HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bill@neocad.com (Bill Bentley)
Subject: Re: Green Bay/Minnesota Tie Breaker
Organization: NeoCAD, Inc.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:14:40 GMT

>If Green Bay and Minnesota both end the season at 10-6

>    Green Bay winning Both
>   Minnesota losing vs Green Bay

>Who holds the Tie breaker??
>And how far down the tie breaking system does it have to go?
The first is head-to-head, the next is division record.
Minn holds the tie breaker because of a better division record.
Minn if that lose to GB will be 6-2 in the division.
GB will be 5-3 in the division.

Bill B.
From: skywalke@dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu (Timothy B. Reynolds)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: The Play of the Day (Skins/Dallas)
Date: 14 Dec 1992 14:23:47 GMT
Organization: X-Ray Crystallography / Atomic Biophysics H.H.M.I.
NNTP-Posting-Host: dino.qci.bioch.bcm.tmc.edu
Keywords: Lucky Break! Aikman

In article <13DEC199223525873@hades.stsci.edu> merrill@hades.stsci.edu (Clark) writes:
>I have a few points I would like to make about the AIKMAN fumble for a
>Redskins TOUCHDOWN!  By the way I am a Redskins fan:-)

{endzone stuff deleted}

 >I thought that  Dallas  outplayed the Redskins except for the four
 >turnovers!  Turnovers can make easily turn a  win into a loss.  That is what
 >killed the Redskins against the Cards.
 >

The argument on the play in the endzone was not the "only play" that cost the 
Cowboys a game they domminated. When you have the ball on the two and
heave up a INT, you lose it's that simple. The Cowboys have no one to blame
but themselves. Hey you win some and lose some, 11-3 , I can live with 
that.

Win with style and lose with style. (unlike some other teams fans:-)

Go Cowboys !!!
tim 

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: hariharn@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ramesh Hariharan)
Subject: Re: `Redskins Repeat !!!
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: To all non-Redskin fans, after the Redskins beat up on the Cowboys this 
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 16:30:10 GMT

In article <XaR=Y4-@engin.umich.edu> sudhama@engin.umich.edu (Sudhama Gopalan) writes:
>In article <Bz43LI.Cuv@andy.bgsu.edu> dlingle@orchestra.bgsu.edu (Donald Lingle) writes:
>>Sunday, Beware Of The Super Bowl Champs!
>>    I will agree that the Skins are having an up and down season thus far.  But 
>>if we beat the Cowboys this Sunday, you must agree that the Redskins will look 
>>pretty good for repeating as Super Bowl Champs.
>>    The skins have had a bunch of injuries, combined with the late pre-season 
>>start of Mark Rypien.  Some of our players are now returning, (Darrell Green,
>>Jim Lachey), and Rypien's coming out of his slump.
>>    I'm happy to see the Cowboys and Redskins games now mean something.  Before
>>last year, Cowboy fans would hide the week before a Redskin vs. Cowboys game. 
>>As for the 49ers, Vikings, Eagles, Packers, & Saints, I know you would love to 
>>go get a easy Super Bowl victory against an AFC team, but you'll have to wait 
>>for Joe Gibbs to retire or better yet, coach your team.
>>    Well, good luck to all NFL fans.  I am just "touring" the user group.  This
>>id actually belongs to a Pittsburgh Steeler's Fan.
>
>
>Well, I too hope the 'Skins thrash the Cowpokes. Personally, I don't care for/
>hate either. All I'm concerned about is the 49ers - more specifically Montana.
>I'm one of those weirdos who has never seen Montana in action - here's hoping
>the 49ers secure home field advantage before their last game so that I can have
>the pleasure of watching Joe for the first time.
>

Joe who ?

