HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: RAP115@psuvm.psu.edu (Robbie Po)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Packer playoff hopes (revisited)
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:52:08 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Penn State University

Packer playoff hopes - they were good.
Packers need to beat Cleveland, this is possible.  Packers need to beat
Minnesota the final week - this is possible.  But, the Packers need the
Vikings to lose to the Steelers.  Rembember the DItka joke?

What do the Pope and Bubby Brister have in common?
---Same answer - you'll see it this Sunday

WIthout O'Donnell, there goes the home field advantage and first round bye.

Thanks, Packers, though for giving us the AFC central division title.
There's always hope for wild card for you.  Sorry us Steelers fans can't help
you out.

-Rob
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN)
Subject: Re: THE FOOTBALL GODS HAVE SPOKEN!!!
Organization: Acme, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:24:16 GMT

In article <15123.2b2e8c63@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu> vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.212709.641@serval.net.wsu.edu>, jjungbau@thorin.eecs.wsu.edu (Jim Jungbauer) writes:
>> In article <1992Dec15.091813.6264@PacBell.COM>, jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN) writes:
>> 
>> |> Gary, you're a BIG WEENIE. [etc etc etc...] 
>> 
>> Yet another intelligent post from John Gloria.  Will this incredibly
>> witty dialogue never end?  Man... don't even need to say anything 
>> about this guy... his posts speak volumes.  I just feel sorry for
>> Packard Bell.
>
>I was under the impression he worked for Pacific Bell. Which is it John?
>
>
>> 
>> Jim
I refuse to answer that in the grounds in my incriminate me! :-)

-- 
 ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
"To be absolutely certain about something, one must know
everything or nothing about it."   Olin Miller
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN)
Subject: Re: Redskins vs Cowboys
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 01:17:33 GMT

In article <8f==n3u00WB5EXLHpX@andrew.cmu.edu> jh2i+@andrew.cmu.edu (Joseph Theodore Helmsen) writes:
>
>    Every Cowboy supporter on the net has been saying how the Cowboys outplayed
>the Redskins.  I would like to offer another interpretation.  Any team that
>turns the ball over 5 times in one game deserves to lose.  What this says to
>me is that the Cowboys are good at marching up and down the field.  However,
>when they really needed to score, they were unable to.  I'll grant you that
>the endzone play was bizarre, at the very least.  However, a "dominant" team
>should be able to overcome that.  The cowboys were not able to.
>
>Joe

Great response JOE!
-- 
 ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
"To be absolutely certain about something, one must know
everything or nothing about it."   Olin Miller
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: root@june.cmp.rpi.edu (J.R. Ordon)
Subject: Re: gannon
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 19:41:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.185217.6746@ultb.isc.rit.edu> vxb8773@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>i like the way dennis green made a firm decision when making the QB change,
>but i did not agree with it. gannon is a better QB than salsibury. 
>gannon would have matched up much better than "sals-steak" when the vikes
>played the eagles. gannon can run just as well as cunningham. by taking
>gannon out, gannon has lost his confidence. i have not heard of any 
>changes this week, so i assume gannon will start. i hope the staff worked
>with him this week. when he is on, he can be a good QB. here is my
>feeling for the rest of the season:
>
>gannon will start no matter what (unlessed injured)
>salsibury can come in relief in the second half if needed because the 
>vikes defense should keep the game close.
>
>						vinnie
>						a nervous viking fan

According to my sources, Denny Green will start Sean Salisbury a.k.a
"t-bone" against the steelers sunday.

-----------------------------------------
J.R. Ordon
A VERY nervous Vikings fan
From: dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Jimmy Johnson: Love em or hate em, he's a winner (and a whiner)
Date: 17 Dec 92 16:44:59 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Tandem Computers (MPD) Austin, TX

In article <1992Dec16.225859.8159@titan.tsd.arlut.utexas.edu> alan@tsd.arlut.utexas.edu (Alan Martin) writes:
>lor@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (edward.lor) writes:
>
>>But whining is not the only way to make your team a winner. At least Gibbs
>>doesn't have to resort to such low-end method.
>
>As for whiners, Johnson certainly is one, although I don't think he's
>demonstrably worse than the average NFL coach.

I don't understand any of this.  Johnson a whiner?  He's anything but.  The
only times he complains is when he has a *right* too, i.e., the Cowboys were
the victims of bad calls.

