HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich Kulawiec)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: What the Bears need.
Date: 23 Nov 92 22:06:08 GMT
Organization: GSP Whitewater Slalom Racing Team

In article <By6K5H.DqF@acsu.buffalo.edu> v066pwk9@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (BRUCE YAEGER) writes:
>I saw a post asking have the Bears given up.
>This is what I think they need.
>
>The Bears need youth more than anything.
>They could also use a new coach since it appears that
>the coach just gives up on his team (i.e. Harbargh scene),
>just like a couple of years ago when he said that they
>would never win another game.  It looks like he might
>be saying that again.

The Bears are going through the same process that lots of teams go through:
veterans retire, younger players aren't quite ready just yet, other
divisional opponents become more competitive, and so on.  The offensive
line that took the Bears through the 80's, and which accounted for a
lot of the rushing yardage that Bear running backs toted up is now
being rebuilt with younger players.  Some of the newer defensive players
(Carrier, Stinson, Paul) are showing a lot of promise, but are not
playing at the Dent/Singletary/Fencik level yet.  Harbaugh has had
a good year, and seems to have weathered the Ditka storms well.

However: There does seem to be a certain lack of intensity.  The focus
and determination which marked past Bear teams seems to be missing.
I've no idea why this has happened, but it's a really disastrous
turn of events in a sport which relies heavily on mental stamina.

About Ditka: I happen to like Ditka.  He's straightforward and honest:
you never have to guess how he feels about something.  If he's pissed,
he says so; if he's pleased, he says so; if he's disappointed,
he says so.   I happen to like that kind of clarity, and find it
really refreshing, especially when I compare it to the equivocating
"diplomatic" niceties that some coaches emit at press conferences.

Sure, he yells at his players -- but sometimes they deserve it.  And yes,
he doesn't have much tolerance for stupid questions -- neither do I, and
neither should anyone.  He's belligerent, forceful, aggressive, and
he *wants to win*.  This tends to irritate some people, notably some
of the media types in Chicago.  Tough.  Pro football is not for the
squeamish or sensitive, whether they're player, coach, media, or fan.

---Rsk
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:55:28 EST
From: <RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Tie Breaker: NFC playoffs
Distribution: na

SAN FRANCSICO LEADS....San Fran lost to Phoenix.  Dallas lost to the Rams
and the Eagles.  Because San Fran has a better NFC conference record, they
have the inside track to No. 1 in the NFC right now.
-Rob
From: jggoslin@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Whiplash Smile)
Subject: Re: rules - tackle eligible
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 05:48:23 GMT

kowalski@crim.ca (Allan Kowalski) writes:
>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

Okay I'm not exactly sure of it myself... but I played tackle, and had
to go out for a pass once myself...

I believe that there are rules governing specific jersey numbers being
designated for specific positions.  As such, numbers upwards of 80 are
WR numbers, 60-80 are lineman #'s, 90+ is DL #'s, et al(not sure of
exact ranges or anything)  So.  Since lineman are not allowed past the
line of scrimmage on a pass, noone with a linemans number is allowed
downfield on a pass.  So what you do is walk up to the ref, tell him
you want to be an eligable reciever for the play and run the play
normally.  It could be a trick play or whatever(ie just to sike out
the defense, or it could be real)  (If you guys had seen me catch you
would know that it was just to sike out the D  :-/  )

Explain it well?

later...peace

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  "Only the dead see the end of war."     |        Whiplash Smile    	|
|  "Conformity is the cradle of boredom."  |     BUBBA   Jeff Goslin	|
|=======================================================================|
|		       jggoslin@vela.acs.oakland.edu       	        |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: v079m8ta@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (JONNY B. GOODE)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Kenny, the best backup around
Date: 23 Nov 92 17:30:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <BILLMS.92Nov23101033@gip.eecs.umich.edu>, billms@eecs.umich.edu (William Mangione-Smith) writes...
>>In article <By5zt7.4Du@acsu.buffalo.edu> v079m8ta@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (JONNY B. GOODE) writes:
>> 
>>	   Just a quick mention of the so-called 'mediocrity' of Kenneth Davis.
>> 
>>	   Can you say 181 yards rushing?  I knew ya could.
>> 
>>	   NOW do you think he could start for just a *few* more teams?  
>> 
>No.
> 
> 
>Bill


	Good argument, Bill.

