark.savey@cccbbs.UUCP (Mark Savey) 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: GAMBLER'S MATE Week 11
Date: 17 Nov 92 21:36:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Cincinnati Computer Connection BBS - Cincinnati, OH - 513-752-8248
Reply-To: mark.savey@cccbbs.UUCP (Mark Savey) 

To those using GAMBLER'S MATE: Football Edition 1992,
  A problem has surfaced in updating week 11.  The system can lock up.
The problem exists within the file SYS1TEMP.92, which controls the 
TRENDS picks for each week.  The last several lines of the file, 
ERRONEOUSLY begin with "10," instead of "11,".  You need to edit all
lines that BEGIN with "10" and make them BEGIN with "11" (ONE KEYSTROKE
change...NO other data should be modified).  I will research the problem
within the TRENDS.EXE program and make the necessary corrections and 
file postings.  
   This is a new problem...sorry for any inconvenience that this may
cause.  Thank-you for continued interest and support.

Take care,

Mark E. Savey
GAMBLER'S MATE software - "Only systems that win!!"                    .
Endorsed by Mike Caro, the "Mad Genius" of Gambling!                   .
Winning for THIRD straight year!                                       .
@ INTERNET: cccbbs!mark.savey@uceng.uc.edu or 74716.1720@CompuServe.com
                             ^-------|------------------^              .
                                   should be the "at" sign (shift-2)   .
---
 . DeLuxe. 1.25 #8865 . GAMBLER'S MATE Football WINS! 60% ATS since 1989!
                                                       
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: lowery@crchh497.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Gary Lowery)
Subject: Re: SUPER BOWL TALK: BILLS AND 49ERS
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx
Distribution: world,local
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 19:27:39 GMT

In article <Bxx5My.1oM@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v130pwbq@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (ANTI-CHRIST) writes:
|> In article <92322.192615U58582@uicvm.uic.edu>, U58582@uicvm.uic.edu writes...
|> >Even I like Bills, but your logic beats me a bit...
|> >SO what if Bills beat 49ers the last time?
|> >DOes it mean they will beat 49ers in the SB?
|> >(they still might, but that's a different issue)
|> >Wonder why the divison teams play with each other then?
|> > 
|> >This starts an interesting question.
|> >Can anyone list the teams which in the SB beat teams they lost to in the
|> >regular season, if any?
|> 
|> It seems like every year in the playoffs and the Super Bowl that if Team A
|> had lost to team B in the regular season that come playoffs and Super Bowl
|> that team A would beat team B.
|> 
|> The following are instances that come to mind:
|> 
|> 1991
|> 
|> regular season: San fran beat the Giants
|> playoffs      : Giants beat San fran
|> 
|> regular season: Buffalo beat the Giants
|> super Bowl    : Giants beat Buffalo
|> 
|> 1984
|> 
|> regular season: Miami beat San fran
|> Super Bowl    : San fran beat Miami|> 
|> I know that there exist many more instances, but off the top of my head I can't
|> remember any more. Feel free to add on.
|>     _____________________________________________________________________
|>    |   Miami Dolphins and Hurricanes:        * Eric Orologio " Dr. O"    |
|>    |   Two of the Best teams in Football!    * V130pwbq @ubvms           |
|>    |_____________________________________________________________________|
If I remember right, the 49ers lost only to Pittsburgh 20-17 in 1984.  I think
an interception sealed the Pittburgh win.  The loss was at Candlestick.  19-0  
would have been sweet, but 18-1 wasn't too bad.

GO NINERS!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: saari@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Jonathan Saari)
Subject: Re: Dallas...
Reply-To: saari@chdasic.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola SPS ASIC, Chandler, AZ
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:41:37 GMT

In article 145421IBA100@psuvm.psu.edu, <IBA100@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> not to mention, now the entire league doesn't look at the Dallas Cowboys
> as the immaculate god team that i always knew they weren't.
> The eagles beat the cowboys, so, the eagles are a good team with a great
> defense, other teams aren't that good. BUT the SUCK rams beat the cowboys
> at home of all places, now no team (save the pats and falcons) should fear
> the cowboys.
> (it's the beginning of the end, but don't spread the word too much)


This individual obviously is not a real football fan, or at least does not track
the progress of some teams in the league....

The Rams are not SB contenders, and do not realistically hold out hope even for a
wildcard playoff spot this year.... BUT, it is not because they suck. It is because
they play in a very tough division (the TOUGHEST... look at the records... both 
overall and outside their division, the NFC WEST IS TOPS!!!) and they are very young.