Ed, if you think that's the only way Jimmy gets the team to win, then you've
got a lot to learn about coaching football.  Maybe you're confusing him with
Glanville, or Wyche.

Daniel Welch
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: bergerson@cvdv79.mayo.edu (Chad D. Bergerson)
Subject: Re: Vikes cannot hope for a wild card.
Reply-To: bergerson@mayo.edu
Organization: Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 13:43:43 GMT


In article <BzBoMp.9In@news.iastate.edu>, jbhuber@iastate.edu (Joseph B Huber) writes:
->Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
->From: jbhuber@iastate.edu (Joseph B Huber)
->Subject: Re: Vikes cannot hope for a wild card.
->
->In article <1992Dec15.212513.13996@bmw.mayo.edu> bergerson@mayo.edu writes:
->>->The Vikes certainly didn't deserve it, right?
->>->
->>->The rest is history.
->>->
->>->-- 
->>->                                          Edward Lor
->>->                                          lor@cbnewsk.att.com
->>Don't post until you know the whole story, know-nothing-fans!!!!!
->>
->
->Calm down, go back, and re-read Ed's post, keeping in mind that humans have
->been known to use sarcasm on occasion.
->
->-- 
->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."
->

Oh oh.  Someone please flame me, I deserve it!!!  I think I was reading other
posts that got me all worked up and I shot off a response without thinking.
Sorry Dude.  I brought some weenies with me to roast while I take my flame.

--
*******************************************************************************
Chad D. Bergerson                            Internet: bergerson@mayo.edu
Mayo Clinic                                  Voice: (507) 255-7567
200 First Street SW                          FAX: (507) 255-5484
Mail Stop 2D-334 STM            "In my dream I was drowning my sorrows  
Rochester, MN  55905             But my sorrows they learned to swim..." - U2
*******************************************************************************
From: satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Saints question (Hilliard)
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:42:53 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1992Dec14.191108.16398@infonode.ingr.com> john@porta.b24a.ingr.com (John Nolin) writes:
>
>Anyone know what happened to Hilliard this weekend?  The game summary
>showed him with 0 carries and the local hick newspaper didn't cover the
>game very well.
>
>-John-
>GEAUX Saints!!!!
>Worship Mora Now!!



With Ironhead pratically RUNNING OVER the Rams run defense and Hebert just
airing them out on some beautiful cross patterns, Hilliard probably never
got a chance to carry.  Didn't he have some sort of streak of scoring a TD
in every game over the last X games?

satish nair
giants (5-11 in '92)

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 23:40:15 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)
Xref: sparky rec.sport.football.pro:28564 dc.redskins:273
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Come back instant replay !!!
Date: 14 Dec 92 03:15:36 EST
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics

In article <13DEC199223291129@devvax.stsci.edu>, merrill@devvax.stsci.edu (Clark) writes:
> In article <1992Dec14.002527.21325@wheaton.wheaton.edu>, mcelha@david.wheaton.edu (Geoff McElhanon) writes...
>> 
>>This is a classic case of a very critical call that wasn't made because of the
>>lack of instant replay.  Now Dallas appears well out of position for any kind
>>of shot at home field advantage throughout the playoffs with the way San
>>Francisco is refusing to go down. 
>> 
> By the way, Dallas voted to get rid of instant replay and the Redskins
> voted to keep it.  Kind of ironic, isn't it?

It certainly is! 

I liked instant replay, what I didn't like were the brain-dead instant-replay
officials who couldn't even make a decent guess at a play when you have
3-5 camera angles on it!

Back to the 1980 when the Steelers beat the Oilers to go to the big show
(Steelers and Oilers diehards will know what I mean..)

