Wednesday, January 5, 2011

[socialactionfoundationforequity:11828 The Central Vigilance Commission

Buzz It
http://www.cvc.nic.in

--
Truth resides in every human heart, and one has to search for it there, and to be guided by truth as one sees it. But no one has a right to coerce others to act according to his own view of truth. - Mohandas Gandhi

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "SAFE - Social Action Foundation for Equity" group.
To post to this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
socialactionfoundationforequity+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.co.in/group/socialactionfoundationforequity?hl=en?hl=en-GB

Medarticles Am in need of the ebooks

Buzz It
Dear Sir/ Friends;

Am in need of the ebooks mentioned bellow. Please upload here also.

Regards,

Sudheer J.

The Clinical Atlas of Parkinson's Disease CD-ROM
DJ Nicholl and A Williams, eds. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Science;
2003. ISBN 1405107782. Order phone 800-759-6102.

Handbook of Clinical Neurology - Volume 99, Pages 639-1179 (2011) -
Sleep Disorders
Edited by: Pasquale Montagna and Sudhansu Chokroverty - ISBN:
978-0-444-52007-4
http://www.sciencedirect.com.aleph.lib.ntue.edu.tw/science/handbooks/...

Handbook of Clinical Neurology - Volume 84, Pages 1-570 (2007) -
Parkinson's Disease and Related Disorders, Part II. Edited by:
Michael
J. Aminoff, François Boller, Dick F. Swaab, William C. Koller and
Eldad Melamed - ISBN: 9780444528933
http://www.sciencedirect.com.aleph.lib.ntue.edu.tw/science/book/97804...

--
You can edit your Group Email settings by visiting the following link.

http://groups.google.com/group/medarticles/subscribe

You can choose abridged email or digest email so that you will receive only one email per day.

How's Your Marketing Business Going?

Buzz It
HI,

Found your Marketing Business on the net and was wondering
how things are going for you?

Sincerely;

Dennis

©2011 GoogleUk Online Promotions

Buzz It
Dear Gmail user
You won £ 500,000.00GBP. (CGPN):7-22-71-00-66-12, Ticket number:
00869575733664, Serial numbers:/BTD/8070447706/06, Lucky
numbers:12-12-23-35-40-41(12). Contact Mr. Bernard Graham for more
details: E-mail: mr.bernardgraham@googlemail.com

Sincerely,
Ms. Fiona James

--
Centro de Pesquisas Rene Rachou/CPqRR - A FIOCRUZ em Minas Gerais.
Rene Rachou Research Center/CPqRR - The Oswaldo Cruz Foundation in the State of Minas Gerais-Brazil.

rec.bicycles.racing - 25 new messages in 6 topics - digest

Buzz It
rec.bicycles.racing
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en

rec.bicycles.racing@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* interview with an insider on doping - 11 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/62e01516d9ce7e0f?hl=en
* Triathlism: an incredibly unserious sport - 5 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/ec19a0075582348d?hl=en
* I'm ashamed to admit I was conned. - 2 messages, 2 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/5e6b1523a2cdde60?hl=en
* Keep It All Secret In the Back Room - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/675581496c3eeddf?hl=en
* Saint Armstrong - Warning - not recommended for cowards or the faint of mind.
- 5 messages, 4 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/95e008b3e3e1af8a?hl=en
* When? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/7e2dddf4ac770471?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: interview with an insider on doping
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/62e01516d9ce7e0f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 12:23 am
From: "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."


On Jan 4, 12:31 pm, "A. Dumas" <alexan...@dumas.fr.invalid> wrote:
> Kurgan. presented by Gringioni. wrote:
>
> > On Jan 4, 9:01 am, Vagina Gorilla wrote:
> >> It is the second rest day of this year's TdF, [...]
>
> > Interesting interview.
>
> "Dan F" posted it July 29th 2009:http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/browse_frm/thread/...

Dumbass -

Damn, that's old.

thanks,

Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.


== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 6:10 am
From: Anton Berlin


Sure - the human mind is made for fitness - however men of conscience
that want to know the truth don't apply truth (knowledge) so
selectively.

It's intellectually dishonest to do that.

Based on this thread alone Mike Jacoubowsky come across as a dishonest
man.

Makes one wonder what else he tells himself and others that is
completely false.


== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 6:14 am
From: Anton Berlin


On Jan 5, 2:22 am, "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."
<kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 2:40 pm, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > It's not - but out of sight - out of mind can be worth 8 minutes or
> > even 30
>
> > And even the best racers have their 'fuck it' days when they just
> > don't want to pedal any harder.
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Regardless of what Flandis doped with, I thought his biggest advantage
> that day was having the team car right there. It was really hot and
> when they handed the bottle to him, he got a little push, then he was
> able to pour the ice water right over his head, all day long. He was
> able to avoid hyperthermia.
>
> Other riders in the pack couldn't do that with the caravan situation
> following the main field.
>
> thanks,
>
> Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.

I didn't actually see it - I wasn't interested in bike racing at the
time.

Doping had overwhelmed the race since Indurain's 2nd win ( the
reality became apparent to me that doping was the primary component of
victory - although it was probably always this way - always )

== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 6:29 am
From: Fred Flintstein


On 1/5/2011 8:10 AM, Anton Berlin wrote:
> Sure - the human mind is made for fitness - however men of conscience
> that want to know the truth don't apply truth (knowledge) so
> selectively.
>
> It's intellectually dishonest to do that.

Jesus fucking christ.

I've repeatedly dumped on Laff for having OCD. You're
right behind him if you think that people shouldn't
prioritize what they give a shit about.

LANCE was on the hot sauce. Just like all the other
top riders. And all the best footballers. And all the
best athletes in other aerobic sports. And power sports.
Don't get me started about how the Olympics drive doping
in sport.

If you want me to get all cranked up over doping in the
workplace, I have to tell you, the pro cyclist's
workplace is way the hell down my list.

Fred Flintstein


== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 8:42 am
From: "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."


On Jan 5, 6:14 am, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 5, 2:22 am, "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."
>
>
>
>
>
> <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 4, 2:40 pm, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > It's not - but out of sight - out of mind can be worth 8 minutes or
> > > even 30
>
> > > And even the best racers have their 'fuck it' days when they just
> > > don't want to pedal any harder.
>
> > Dumbass -
>
> > Regardless of what Flandis doped with, I thought his biggest advantage
> > that day was having the team car right there. It was really hot and
> > when they handed the bottle to him, he got a little push, then he was
> > able to pour the ice water right over his head, all day long. He was
> > able to avoid hyperthermia.
>
> > Other riders in the pack couldn't do that with the caravan situation
> > following the main field.
>
> > thanks,
>
> > Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
>
> I didn't actually see it  - I wasn't interested in bike racing at the
> time.
>
> Doping had overwhelmed the race since Indurain's 2nd win  ( the
> reality became apparent to me that doping was the primary component of
> victory - although it was probably always this way - always )

Dumbass -

I disagree about doping being primary.

It's one of a number of details that need to be taken care of. Don't
take care of any of them and a racer isn't competitive (at the top
level). The guy in the interview basically says the same thing.

thanks,

Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.


== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:43 am
From: Anton Berlin


By primary I mean deciding when all other factors are equal - but that
sounds a little bullshitty.

What I mean is that given great genetics, proper training, nutrition,
rest, a strong team and good tactics - doping ended up being the
primary deciding factor.

That's why they do it - without dope chance, guts, strategy and the
things we originally loved about cycling come into favor.

But the cheats can't trust that - just like the guy in Miller's
Crossing

"It's gettin' so a businessman can't expect no return from a fixed
fight. Now, if you can't trust a fix, what can you trust? For a good
return, you gotta go bettin' on chance - and then you're back with
anarchy, right back in the jungle"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXQ940YSD2A&feature=related

== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:44 am
From: Anton Berlin


The debate isn't about whether Lance doped - (that's been established
among the men of conscience) it's about why Mike lives with blinders.


== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:54 pm
From: Frederick the Great


In article <FNOdnQHHpM8AB77QnZ2dnUVZ_omdnZ2d@earthlink.com>,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com> wrote:

> "Anton Berlin" <truth_88888@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:137b1c3e-577c-4be1-b77b-2d077fcafbb0@29g2000yqq.googlegroups.com...
> > MJ - You haven't been around any kids?
> >
> > That guy that died on Ventoux = the guy that sang in the Beatles and
> > that president guy that got shot in Dallas.
> >
> > Kids are that fucking stupid today.
>
> This is someone who, according to the story (er, I mean, interview), has
> been around for a while. Should be pretty well schooled in what went down.
> When the TdF climbs Ventoux, pictures and stories about Tom Simpson are
> *everywhere.*
>
> I agree that kids are that stupid. But not everyone is a "kid" and anyone
> aware of the dangers of doping (as the person in the story, er, interview,
> claimed to be) would likely be aware of the single most-famous incident of a
> cyclist dying from an the effects of doping.
>
> I'm open to arguments otherwise. Persuade me. And try to convince me that
> someone really believes a testosterone patch alone, worn too long, was worth
> 8 minutes.

You are naive enough or feverish enough in you
anti-doping stance to believe that Tom Simpson
died from dope; so the kids do not have to be
dragged into it.

--
Old Fritz


== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:19 pm
From: Frederick the Great


In article
<725ba42a-dc6c-460a-be47-8a45caaadf05@w17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Fredmaster of Brainerd <bjweiner@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 4, 6:14 pm, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > I do have access to a couple people who are in a position to know the answer
> > > to "Is Lance clean?"... and would actually tell me. I will not ask, because
> > > I don't want to be in the position of figuring out what to do with the
> > > answer.
> >
> > With that kind of dissonance you won't have much rattling around in
> > your head ever.
> >
> > What do you stand to lose from knowing the truth ?  Not just this but
> > anything?
>
> Dumbass,
>
> Is that a stupid question or have you just not
> thought about it?
>
> There are a lot of times when knowing the truth
> isn't such a great idea. Our illusions are the only
> thing that keeps us from going crazy over how
> fucked up the world is.

I disagree that illusions have to come into it. Sometimes
one does not want to know a secret so that if the secret
comes out, then one is not suspected, for an extreme
example. As a less extreme example why would anyone want
to know the details of any chicanery in sports? I am
fully capable of enjoying sporting events knowing that
rules are broken. What acutally concerns me is doping
treated as more than a sporting foul by some. Those
people would be better occupied examining their own lives.

> What do you stand to *gain* from knowing the truth
> about whether LANCE doped or not?

Just so.

> It's just a
> goddamn bike race. If you want to pick some harsh
> truth to enlighten America about, I can think of
> several that are more important.

--
Old Fritz


== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:21 pm
From: Frederick the Great


In article
<91cd74ba-d59b-4092-8fae-a3c35a25d608@l22g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
Anton Berlin <truth_88888@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Sure - the human mind is made for fitness - however men of conscience
> that want to know the truth don't apply truth (knowledge) so
> selectively.
>
> It's intellectually dishonest to do that.
>
> Based on this thread alone Mike Jacoubowsky come across as a dishonest
> man.
>
> Makes one wonder what else he tells himself and others that is
> completely false.

Do you know that recently you often reply without quoting any
text in the message to which you reply?

--
Old Fritz


== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:41 pm
From: Fred Flintstein


On 1/5/2011 4:21 PM, Frederick the Great wrote:
> In article
> <91cd74ba-d59b-4092-8fae-a3c35a25d608@l22g2000vbp.googlegroups.com>,
> Anton Berlin<truth_88888@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Sure - the human mind is made for fitness - however men of conscience
>> that want to know the truth don't apply truth (knowledge) so
>> selectively.
>>
>> It's intellectually dishonest to do that.
>>
>> Based on this thread alone Mike Jacoubowsky come across as a dishonest
>> man.
>>
>> Makes one wonder what else he tells himself and others that is
>> completely false.
>
> Do you know that recently you often reply without quoting any
> text in the message to which you reply?

I wouldn't dissuade him from doing that. It looks creepy as hell
so I think it's entirely appropriate given his creepy fixation
with LANCE.

Fred Flintstein

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Triathlism: an incredibly unserious sport
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/ec19a0075582348d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 6:16 am
From: Anton Berlin


On Jan 5, 2:17 am, "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."
<kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 7:30 am, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > 4. And you're fucking swimming anyway so maybe you should be in the
> > tri forums
>
> Dumbass -
>
> Sure I swim, but I also know how to handle a bike in a pack.
>
> The great majority of these triathletes do not. They're getting better
> ever since they started the draft legal thing, but even so you'll see
> some races where they do stuff like have huge pileups at a non
> attacking section when their getting ready for entering the transition
> zone to the run.
>
> Freds. A lot of them have Cat 1 engines with Cat 5 pack handling
> skills.
>
> Another problem is: I don't think most of the age group races are
> draft legal. The people that do that are going to continue to be
> Freds. There's no incentive to learn handling skills.
>
> thanks,
>
> Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.

Agreed - they mainly handle packs like shit - I even had one say
something to me once - he has no idea how close he came to getting an
introduction to meet Mr. Curb

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:55 am
From: Brad Anders


On Jan 3, 6:25 pm, "derFah...@gmail.com" <derfah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyone who thinks triathlon is serious should be forced to watch this
> over and over until they are cured:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRKajY5GlyI

I love that vid. I really love it when the girl in black who crashed
finally gets going, and proceeds to veer straight across the road, in
front of oncoming riders, then veer back, all without looking. I also
like the girl with the dangling yellow shoe, wish they'd tracked her,
I wanted to see what happened when it got caught in her rear wheel.


== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:04 am
From: Brad Anders


On Jan 3, 6:25 pm, "derFah...@gmail.com" <derfah...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anyone who thinks triathlon is serious should be forced to watch this
> over and over until they are cured:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRKajY5GlyI

Then, there's this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPeNQ4pzIX8


== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:29 am
From: Amit Ghosh


On Jan 4, 2:57 pm, --D-y <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 9:30 am, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 4, 1:31 am, "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."
>
> > <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jan 3, 7:22 pm, TriGuru55x11 <tri_trai...@contractor.net> wrote:
>
> > > > On Mon, 3 Jan 2011 12:52:05 -0800 (PST), Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > > > > On Jan 3, 11:58 am, "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."
> > > > > <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> On Jan 3, 6:05 am, Fred Flintstein <bob.schwa...@sbcremoveglobal.net>
> > > > >> wrote:
>
> > > > >>> On 1/3/2011 7:11 AM, Anton Berlin wrote:
>
> > > > >>> > Ryan - I think you're wrong. Train for and do an ironman - it's a
> > > > >>> > fucking bitch.
>
> > > > >>> Dumbass,
>
> > > > >>> Hard != Serious
>
> > > > >>> For example, RAAM is hard.
>
> > > > >> Dumbass -
>
> > > > >> Triathlon is serious.
>
> > > > >> There's a decent amount of money at stake. $$$ brings out the
> > > > >> seriousness.
>
> > > > > In theory I can believe that. This interview was empirical evidence
> > > > > you're wrong.
>
> > > > As painful as that video was to watch that, I still want to thank you.
>
> > > > That hit me hard and this for me was a real "moment of truth" "wake up and
> > > > smell the taint" kind of realization, I think I learned some valuable
> > > > things to help further train my clients.
>
> > > > I don't usually read this board and it is good to see there's worthwhile
> > > > information being posted.
>
> > > Dumbass -
>
> > > If you're a triathlete, it's a good idea to not read this board.
> > > Triathletes handle this place about as well as they do riding in the
> > > middle of a pack.
>
> > > thanks,
>
> > > Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
>
> > I wouldn't be so quick to judge -
>
> > 1. Good triathletes are as elite as any cyclist ( I saw number of them
> > turn in 54 minute TTs on a hilly multi corner bad pavement course) and
> > that's after the swim in 60 degree lake water!   Those guys would have
> > easily won every state championship tt that year.)
>
> > 2. We barely talk about cycling anyway
>
> > 3. His rants will probably be better than Ed Dolans
>
> > 4. And you're fucking swimming anyway so maybe you should be in the
> > tri forums
>
> Some of them are truly monsters. They do one thing, by and large, on
> the bike, and that specialization (including equipment, positioning,
> training) works.

dumbass,

anyone who is good in one aerobic discipline can potentially be good
in another.

triathlism sucks because it is a clumsy mash up of three different
sports. even if you like chinese food, french food and italian food,
it doesn't mean it's all good in the same meal.

plus triathletes manly come from two different camps, OCD runners who
think they got dropped in the crosswind because they ate too much
gluten and grim corporate types who want to put everything into a
spreadsheet and look around for someone to pay instead of just losing
25 lbs.

== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:43 am
From: --D-y


On Jan 5, 1:29 pm, Amit Ghosh <amit.gh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 4, 2:57 pm, --D-y <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 4, 9:30 am, Anton Berlin <truth_88...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 4, 1:31 am, "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."
>
> > > <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Jan 3, 7:22 pm, TriGuru55x11 <tri_trai...@contractor.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Mon, 3 Jan 2011 12:52:05 -0800 (PST), Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> > > > > > On Jan 3, 11:58 am, "Kurgan. presented by Gringioni."
> > > > > > <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >> On Jan 3, 6:05 am, Fred Flintstein <bob.schwa...@sbcremoveglobal.net>
> > > > > >> wrote:
>
> > > > > >>> On 1/3/2011 7:11 AM, Anton Berlin wrote:
>
> > > > > >>> > Ryan - I think you're wrong. Train for and do an ironman - it's a
> > > > > >>> > fucking bitch.
>
> > > > > >>> Dumbass,
>
> > > > > >>> Hard != Serious
>
> > > > > >>> For example, RAAM is hard.
>
> > > > > >> Dumbass -
>
> > > > > >> Triathlon is serious.
>
> > > > > >> There's a decent amount of money at stake. $$$ brings out the
> > > > > >> seriousness.
>
> > > > > > In theory I can believe that. This interview was empirical evidence
> > > > > > you're wrong.
>
> > > > > As painful as that video was to watch that, I still want to thank you.
>
> > > > > That hit me hard and this for me was a real "moment of truth" "wake up and
> > > > > smell the taint" kind of realization, I think I learned some valuable
> > > > > things to help further train my clients.
>
> > > > > I don't usually read this board and it is good to see there's worthwhile
> > > > > information being posted.
>
> > > > Dumbass -
>
> > > > If you're a triathlete, it's a good idea to not read this board.
> > > > Triathletes handle this place about as well as they do riding in the
> > > > middle of a pack.
>
> > > > thanks,
>
> > > > Kurgan. presented by Gringioni.
>
> > > I wouldn't be so quick to judge -
>
> > > 1. Good triathletes are as elite as any cyclist ( I saw number of them
> > > turn in 54 minute TTs on a hilly multi corner bad pavement course) and
> > > that's after the swim in 60 degree lake water!   Those guys would have
> > > easily won every state championship tt that year.)
>
> > > 2. We barely talk about cycling anyway
>
> > > 3. His rants will probably be better than Ed Dolans
>
> > > 4. And you're fucking swimming anyway so maybe you should be in the
> > > tri forums
>
> > Some of them are truly monsters. They do one thing, by and large, on
> > the bike, and that specialization (including equipment, positioning,
> > training) works.
>
> dumbass,
>
> anyone who is good in one aerobic discipline can potentially be good
> in another.

Well, yeah, I think that was contained in content.

> triathlism sucks because it is a clumsy mash up of three different
> sports. even if  you like chinese food, french food and italian food,
> it doesn't mean it's all good in the same meal.
>
> plus triathletes manly come from two different camps, OCD runners who
> think they got dropped in the crosswind because they ate too much
> gluten and grim corporate types who want to put everything into a
> spreadsheet and look around for someone to pay instead of just losing
> 25 lbs.

Triathlism sucks IMHO because the bike portion is self-contradictory,
so to speak: the "athlete alone against the clock" ethos goes out the
window when there are groups of riders on the road, and there's no way
to fix the problem. Time penalties or other sanctions for "drafting"
don't solve the problem, and if the rules are fudged to allow
drafting, then it's not "athlete alone against the clock", it's a mass-
start swimming race followed by a mass start bike race followed by a
mass start running race. Noting, the first and last mass-start races
also include pacing and some amount of "drafting", it's just that
drafting in the bike segment is a much larger potential advantage.
--D-y

==============================================================================
TOPIC: I'm ashamed to admit I was conned.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/5e6b1523a2cdde60?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 6:20 am
From: Cam


On Jan 4, 8:01 pm, Tºm Shermªn™ °_° <""twshermanREMOVE\"@THI
$southslope.net"> wrote:
> On 1/4/2011 2:32 PM, Cam wrote:> On Jan 2, 11:36 am, Peter Cole<peter_c...@verizon.net>  wrote:
>
> >> I always liked Sheldon's line about New England being great for cycling
> >> 10 months out of the year -- July and August being just too hot.
>
> > I commute by bike in Toronto and miss more days due to smog in the
> > summer than snow in the winter.
>
> The last time I was in Toronto, the only air pollution was from manure
> spreading on the adjacent fields.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto,_Iowa>
>
> --
> T m Sherm n - 42.435731,-83.985007
> I am a vehicular cyclist.

I'm in one of the other Torontos
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centre_of_the_universe

Cam


== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:33 am
From: AMuzi


jbrandt@sonic.net wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>
>>>> I always liked Sheldon's line about New England being great for
>>>> cycling 10 months out of the year -- July and August being too
>>>> hot.
>
>>> I commute by bike in Toronto and miss more days due to smog in the
>>> summer than snow in the winter.
>
>> The last time I was in Toronto, the only air pollution was from
>> manure spreading on the adjacent fields.
>
> I had that problem in the Alps where cows spend winters in the barn
> eating green grass that was mowed in low lying fields in summer, while
> cows ate the fresh grass in the steep highlands. That produced lots
> of liquid cow dung (Jauche) or in Swiss (Gülle) spread from the rear
> of aluminum tanks with fan nozzles.
>
> Swiss:
> http://tinyurl.com/2vlc4ur
> Canada:
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto,_Iowa>


> of liquid cow dung (Jauche) or in Swiss (Gülle) spread
from the rear
> of aluminum tanks with fan nozzles.
>
> Swiss:
> http://tinyurl.com/2vlc4ur

The Swiss are spreading Jimmy Wales' remains with a nozzle?

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Keep It All Secret In the Back Room
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/675581496c3eeddf?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:07 am
From: BLafferty


http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/armstrong-shrugs-off-fda-investigation

Free Press=Anarchy?!

''Our [issues] most of the time play out in the public eye, [with]
people popping off in the press. As long as that kind of anarchy exists
we'll never move forward. It's easy for people to use the UCI as a sort
of whipping boy � To me, there is total lack of solidarity or unity when
it comes to the athlete and the team. Whether it's entry to races, or
race radios, there will still be issues.�

"You can never come to a consensus, which is fine. But some of it should
be dealt with behind closed doors - among the teams, among the riders
who [must] come to a solution that should be the approach they move
forward with. But it's not. People walk out of these meetings and
immediately � start popping off [to the media]."