:-) 
-- 
**************************************************************************
Ramesh Hariharan , Chem Engg. Dept., Princeton Univ. 
Research topic : Stabilization of Colloids using diblock copolymers.
Research baap : Bill Russel (no ! not the Celtic legend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: bc@pdsbc.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Bobby Curtis)
Subject: Status Ricky Watters 
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 15:53:00 GMT

Is Ricky going to start if not will he play and how much ?
From: ronnie@uts.amdahl.com (Ronnie Townsend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Wilbur Marshall
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:12:47 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <656@blue.cis.pitt.edu> rtcst3+@pitt.edu (Robert   T Conticello) writes:
>
>
>
>   Am I the only one who thinks that this guy is dirtier than Andre "Dirty"
> Waters?  Every game that I see him play in, he makes at least one cheap
> hit.  I thought he made a couple pretty bad ones against Dallas: trying
> to spear Aikman in the gut with his helmet, and leveling Novacek whose
> back was turned after the play was over.
>

I would tend to agree with this. Wilbur Marshall is a mean, nasty son of a 
bitch!  He has a genuine dislike for anybody wearing the other uniform and 
does not appear to be above getting dirty behind it. The league needs to tone 
him down or he will hurt someone. I will say this in his defense (because he's 
from Florida) he has never hit anybody in such a way as to injure. No legs, 
knees or anything like that. It's usually just a blast to the torso area. Waters
built his reputation because he has gone after guys legs.... 


-- 
Ronnie
-------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not cynical... I just don't believe in anything....


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: twolf@cs.utah.edu (Tom Wolf)
Subject: Team Rankings by points
Date: 12 Dec 92 16:28:34 MST
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept

As of Thursday, Dec. 10. 

Offense:
1	366	San Francisco
2	331	Buffalo
3	324	Dallas, Minnesota
5	297	Philadelphia
6	294 	Houston
7	285	Miami
8	267	Pittsburgh
9	261	N.J.Giants
10	258	Kansas City
11	257	New Orleans
12	248	Chicago, Atlanta, L.A.Rams
15	247	Washington
16	241	San Diego
17	239	Tampa Bay
18	231	Cleveland
19	227 	Cincinnati, Detroit
22	225	Green Bay
22	215	Denver
23	208	Phoenix
24	207	L.A.Raiders
25	197	N.J.Jets
26	169	Indianapolis
27	162	New England
28	103 	Seattle

Defense:
1	168	New Orleans
2	176	Pittsburgh
3	192	Dallas
4	199	San Francisco
5	200	Washington
6	203	San Diego
7	205	L.A.Raiders, Philadelphia
9	207	Kansas City
10	211	Cleveland
11	219	Minnesota
12	223	Buffalo
13	225	Houston
14	242	Green Bay
15	244	Miami
15	251	Seattle
17	254	Denver
18	266	Indianapolis, N.J.Jets
20	291	Detroit, L.A.Rams
22	300	New England
23	306	Cincinnati, Tampa Bay
25	307	N.J.Giants
26	309	Phoenix
27	312	Chicago
28	328	Atlanta


This table seems to contradict several commonly stated opinions on the
net this season.

#1 San Francisco has a lousy defense. If so, then people would have to say
	Philadelphia, Minnesota, Washington, and San Diego. Only three
	teams have given up fewer points than S.F. (Dallas, Pittsburgh, and
	New Orleans).

#2 Minnesota has great defense, but poor offense. From the numbers, they
	have scored more points than 24 other teams. Seems to be pretty
	good to me.

#3 Philadelphia has great defense. Seems to me, any team that barely makes
	it in the top quartile for defense, is good, but not great.

#4 Dallas is very well balanced in both defense and offense.

#5 With all the talk about Foster and who will be the QB at Pittsburgh, I
	thought Pittsburgh's strength was in its offense. Seems they have
	an awesome defense too.

Just for the fun of it, I ranked the playoff contenders by combining the
defensive and offensive rankings. They were then sorted buy lowest to
highest.

