i read somewhere that telaman had 24 as, 1 a minus in 3 years while farley had 29 as 3 a minuses in 3 years
but if Teleman went another year, he would of not of beaten Farley am i correct?
i read somewhere that telaman had 24 as, 1 a minus in 3 years while farley had 29 as 3 a minuses in 3 years
but if Teleman went another year, he would of not of beaten Farley am i correct?
does anyone know what the logical thing would be to do in this situation?
I don’t understand what you’re asking.
This is a controversy from almost 25 years ago. This is the Globe article.
http://www.latticetheory.net/media/pdf/boston_globe.pdf
And why is this important now?
just curious thats all, gibby