HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chyang@australorp.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang)
Subject: Re: Apple Cup (was Re: Washington vs. Arizona)
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 17:36:01 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: usa
Originator: chyang@australorp.engin.umich.edu


In article <26036@optima.cs.arizona.edu>, bakken@cs.arizona.edu (Dave Bakken) writes:
> In article <5dA=Ra+@engin.umich.edu> chyang@simile.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang) writes:
> >                                           Despite the loss, the Huskies 
> >will go to the Rose Bowl if they win their last two games and that should
> >be easy.  
> 
> I hope that the Husky football team has as much (typical) foolish arrogance
> as you display here, because if so the Cougars will blow them out of the
> water in the Apple Cup.  Granted, in half of the dozen or so years I've
> followed the contest as a Cougar partisan, the UW had the Cougs outclassed
> so the outcome wasn't much in doubt.  But that is not at all the case
> this year.  The Cougar offsense is a bit better than most years,
> and for once they have a good defense.  And the game is in Pullman.  Beware!
> 
> Please, do what you can to get your football team to adopt the above
> attitude.  :-}

	If the Huskies were undefeated.  Yes, I will agree with you that
they should be weary of the Cougers.  But not after the heartbreaking lost
to Arizona.  The monkey's off Washington's back now.  They can be as good
as they want to be.  

	It it not arrogance.  Its percentages.  Do you seriously think
that the team with the talent of the Huskies would play as poorly as they
did against Arizona two weeks in a role?  

	I feel bad for OSU because the Huskies will let off some steam 
next week against them.

- Chung Yang

 --
> Dave Bakken                               Internet: bakken@cs.arizona.edu
> Dept. of Computer Science; U of Arizona   Voice:    +1 602 621 4098      
> Tucson, AZ 85721; USA                     FAX:      +1 602 621 4246
> The fact that you're paranoid doesn't prove they're *not* out to get you.
From: jb118@prism.gatech.EDU (Jeffrey N. Burch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: MAJOR NEW CONFERENCE PROPOSED
Date: 6 Nov 92 15:39:06 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech Research Institute -- EOL

In article <199211052103.AA09635@tuna.wang.com> WILLIAM.S.BILL.W.ZUK@OFFICE.WANG.COM ("William S. Zuk") writes:
>POTATOE DIVISION      OZONE DIVISION      BOZO DIVISION
>
>IDAHO                 ARIZONA             ALABAMA
>INDIANA               FLORIDA             OKLAHOMA
>TEXAS                 NEBRASKA            SOUTH CAROLINA
>NORTH CAROLINA        WYOMING             MISSISSIPPI
>VIRGINIA              SOUTH DAKOTA        UTAH
>KANSAS                ALASKA              NORTH DAKOTA
>
>
>THE NEW CONFERENCE PLANS TO BE KNOWN AS THE BUSH LEAGUE.

Can't be.  

It will be too full of blood and Gore.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^  Dr. Jeffrey Neil Burch                   jb118@prism.gatech.edu    ^
^  Georgia Tech Research Institute                                    ^ 
^  Electro-Optics and Physical Sciences Laboratory                    ^
^  Atlanta, Georgia                                                   ^
^  30332             Even if it isn't true, it makes a great story.   ^ 
^  404-894-3628                                                       ^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: rszczerb@turing.helios.nd.edu (Robert Szczerba)
Subject: Re: Open Question to Miami fans
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:13:06 GMT

In article <BxK1tD.2yx@rice.edu> tomscud@ruf.rice.edu (Thomas Reid Scudder) writes:
>Well, it's A'n'M's decision (the cotton bowl's really), assuming that A'n'M is
>ranked ahead of Ablama and Nebraska (or Flahryda and Nebraska).  If the Cotton
>Bowl wants Miami, they get Miami.  If they wanna wimp out and pick Notre Dame
>or somebody, thats their choice.
>-- 
>Tom Scudder                    tomscud@ruf.rice.edu

Actually, that's not quite true.  Since it's not a #1 vs #2 matchup and since
the Orange Bowl offers more money than the Cotton Bowl, if the Cotton Bowl
invites Miami they have the opportunity to turn them down and go play in
the Orange Bowl against Nebraska.  As this is moot unless Alabama finds a way
to lose.

		- Rob
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Miami #1
From: William Karamo Motley <wm1o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 03:46:35 -0500 
Organization: Sophomore, Civil Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

In an article <1992Nov12.200918.40770@uvmark.uucp> davem@uvmark.uucp
(Dave Meeks) writes:

>Based on current standings or course of year schedules???  
>Miami has played #5 FSU, #9 Arizona, and #22 Penn State so far.  They
>are schedule to face #10 Syracuse next week.