Teams in playoff contention:
			Off	Def	Total
1	San Francisco	 1	 4	 5
2	Dallas		 3	 3	 6
3	Pittsburgh	 8	 2	10
4	New Orleans	11	 1	12
4	Philadelphia	 5	 7	12
6	Minnesota	 3	11	14
	Buffalo		 2	12	14
8	Kansas City	10	 9	19
 	Houston		 6	13	19
10	Washington	15	 5	20
11	Miami		 7	15	22	
12	San Diego	16	 6	22
13	Cleveland	18	10	28
14	Green Bay	22	14	36
15	Denver		22	17	39

Tom
From: satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: `Redskins Repeat !!!
Date: 19 Dec 92 23:01:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec19.211108.3267@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> jdhl@troi.cc.rochester.edu (papa_sm00sh) writes:
>
>
>
>answer... never...
>
>i do not believe a wild card team has EVER made it to the superbowl...
>this would immediately disqualify a championship game between two
>wildcards... but i could be wrong on that... i don't know for sure if
>a wild card team has made it to the superbowl... i remember hearing a
>couple years ago that no AFC wildcard team has ever made it to the
>superbowl... but i am not so sure about the nfc...
>
>jason



As Alex Trebek is prone to saying "Oh, I'm sorry, your answer is incorrect."
The Raiders, of course, not only made it to the Super Bowl back in 1981 but
beat the (favored) Philly Eagles.

Another AFC team that made it to the Super Bowl as a wild card was the 1985
New England Patriots (yes, them!) but they got crushed by Da Bears and their
Super Bowl Shuffle.

I think the Cowboys were the first to make it there as a wild card team in
one of the "Black Sunday" games against the Steelers.

satish nair
giants (6-10 in '92)

Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: Frank Bilotti <frank@wanda.princeton.edu>
Subject: Jimmy Johnson: Love em or hate em, he's a winner
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A75452512F01700D@rambo.princeton.edu>
Originator: news@nimaster
X-Xxdate: Wed, 16 Dec 92 03:26:09 GMT
Organization: Geology Dept, Princeton Univ
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d12
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 10:44:54 GMT

I have been a big fan of Jimmy Johnson since before I started college at
Miami in 1987.  He takes alot of shit, even when he was kickin' college
football's collective butt.  Now that he's the coach at Dallas I'm doubly
lucky because they've been my team since I was knee-high to (something
short).  Well, I heard this quoted on TV tonight (I forget where) and it
summarizes why I think he's such a winner:


'I don't want players on our team who it doesn't hurt to lose. I don't
want to have someone who doesn't get a little sick feeling when they
totally commit themselves to something and come up a little bit short. If
you don't get that sick feeling, the next time, you think, 'so what.'
Then there is the next time and the next time and then after a period
time you will put a token effort into it. And you will become like a lot
of other folks. And I don't want to be like a lot of other folks'

[for the sake of brevity]

'I'll be happy the next time we win. That's when I will have a good
feeling again. I didn't have a good feeling at Miami until we won the
national championship. And to this day, I still think about the pain we
had after that loss'(referring to Penn St., Fiesta Bowl).

[will I get sued for reproducing news?]

FRANK

Oh, by the way, feel free to flame away, JJ can take it!
__________________________________________
Go 'Canes & Cowboys
frank@wanda.princeton.edu
__________________________________________
Xref: sparky rec.sport.football.pro:28631 dc.redskins:275
From: curt@oce.orst.edu (Curt Vandetta)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Only the Buccaneers could manage this.
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:59:12 GMT
Article-I.D.: gaia.1garugINNi93
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: ricky.oce.orst.edu

In article <Bz3JGq.KIo@fang.att.com> bcd@fang.att.com (Brendan Dwyer) writes:
>From article <1992Dec10.225422.12927@bradley.bradley.edu>, by dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell):
>[.....]
>> So....what do you think the odds are of Boomer being in town next year?
>> More important, will Testeverde be in town next year, and if so, at what
>> salary?  And what about Erickson?
>> 
>I don't know about Boomer but I am willing to bet an appendage that 
>Vinnie is not with the Bucs next year.  With season ticket sales slumping
>and price increases possibly being delayed another year, the Bucs will
>be looking for someone to bring people into the stadium.   Whether he
>has talent or not, he's perceived to be a loser and is not very popular
>(on several occasions I've witnessed the fans boo him worse than the
>opposing team).  I'm sure Leo James will call me a meathead, but I would
>like to see a QB with better leadership qualities to drive off the loser
>attitude this team seems to have.