Jon
From: tes0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (THOMAS EDWIN SCHMIDLIN)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Emmitt & Thurman's stats
Date: 23 Nov 92 17:56:33 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov23.052727.143657@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu>, tes0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (
THOMAS EDWIN SCHMIDLIN) writes:
>Could someone please let me know the stats for Emmitt Smith and Thurman
>Thomas.  I'd like to know their rushing and receiving yards.  Thanks in
>advance.
>--
>
>
>Tom Schmidlin       DEEP THOUGHTS: By Jack Handey - I wish a robot would
>TES0@LEHIGH.EDU         get elected president.  That way, when he came
>215-758-0875            to town, we could all take a shot at him and not
>                        feel too bad.
>

Well, to answer my own question:

Emmitt Smith                84 yards rushing        0 yards receiving
Thurman Thomas             103 yards rushing        0 yards receiving
Barry Foster               168 yards rushing       42 yards receiving

That extends Foster's lead as the NFL's leading rusher to 90 yards.
Also, with 107 yards more than Thurman yesterday, Foster should be leading the
NFL in yards from the line of scrimmage by 70 or 80 yards.  Hmmmmmmmm
-- 


Tom Schmidlin       DEEP THOUGHTS: By Jack Handey - I wish a robot would
TES0@LEHIGH.EDU         get elected president.  That way, when he came
215-758-0875            to town, we could all take a shot at him and not
                        feel too bad.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: Adriene_Nazaretian@QM.cis.YALE.EDU (ALN - Go Giants!)
Subject: Re: Congratulations to New England!
Organization: Yale University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 12:42:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.040935.18873@ncsu.edu> delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu (DERRELL EMERY LAROCQUE) writes:
>From: delarocq@eos.ncsu.edu (DERRELL EMERY LAROCQUE)
>Subject: Congratulations to New England!
>Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 04:09:35 GMT
>
>
>
>  I just wanted to say congratulations to the Patriots today. No matter
> if you beat the Bills or not, no team deserves to go 0-16 except the
> N.Y. Giants and the L.A. Raiders... Great job!!!
  ^^^^^^^^^^^     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
EXSQUEEZE ME?  Oh Please, go F*CK yourself... 

No One should go 0-16. PERIOD!

Dont ruin a congrats post, just to insult other teams... 
Adriene L. Nazaretian            G         Nazaretian-Adriene@Yale.Edu
Sr Technical Specialist       G  I         Adriene_Nazaretian@QM.CIS.YALE.EDU
Computing and Info Systems    O  A         Adriene@YALEADS.BITNET
Yale University                  N         Adriene@YALEVM.YCC.YALE.EDU
175 Whitney Avenue               T         Voice (203) 432-6683
New Haven, CT. 06520             S         FAX  (203) 432-6165
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: Troy Aikman
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 20:13:51 GMT

In article <douthit.722194286@scofflaw> douthit@convex.com (Ronnie Douthit) writes:
>
>...
>jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria) writes:
>>Food for thought. Compare Steve Young's performance when he was down
>>20-3 and how me came through. Big difference. The comparsion is 
>
>Elway is a great comeback guy, but he didn't come back in every game.
>Steve Young did a good job, but he won't do it in every game.
>
>The cowboys have been in this postion only once this year.  This is not
>a sample size from which you could draw some general conclusion.  Sure he
>made an obvious mistake when running that one play when he should have slammed
>the ball in the ground.  What you seem to forget, however, is that he
>did drive the team down to the ~15 yard line.  It is easy to be an arm
>chair quaterback, but things look a lot different on the field.
>
>You can't win them all and you can't blame one person for a game that
>the Rams won and 47 Cowboy players lost.
>
>			-Ron