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Saint Armstrong - Warning - not recommended for cowards or the faint of
mind.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/95e008b3e3e1af8a?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:53 am
From: Anton Berlin


http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5040547056_3dacf5edfd.jpg

== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:59 am
From: BLafferty


On 1/5/2011 2:53 PM, Anton Berlin wrote:
> http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5040547056_3dacf5edfd.jpg
>

Thank God Armstrong was able to do what he did riding clean. If
Escartin and Schleck had Armstrong's work ethic, they'd be on top of the
drug heap, too. :-)


== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 12:33 pm
From: Phil H


On Jan 5, 12:59 pm, BLafferty <b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> On 1/5/2011 2:53 PM, Anton Berlin wrote:
>
> >http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5040547056_3dacf5edfd.jpg
>
> Thank God Armstrong was able to do what he did riding clean.  If
> Escartin and Schleck had Armstrong's work ethic, they'd be on top of the
> drug heap, too. :-)

Positive samples from 99 should read, unconfirmed so-called positive
samples from 99. There is a reason those results were thrown out.
Phil H


== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:30 pm
From: BLafferty


On 1/5/2011 3:33 PM, Phil H wrote:
> On Jan 5, 12:59 pm, BLafferty<b...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> On 1/5/2011 2:53 PM, Anton Berlin wrote:
>>
>>> http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5040547056_3dacf5edfd.jpg
>>
>> Thank God Armstrong was able to do what he did riding clean. If
>> Escartin and Schleck had Armstrong's work ethic, they'd be on top of the
>> drug heap, too. :-)
>
> Positive samples from 99 should read, unconfirmed so-called positive
> samples from 99. There is a reason those results were thrown out.
> Phil H
The results were never thrown out because they we being used for
research. But, don't worry. They'll be admissible at his criminal trial.


== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:49 pm
From: "Mike Jacoubowsky"


"Anton Berlin" <truth_88888@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:053a0fb4-1d82-42c7-b4ae-5100240ee978@w29g2000vba.googlegroups.com...
> http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5040547056_3dacf5edfd.jpg


Ohmygosh, I hadn't made up my mind until I saw that graphic. It's just
so.... graphic! Not to mention a revelation. Who knew any of that stuff
before now?

Why is it only relevant for the Armstrong years, by the way? Because doping
isn't exciting unless you think Lance is involved? Oh, right, there weren't
any doping issues or scandals in the non-Lance years. I forgot. How stupid
of me.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA


==============================================================================
TOPIC: When?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/t/7e2dddf4ac770471?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:34 pm
From: BLafferty


Given that Armstrong is going to Australia to race, I have to wonder if
there is a sealed indictment out there since Tuesday's meeting of the
Federal Grand Jury in Central California. Will he be asked to surrender
for arraignment before he leaves or when he comes back?


==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rec.bicycles.racing"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rec.bicycles.racing+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets - 25 new messages in 10 topics - digest

Buzz It
alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets?hl=en

alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

* Discount Wholesale Affliction Jeans Armani Jeans Christian Audigier Jeans
True Religion Jeans and so on <free shipping paypal payment> (http://www.24
hour-buy.com/ ) - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/e460c1344128d139?hl=en
* Masseuses sue Jets, Brett Favre - 6 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/84eb7c01de5b45ed?hl=en
* 2011 Strength of Schedule... Jets 3rd toughest... - 11 messages, 6 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/ef30b045b0b473c5?hl=en
* Fat Bastard dead soon - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/640e26c50838e5c7?hl=en
* SI: Ranking the playoff teams - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/49694b7fa0b96bde?hl=en
* Cromartie + No Leonhard = Secondary Wash, Downgrade? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/b5f364d76aa290a7?hl=en
* Was the buff win good or bad going into the playoffs ??? - 1 messages, 1
author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/1c92b79aa9189168?hl=en
* Wildcat - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/daf93da716580e95?hl=en
* How the Jet CB's will be used... - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/c85dba1ce782bca6?hl=en
* Anyone going to Indy? - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/ad619c8cb7cfa9d3?hl=en

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Discount Wholesale Affliction Jeans Armani Jeans Christian Audigier
Jeans True Religion Jeans and so on <free shipping paypal payment> (http://www.
24hour-buy.com/ )
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/e460c1344128d139?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Tues, Jan 4 2011 10:05 pm
From: jialiujeans


(http://www.24hour-buy.com/ )
Discount Wholesale Affliction Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale AK Jeans (http://www.24hour-buy.com/ )
Discount Wholesale Armani Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale Artful Dodger Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale BAPE Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale BBC Jeans (http://www.24hour-buy.com/ )
Discount Wholesale Black Label Jeans
Discount Wholesale Cavalli Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale Christian Audigier Jeans
Discount Wholesale Coogi Jeans
Discount Wholesale Crown Holder Jeans (http://www.24hour-buy.com/ )
Discount Wholesale D&G Jeans
Discount Wholesale Diesel Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale ECKO Jeans (http://www.24hour-
buy.com/ )
Discount Wholesale ED Hardy Jeans
Discount Wholesale Evisu Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale G-STAR Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale GUCCI Jeans
Discount Wholesale Iceberg Jeans
Discount Wholesale Kanji Jeans (http://www.24hour-buy.com/ )
Discount Wholesale Laguna Beach Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale Levi s Jeans
Discount Wholesale LRG Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale LV Jeans
Discount Wholesale Prada Jeans (http://www.24hour-buy.com/ )
Discount Wholesale RMC Jeans
Discount Wholesale Roca Wear Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale Rock&Republic Jeans
Discount Wholesale True Religion Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale Versace Jeans <free shipping paypal payment>
Discount Wholesale ZEN Jeans (http://www.24hour-buy.com/ )


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Masseuses sue Jets, Brett Favre
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/84eb7c01de5b45ed?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 6:40 am
From: eric


On Jan 4, 8:38 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:55:40 -0800 (PST), eric <warth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 4, 11:58 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
> >> Yeah, winning 11 games is going in the wrong direction... especially, when you don't have
> >> the horses on D. He's been able to field a competetive D, for most of the season, with
> >> smoke & mirrors. As for his behavior, how could anyone live up to such a sterling example
> >> as yourself? I'm sure you're perfect, and never make mistakes in judgement, like the rest
> >> of us.
>
> >Nobody is perfect, but if I had been found behaving on my job like Rex
> >was to the reporter Sainz I would have immediately been fired. Ryan is
> >management and as such is responsible for maintaining a proper work
> >place.
>
> How exactly, did Rex behave to the reporter?
>
>
>
> >I'd bet this incident is going to be front and center when the
> >therapist's law suit comes up to trial.

http://www.gacksports.com/4410/nfl-investigating-ny-jets-for-sexually-harassing-behavior-toward-female-reporter/

== 2 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 7:23 am
From: John Vamp


On Jan 4, 8:47 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:00:24 -0800 (PST), John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 4, 9:40 am, "yoyodog" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> But I understand the Pats fans
> >> fear of Rex. First legitimate threat to BB and the Pats in years. After
> >> all, if Rex didn't come here to kiss BB's rings, BB isn't staying in
> >> coaching to kiss Rex's feet, though Rex would LOVE that ;-)
>
> >Rex is a good football coach.  He's very strange, with the wife/video/
> >feet/sex stuff, but he's a good coach.  His players rally around him
> >and they buy what he's selling.  And that's important.
>
> >That said, he's never won anything, really.  Two trips to the playoffs
> >(one of which was a gift from Indy and Cincy).  No division titles
> >(not even close to one, really), no conference championships.  The
> >last team to win the AFC East besides New England wasn't NY...it was
> >Miami in 2008.
>
> >I'm not saying that the Jets can't win the AFC...I think if things
> >break right for them they certainly can.  But I think most Pats fans
> >are pretty confident if Sanchez and the Jets come to Foxboro on a cold
> >January night for a playoff game.
>
> Of course, you're confident... why wouldn't you be?
>
> On the other hand, as a Jets fan I'm not particularly scared of the Pats, especially your
> D.  