BTW, It was a Washington TD by my analysis of the replays :/



> 
> Clark B. Merrill                        A Life Long Redskins Fan!
> Space Telescope Science Institute
> Baltimore, Maryland
> merrill@stsci.edu

-Garrett

B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S

Go Browns!!!!
From: ronnie@uts.amdahl.com (Ronnie Townsend)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Watters status????
Date: 17 Dec 92 01:07:38 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <4e6M03Bhc4os00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> ahmed@uts.amdahl.com (Syed S. Ahmed) writes:
>In article <1go6ijINN50j@morrow.stanford.edu>, GC.SUL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Sullivan) writes:
>> In article <1992Dec16.183826.29369@neocad.com>,
>> bill@neocad.com (Bill Bentley) writes:
>> >Will Ricky Watters play this week????
>> 
>> According to the papers, he claimed he was still hurting.  He feels
>> no hurry to come back since Lee is playing so well.  There is
>> nothing definite but he won't start.
>> 
>> Mike
>
>Ricky Watters doesn't seem to be too pleased with Amp Lee's performance 
>against the Vikings (134 yards rushing and 2 TDs). When asked by the press
>about Lee's performance, his reply was "I have no comments".
>
>I don't see why he should feel so intimidated. Obviously when he's healthy,
>he is going to get his job back. 

I agree that Rick should not be intimidated since Seifert has never really 
hesitated to give a starter back his job when he (Seifert) deems the starter 
is ready. Watters may worry that having Lee racking up big yardage may color 
George's estimation of his own readiness.  I will take this opportunity to 
gloat just a bit for having been the first to predict that Amp Lee would fill
in nicely in Rick's absense. I thought he had a legitimate shot at the starting
job in camp but Watters' year of familiarity with the offense paid off for 
him. I am happy for Ricky and the year he has had. I ran into him in bars a 
couple of times in the off-season and talked with him some and he really 
was down about last year and wanted desparately to have a big year and silence
his critics. He has certainly accomplished that but the durability question 
has obviously reared its ugly head again. Backs get hurt in the NFL. The Niners
would do well to consider a plan to keep both of these youngsters on the roster
and happy! No small task as both are very talented. I've said before that RB is
a loaded position in the NFL. Moving around is no guarantee you'll get the 
starting job unless you just have overwhelming ability like Herschel or Eric D.
Those guys have pretty much been difficult to keep on the bench anywhere they've
gone. The Niners have shown much improved line play this year in general so if
I were Watters and Lee I'd consider riding this juggernaut to a couple of Super
Bowl rings before making a lot of noise about PT. 
-- 
Ronnie
-------------------------------------------------------------
Whenever the fates hear someone say, "It can't get any worse than this..." 
They just laugh and double your misery!
From: kprashan@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (hyderabadi)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Sorry folks (Re: Heisman.. what a farce.. Faulk was screwed)
Date: 13 Dec 92 01:02:19 GMT
Distribution: na


Sorry folks.. that was supposed to go to r.s.f.c

prashanth
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
From: mzimmers@netcom.com (Michael Zimmers)
Subject: Then vs. Now; Was Re: The Dynasty Continues..........
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 04:50:37 GMT

In article <RLAG10-171292122905@222.14.80.23> RLAG10@email.sps.mot.com (Gary Gavlick) writes:

>  I'm jumping into this discussion late but I have always enjoyed "what if"
>scenarios.  The basis for this argument seems to be that the 1980's Niners
>would be superior to the 60's Packers because of the improved physical
>conditioning (including access to steriods?) of the players.  In the 60's,
>though, there were fewer teams (14 vs. 28) dividing up players between them
>and so the high-level talent was more concentrated.  (I've heard arguements
>against further league-expansion because it dilutes the talent on each
>team.)  Thus the 60's Packers probably had more natural athletes than the
>80's Niners which might offset the better conditioning of the present-day
>athelete.

True, but there are more people in the country now than there were 25 years
ago (though not nearly twice as many), and prep and college football seem
to be more "big time" than ever.  Also, there's more exposure to other
countries' athletes.  And there have to be some supply-demand dynamics
to league expansion that suggest that with more high-paying teams out
there, more athletes will be drawn to the sport.  Look at the NBA:  there's
way more teams now than 40 years ago, but who'd argue that yesteryear's
teams were as good as today's?

>   Also one has to considered how the NFL constantly tinkers with the game
>(allowing off. linemen to extend arms, no bumping the receiver after 5 yds,
>etc.).  My impression of the Niners has always been that there are very few
>HoF players on the team but that the team uses an excellent system and is
>very well-coached.  Would the passing system developed by Walsh been as
>effective using the rules of the 60's ?

Almost certainly not, but one can make the argument both ways.  All it
proves is that the game has changed (sadly).

I think I'd argue that the Niners had their share of HoF players.  Joe,
Ronnie and Jerry for sure.  Roger, probably.  Randy Cross and Guy McIntyre
too.