Don't forget they also played Nebraska.  

Will
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: oday@lobster.gsfc.nasa.gov  (Orin Day)
Subject: Re: what if....
Reply-To: oday@lobster.gsfc.nasa.gov  (Orin Day)
Organization: Goddard Space Flight Center
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 23:22:49 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.213613.12508@ods.com> scott@ods.com (Scott Harper)  
writes:

> Also, there is absolutely nothing which says that a #1 ranked Miami can't
> turn down an invitation to play in the Sugar Bowl in favor of a higer
> pay-out in the Orange Bowl.  Does this sound familiar too?

Exactly, and a hot topic of discussion up here.  I feel that Miami's
MNC would be tainted if they stayed for the Orange Bowl, but if they
won convincingly, they'd still certainly get it because of the "Law
of Inertia".

> According to today's (11/11) Dallas Morning News, as an example, Miami
> would make $1.2 million more in pay-out from the Orange Bowl instead
> of the Cotton Bowl.  Then throw $700,00 savings in travel costs, and it's
> worth close to $2 mil for them to stay home.  Remember, football pays
> a lot of other athletic dept. bills...

I assume that the Sugar Bowl payout is also less than the Orange,
even before adjustment - correct me if I'm wrong...and money makes the
bowl system popular with the colleges...  

--
************* "How about a little fire, Scarecrow?" **************
Orin Day, Code 664.1                    oday@lobster.gsfc.nasa.gov
Hughes STX/NASA       GSFC Laboratory for High Energy Astrophysics
*******"Think that this is NASA's opinion?   NO, NO, NO!!!" ******
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: conditt@tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Paul Conditt)
Subject: Re: Is this really true?
Keywords: Bowl game,Pulan Weedeater Bowl
Organization: Applied Research Laboratories, University of Texas at Austin
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 13:55:40 GMT

In article <Bx9zxA.C9@news.cso.uiuc.edu> sas37147@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Scott A. Splater) writes:
>I've joked about the Toilet Bowl, the Dust Bowl, the Soup Bowl, and
>all of that.  Everyone knows those don't exist.  But is there really
>a Pulan Weedeater Bowl for NCAA Division I teams?  What I have heard
>is that it is in Shreveport, Louisiana, and it is on the 26th of
>December.  Could anyone either verify this, or tell me that it is just
>another joke?  Thanks.
>
>Scott Splater
>
This used to be known as the Independence Bowl.  Kinda like the Sun
Bowl is now the John Hancock Life Assurance Society Bowl.
From: kkc@stat.nursing.arizona.edu (Kee Koon Chua)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Lee Corso's latest prediction
Date: 6 Nov 92 21:28:23 GMT
Reply-To: kkc@stat.nursing.arizona.edu
Organization: University of Arizona - College of Nursing

In article by tannerg@carson.u.washington.edu, Glenn Tanner writes:
>
>For those of you who missed it, Lee Corso last night predicted that 
>Louisville will beat Texas A&M on Saturday.
>
>And he again predicted that Arizona will beat Washington.
>
>And it looked like he really pissed off Tom Osborne.
>
>And I'm leaving now.
>
>GT

Lee Corso has been predicting a Washington's loss since the first week of
the season. It seems like he has something personal against Washington.
As for Miami, it is always #1 to him regardless of how bad Miami played or
how well Washington played.

            Flame Lee Corso, he is sucks!!!
From: RREYNOLD@ua1vm.ua.edu (Robert F. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Auburn--NCAA comes a callin'
Date: 10 Nov 92 22:35:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: ua1vm.1689BE96B.RREYNOLD
Organization: The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa


 
In article 13233@infonode.ingr.com, knightb@abulafia.b21.ingr.com (William B. Knight) writes:
 
>You also must ask these questions:
>
>a) What is Eric Ramsey getting out of this ? (USA Today reported that Ramsey and
>   his lawyer, the Honorable(sic) Donald Watkins feel "vindicated"...of WHAT???
 Good point.  You might also find it interesting that Donald Watkins is also
a good friend of Birmingham mayor Richard Arrington, besides being his lawyer,
AND both Ramsey and his wife are on his (Arrington's) payroll.  Makes you
wonder if Arrington is not taking a little revenge out on Auburn for moving
the Iron Bowl out of town.  I wouldn't put it past Arrington.  (Then again,
I wouldn't put paying a player past Pat Dye either.)
 