Pats' defense:

- gave up just 9 fewer points on the entire season than the Jets
(finished #8 in the NFL in pts allowed)
- had 36 takeaways (#1 in NFL)
- last 5 games: allowed just 9.4 pts, 294.8 yds, 3.6 turnovers
created per game

Those are numbers that speak of a much better defense than they're
given credit for. Granted, they tend to allow a lot of yards (but the
last 5 games, not so much) and 3rd down conversions, but the last 5
weeks they've really clamped down on both. I gave you the yds allowed
in the past 5 games above, but how about 3rd down conversions? 24-62
(38.7%, which would rank them #10 in the NFL...not the best, but
certainly a *huge* improvement from earlier in the year).

> I'm more concerned with the lameness of our OC, & whether he'll prepare the O to play
> the Pats, or just follow his misguided plan, which is the same against all opponents.
>
> As for your O, it's a pleasure to watch, but can be physically beaten.  The question is if
> the Jets can do it for a full 60... of course, easier said than done  ;)

Yep. Much easier said than done. But any Pats fan that thinks this
team cannot be beaten is kidding himself. Nevertheless, the Pats' A
game is better than anyone else's A game, so if they bring their A
game, they'll be holding the Lombardi Trophy.


== 3 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:09 am
From: buRford


On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 06:40:37 -0800 (PST), eric <warthog0@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 4, 8:38 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:55:40 -0800 (PST), eric <warth...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Jan 4, 11:58 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> Yeah, winning 11 games is going in the wrong direction... especially, when you don't have
>> >> the horses on D. He's been able to field a competetive D, for most of the season, with
>> >> smoke & mirrors. As for his behavior, how could anyone live up to such a sterling example
>> >> as yourself? I'm sure you're perfect, and never make mistakes in judgement, like the rest
>> >> of us.
>>
>> >Nobody is perfect, but if I had been found behaving on my job like Rex
>> >was to the reporter Sainz I would have immediately been fired. Ryan is
>> >management and as such is responsible for maintaining a proper work
>> >place.
>>
>> How exactly, did Rex behave to the reporter?
>>
>>
>>
>> >I'd bet this incident is going to be front and center when the
>> >therapist's law suit comes up to trial.
>
>http://www.gacksports.com/4410/nfl-investigating-ny-jets-for-sexually-harassing-behavior-toward-female-reporter/

So, he threw a ball near Sainz, and acted like a child with his players.
Poor judgement... that's an offense to be fired?
If he shows a propensity to treat women/people in such a manner, that could be trouble,
but it was a one-time incident. The only other thing he's done, was fling the finger at a
fan. Of course, there's the foot thing, too, but that's in his personal life.
Rex is just playful, and I suspect that won't change.

But, he aint your coach, so why worry?

== 4 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:17 am
From: buRford


On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 07:23:07 -0800 (PST), John Vamp <jvampatella@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 4, 8:47 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:00:24 -0800 (PST), John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >On Jan 4, 9:40 am, "yoyodog" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> But I understand the Pats fans
>> >> fear of Rex. First legitimate threat to BB and the Pats in years. After
>> >> all, if Rex didn't come here to kiss BB's rings, BB isn't staying in
>> >> coaching to kiss Rex's feet, though Rex would LOVE that ;-)
>>
>> >Rex is a good football coach.  He's very strange, with the wife/video/
>> >feet/sex stuff, but he's a good coach.  His players rally around him
>> >and they buy what he's selling.  And that's important.
>>
>> >That said, he's never won anything, really.  Two trips to the playoffs
>> >(one of which was a gift from Indy and Cincy).  No division titles
>> >(not even close to one, really), no conference championships.  The
>> >last team to win the AFC East besides New England wasn't NY...it was
>> >Miami in 2008.
>>
>> >I'm not saying that the Jets can't win the AFC...I think if things
>> >break right for them they certainly can.  But I think most Pats fans
>> >are pretty confident if Sanchez and the Jets come to Foxboro on a cold
>> >January night for a playoff game.
>>
>> Of course, you're confident... why wouldn't you be?
>>
>> On the other hand, as a Jets fan I'm not particularly scared of the Pats, especially your
>> D.  
>
>Pats' defense:
>
>- gave up just 9 fewer points on the entire season than the Jets
>(finished #8 in the NFL in pts allowed)
>- had 36 takeaways (#1 in NFL)
>- last 5 games: allowed just 9.4 pts, 294.8 yds, 3.6 turnovers
>created per game
>
>Those are numbers that speak of a much better defense than they're
>given credit for. Granted, they tend to allow a lot of yards (but the
>last 5 games, not so much) and 3rd down conversions, but the last 5
>weeks they've really clamped down on both. I gave you the yds allowed
>in the past 5 games above, but how about 3rd down conversions? 24-62
>(38.7%, which would rank them #10 in the NFL...not the best, but
>certainly a *huge* improvement from earlier in the year).
>
>> I'm more concerned with the lameness of our OC, & whether he'll prepare the O to play
>> the Pats, or just follow his misguided plan, which is the same against all opponents.
>>
>> As for your O, it's a pleasure to watch, but can be physically beaten.  The question is if
>> the Jets can do it for a full 60... of course, easier said than done  ;)
>
>Yep. Much easier said than done. But any Pats fan that thinks this
>team cannot be beaten is kidding himself. Nevertheless, the Pats' A
>game is better than anyone else's A game, so if they bring their A
>game, they'll be holding the Lombardi Trophy.

Stats never do much for me, because they can be spun in, oh, so many ways.
I'd say one key for your D, is the O it has covering it's back.
Brady doesn't throw turnovers, & the O scores a lot... so, the D is rarely under any
pressure. Your D is, generally, with a lead, and often with a significant lead. That
would skew the D stats bigtime. Pressure the D, and the equation changes.

As I said, if a team can physically compete with the Pats O, the rest will fall into
place. Again, easier said than done, but I can see it by a few teams the Pats may play.

Should be fun. Hope we get to play one another next week!


== 5 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:42 am
From: John Vamp


On Jan 5, 1:17 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 07:23:07 -0800 (PST), John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 4, 8:47 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 12:00:24 -0800 (PST), John Vamp <jvampate...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 4, 9:40 am, "yoyodog" <NOS...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> >> But I understand the Pats fans
> >> >> fear of Rex. First legitimate threat to BB and the Pats in years. After
> >> >> all, if Rex didn't come here to kiss BB's rings, BB isn't staying in
> >> >> coaching to kiss Rex's feet, though Rex would LOVE that ;-)
>
> >> >Rex is a good football coach.  He's very strange, with the wife/video/
> >> >feet/sex stuff, but he's a good coach.  His players rally around him
> >> >and they buy what he's selling.  And that's important.
>
> >> >That said, he's never won anything, really.  Two trips to the playoffs
> >> >(one of which was a gift from Indy and Cincy).  No division titles
> >> >(not even close to one, really), no conference championships.  The
> >> >last team to win the AFC East besides New England wasn't NY...it was
> >> >Miami in 2008.
>
> >> >I'm not saying that the Jets can't win the AFC...I think if things
> >> >break right for them they certainly can.  But I think most Pats fans
> >> >are pretty confident if Sanchez and the Jets come to Foxboro on a cold
> >> >January night for a playoff game.
>
> >> Of course, you're confident... why wouldn't you be?
>
> >> On the other hand, as a Jets fan I'm not particularly scared of the Pats, especially your
> >> D.  
>
> >Pats' defense:
>
> >- gave up just 9 fewer points on the entire season than the Jets
> >(finished #8 in the NFL in pts allowed)
> >- had 36 takeaways (#1 in NFL)
> >- last 5 games:  allowed just 9.4 pts, 294.8 yds, 3.6 turnovers
> >created per game
>
> >Those are numbers that speak of a much better defense than they're
> >given credit for.  Granted, they tend to allow a lot of yards (but the
> >last 5 games, not so much) and 3rd down conversions, but the last 5
> >weeks they've really clamped down on both.  I gave you the yds allowed
> >in the past 5 games above, but how about 3rd down conversions?  24-62
> >(38.7%, which would rank them #10 in the NFL...not the best, but
> >certainly a *huge* improvement from earlier in the year).
>
> >> I'm more concerned with the lameness of our OC, & whether he'll prepare the O to play
> >> the Pats, or just follow his misguided plan, which is the same against all opponents.
>
> >> As for your O, it's a pleasure to watch, but can be physically beaten.  The question is if
> >> the Jets can do it for a full 60... of course, easier said than done  ;)
>
> >Yep.  Much easier said than done.  But any Pats fan that thinks this
> >team cannot be beaten is kidding himself.  Nevertheless, the Pats' A
> >game is better than anyone else's A game, so if they bring their A
> >game, they'll be holding the Lombardi Trophy.
>
> Stats never do much for me, because they can be spun in, oh, so many ways.
> I'd say one key for your D, is the O it has covering it's back.
> Brady doesn't throw turnovers, & the O scores a lot... so, the D is rarely under any
> pressure.  Your D is, generally, with a lead, and often with a significant lead.  That
> would skew the D stats bigtime.  Pressure the D, and the equation changes.
>
> As I said, if a team can physically compete with the Pats O, the rest will fall into
> place.  Again, easier said than done, but I can see it by a few teams the Pats may play.
>
> Should be fun.  Hope we get to play one another next week!

