HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Re-Build the team

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-14-2010, 02:10 PM
  #51
TheBuriedHab
Registered User
 
TheBuriedHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,181
vCash: 500
I really don't see how Hammer is movable. The cap is not going up people, there are alot of teams in the same situation as us. Tight to the cap and trying to shed salary. I don't know who will be willing to take a 35 year old dman at 5.5 cap hit. A lot of southern teams are also in Financial trouble and I doubt they are willing to take on big salaries aswell.

TheBuriedHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:14 PM
  #52
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTHabsfan View Post
Problem #1: Just like a list can be put together of good 2nd round picks (see Moore thread), you can also put together a list of early 1st round picks who were mediocre, if not outright flops.
Higher picks = higher chance of getting good players.

Scouts have gotten better and teams have more and more scouts. This is truer than ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTHabsfan View Post
Problem #2: Tanking cannot guarantee a team a 1st overall pick, since there is a draft lottery.
But you can guarantee a 1st or 2nd overall pick. Most drafts include at least 2 excellent players. Not like you wasted a season if you lose the lottery and get the 2nd guy (in most draft year).


Quote:
Originally Posted by CTHabsfan View Post
Problem #3: How are you going to get players and coaches to tank? Don't they want to do as well as possible so that they can earn a new/bigger contract?
No one tanks. Teams rebuild. It's two totally different things. Those advocating for "tanking" simply don't know what they're talking about or are frustrated.

What you do is you trade veterans for picks and/or prospects.

You purposely not hit the salary cap so you can save on cost IN CASE attendance drops.

You favor young promising players with more ice time over certain veterans that could possibly do a little better right now so these young guys can get the experience they need to develop better (if that's what's good for them of course). If a young exciting player causes a few bad turnovers because he was taking chances offensively you don't bench him the rest of the game, you let him develop and express his offensive talent. You can always teach them to be a bit better defensively AFTER they have full confidence in their offensive talent.

The coach/gm don't have to go out there and tell the players to suck ass and lose on purpose. In fact, that's not what you want to see happen. You want to see them compete as hard as possible and try to put on a good show even in losses.

It's basically about making decisions that will make your team stronger in the future instead of stronger right now at the cost of the future. A lot of decisions we're taking right now makes absolutely no sense. This team is not at the point where playoffs rental are going to push into contender status. Getting a playoff rental (especially an ordinary 3rd line guy) for a draft pick is... not very saavy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CTHabsfan View Post
Problem #4: Do the Molsons want to screw up their bottom line for 3 or so years until the team can be rebuilt? For those of you who think that the Canadiens would sell out anyway, I would just like to remind you that the last time the Habs were truly awful there was talk that Centre Bell was too big. They would also miss out on playoff money. Even last year, when there were only two home games, that is a lot of money.
The bell centre will be VERY close to max capacity no matter what. Even if I'm wrong and attendance suffers a little, you can recoup whatever you lost with a lower payroll.

And if the habs brass is transparent and eloquent about what they want to do, I have a good feeling that the outcry wouldn't be as bad as everyone thinks. Even if people were to complain, it's not because a team loses that an exciting product can't be put on the ice.

Either way, a rebuild is definately an investment. You have to have confidence in your management to do that. And your management has to believe in it and do it properly. And if they do it properly, by being transparent about what they're doing, and by lowering the costs through payroll, it's possible you don't lose money at all. It's even possible you can make more of a profit if costs are lowered and you still put out an exciting product that appeal to people despite the fact it's not a contender.

After all, the habs have never had a hope of contending except one season and people still fill up the bell centre.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:16 PM
  #53
TheBuriedHab
Registered User
 
TheBuriedHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,181
vCash: 500
When the molson's got the loan from the city or Province, I believe there was a clause in it that said they had to spend up to 90% of the cap. Can anyone confirm?

TheBuriedHab is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:19 PM
  #54
Em Ancien
Sexy 2nd Rounder
 
Em Ancien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Mount Real Life
Posts: 8,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
The bell centre will be VERY close to max capacity no matter what. Even if I'm wrong and attendance suffers a little, you can recoup whatever you lost with a lower payroll.
That may be true for some teams, but it's not even close for the Habs.