  -Rob
 
 Robert F. Reynolds                            rreynold@ua1vm.BITNET
 Seebeck Computer Center                       rreynold@ua1vm.ua.edu
 The University of Alabama                     rob@buddha.us.ua,edu
 Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35486
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: scott@ods.com (Scott Harper)
Subject: Re: UA&AU
Organization: Optical Data Systems, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:54:10 GMT

Debbie Pruett (pruett@b15.ingr.com) wrote:
: I am an eager Bama fan who is waiting on the
: total destruction of Auburn !!
: This is the year that Bama should run away with
: it!!! I am looking for at least a 20 to 30 point
: blowout!!!!
: 
: Roll Tide 
gig 'em aggies
: REVENGE ON THE HURRICANES ON NEW YEARS DAY
: WE WILL NOT BE DENIED!!!!!!!!!
-- 
Scott Harper                       Optical Data Systems, Inc.
scott@ods.com                      1101 E. Arapaho Road
(214) 234-6400                     Richardson, TX  75081
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: rbutera@owlnet.rice.edu (Robert John Butera)
Subject: Re: grant teaff
Organization: Rice University
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:23:45 GMT

In article <news.rice.edu-111192173823@128.42.239.21> news.rice.edu (mls) writes:
>It seems to me that Grant Teaff is complaining a little too much about the
>officiating at the Baylor/Texas A&M game.  Bad officiating can be part of
>any football game, and for Grant Teaff to cause such a commotion is only
>embarrassing to Baylor.  Let it rest already!!!

Actually, at the Baylor-Georgia Tech game, Baylor had a field goal
called now good by the "quality" ACC crew - several Tech players said
after the game that they all thought it was good, and most of us were
in the Tech section agreed.  ANYWAY, due to the publicity of the A&M
complaint, Teaff told his team not to say a thing about the lousy
call.

I'm no Baylor fan, but Teaff is a pretty respectable fellow who is not
about to whine and complain for the hell of it.  Teaff had many good
reasons to complain about the officiating at the A&M fan - even some
of my fellow Aggies agree.  This "gag rule" for coaches is bogus.
Yes, it is spilt milk and Teaff can't change the results, but maybe he
can point out that the refs need to be working on a higher level of
alertness.




-- 
Rob Butera - ECE grad student   Rice University, Houston, TX   rbutera@rice.edu
"The 'wall of separation of church and state' is a metaphor based on bad
 history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging.  It should
 be frankly and explicity abandoned." - Chief Justice William Rehnquist
From: johndoe@samadams.inmet (johndoe)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Big 8 woof
Date: 11 Nov 92 21:48:43 GMT
Reply-To: johndoe@inmet.com (Bus error - core dumped)
Organization: Intermetrics, Inc.

In article <100130038@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> gregb@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Greg Begay) writes:
>>i would consider this incorrect in every aspect but the final score.  sure,
>>nebraska won 52-7 over colorado (and deserved to win big) and won "only"
>>49-7 over kansas (and deserved to win big), but 21 of nebraska's points
>>against cu came in the fourth quarter, and a good deal of colorado's
>>suffering was "self-inflicted" (interceptions, fumbles, penalties at
>>inopportune times), whereas kansas was just sort of slowly steamrolled in
>>the first half before nebraska called off the dogs early in the third.
>
>I've detected an annoyingly familiar Buffie woof:  When the Buffies win 
>it's because of superior talent/coaching/etc.  But when the Buffies lose,
>it's "self-inflicted".

then you didn't even re-read the whole comment you included in your post.
it says that in both cases, nebraska desrved to win big.  and if you had
read the rest of the post which you did not include, the point is that cu is
about to play ku, and that in comparing them both to a recent opponent,
taking in the method of thrashing is important in trying to predict the
winner of the upcoming game.

as a matter of fact, i think the buffs would probably have lost to nebraska
anyway, even if they had not committed the number of turnovers they did.  a
couple of the turnovers were good nebraska plays, even if a couple of the
others were receivers tipping good passes to the nu defense, and the later
turnovers being a result of passing to try to catch up.  nebraska has more
talent at running back, a fast qb, and a tough d.  (if i were a husker fan,
though, i'd wait until new year's day to see how the freshman qb handles
some real pressure.)

finally, i would suggest (even though i did not) that the talent on the cu
defense and offense outranks that of ku (having seen them both a couple of
times this season against similar or the same opponents).  scott suggested
that if cu turns the ball over against ku, they won't win.  i think they
have enough talent to overcome a couple of turnovers against kansas, whereas
i think kansas does not.