Your vaunted Eagles also lost to Green Bay, got trounced by Kansas City, were
lucky to beat Phoenix, and could not (unlike the Rams) beat Dallas in Texas Stadium.

Now who sucks???

By the way, the Rams have a better record against NFC East teams than Philly does
(2-1 .667 versus 3-2 .600)...

===========================================================
Jonathan Saari                 | The views expressed here
saari@chdasic.sps.mot.com      | are my own...
Test Engineer                  | They are not my employers.
Motorola, Incorporated         | Although they should be...
Chandler, AZ                   | GO RAMS!!
===========================================================
"I want to buy a husband who, every week when I sit down to watch `St.
Elsewhere', won't scream, `FORGET IT, BLANCHE ... IT'S TIME FOR "HEE
HAW"!!'"
		-- Berke Breathed, "Bloom County"


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN P. GLORIA)
Subject: Re: Troy Aikman
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 19:02:35 GMT

In article <2957@devnull.mpd.tandem.com> dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch) writes:
>In article <1992Nov19.201351.557@PacBell.COM> jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>>The point you fail to miss, i.e., blinded by unfailing loyalty,
>
>Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha.  Whew.  I actually think he was serious on this
>one.  That makes it even fun...funn..bwwahahahahaha.  Sorry.  I never thought
>I'd see the day that Gloria would accuse someone *else* of being blinded by
>unfailing loyalty.  Of course, I don't know why I thought this -- he seems
>perfectly capable of it, going by past record.
>
>Daniel Welch

Danny, Danny, Danny. You have a memory like an elephant and
about as much brains as a stepped on ant. BTW, are you
loyal to your team or are you one of this fly-by-night
fans who changes team loyalty faster than a drag queen
changes its costume.
-- 
        ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
 		"You cannot depend on your eyes when your imagination
	       is out of focus."   -     Mark Twain
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	)
Subject: Re: It's only the Packers
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date: 18 NOV 92 14:19:31    

In article <1992Nov17.232952.5663@zip.eecs.umich.edu>, sybesma@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Eric Sybesma) writes...

>In article <1992Nov17.220114.14267@macc.wisc.edu> heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:
> 
>>BTW, the Packers are more likely than any other team to take the 
>>divison away from the Vikes by virtue of the fact that they are tied 
>>for 2nd place in the NFC Central but have been beaten by the Vikings 
>>only once.  (Vikings magic number is 3.)
> 
>This is a scary thought, but imagine that the Packers lose their next
>game.  Then the Vikings could go the rest of the season and lose
>every game except the game against the Pack...and win the division
>at 8-8!  The Bears and the Bucs would have to win 5 out of 6 to
>beat them out.  I only say this because the Vikings have a very tough
>schedule and have not yet proven that they can beat good teams.

I think it's simpler just to say the Vike's magic number is 3.  :-)

Actually, the Packers seem to have a reasonable chance.  Lets suppose 
they go 5-1 with one of the wins being against the Vikes and finish 9-7.  
(I'm not saying that's likely - I said yesterday I still am predicting 
6-10.)  The Vikings would have to go 3-3 in their remaining games to 
win the division outright.  One of the losses would be to GB so they'd 
have to go 3-2 against Cleveland, LA Rams, Philly, SF, and Pittsburg.  
That isn't going to be easy.

>Also, the Vikings may not even hurt their standing by doing such
>a thing as it is going to be VERY difficult to beat out the 49ers
>and the Cowboys for 2nd best record.  Something to laugh about, I
>guess.

I think the Vikings will be 11-5.  I don't think that'll do it.

JGH
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: sybesma@quip.eecs.umich.edu (Eric Sybesma)
Subject: Re: Monday Night...FINAL SCORE!
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:27:36 GMT

In article <If2FbsS00WBOE2UaNN@andrew.cmu.edu> Young-Soo Che <yc25+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:

>Everyone agreed that he threw it to avoid the sack, and that there was
>no way he could have gotten the ball to McKellar.  He just let go of the

I disagree.  The ball landed in the VERY near vicinity of McKellar.
Keely was under pressure and dumped the ball to the only place he could
without getting called for intentional grounding.  There is always
calculated risk involved.  I think it was a judgement call on the
part of the ref and Kelly felt that it was a risk worth taking...and
he was right...