  If all they want to do is increase ticket sales, then I would say that
  they should go after Toretta in the upcoming draft.  Toretta is probably
  more popular in the area then Vinnie.  Could draw in some of those U of
  Miami fans.  Although didn't Vinnie come from the U of Miami?  Maybe it
  won't work after all.

  Curt
From: kowalski@crim.ca (Allan Kowalski)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Physics 101
Date: 17 Dec 92 15:55:23 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Centre de Recherche Informatique de Montreal

HA HA HA ZAPRUDER FILM. I LOVE IT.

well said. story closed (I hope).

let it rest guys.

agk
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)
Subject: Re: "Your #1 [sic]" (was Re: Bears 30, Steelers 6 !!)
Date: 15 Dec 92 18:25:28 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation
Reply-To: richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut)

In article <BzA7EM.J5n@news.cso.uiuc.edu> jab55062@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (The World Reknown Jason Boskey) writes:
>richs@microsoft.com (Rick Schaut) writes:
>>honor. Now, I don't normally get on spelling binges, but
>>these _are_ the same people who have had occaision for calling Packer
>>fans "Cheeseheads".

>I believe it's spelled occasion, you cheesehead.

Check the OED.  It's a legitimate alternate spelling.

>>You can always count on a few Bear fans to woefully demonstrate their
>>intelligence.

>The intelligence that Packer fans crave?

Seriously?  Chicago isn't called the Windy City merely because it's
situated on the shores of Lake Michigan.


-- 
Rick Schaut
UUCP:...{uunet | uw-beaver}!microsoft!richs

Microsoft doesn't speak for me, and I don't speak for Microsoft.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: claird@NeoSoft.com (Cameron Laird)
Subject: Trials of #34 (was: Benchmark = OJ)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- (713) 684-5900
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 21:26:03 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.020519.26992@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Michael.P.Colburn@dartmouth.edu (Michael P. Colburn) writes:
			.
			.
			.
>sorry to be so picky, but I believe the game you are referring to was a
>loss to Detroit in 1976 where OJ ran for 273 yards...Buffalo lost
>27-14.
>
>The best single rushing day for a RB...Walter Payton, 275 yards against
>Minnesota in 1977.  
'Know who won that one?
			.
			.
			.
-- 

Cameron Laird
claird@Neosoft.com (claird%Neosoft.com@uunet.uu.net)	+1 713 267 7966
claird@litwin.com (claird%litwin.com@uunet.uu.net)  	+1 713 996 8546
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: dubear@molbio.cbs.umn.edu (Dubear Kroening)
Subject: Re: Call against the Vikes
Organization: University of Minnesota
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 22:20:59 GMT

I've seen the replay a number of times, and from the slow/stop motion it is
obvious that the 'kick' is a short jab with the heel to the defenders right 
butt cheek (not the groin area).  It also appeared that Allen was already down
and the defender was antoganizing him with the wheelbarrow move.  It was later
stated that the niners were trash talking, etc... throughout the game, thus
causing a number of stupid moves (reactions) by the Vikes.  They therefore
deserved to lose, but I still think that it was a very bad call, it should've 
went the other way IMHO.