>Give me a break!

as a sooner fan, you need all the breaks you can get, don't you?

>>-johndoe
>>----------
>
>GO SOONERS!

at least against the huskers!!!

>GregB

-johndoe
From: rwd4f@poe.acc.Virginia.EDU (Rob Dobson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: My Top 25
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:27:36 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Virginia

In article <XjB=-X=@engin.umich.edu> quay@engin.umich.edu (bryan scott luedy) writes:

>>1. Alabama. Roll f*cking Tide, Roll. No real reason to put them ahead
>>            of Miami and A&M, but I dont like to move teams up on
>>            an idle week, so miami has to stay at #2
>
>Yet you moved Alabama up?  Go figure.

Not hard to figure at all. Alabama beat LSU 31-11 (?) in Baton Rouge, hardly
an idle week.

snide remark about the fact that this misstatement came from umich deleted.


-rob
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: kitchel@manta.dpsi.com (Sidney W. Kitchel)
Subject: Re: Nebraska beats Colorado
Organization: Data Parallel Systems, Inc
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:38:56 GMT

"Susan R. Wagner" <sw39+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>do you not agree with?  Did you even read the original post?  

	Probably not. I was interested in discussing CU-NU. I saw your
name and thought you'd be discussing your favorite team: KSU.

>								I'd be
>happy to further explain my reasonings and discuss it with you if you
>can be rational!  If not, then please don't respond with stupid,
>irrelevant postings such as the one I just read!  Thank you.

	Oh, you don't think that the behavior of a headcoach reflects
on his school, conference and the game? I guess I differ on that!! I
would direct your attention to buffie posts over the course of the
last three years to get an idea of where some of the inspiration for
my post came from.

						soONEr born!!!,
						 (and a supporter
						  of gay rights, 
						  even in ultra-
						  liberal (???) 
						  Colorado!)
						         --Sid




--
Sidney W. Kitchel  	    kitchel@cs.indiana.edu, kitchel@dpsi.com
Data Parallel Systems, Inc.  ============||  DPSI  ||===============
4617 E. Morningside Drive	                      (812) 334-8100
Bloomington, Indiana,  47408  USA		FAX:  (812) 334-8121
From: morse@satie.cs.unc.edu (Bryan Morse)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Pepsi State vs. BYU, Marshall Faulk vs. BYU
Date: 8 Nov 92 19:40:17 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In article <92311.011719LNF@psuvm.psu.edu> LNF@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>>BTW, Notre Dame - one of the best running teams in the country - was
>>not even able to match Marshall Faulk's rushing total against
>>BYU - they fell a few yards short.  ................................
>
>I believe you are falsely assuming that ND tried to match the yardage.
>Notre Dame was probably more inclined to put in the second
>string and not attempt to break rushing records.

Did you even *see* the game or did you just read the final score?
ND only led 14-9 at the half and 21-16 at the end of the third quarter.
Only BYU's inability to score from inside the 10 (three field goals
in the first half) kept them from the lead and possibly winning this game.
Anyone who puts in the second string against BYU with only a 5 point 
lead needs his head examined.  (Well, okay, maybe Lou does anyway.)  
Notre Dame scored to go ahead 28-16 early in the fourth and then blew 
it open when BYU threw a couple of interceptions trying too hard to 
make a comeback.  Notre Dame *did* go with the run for most of the 
second half, trying to simply pound away at the BYU defense and to 
control the ball and the clock.  SDSU/Faulk did exactly the same.

-- 
Bryan Morse                University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
morse@cs.unc.edu           Department of Computer Science
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
Subject: Re: Rice vs. Baylor (was: Re: Trevor Cobb 6, Lloyd Hill 0)
From: bsutesch@wsuhub.uc.twsu.edu
Date: 11 Nov 92 15:18:52 CST
Distribution: na
Organization: Wichita State University, Wichita, Ks

In article <BxH2qD.Lnw@rice.edu>, tomscud@ruf.rice.edu (Thomas Reid Scudder) writes:
> too.  Nothing like half a foot of mud to slow down those quick guys B-).
> (Does Baylor have natural turf??  I'm not too clear on this for most teams...)
> 
> 
> -- 
> Tom Scudder                    tomscud@ruf.rice.edu
> "It's 106 miles to Chicago, we have a full tank of gas, a half pack of
> cigarettes, it's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses."
> "Hit it."

