🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <DMoA0B.ADy@hpl.hp.com>, dsmith@hpl.hp.com (David R. Smith) wrote:

> Samster The HAMMER (ez043491@peseta.ucdavis.edu) wrote:
> : On Fri, 9 Feb 1996, David R. Smith wrote:
>
> : > Samster The HAMMER (ez043491@peseta.ucdavis.edu) wrote:
> : > : Oh, and the Niners sneaked into the playoff because they played the
> : > : sixth-easiests chedule in the NFL, despite being defending champs. The
> : > : Niners just were not that good this year, pal.
> : >
> : > It's true that the 49ers were not as good this year, but I wonder on
> : > what basis you claim they had the sixth-easiest schedule.  Their opponents
> : > had a .504 winning fraction, in spite of mostly losing to the 49ers.
> : > By comparison, 15 teams had opponents with worse records than this,
> : > including the Cowboys, Steelers, Packers, and Colts.  13 teams had
> : > opponents with better records.
>
> : Please see earlier post on this thread.
> : Based on 1994 records, in division.
>
> OK, I have seen the "earlier" post, which showed up the day after I
> responded.  I have also seen Eric Smith's post which effectively refutes
> your position.

I think we all know these posts never show up in order....geez.

BTW, it does not effectively refute anything. That's how 1995 schedules
were determined, based on 1994 records. Niners division opponents in 1994
were pathetic, as usual.