Ticket revenues for season and offseason is so much more than the difference in payroll.

Not to mention the merch sales drop.

Em Ancien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:21 PM
  #55
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoopok View Post
I really don't see how Hammer is movable. The cap is not going up people, there are alot of teams in the same situation as us. Tight to the cap and trying to shed salary. I don't know who will be willing to take a 35 year old dman at 5.5 cap hit. A lot of southern teams are also in Financial trouble and I doubt they are willing to take on big salaries aswell.
A contender that feels they could use another solid top 4 guy and have the room to take on his contract for the remainder of the season definately could bite. They could always unload him after their playoffs run during the summer with little trouble considering he only has 1 year left on his contract after this season.

I'm pretty sure you can find someone to take on his last year because hammer is a solid dman. Not like he's worthless. He will be slightly overpaid, but that doesn't matter when you only need the guy for a year and you have the room.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:25 PM
  #56
Kjell Dahlin
Registered User
 
Kjell Dahlin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Québec, Québec
Posts: 1,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smoopok View Post
I really don't see how Hammer is movable. The cap is not going up people, there are alot of teams in the same situation as us. Tight to the cap and trying to shed salary. I don't know who will be willing to take a 35 year old dman at 5.5 cap hit. A lot of southern teams are also in Financial trouble and I doubt they are willing to take on big salaries aswell.

Hamrlik is 35 years old; you are right. But he is also a legit and solid top4 D. And you must also remember that some teams, like TB, are having difficulties to respect the lower limit.

Because of a guy like Subban, moving Hamrlik or Spacek (with youth and in return of a big forward), during the off season is not only doable: it’s a likely scenario imo.


Edit: I just noticed E = CH²'s post... I agree with him!

Kjell Dahlin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:29 PM
  #57
PunkinDrublic*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sutton,Qc-Sudbury,On
Posts: 8,283
vCash: 500

I actually stopped at trade Price....trade a 21 year old goaltender. Now there is a great idea !

PunkinDrublic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:33 PM
  #58
Hermamoud
Registered User
 
Hermamoud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 2,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PunkinDrublic View Post

I actually stopped at trade Price....trade a 21 year old goaltender. Now there is a great idea !
Didn't you know? When players don't have an immediate impact at 21, they're busts.

Hermamoud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:41 PM
  #59
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLPacman67 View Post
That may be true for some teams, but it's not even close for the Habs.
I fail to see how that could be true considering most teams have american dollars revenue from ticket sales while our revenues are in canadian dollars. Granted that varies but still.

Especially considering the fact that our attendance is amongst the best in the league and under all likelihood, even if it dropped, would still be higher than most other teams.

The only scenario where the habs would stand to lose more from a lower payroll and lower attendance than another team, is if you include playoffs games in the mix. But that's a crapshoot one way or another.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLPacman67 View Post
Ticket revenues for season and offseason is so much more than the difference in payroll.
How much more. That's really impossible to tell because you don't know if attendance would drop, and if it would, by how much. And you also don't know how much lower than the salary cap we would be going. You also don't know if the current team would make the playoffs and how many home games they would play.

Bottom line, it's impossible to know how much we could lose/gain.

I'm not saying rebuilding would necessarily end up one way or another. But there are scenarios where if you cut say 15M off the salary cap, and if the bell centre is still 100% filled up, that you could even see a greater profit despite missing the playoffs (seeing how even with going to the cap you can still miss the playoffs).

Of course, nothing would pay more than going all the way to the finals and play 7 games every series. But even in the current situation, the chances of that happening are close to zero. The best the Molsons will see is the team play 2-6 home games with a definite possibility of no playoffs altogether.

The real money maker is making the playoffs. And if you rebuild, and do it properly, the chances are good you'll get more home games in the playoffs in the long run than if we stick with the current situation.

As I said before, it's definately an investment, and like all investments it has risks. But it also has potential for greater rewards both monetarily and excitement wise.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTLPacman67 View Post
Not to mention the merch sales drop.
Actually, the merchandise is where you stand to make the most money out of a rebuild. A very small percentage of people are going to buy Moore's jersey/accessories. How many would buy Taylor Hall's jersey/accessories, or Couturier's jersey/accessories ?

