Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site ISM780B.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!petrus!bellcore!decvax!ISM780B!jimb
From: jimb@ISM780B.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.sport.football
Subject: Re: (Orphan) Re: PAC 10 FOOTBALL (we win
Message-ID: <30400018@ISM780B.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 9-Jan-86 11:47:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ISM780B.30400018
Posted: Thu Jan  9 11:47:00 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 13-Jan-86 07:59:41 EST
References: <1294@ihuxi.UUCP.UUCP>
Lines: 53
Nf-ID: #R:ihuxi.UUCP:1294:ISM780B:30400018:000:2277
Nf-From: ISM780B!jimb    Jan  9 11:47:00 1986



>Pac 10 does better than the Big 10 in big games?  Pac 10 was 2:2 in bowl     s
>game this year and Big 10 3:3.  Seems even to me, unless somebody can't do
>simple math.
>
>Robert (note that he can't even get my name right.  Not much on brains, is   ?)
>he?)
>
>  A.  Ekblaw

Whew, back to normal.  Even though the message you're responding to didn't
come from me, I'll jump in.

In the second place, EVERYONE on this net except the new, blind, feeble, and
Alzheimer-stricken aged knows your name; if they forget your first name, it's
simply because a posting of yours wasn't on-screen at the time.  (It was a
nice 2-3 weeks without you; I hope you enjoyed your vacation as much as the
rest of us did.)  To climb on a guy for making the equivalent of a
typographical error or minor memory lapse only reinforces opinions about your
abilities to incisively cut to the central point of an argument, make an
intelligent appraisal, and deliver a cogent argument.

In the first place, as MY message on conferences stated, all the conference
records were pretty comparable.  HOWEVER, when it came to the big one, the
direct Pac-10 vs. the vaunted Big-10 in the Rose Bowl, the Big-10 sucked the
green weenie.  Using standard tie-breaking rules, head-to-head competition,
the thrashing left no doubt in many peoples minds which conference was
superior.  (Oh, wasn't the Peach Bowl nice, too?   Are you by any chance on
the UI coaching staff?  You seem to have the requisite intelligence.)

In the third place, back to your name, your annoyance indicates possible
concern about identity and/or immortality.  Rest easy.  As your exposure
continues, I suspect that the intransitive verb "to ekblaw", meaning "to
make obnoxious and hostile assertions without visible means of support", will
gain increasing currency in the English language.   (Anyone out there in
net-land got a better definition?)  Example of usage:  "I'm sorry if I
ekblawed last night...."

There, now just because I agreed with you on the preceeding message you won't
think I'm growing soft in my old age.


      -- from the bewildered musings of Jim Brunet

		  {ihnp4, decvax}!ima!jimb  (most reliable)

		  ihnp4!vortex!ism780!jimb


		  or   jimb at ima/*cca-unix.arpa
				   ^
				   this asterisk is necessary!