The point you fail to miss, i.e., blinded by unfailing loyalty,
is that my point is that Aikman needs more big-time game
experiences before he is truly seasoned. IMO, by next year,
barring injuries, Aikman will be one of the premier QBs in 
the league if he is able to learn from his mistakes. I
envision him taking the Cowboys all the way to the SB and
winning it in the next year or two. This year is for learning.
For my final disclosure statement, anything can happen and
the possibility always exists that any QB can win the big one,
including Aikman. More power to him if can succeed this year.
-- 
        ---------  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: karki@lars.acc-admin.stolaf.edu (David K Karki)
Subject: Vikings Trivia Answers
Organization: St. Olaf College; Northfield, MN
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 20:53:35 GMT


Not that it's really needed, since that excerpt from the Tarkenton/Klobuchar
book was posted, but here are the answers to the trivia:

(1) The play was a Hail Mary TD pass that was highly questionable since the
    WR apparently pushed off the CB.

(2) The teams were the Minnesota Vikings and Dallas Cowboys

(3) The game was played at Metropolitan Stadium. 

(4) The QB on the play was Roger Staubach

(5) The receiver who may have pushed off was Drew Pearson.

(6) The defenders were CB Nate Wright and safety Paul Krause.

(7) The next opponent for Dallas was the L.A. Rams, but I accepted the Steelers
    as a correct answer since I screwed up,forgetting the Dallas/Minnesota
    game was a divisional playoff and not the NFC Championship game, and was
    rightfully flamed for it e-mail. Dallas did play Pittsburgh in the Super
    Bowl after the real NFC title game against the Rams.

(8) The infamous fan reaction was a person in the upper deck throing an empty
    liquor bottle and beaning a referee on the head, KOing him.

The winners were Chad Bergerson and Dale Wyttenbach, who both answered all 
correctly, and whose answers I received simultaneously. 

Dave 					Go  VIKINGS!!!!!




*********************************************************************************  David Karki (karki@mari.acc.stolaf.edu) | "Minnesota? It's really cold up   **  St. Olaf College, Northfield, Minnesota |        there, isn't it?"          *********************************************************************************
From: carrato@acsu.buffalo.edu (Michael Carrato)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Monday Night...FINAL SCORE!
Date: 20 Nov 92 00:07:41 GMT
Organization: UB

saari@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Jonathan Saari) writes:

>In article J7I@acsu.buffalo.edu, carrato@acsu.buffalo.edu (Michael Carrato) writes:
>> 
>> When a receiver is in the area of the ball, intentional grounding
>> is not called. It was not called on Marino in the first half either,
>> when Clayton was 10 yards from where Marino threw it away.
>> 

>Good Call??? The rule doesn't say anything about a "receiver in the area" ...

>It says that if the QB throws with the "intent to avoid a sack" it is intentional
>grounding. Now, I admit, this is a judgement call. I do believe, however, based upon
>the reactions of fans around the country, announcers, and just about everybody, that
>that WAS INTENTIONAL GROUNDING!! Obviously at least two people disagree, the referee
>and the person who posted this article....

Regardless of the wording of the rule, the spirit of the rule states that
a receiver in the area negates intentional grounding. In all my years
of watching football I've never seen it called when the ball lands 
within 15 yards of an eligible receiver. Why should they start now?

As for Dierdork and his pals, they were miffed because they were 
deprived of a Marino last-second finish... 


>I am not a Bills nor a Fins fan, so no bias is involved in this appraisal.


I am a Bills fan, so there is some bias. But when Marino threw it away
in the first half I said the exact same thing. Clayton was in the area,
and even though EVERYONE in the stadium knew he was throwing it away
to avoid the sack, it was not called. It was the correct call.



Mike C.
From: mk0e@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (MAHEENDRA BABURAO KASMALKAR)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: NFC East loses!
Date: 16 Nov 92 04:24:24 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

I am not a woofer but after reading all those moronic posts by NFC East
woofers for so long how could I let this one go.

All teams in NFC East lost today!

This doesn't happen everyday. So I am relishing this one chance of a big WOOF!
(Every dog has his day!)

As a bonus, two of the NFC East teams lost to AFC West teams. WOOF WOOF!