>  Finally what about the 70's Steelers vs the 80's Niners ?  This was a
>team with HoF players on the defensive line, at linebacker, secondary, and
>quarterback.  The Niners were vulnerable to strong defensive teams ('85
>Bears, '86 & '90 Giants) and the Steel Curtain was one of the most
>dominating in the history of the game -- especially if you're playing by
>70's rules.          

Yes, but 10 years is much less than 25.  And the Steelers' dynasty ended
a mere two years before the Niners' started.  Nowhere near enough time
to see evolutionary results.  But the '89 Niners would have given any
of the Steelers a run for their money.
-- 
Michael Zimmers                                    |  Home:  408 996 1984
SoftHelp                                           |  Work:  408 996 1965
Software Solutions for Open Systems                |  Data:  408 996 1974
From: falknemj@cnsvax.uwec.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: The Packers Should Simply Make the Playoff Over the Vikings
Date: 18 Dec 92 20:04:30 -0600
Organization: University of Wisconsin Eau Claire

I've been a Viking fan since the Super Bowl days of Fran Tarkenton, Chuck
Foreman, and the like, but honestly I believe that the Green Bay Packers should
go to the playoffs over the Vikings.  Why??  Plain and simple.  The Vikes
aren't ready for Prime Time (and I'm not talking about Deion)  =).

The Vikings can't beat playoff caliber teams, the Packers can, especially in
winning 6 of their last 7 or so.  A Viking playoff game in the Dome would be
close, but they'd be one and done.  The Packers would have better hopes.

						Mike Falkner
						DGIF 10769

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 05:00:08 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)
From: vancleef@ohstpy.mps.ohio-state.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Rice....Touchdown 49errrrrs!
Date: 20 Dec 92 04:38:43 EST
Distribution: na
Organization: The Ohio State University, Department of Physics

In article <1992Dec20.035111.23847@PacBell.COM>, jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (JOHN) writes:
> - 
>  ---------  John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	--------	
> "To be absolutely certain about something, one must know
> everything or nothing about it."   Olin Miller

Beware of Cajun Voodoo the fact that the Football Gods tend to frown upon
zealous woofing. I know, I have been there many times...

B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S B R O W N S

Geaux BROWNS!

(OK, at least I have a backup team to root Feauxr :)
From: satish@a.chem.upenn.edu (Satish Nair)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Vikes stuff
Date: 11 Dec 92 16:52:23 GMT
Distribution: rec.sport.football.pro
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


Hi,

All this stuff about the Vikes not having beaten a team with a winning
record is kind of moot.  There was a period between 1973-1976 when the
Vikes were the only team in the NFC Central who had a record over .500.
As a matter of fact when they went to the Super Bowl in 1976, their record
against a team with a winning record was 1-1-1.  During this period, they
made it to the Super Bowl 3 times.  So, in spite of their competition this
year, there is actually some precedent for them being able to go
to the Super Bowl (of course, actually WINNING the S.B. is a totally
different fettle of kish).


satish nair
go giants
From: Kalle.Kivimaa@hut.fi (Kalle Kivimaa)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.pro
Subject: Re: Was Dallas screwed? You make the call....
Date: 14 Dec 1992 19:45:48 GMT
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab
Distribution: inet
NNTP-Posting-Host: robin.cs.hut.fi

In <1410@netxcom.netx.com> jwc@netxcom.netx.com (Jeff Comer) writes:
>[1] Was Aikman's forward motion enough to make it a pass? On this, I am
>    inconclusive. The official ruled that he saw no forward motion, and so

As I already said, the rule for this is a bit strange, but it seems
to state that forward motion of the hand IS NOT enough to make the
pass forward.

>    the ball was an incomplete pass. Someone here claimed that the passed
>    ball hit a lineman in the facemask. If this is true, it should indeed
>    have been called an incomplete.

This also depends.  If the ball had left Aikman's hand before striking
the facemask, then it would be an incomplete.  However, if Aikman hits
the lineman WITH the ball in his hands, then it is a backward pass.

In college, things are simpler.  The pass made behind the line is
ruled a forward pass if in doubt (as in this case).

--
************************************************************************
* The night sky over the planet Krikkit is the least interesting sight *
* in the entire Universe.  -- Douglas Adams, HHGTG                     *
************************************************************************