O.K., once and for all, Baylor plays on ARTIFICIAL turf.
They installed new turf just about 3-4 years ago (no painted
lines or logos, colored turf inlayed in to the green turf).
Thus, I seriously doubt they will change to natural until
the artificial becomes worn out.

Brian




Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: chyang@australorp.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang)
Subject: Re: WAR OVER!!!! MIAMI WINS !!!!!!
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 14:07:41 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Originator: chyang@australorp.engin.umich.edu


In article <TOMA.92Nov8200004@db.TC.Cornell.EDU>, toma@db.TC.Cornell.EDU (Rory Toma) writes:
> 	The Dawg only have class for fellow classy fans, but will have
> 	no class against the classless felines.
> 
> Well, UW should have class. $50K can buy a lot of class.
> (But not a win)
> --
> 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...

	That is low!

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: C14577@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Debra Sullivan)
Subject: Re: WAR OVER!!!! MIAMI WINS !!!!!!
Organization: Motorola
Date: 12 Nov 1992 15:12:08 CST




The Tide should not be calling Miami "over footballed and under educated
I recall applying to Alabama and all it took was a post card application
So let us not be talking about educations here because Miami will beat
the Tide in that as well!!!!
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: Mitch Blake <blake@l42al.jsc.nasa.gov>
Subject: Re: texas #20???
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A71EE551C501188F@l42al.jsc.nasa.gov>
Organization: Lockheed Engineering & Sciences Co.
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 20:50:52 GMT
X-Xxdate: Thu, 5 Nov 92 14:50:57 GMT
X-Posted-From: l42al.jsc.nasa.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

Subject: texas #20???
From: Mike, mhorbove@digi.lonestar.org
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:42:11 GMT


>believe me, texas does not deserve to be ranked #15, nor #20.  beating
>tech, tcu (this week), smu (next week)...doesn't mean a thing.  now, if
>texas would have beaten miss st. and syracuse then i would say yes rank
>them around #15.  texas hasn't beat anyone they shouldn't have.  as for
>a&m, they are not a #5 team.  i would like to see them play someone other
>than louisville this week.  they definitely need to add better football
>teams to their schedule.  if they want to be respected, they need to add
>ranked teams to their schedule.  don't get me wrong, they have a decent
>football team but #5....i don't think so.
>


The current series vs LSU was a BIG matchup until LSU entered its current
lull (still tough to beat at home though).  Tulsa has turned out to be a
tough non-conference opponent (a quality team the last couple of years
and a bowl team last year I believe).  In the not too distant past,
Texas, Houston, and Baylor were all highly ranked teams or were at least
good enough to beat some quality teams (Baylors upset of Colorado last
year (???) comes to mind.  If one was to look at A&M's schedule this year
back in the late 80's when it was set in stone, one would shiver and
think that it just might be one of the toughest around.  It just so
happens that most of the teams on A&M's schedule are not at thier
strongest this year.  Hence, the scheduling changes being made for the
mid to late nineties with ND, OU, Col. appearing (possibly) on the
schedules.  

Mediocre schedule ->Probably.
On purpose -> Probably not.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college
From: chyang@ruapehu.engin.umich.edu (Chung Hsiung Yang)
Subject: Re: Trouble at Huskyville
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 12:31:00 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: usa
Originator: chyang@ruapehu.engin.umich.edu


In article <1992Nov6.080847.20732@u.washington.edu>, baze@carson.u.washington.edu (Behzad Khamneian) writes:
> All you Cougar fans don't get too happy too soon.  The news channels around
> here have been hootin' and hollering about Hobert, but unless the entire team
> (mainly the coaching staff) has been found responsible, the only sanctions will
> be personal punishment against Hobert.  Also, if the Huskies get penalized in
> any way, they are gonna take out their frustrations on someone, and who better
> than WSU?
> 
> Very unsportsmanlike of you WSU fan(s) to put ':-D' right after mentioning
> suspentions and possible sanctions.  Let it be settled on the field.  It is
> not good to assume that a team is going to get 'big-league' sanctions and
> then jubliate after it.
> 
> With regards,
> 
> -Behzad
> 
> 

	Yeah! I agree.  However, I don't think that this will get out of hand
because the guy who gave Hobert the loan is in no way affiliated with UW.  
Secondly, the coaching staff had absolutely no idea that Hobert had taken 
the loan.  I don't think an NCAA investigation of any kind should be
commited because it is Hobert's personal doings that has caused the possible
ending of his own college career.  

	How did the new get out in the first place???

- Chung Yang 
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college