Bottom line is that we're no worse off than other teams when it comes to doing a rebuild. In fact, chances are we're one of the team in the best situation to go for it.

The only aspect that is harder is fan/media expectations. It's an important one, but I still think our fans would be really happy to watch an exciting offensive team with back and forth hockey, blowouts and 6-5 goal scoring fests even if it didn't get into the playoffs. I'd love it a lot better than to watch this current edition of the habs lose 1-0 to buffalo and finish the season 9th overall.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:45 PM
  #60
Melvin Udall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheed36 View Post
I can guarantee you that if Josh Gorges was on the market there would be quite a few teams who would want him...
Agreed......an oversight on my part!

Melvin Udall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 02:46 PM
  #61
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PunkinDrublic View Post

I actually stopped at trade Price....trade a 21 year old goaltender. Now there is a great idea !
Trading Price would be a boneheaded move. I'd rather see the guy bust here and crumple under pressure than succeeds elsewhere. It's hard to get a fair return for a goalie prospect anyway. And the best you can do, in most cases, is trade one goalie for another.

We should definitely stick with Price. The chances are extremely good he'll solve his problems and get better.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:00 PM
  #62
Melvin Udall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTHabsfan View Post
Problem #1: Just like a list can be put together of good 2nd round picks (see Moore thread), you can also put together a list of early 1st round picks who were mediocre, if not outright flops.

Problem #2: Tanking cannot guarantee a team a 1st overall pick, since there is a draft lottery.

Problem #3: How are you going to get players and coaches to tank? Don't they want to do as well as possible so that they can earn a new/bigger contract?

Problem #4: Do the Molsons want to screw up their bottom line for 3 or so years until the team can be rebuilt? For those of you who think that the Canadiens would sell out anyway, I would just like to remind you that the last time the Habs were truly awful there was talk that Centre Bell was too big. They would also miss out on playoff money. Even last year, when there were only two home games, that is a lot of money.

BTW, it's interesting that of the four definite "keepers" that you list up front, three are guys who Bob Gainey picked up since the end of last season, two of whom he got "for nothing".
I agree.......1st rounders (even early first rounders) do not come with a guarentee of success.

However, with the exception of maybe Detroit and NJ Devils - for the most part,
the better teams in the league have spent time at or near the bottom of the league, selelcted early and well in the draft (obviosly, having a good scouting staff makes a huge difference) and built their successful teams accordingly.

I can't speak for the Molsons - what I can say is that a smart business man will undersatnd that the further his team goes into the playoffs (and the more frequently the team does so) - the more money he is going to make LONG TERM.

Great for Gainey that he signed a couple of good UFAs for "nothing" - if all it took to build a contender was signing a couple of good UFAs then Gainey would still be the Habs GM and the Habs would be a contender!

The fact that Gainey had to sign a bunch of UFAs in the summer of '09 tells me that he did not see his scouting staff drafting well and had to go outside his organization to build the core of his team - something that better teams rarely need to do!




Last edited by Melvin Udall: 02-14-2010 at 03:06 PM.
Melvin Udall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:12 PM
  #63
Born in 1909
Hockey Royalty
 
Born in 1909's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marc88 View Post
can't everyone calm down..we are missing half our team which happen to be our better players. Of course we are going to lose some games to teams that are healthy. Re evaulate after the olympic break.
A team is missing 6 guys, four of them tops... and their goaltender plays the worst he can

Its a perfect scenario for the whiners

Obviously the team needs tweaking... but they ALL do... especially the mighty Caps who can allow 12 goals in 2 games vs Mtl and Ottawa

Born in 1909 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:19 PM
  #64
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ND Irish View Post
I agree.......1st rounders (even early first rounders) do not come with a guarentee of success.

However, with the exception of maybe Detroit and NJ Devils - for the most part,
the better teams in the league have spent time at or near the bottom of the league, selelcted early and well in the draft (obviosly, having a good scouting staff makes a huge difference) and built their successful teams accordingly.