The weird thing about this D is that they seem to come up with big
stops as they're needed.

- Week 3, vs Buf: Leading 38-30, the offense can't get out of its own
way and they are forced to punt the ball back to the Bills, who take
over at their 35 with 3:04 to go. Meriweather intercepts Fitzpatrick
to seal the game.

- Week 4, vs Bal: Down 20-17, the Pats' D stops Baltimore at the
Ravens' 47, forcing a punt and setting up NE's game-tying FG drive.
Then, after Balt gets the ball with 1:51 left, the Pats force a 3-and-
out. Then, in OT, the Pats stop Baltimore on three straight drives
before winning the game late in overtime.

- Week 5, at SD: Ahead 23-20, the offense gives the rallying Chargers
the ball back on the Pats' 47 with 1:55 to play. The Chargers look
like they're going to drive for the win but Sergio Brown tackles Gates
two yards short of the first down, and SD ends up missing a 50-yard
game-tying FG attempt.

- Week 11, vs Ind: Ahead 31-28 and the Colts rallying, the Pats'
offense is trying to run out the clock, to no avail. Four plays, 17
yds, and just 2:21 run off the clock, and NE punts to Indy, who takes
over at their 26 with 2:25 to play. An eternity for Peyton Manning.
He moves the ball downfield but then, on 1st and 10 from the Pats' 24,
James Sanders intercepts Manning at the NE 6 to seal the win.

- Week 15, vs GB: The Pats, trailing 27-24, score the go-ahead TD
with slightly more than 7 minutes left. They allow one first down,
but then force GB to punt. Then, ahead 31-27, the Pats once again
can't run out the clock (see a frustrating pattern here?), giving the
ball back to GB on the Packer 43 with 4:22 to go. GB moves the ball,
but on 4th and 1 from the NE 15, the Pats sack the QB and force a
fumble to end the game.

That's 5 games this year that, whatever flaws this D has (and they do
have flaws), they seem to come up with the big stop late in games.


== 6 of 6 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 2:12 pm
From: eric


On Jan 5, 1:09 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 06:40:37 -0800 (PST), eric <warth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Jan 4, 8:38 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, 4 Jan 2011 16:55:40 -0800 (PST), eric <warth...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 4, 11:58 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> Yeah, winning 11 games is going in the wrong direction... especially, when you don't have
> >> >> the horses on D. He's been able to field a competetive D, for most of the season, with
> >> >> smoke & mirrors. As for his behavior, how could anyone live up to such a sterling example
> >> >> as yourself? I'm sure you're perfect, and never make mistakes in judgement, like the rest
> >> >> of us.
>
> >> >Nobody is perfect, but if I had been found behaving on my job like Rex
> >> >was to the reporter Sainz I would have immediately been fired. Ryan is
> >> >management and as such is responsible for maintaining a proper work
> >> >place.
>
> >> How exactly, did Rex behave to the reporter?
>
> >> >I'd bet this incident is going to be front and center when the
> >> >therapist's law suit comes up to trial.
>
> >http://www.gacksports.com/4410/nfl-investigating-ny-jets-for-sexually...
>
> So, he threw a ball near Sainz, and acted like a child with his players.
> Poor judgement... that's an offense to be fired?

His owner had to issue a public apology for his team's behavior. Those
responsible are generally sacked when that sort of thing happens.


==============================================================================
TOPIC: 2011 Strength of Schedule... Jets 3rd toughest...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/ef30b045b0b473c5?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:00 am
From: buRford


It won't get any easier next season.
What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.

Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating the schedule, as
the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule. While the Ravens have the 2nd easiest, &
Steelers the 4th easiest.
Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats, since they're
in the same division. The formula is wacky ;)


http://es.pn/h4rRw6
STRENGTH OF SCHEDULE

A look at the most difficult schedules in 2011 (based on opponents' 2010 record).
Team Combined win-loss record Percentage
1. Carolina Panthers 142-114-0 .555
2. Buffalo Bills 137-119-0 .535
3t. New York Jets* 133-123-0 .520
3t. Indianapolis Colts* 133-123-0 .520
3t. Jacksonville Jaguars 133-123-0 .520
3t. Kansas City Chiefs* 133-123-0 .520
3t. San Diego Chargers 133-133-0 .520
3t. Denver Broncos 133-123-0 .520
3t. Detroit Lions 133-123-0 .520
10t. Miami Dolphins 132-124-0 .516
10t. Houston Texans 132-124-0 .516
10t. Minnesota Vikings 132-124-0 .516
13t. Green Bay Packers* 130-126-0 .508
13t. New Orleans Saints* 130-126-0 .508
15t. New England Patriots* 129-127-0 .504
15t. Philadelphia Eagles* 129-127-0 .504
15t. Dallas Cowboys 129-127-0 .504
18. Tampa Bay Buccaneers 127-129-0 .496
19t. Cleveland Browns 126-130-0 .492
19t. Oakland Raiders 126-130-0 .492
19t. New York Giants 126-130-0 .492
19t. Atlanta Falcons* 126-130-0 .492
23t. Tennessee Titans 125-131-0 .488
23t. Chicago Bears* 125-131-0 .488
23t. Seattle Seahawks* 125-131-0 .488
26. St. Louis Rams 122-134-0 .477
27t. Pittsburgh Steelers* 121-135-0 .473
27t. Cincinnati Bengals 121-135-0 .473
27t. Washington Redskins 121-135-0 .473
30. San Francisco 49ers 119-137-0 .465
31. Baltimore Ravens* 117-139-0 .457
32. Arizona Cardinals 113-143-0 .441

Source: ESPN Stats & Information | *Reached playoffs in 2010


== 2 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:28 am
From: Steve Russo


On Jan 5, 1:00 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> It won't get any easier next season.
> What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.
>
> Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating the schedule, as
> the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule.  While the Ravens have the 2nd easiest, &
> Steelers the 4th easiest.
> Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats, since they're
> in the same division.  The formula is wacky  ;)

If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The Bills play the Pats
twice so a 14-2 record gets figured into their Strength of Schedule...
twice. For the Pats, the reverse is true. By virtue of playing the
Bills twice (4-12), it weakens their SoS.

Because it also has no foresight into how good or bad these teams are
next year, I've always held Strength of Schedule to be a worthless
stat (unless you use it to look backwards, as in the strength of the
teams we played this year was...).

== 3 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:51 am
From: "Ray O'Hara"

"Steve Russo" <srusso100@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:20b98d93-2ec8-4873-83de-80c2f4cd3a39@f9g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 5, 1:00 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> It won't get any easier next season.
> What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.
>
> Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating
> the schedule, as
> the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule. While the Ravens have the
> 2nd easiest, &
> Steelers the 4th easiest.
> Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats,
> since they're
> in the same division. The formula is wacky ;)

If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The Bills play the Pats
twice so a 14-2 record gets figured into their Strength of Schedule...
twice. For the Pats, the reverse is true. By virtue of playing the
Bills twice (4-12), it weakens their SoS.