Dubear
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: hariharn@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (Ramesh Hariharan)
Subject: Re: `Redskins Repeat !!!
Originator: news@nimaster
Keywords: To all non-Redskin fans, after the Redskins beat up on the Cowboys this 
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 10:40:15 GMT

In article <XaR=Y4-@engin.umich.edu> sudhama@engin.umich.edu (Sudhama Gopalan) writes:
>In article <Bz43LI.Cuv@andy.bgsu.edu> dlingle@orchestra.bgsu.edu (Donald Lingle) writes:
>>Sunday, Beware Of The Super Bowl Champs!
>>    I will agree that the Skins are having an up and down season thus far.  But 
>>if we beat the Cowboys this Sunday, you must agree that the Redskins will look 
>>pretty good for repeating as Super Bowl Champs.
>>    The skins have had a bunch of injuries, combined with the late pre-season 
>>start of Mark Rypien.  Some of our players are now returning, (Darrell Green,
>>Jim Lachey), and Rypien's coming out of his slump.
>>    I'm happy to see the Cowboys and Redskins games now mean something.  Before
>>last year, Cowboy fans would hide the week before a Redskin vs. Cowboys game. 
>>As for the 49ers, Vikings, Eagles, Packers, & Saints, I know you would love to 
>>go get a easy Super Bowl victory against an AFC team, but you'll have to wait 
>>for Joe Gibbs to retire or better yet, coach your team.
>>    Well, good luck to all NFL fans.  I am just "touring" the user group.  This
>>id actually belongs to a Pittsburgh Steeler's Fan.
>
>
>Well, I too hope the 'Skins thrash the Cowpokes. Personally, I don't care for/
>hate either. All I'm concerned about is the 49ers - more specifically Montana.
>I'm one of those weirdos who has never seen Montana in action - here's hoping
>the 49ers secure home field advantage before their last game so that I can have
>the pleasure of watching Joe for the first time.
>

Joe who ?

:-) 
-- 
**************************************************************************
Ramesh Hariharan , Chem Engg. Dept., Princeton Univ. 
Research topic : Stabilization of Colloids using diblock copolymers.
Research baap : Bill Russel (no ! not the Celtic legend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: patpower@crchh458.bnr.ca (Patrick Power)
Subject: Re: Jimmy Johnson: Love em or hate em, he's a winner (and a whiner)
Reply-To: patpower@crchh458.bnr.ca (Patrick Power)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:58:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.162302.18032@cbnewsk.cb.att.com>, lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
|> In article <1992Dec16.104454.20104@Princeton.EDU> Frank Bilotti <frank@wanda.princeton.edu> writes:
|> >'I'll be happy the next time we win. That's when I will have a good
|> >feeling again. I didn't have a good feeling at Miami until we won the
|> >national championship. And to this day, I still think about the pain we
|> >had after that loss'(referring to Penn St., Fiesta Bowl).
|> > .....
|> >Oh, by the way, feel free to flame away, JJ can take it!
|> NO, he can't.
|> 
|> Two days after a controversial call against his team, he still whined about
|> it on TV.
|> 
|> That's NOT what a professional coach should do. In sports, you get good calls
|> and you get bad calls, but good or bad, you MOVE ON. Only a crybaby dwells
|> on a bad call against his team.
|> 
|> Back in October, the Skins got screwed by a "12 man on the field" penalty 
|> against the Giants that led to a TD right before the half. They lost the game.
|> The league office ADMITTED the mistake, but we didn't see Joe Gibbs putting
|> up a soap opera on national TV claiming "you want something so bad and somebody
|> takes it away from you ...."
|> 
|> Back in 1984, the Broncos and the Seahawks were in a big divisional battle.
|> The Seahawks won, largely helped by a Bronco fumble that should have been ruled
|> an incomplete pass (receiver didn't have possession). Later, Dan Reeves
|> commented something to the extent of "let's move on ...."
|> 
|> That's why I always think a pro coach's attitude is "good or bad break, you
|> take it like a man". Hey, bad calls are PART OF THE GAME, let alone the Aikman
|> fumble not being an outright wrong call.
|> 
|> JJ is not a man, he's a crybaby.