I can't speak for the Molsons - what I can say is that a smart business man will undersatnd that the further his team goes into the playoffs (and the more frequently the team does so) - the more money he is going to make LONG TERM.

Great for Gainey that he signed a couple of good UFAs for "nothing" - if all it took to build a contender was signing a couple of good UFAs then Gainey would still be the Habs GM and the Habs would be a contender!


Gainey decided to have all of his players up for unrestricted free agency at the same time and to let go of most of them. Because he did that, he was forced into 2 decisions.

1. Trade/sign for a bunch of players to fill the holes
2. Rebuild

I don't necessarily have a problem with either option. What I have a problem with is how he did #1. Jacques Martin with a bunch of smallish players and a slow defense. That was never gonna turn us into a contender. There just wasn't a long term plan / vision here.

First, he should have signed Jacques Lemaire when it was basically a done deal instead of ****ing Jacques Martin.

Second, when he saw what was out there on the market and that he couldn't actually build a contender with that mishmash of players, he probably should have taken a pass and went for #2. I don't have a problem with trying to keep the team competitive. But you do it right or you don't do it. Or if you absolutely need to try, then you don't commit long term to a hodgepodge of players that won't work well with the coach you got.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:22 PM
  #65
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by citylife View Post
A team is missing 6 guys, four of them tops... and their goaltender plays the worst he can

Its a perfect scenario for the whiners

Obviously the team needs tweaking... but they ALL do... especially the mighty Caps who can allow 12 goals in 2 games vs Mtl and Ottawa
The caps need major tweaking if they want to win the cup. Or they need to get lucky and only face the type of teams they can win reliably against.

I don't like their chances of winning it all.

That said, they're a lot closer to a cup than we are. They have guys that are incredibly difficult to obtain and are necessary for assembling a legit cup contender. We have precious few of these guys. And we need a lot more than just a few little tweaks to turn into a contender.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:23 PM
  #66
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,369
vCash: 500
The #1 priority is 21,273. Whatever keeps that going is the focus. A proper rebuild isn't in the cards.

gusfring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:24 PM
  #67
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
The #1 priority is 21,273. Whatever keeps that going is the focus. A proper rebuild isn't in the cards.
Is that your #1 goal ? You'd rather see the bell center full than a winning team ?

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:25 PM
  #68
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
If 21 273 people show up to watch a habs team that's without cammy, AK, Pouliot and Markov I'm willing to be they'd show up no matter what. At least for 1-2 years.

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:28 PM
  #69
Melvin Udall
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,304
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
The caps need major tweaking if they want to win the cup. Or they need to get lucky and only face the type of teams they can win reliably against.

I don't like their chances of winning it all.

That said, they're a lot closer to a cup than we are. They have guys that are incredibly difficult to obtain and are necessary for assembling a legit cup contender. We have precious few of these guys. And we need a lot more than just a few little tweaks to turn into a contender.

E = CH²,

Finally, I am actually reading commom sense on this board!

And I agree - Caps may (or may not) win the Cup in 2010 - but I wish the Habs were as much of a contender as they are!


Melvin Udall is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:36 PM
  #70
JHabs
HFB Partner
 
JHabs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,358
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to JHabs
Gauthier: I have no intentions of going through a rebuild. I feel the solution to our playoff goal will come from within the organization.

Yeah no dice guys, apparently we are just fine the way we are, mediocre on good nights, and horrendous on others. Go Gauthier!

JHabs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:36 PM
  #71
gusfring
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,369
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by E = CH² View Post
Is that your #1 goal ? You'd rather see the bell center full than a winning team ?
Not my goal - theirs.

gusfring is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:42 PM
  #72
Patty Roy
Registered User
 
Patty Roy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,747
vCash: 500
Its not going to be a full on re-build, but we need to start making some changes as of this years trade deadline.
  • Deal Hamrlik and his contract for a tough bottom pair d-man in the Shane O'Brien mold.
  • Deal Hal Gill to a playoff contender for a 3rd round pick in 2010.
  • Find a new home for Matt D'Agostini. If we can swap him for another struggling prospect, maybe somebody with more size and grit, less ability then do that.