Because it also has no foresight into how good or bad these teams are
next year, I've always held Strength of Schedule to be a worthless
stat (unless you use it to look backwards, as in the strength of the
teams we played this year was...).

=========================================================================

also the Pats can't play the Colts, Pitt and SD every freaking year as the
discretionary games.
occasionly the Raiders and the Chiefs have to be scheduled.


== 4 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:03 am
From: Keith Keller


On 2011-01-05, Steve Russo <srusso100@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The Bills play the Pats
> twice so a 14-2 record gets figured into their Strength of Schedule...
> twice. For the Pats, the reverse is true. By virtue of playing the
> Bills twice (4-12), it weakens their SoS.

The Bills played the Jets twice too.

> Because it also has no foresight into how good or bad these teams are
> next year, I've always held Strength of Schedule to be a worthless
> stat (unless you use it to look backwards, as in the strength of the
> teams we played this year was...).

That's certainly true. So the best we can say is that the Jets clearly
had a tougher schedule than the Patriots this season.

--keith

--
kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information

== 5 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:20 am
From: Michael


On Jan 5, 1:51 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "Steve Russo" <srusso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:20b98d93-2ec8-4873-83de-80c2f4cd3a39@f9g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
> On Jan 5, 1:00 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
> > It won't get any easier next season.
> > What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.
>
> > Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating
> > the schedule, as
> > the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule. While the Ravens have the
> > 2nd easiest, &
> > Steelers the 4th easiest.
> > Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats,
> > since they're
> > in the same division. The formula is wacky ;)
>
> If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The Bills play the Pats
> twice so a 14-2 record gets figured into their Strength of Schedule...
> twice. For the Pats, the reverse is true. By virtue of playing the
> Bills twice (4-12), it weakens their SoS.
>
> Because it also has no foresight into how good or bad these teams are
> next year, I've always held Strength of Schedule to be a worthless
> stat (unless you use it to look backwards, as in the strength of the
> teams we played this year was...).
>
> =========================================================================
>
> also the Pats can't play the Colts, Pitt and SD every freaking year as the
> discretionary games.
> occasionly the Raiders and the Chiefs have to be scheduled.

considering the history, pats fans should be queer to play the
steelers 16 times a year. at least you guys dont have to fly to
oakland every fucking year


== 6 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:39 am
From: buRford


On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 10:28:43 -0800 (PST), Steve Russo <srusso100@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 5, 1:00�pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>> It won't get any easier next season.
>> What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.
>>
>> Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating the schedule, as
>> the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule. �While the Ravens have the 2nd easiest, &
>> Steelers the 4th easiest.
>> Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats, since they're
>> in the same division. �The formula is wacky �;)
>
>If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The Bills play the Pats
>twice so a 14-2 record gets figured into their Strength of Schedule...
>twice. For the Pats, the reverse is true. By virtue of playing the
>Bills twice (4-12), it weakens their SoS.

Of course, but that wasn't my point... the point is that the formula makes no sense, in
essence, rewarding good teams that happen to play in a division with a bad team, while
penalizing bad teams that have good teams in their division. Much the same as giving a
7-9 team that wins a weak division, a higher seed than a team that won more in a tougher
division, with the better teams often not making hte playoffs, because of the bizarre
formula.

>
>Because it also has no foresight into how good or bad these teams are
>next year, I've always held Strength of Schedule to be a worthless
>stat (unless you use it to look backwards, as in the strength of the
>teams we played this year was...).


== 7 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:40 am
From: eric


On Jan 5, 1:00 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> It won't get any easier next season.
> What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.
>
> Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating the schedule, as
> the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule.  While the Ravens have the 2nd easiest, &
> Steelers the 4th easiest.
> Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats, since they're
> in the same division.  The formula is wacky  ;)

The Patriots don't have to play the Patriots while the Bills play them
twice. That makes the Bills' schedule a lot tougher.

Tough to be in the same division as the Patriots.


== 8 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:43 am
From: buRford


On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:20:39 -0800 (PST), Michael <mjd1966@verizon.net> wrote:

>On Jan 5, 1:51 pm, "Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Steve Russo" <srusso...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:20b98d93-2ec8-4873-83de-80c2f4cd3a39@f9g2000vbq.googlegroups.com...
>> On Jan 5, 1:00 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>>
>> > It won't get any easier next season.
>> > What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.
>>
>> > Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating
>> > the schedule, as
>> > the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule. While the Ravens have the
>> > 2nd easiest, &
>> > Steelers the 4th easiest.
>> > Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats,
>> > since they're
>> > in the same division. The formula is wacky ;)
>>
>> If you think about it, it makes perfect sense. The Bills play the Pats
>> twice so a 14-2 record gets figured into their Strength of Schedule...
>> twice. For the Pats, the reverse is true. By virtue of playing the
>> Bills twice (4-12), it weakens their SoS.
>>
>> Because it also has no foresight into how good or bad these teams are
>> next year, I've always held Strength of Schedule to be a worthless
>> stat (unless you use it to look backwards, as in the strength of the
>> teams we played this year was...).
>>
>> =========================================================================
>>
>> also the Pats can't play the Colts, Pitt and SD every freaking year as the
>> discretionary games.
>> occasionly the Raiders and the Chiefs have to be scheduled.
>
>considering the history, pats fans should be queer to play the
>steelers 16 times a year. at least you guys dont have to fly to
>oakland every fucking year


That, too... it's just bizarre that the Raiders never come here.
One would think that home/away would factor into the formula.
I'm tellin' ya, they have some monkeys, battleworn from drug experiments, sitting in some
room throwing darts with team names, onto a dartboard ;)


== 9 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:52 am
From: buRford


On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 11:40:45 -0800 (PST), eric <warthog0@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jan 5, 1:00�pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>> It won't get any easier next season.
>> What's interesting, is that the Pats have the 15th toughest schedule.
>>
>> Looking at this list, it seems the NFL has a bizarre formula for creating the schedule, as
>> the Panthers & Bills have the toughest schedule. �While the Ravens have the 2nd easiest, &
>> Steelers the 4th easiest.
>> Makes no sense that the Bills would have a tougher schedule than the Pats, since they're
>> in the same division. �The formula is wacky �;)
>
>The Patriots don't have to play the Patriots while the Bills play them
>twice. That makes the Bills' schedule a lot tougher.
>
>Tough to be in the same division as the Patriots.

Again... not my point. The point is that the formula makes no sense. <------ period.
Either schedules should be totally arbitrary, like a lottery... or if parity is the thing
they want, the best teams should compete against the best, & worst against worst.
Rewarding good teams with a weak schedule, makes no sense.


== 10 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 12:00 pm
From: Steve Russo


On Jan 5, 2:43 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> That, too... it's just bizarre that the Raiders never come here.
> One would think that home/away would factor into the formula.
> I'm tellin' ya, they have some monkeys, battleworn from drug experiments, sitting in some
> room throwing darts with team names, onto a dartboard  ;)- Hide quoted text -
>

Peter King referenced a bizarre rule whenever a division is playing
the Western division in a given year.

"Beginning in 2010, a change was made to how teams are paired in the
schedule rotation to ensure that teams playing the AFC and NFC West
divisions would not be required to make two West Coast trips (e.g. at
San Francisco and at Seattle), while other teams in their division had
none (e.g. at St. Louis and at Arizona) ... Seems a quirky and
unimportant rules change that hurts fans to me, because now,
potentially and anecdotally, a great player like Ben Roethlisberger
could play his entire career and never play in Seattle. The Steelers
could go 12 years without playing in Seattle."