    So manhood is determined by the manner in which you react to bad calls?
    Nice logic, stud. NOT!

|> 
|> -- 
|>                                           Edward Lor
|>                                           lor@cbnewsk.att.com
|>                                           

-- 
If I could, I'd slow the whole world down*I'd bring it to its | Pat Power
knees*I'd stop it spinnin' round*But as it is, I'm climbing   | My opinions only
up an endless wall*No time this time, No time at all          |
       - The Police, "No Time This Time"                      | Da Boyz are back!!


Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: fester@island.COM (Mike Fester)
Subject: Re: Steling Sharpe is NOT better than Rice
Organization: /usr/local/rn/organization
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:25:03 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.164718.14507@seq.uncwil.edu> rsmith@seq.uncwil.edu (Ross Smith) writes:
>heim@vms.macc.wisc.edu (JOHN HEIM	) writes:
>
>>>rsmith@seq.uncwil.edu (Ross Smith) writes:
>>>>         catches   yards   yards/catch   TDs
>>>>Rice       4.40    81.35      18.5      .82
>>>>Sharpe     3.39    66.88      15.2      .36
>
>>Also, you are comparing the 1st 4 years of Sharpe's career to Rice's 
>>prime.  You could at least compare the 1st 4 years of Rice's career to 
>>Sharpe's 1st 4 years.
>
>Oh... NOT! these numbers are from Rices first four years... 85-88. Read
>the original post if you dont believe me. Besides I checked the original posts
>numbers against those in the Football Register and made sure he used the
>1st four years of both players...
>
>>The fact is that no matter what comparison you make you can't prove 
>>anything.  I guess I think it's rude of Packer fans to claim Sharpe is 
>>better than Rice when Rice has at least 1 NFL record and Sharpe has 
>>none.  On the other hand, I think it's rude of 49er fans to say Rice 
>>is positively the best of all time when Largent has most of the 
>>records.  
>
>Which major record does largent hold? The TD receptions was the last one...
>Monk has catches, Lofton yards and Rice TDs... so what is left to
>Largent (except maybe games played...or consecutive game rec streak...?)

And it only took Rice a few more games to break Hutson's record than it took
Hutson. This, in an era that favors offense.

Mike
-- 
Disclaimer - Oh come on! You didn't think I was serious, did you?
Organization: Central Michigan University
Date: Tuesday, 15 Dec 1992 10:29:26 EST
From: Robert Newby <3ZASIB3@CMUVM.CSV.CMICH.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Andre Ware is Baaaaaaad!!!!!
 <jjonsson.297@alexandria.lib.utah.edu>


I neglected to nnget your file but you can't be serious.  As someone else
has posted, Sanders is in a league with only three other backs in the history
of the game to amass 1000 in their first 4 years -- and that's with the R&S.
The major problem was that the success of the offense (short time of
possession) was wearing out the defense.  Time of possession was not a problem
Sunday.  Also, in the past several years (this year being an exception) they
have had one of the best offensive stats in the game.  Run & Shoot has been
effective and its been fun to watch.  The so-called "Jumbo" (with the tight
ends) has been a complete flop in my books.  The problem for Barry this year,
as opposed to years past, he hasn't gotten the seam, and that's all he needs,
is a seam and he's gone -- history.  If you don't believe it just check the
record (that's also history).  Bob
From: satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Steve Young vs. Randall Cunningham
Date: 16 Dec 92 16:30:01 GMT
Distribution: rec.sport.football.pro
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


I can't believe that I'm actually going to defend someone like Norman
Braman but... he is a businessman, he bought the Eagles as a business
investment and it's an investment that paid off great dividends over
the last few years.  As Ed DeBartolo would be quick to tell you, to date
the Niners organization has netted little or no revenue for him.  Yes
he has a winning team but due to big contracts, lavish player incentives
and other such perks, he is making very little on his investment. So
it's a matter of different philosphies... either have a winning organization
(i.e. 4 Super Bowls, consistent division championships, satisfied players,
etc. etc.) or make some money on your investment.


satish nair
bitter & twisted giants fan