IMO these moves set us up to be better next season, but do not really hamper the current lineup. Hamrlik is a bit of a loss, but thats the price we need to pay to clear up the cap space required to sign Plekanec.

Off Season:
  • Sign Plekanec to a longterm deal.
  • Sign a goon, think Derek Boogaard. Sign a physical depth forward, think Artyukhin.
  • Explore the opportunities for dealing one of Price and Halak. If a great deal is to be had then go for it, otherwise keep them both.

2010-11

Mike Cammalleri-Tomas Plekanec-Andrei Kostitsyn
Benoit Pouliot-Scott Gomez-Brian Gionta
Sergei Kostitsyn-Maxim Lapierre-Evgeny Artyukhin
Travis Moen-Tom Pyatt-Ryan White
Derek Boogaard

Andrei Markov-Ryan O'Byrne
Jaroslav Spacek-PK Subban
Josh Gorges-Shane O'Brien (type)
Yanick Weber

Price/Halak

Patty Roy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:47 PM
  #73
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 6,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yarfangor View Post
Gauthier: I have no intentions of going through a rebuild. I feel the solution to our playoff goal will come from within the organization.

Yeah no dice guys, apparently we are just fine the way we are, mediocre on good nights, and horrendous on others. Go Gauthier!

Well, another way of looking at it is that despite many, many other injuries, the Habs are 14-8-3 with Markov in the lineup, and he wasn't even at his BEST.

That's on pace for over 100 points, and like I said, there were still a RIDICULOUS number of injuries we played through during those 25 games.

To help give us the tools to build the team up even further, I advocate getting 5 more picks or decent prospects by trading between now and the deadline:

Metropolit
Mara
D'Agostini
Spacek
Bergeron

If Spacek doesn't happen, keep trying, we have more time in his case. If we can't move Spacek, then as a last resort, I would accept moving Hamrlik, but on condition that we MUST use some of the money saved to find a strong #2 to Markov. A D-corps with Spacek and Gorges as #2 and #3 just won't cut it.

BaseballCoach is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 03:53 PM
  #74
Des Louise
Formerly E=CH2
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Sri Lanka
Posts: 17,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nittany View Post
Not my goal - theirs.
The #1 goal of any company is to make more profits. More profits doesn't necessarily mean a full building right now.

The real money is in the playoffs. That's where owners will make the most money. This team doesn't stand a chance to go deep in the playoffs. Not only that, but we'll not be the home team, which means less home games overall.

Money is not a static thing. It has value in time. Sure a dollar now is better than a dollar in 10 years. But is a dollar now better than 10 dollars in 2 years ?

The bottom line is that 1 more home game in the playoffs = around 21 regular season games of 1000 less spectators. If you build a contender, you're expecting to go deeper in the playoffs more consistently and get more home playoffs games and that is where the real money is at.

Rebuilding is an investment that can equate to more money down the line. For any business, the #1 goal is not having bigger revenues, it's more profit. Even businesses that are aggressively trying to increase their revenues at the cost of profit do it because they want bigger profits down the line (and this doesn't apply to the habs anyway since they're not really competing with anyone in that sense).

And like I said earlier, I'm convinced that it would be possible to put an exciting product on the ice that people would love to watch even if that team wasn't as competitive as the one we currently have. I'm convinced that, if done properly, attendance could be kept at the levels they're at currently. In fact, I think a certain portion of the population would be happier watching a more exciting team that finishes a bit lower than this current edition (a team that has a good chance of not making the playoffs anyway).

Des Louise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-14-2010, 04:04 PM
  #75
PunkinDrublic*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sutton,Qc-Sudbury,On
Posts: 8,283
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yarfangor View Post
Gauthier: I have no intentions of going through a rebuild. I feel the solution to our playoff goal will come from within the organization.

Yeah no dice guys, apparently we are just fine the way we are, mediocre on good nights, and horrendous on others. Go Gauthier!
I wouldn't worry, because the Molson's will be a HELL of alot less patient with Gauthier then they were with Bob, for obvious reasons.

PunkinDrublic* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:23 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.