Kassu
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
!  My life in US :            !      Maheendra Kasmalkar         !
!                             !      mk0e@lehigh.edu             !
!  Apartment , Department     !      mk0e@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu      !
!  Advisor and Budweiser      !      (215)-758-8081              !
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rsmith@strobe.ATC.Olivetti.Com (Russ Smith)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Cards suffer major blows
Date: 19 Nov 92 15:25:39 GMT

At the risk of sounding like a whiner, why is it always the Cardinals?
It turns out the Cards lost a hell of a lot more than one football game
on Sunday in the Georgia Dome.

Linebacker Ken Harvey is out for "at least 10 MONTHS" after suffering an
unspecified knee injury sunday(10 months seems to me like an ACL or some
sort of reconstruction). Linebacker Freddie Joe Nunn is out "indefinitely"
after suffering an unspecified knee injury.

Harvey is the team's best pass rusher, Nunn is probably the 2nd best, they
are the team's outside linebackers. Looks like they will have to draft
a linebacker next year just in case(or trade one of their QB's to get
one).

Just when the team seems to be turning the corner to respectability, what
a blow. I didn't see either injury but since the Dome is an artificial
turf stadium, I'd speculate there is a connection to the injuries.

Damn.




Russ Smith
*******************************************************************************

"What an angry clown!" -- Jerry Seinfeld

********************************************************************************
From: seale@bcserv.wustl.edu (Seale (Jeff))
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: It' official
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:57:18 GMT
Organization: Washington University in Saint Louis, MO USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bcserv.wustl.edu
Keywords: Seahawks

In case you missed it yesterday, the soon-to-be-St. Louis
Patriots won a game. This officially makes our Seahawks the
worst team in the NFL. Actually, there really wasn't much
doubt before yesterday. New england scored half as many points
in one game as the Seahawks.
Someone shoot me, please.
-A disgruntled Seahawk fan praying that there is a draft next year!



Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jic@vexcel.com (jic account for NAVY)
Subject: Re: intentional grounding (Re: Bills vs. Dolphins)
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder CO
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 23:10:38 GMT

In article <Bxvu45.2GJ@news.iastate.edu> jbhuber@iastate.edu (Joseph B Huber) writes:
>In article <97999@netnews.upenn.edu> satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair)
>writes:
>
>>And my personal favorite, Kelly is about to be sacked by Coleman, he tosses
>>the ball away.  I'm still waiting for that intentional grounding call.
>
>Kelly threw the ball towards an eligible reciever and the ball landed at
>the reciever's feet. Why should this have been intentional grounding? Just
>because the three goofballs said it should be? I know the ruling says
>something about throwing the ball to avoid a sack, but I think the spirit of
>the rule intends to prevent qb's from throwing the ball to an area where no
>recievers are present just to avoid being sacked. Kelly picked out a receiver
>and threw the ball at him.
>
>It was a great, heads up play by Kelly. If the wording of the intentional
>grounding rule prevents a qb from throwing the ball at an eligible reciever,
>the rule needs to be changed.
>
>A quite similar play happened in the Iowa State-Nebraska game (go Cyclones!)
>last Saturday. The NU qb, who was being sacked and practically laying on the
>turf, flung the ball at the TE who was in blocking on the play. The TE made
>the tough catch and took the ball in for a TD. That was a great play. I'd
>certainly hate to see an NFL rule prohibiting such plays.

Indeed! As I saw it Marino made a very similar play earlier in the game,
about to be sacked, and he heaved it to an open man a few yards away (Higgs?).
Their actions appeared identical and neither was flagged, as it should be.

Tom.
>
>-- 
>Joe Huber 
>(jbhuber@iastate.edu)        | Capt. James T. Kirk on the 2nd law of thermo: 
>Dept. of Mech. Egr.          |  "It's not a hundred percent efficient,
>Iowa State University        |   but nothing ever is."
From: frigo@asiago.med.ge.com (Fred Frigo 5-5806)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Packers 27, Eagles 24!
Date: 16 Nov 92 17:22:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: mr.1992Nov16.172238.25001
Reply-To: frigo@opustech.com
Organization: Opus Technologies, Inc. - Brookfield WI

In my previous post I wrote:
> Sterling Sharpe has 68 catches this year for over 100 yards.
                                                    ^^^
That should be 1000!  At this rate, Sharpe will surpass Art Monk
for the most catches by a receiver in one year.  I think the record 
is 106.