== 11 of 11 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 12:59 pm
From: Steve Russo


On Jan 5, 2:52 pm, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
>
> Again... not my point.  The point is that the formula makes no sense.  <------ period.
> Either schedules should be totally arbitrary, like a lottery... or if parity is the thing
> they want, the best teams should compete against the best, & worst against worst.
> Rewarding good teams with a weak schedule, makes no sense.

But they're not being rewarded. SoS has no bearing on the upcoming
schedule. Teams play against specific divisions and counterpart teams.
If you finished 1st in your division, you play the team that finished
1st; 2nd vs 2nd; etc. SoS has no bearing on how the schedule is
formulated.


==============================================================================
TOPIC: Fat Bastard dead soon
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/640e26c50838e5c7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:10 am
From: DIet Plan <1of9@kaxy.com>


:) 1 n done

==============================================================================
TOPIC: SI: Ranking the playoff teams
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/49694b7fa0b96bde?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 10:36 am
From: Michael


SI Ranks the playoff teams

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/don_banks/01/05/nfl-playoff-power-rankings/index.html?xid=cnnbin&hpt=Sbin


Here is my two cents.

1. GB: Best defense in the NFL. Excellent offense. Good coaching.
Way too much weight given to AR not winning the big game. I estimate
GB as the most probable Superbowl winniner.

2. NE. Defense has been evolving in a positive manner and the offense
is simply wonderous. Unless NE runs into NO in the superbowl, they
will probably wind up with their first non tainted Lombardi.

3. NO. Not the same deep, explosive passing team as last year, but
these guys are still winners. IMHO, DC Greg Williams is the only guy I
think has the brainpower to scheme for the NE offense. If NE gets to
the superbowl, they need to hope NO does not.

4. Atlanta: Most well rounded team in the league. Great offensive
line, air-tight coaching, and a winner at QB. I put Atlanta just
below the top three because their offense is not instantly explosive.
Such can come in handy come Jan-Nov.

5. Jets. Yep... The Good Old Jets. They play with an emotional
advantage at times like this. Their offense has gone throuhg a
metamorphosis and their defense is capable.

6. Steelers. Excellent defense, big play capability from big ben and
a good running game too.

7. Eagles. I have them downgraded to this spot. Vick has been beat up
and is slowing down. I dont like this offense in jan-feb.

8. Chicago. This is all about match-up. Depends on what style of
defense they have to face. Fortunately for them, Ravens and Steelers
are in the AFC.

9. Ravens. Yawn

10. Colts. Not who the were last season.

11. KC. Solid but lacking big play guys and big time experience

12. Seattle. Just thankful to be here, sir

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Cromartie + No Leonhard = Secondary Wash, Downgrade?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/b5f364d76aa290a7?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 11:58 am
From: JetsLife


You hear some media and Rex saying certain Jets' offseason moves were
made to upgrade the secondary.

Unfortunately with Leonhard out, and Wilson and the remaining safeties
not being anything special, it seems the Cromartie upgrade has been
mostly if not completely negated. It's noteworthy that before Leonhard
was injured the secondary played well enough, save Miami game 1 for
two quarters and Houston in the 4th quarter.

Then Leonhard goes down and NE and Chicago torch the secondary, and R-
berger passes for substantial yardage. Tho the seconday deserves
credit for holding Pittsburgh to 17 points.

Jets Defensive To Do list this offseason: upgrade the pass rush and
obtain a solid safety opposite Leonhard. Heck maybe 2 safeties
considering Leonhard's coming off an injury. Hopefully Wilson grows in
to his first-round grade next year and ideally sooner.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Was the buff win good or bad going into the playoffs ???
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/1c92b79aa9189168?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 12:00 pm
From: JetsLife


On Jan 3, 6:44 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 21:08:36 -0800 (PST), Michael <mjd1...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >not so sure if this was good or bad win. it could help for confidence,
> >but could they wind up drinking too much of their own kool-aid for
> >beating up on one of the worst teams in the league ??? perhaps
> >forgetting to take into account how often they did badly on both sides
> >of the ball this season ???
>
> I don't think it hurt.
> If they remember how they felt, at the end of the Championship Game, that should be a nice
> balance to any bloviated thinking.
> Then, there's the Pats.  If they come out flat again...

Bloviated. Always a classic. Who says us Jets newsgroupers aren't of
brilliant intellect.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Wildcat
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/daf93da716580e95?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 12:58 pm
From: JetsLife


On Jan 2, 7:00 pm, "papa.carl44" <papadotc...@nospamverizon.net>
wrote:
> They ran it today like it should be run...and when they left the QB on the
> field we saw what can happen...plus they showed they can make the changes
> without calling a timeout.  What did bug me was in the early game Buffalo
> had NO idea how to stop that option, then near the goal instead of running
> it again they used the wildcat with an inside play that got stuffed...then a
> FG instead.  I did not like that...I still believe you run a play till the
> defense shows you they can stop it, and by stopping it they almost always
> give something else big up, this is what I think is the breaking of the
> rhythm that happens.  They should have run that deal right into the endzone.
> All that said, they showed that it can be a very effective option to use,
> and I liked Conor being part of it...they formation they preferred was the
> "pistol" with running back options open....I like it.

Don't know if was mentioned somewhere in this thread, but Wildcat
success should be taken with a large grain of salt. I.e. v. Buffalo's
worst run defense in the league.


==============================================================================
TOPIC: How the Jet CB's will be used...
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/c85dba1ce782bca6?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:06 pm
From: Michael


On Jan 5, 12:17 am, "papa.carl44" <papadotc...@nospamverizon.net>
wrote:

<SNIP>

> AGAIN GREAT ANALYSIS.....it seems like people are wanting to toast the D
> backs, safeties...and it isn't really their fault, IMHO....there is only so
> much that can be done without any pass rush...and I mean a legit threat from
> the D line...at least one guy who can get there...they have NOTHING going
> on...and that leaves the DB's hung out to dry...not even to mention what it
> will do to at least one LB who MUST cover someone and usually in man
> coverage.


papa... im interested to know what you think of my idea above to use
six db's and 2 lbs against the pats. im sure you must have seen
similar defense used on run and shoot spread offense. 4 db's in man
and two in zone. only 2 lbs with three down linemen. line for db's
across in man, (revis, poole, lowrey or coleaman and cromartie) one
post db in zone (lowrey or coleman) and one in shallow zone (smith).
the shallow db can be used in coverage, come up against the run or
used in a zone blitz. a spy MLB (harris) on the ball carrier and the
second OLB (pace or blt) to be used on the edge. Of course, each and
every DB could be used in a zone blitz too.

opinion ?

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Anyone going to Indy?
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/t/ad619c8cb7cfa9d3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Wed, Jan 5 2011 1:45 pm
From: "IndyJetsFan@gmail.com"


On Jan 4, 9:09 am, buRford <buRf...@buR.ford.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jan 2011 10:20:18 -0800 (PST), "IndyJets...@gmail.com" <indyjets...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >If anyone is going to Indy for the game and needs any info about the
> >city, let me know. It would be nice to meet any fellow Jets fans. I've
> >been reading your posts for several years. I live 20 minutes from
> >Indy, and work on the westside. I'm originally from NJ.
>
> >David
>
> Nice offer, David.
> Will you be going to the game?
> And please feel free to participate... the more hte merrier ;)

I'll be there. I went to all the Jets games back when they came here
to play their former AFC east foes. Although the colts have had
several good seasons since the arrival of Manning, it's really not a
football city. All the fans know is what they read in the paper, or
see on local TV. I've never seen the Jets play in NJ. I'm hoping to
take my 2 sons to a game out there next season.


==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.sports.football.pro.ny-jets/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

gsk

https://secure.shareit.com/shareit/checkout.html?PRODUCT[300429992]=1&languageid=1&stylefrom=300429992&backlink=http%3A%2F%2Fforexguide.blogspot.com&cookies=1¤cies=USD&pts=VISA,MASTERCARD,AMEX,DC