-- 
Eric Sybesma                                    sybesma@quip.eecs.umich.edu
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Harbaugh back to throw, screen to Anderson, and it's PICKED off by
 Todd Scott at the 30..25..20..10.  TOUCHDOWN VIKINGS!!!"
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:57:43 EST
From: <RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Bills No. 1 in AFC
 <1992Nov18.204717.2383@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>

In article <1992Nov18.204717.2383@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>,
jdhl@troi.cc.rochester.edu (papa_sm00sh) says:
>so to the person who posted sunday after the steelers won their game
>and before the bills played theirs who said, basically...
>Which wasn't me, I posted before the Steelers won their game.
>nah nah nah nah nah.... pittsburgh would be higher than the bills if
>the season ended right now... i say... so what?  of course they
>would... the got a chance to play one more game than the bills did and
>thus, even if they had the same number opf losses they would have been
>ranked higher... no duh... gee, get real...
Okay, since you requested to get real, let's get real.  After the Steelers
won, they were 7-3.  Buffalo was 7-2.  Who was ranked higher?  The Steelers,
yep, believe it or not, educate yourself Jason, you might learn something new.
The Bills were in 4th because they were in a wildcard position.  A wildcard
position never is ahead of a division leader.  But now, Buffalo has jumped to
No. 1, which I was the first to post this info.  Brag about your team all you
want, but don't brag about your team being the best in the league if they
aren't, which they weren't at the present time.
** Rob **
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: chrisc@cae.wisc.edu (Chris Carey)
Subject: Re: Cowboy Bandwagon
Organization: College of Engineering, Univ. of Wisconsin--Madison
Distribution: usa
Date: 17 Nov 92 22:13:59 CST

I think how the Packers played in '89 in a perfect example of what he's talking
about.  The Packers were, for one brief year, because of Majkowski, for real.
You don't beat a team like San Francisco was, by "being lucky".  The Packers
had a good season, were in contention for the playoffs, and proved that they
were good(for that one oh so brief season) by making the big plays

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Subject: Re: 49ers release Green
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:39:40 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.202053.18837@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> marshall@nebula.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com writes:

>The 49ers released defensive end Jacob Green yesterday, just a couple of
>weeks after picking him up. He was used very little while he was here.
>
>This move frees up a roster spot which was not immediately filled. The
>most obvious choice is to activate Dexter Carter, but the 49ers are going
>to wait a day or two to see how the tight end situation develops. Brent
>Jones is still sore from last week's game, and if he's not available to
>play then they only have Jamie Williams at tight end.

If it were up to me, I'd use my five reactivations *before* bringing
the Midget back.  He's more likely to clear waivers than some of the
others (Montana comes to mind).

Of course, if it were up to me, I'd never have drafted that little
fiasco in the first place (and I'd have traded him to Houston for 
-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974
From: alan@sierra.unr.edu (Alan McKay)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: 49ers/Saints
Date: 16 Nov 92 22:44:11 GMT
Reply-To: alan@wrc.unr.edu (Alan McKay)
Organization: Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada

In article <1992Nov16.010311.24644@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com> marshall@nebula.ssd.lmsc.lockheed.com writes:

>Question : why were the 49ers in such a hurry with 1st and goal at the
>seven and 50 seconds left? Huddle up and let the clock run a little bit
>for crying out loud! Fortunately it didn't end up costing them.

Because hurrying up is exactly what had the Saints' defense back on it's
collective heels; hurrying up is what got them to the seven. The Saints
were dazed and confused, and you don't huddle up and give them a chance
to collect themselves. ~If~ all you needed was a field goal, and considered
field position at the seven a "gimme" distance, then yeah, let the clock run
down to almost nothing, and kick it. But when you need seven, you don't
screw around.

>
>Through the first three quarters the 49ers' defensive line once again
>failed to put any pressure on Hebert. But they did come alive somewhat
>in the 4th quarter and harried Hebert enough to force the Saints to punt.

Yes, the niners are managing to make alot of quarterbacks look good this
year; This a not a particularly great niner defense , and I'm
afraid it'll be their downfall in the playoffs. Charles Haley's attitude
looks better each week.


.....al
w.a. mckay
desert research institute
reno, nevada
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: nix@ssdss5.asl.dl.nec.com (David Nix)
Subject: Attention Browns Fans
Summary: Concerning Lawyer Tillman
Organization: NEC America, Inc Irving TX
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 21:54:31 GMT

I have a question for die-hard Browns fans.  I have been hearing good things
about Lawyer Tillman over the last several weeks.  My question is: was last
week's performance a fluke, or did San Diego really have that much trouble 
covering him?  Did they double-team Jackson?  How did the pass protection
look?  Did Tomaczak have time in the pocket or was he under pressure?

I would appreciate some information.  Thanks in advance.

David