The local press here has been very positive about Bret Favre's
performance at QB.  He was dinged up pretty bad early in the
game but he hung in there and did a pretty good job.  As did
the entire team... except for the the DBs.
 



--
Fred Frigo    Opus Technologies, Inc.                 (__)
Voice: (414)-521-0400   FAX: (414)-549-9744           (oo)
E-mail: frigo@opustech.com                    /--------\/  
US-mail: PO Box 717,  Brookfield, WI 53008   * ||-----||
From: GC.SUL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sullivan)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Niners squeek past Saints
Date: 16 Nov 1992 11:24:16 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

Man, what a game!

What a pleasure it was to watch two teams play so intense and
hit so hard that they don't have the energy to dance after every
tackle or pass reception or ball carry for > 3 yards.  These are
two class organizations, full of class players.  Both teams played
at a high enough, consistent enough level that the refs tended to
keep the flags in their pockets also.

I was right that it was a dogfight all the way in the absence of a
first Niner TD.  I was very wrong about Hebert.

I take it all back about Hebert...  Though I am one of the biggest
Hebert rags, he played a flawless game.  I know some experts want to
whine about how lousy the Niner D was, but I thought they had a
great game.  There were no first half sacks, but the line was
getting a good push and hitting him a lot, even in the first half.

Yes, Hebert had time to throw, but the classic Niner scheme against
Hebert is to take away the run, and make him drive the length of the
field until he makes a mistake.

Hebert didn't make any.

The defense changed in the 4th quarter, tightening coverage and
blitzing.  The defense shares the credit for this win, giving the
ball back to the offense 3 times in 4th quarter after go-nowhere
Saints drives.

The Saints had 4 really good drives that ended in 4 scores, 2 tds
and 2 fgs.

The Niners had 5 really good drives that ended in 3 tds, 1 INT, and
1 missed fg.

Shanahan did a GREAT job adjusting.  I loved the Watters draw on the
last drive, then going right back to him again for the 9 yard gain.
The Saints had to be muttering to themselves after that one.
Using Rice out of the backfield was a nice touch also.  He got at
least one crucial first down out of that formation.

Niners got some help.  A couple dropped easy passes by Martin and
TE, a dropped INT by Saints.  The liberal officiating appeared to
favor the Niners this time around, that was definitely a Offensive
PI by Rice in the second half.  In a way, I was almost glad Jerry
'anybody but the Niners' slezoid threw the gratuitous Offensive
holding flag on the endzone PI, thus negating play.  I wanted to see
Young march in for the win without any doubts.  For you Niner fans,
Jerry was the guy who threw the consecutive defensive holding flags
on Wright and Lott in the NFC championship game against Washington
in '85 or '86.

I think the Niners were very lucky to win both of these games with
the Saints, who at this point of the season are every bit as good
if not better than the Niners.  I fully expected two close games
with a split.  Come playoff time, the Niners will be a better team
than the Saints.

Mike
From: jadler@phoebe.its.uci.edu (Jeff Adler)
Subject: Re: rules - tackle eligible
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 19 Nov 92 20:15:32 GMT

In article <kowalski.722185801@clouso> kowalski@crim.ca (Allan Kowalski) writes:
>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


I think the reason has to do with the jersey numbering system and not
confusing a player's position.  

In NFL football, each position requires players to have certain jersey 
numbers so that they are recognizeable on the field (e.g., QB 1-20, RB 20-59,
WR 80-89...)  This helps the officials and everyone recognize players (also
helps to control eligible receivers and illegal men down field)

There are a few players who are generally used as linemen (and
have the proper jersey number) but are also infrequently used in some 
formations such as goal line with extra linemen.  When they enter the game, 
they must check in with the officials so that it is known they can move
about the field without drawing penalties.  It also prevents teams from 
sneaking players in with different jerseys.