HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Trade Rumors and Free Agent Talk Trade rumors, transactions, and free agent talk. Rumors must contain the word RUMOR in post title. Proposals must contain the word PROPOSAL in post title.

2012 Eklund Rumor Hit Percentage ?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-28-2012, 11:16 AM
  #51
gifted88
Dante the poet
 
gifted88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Guelph, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,351
vCash: 500
He broke one trade before the mainstream media picked it up.

Maybe next year he can step up and get 2.

gifted88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:28 AM
  #52
SupremefartMachine
Registered User
 
SupremefartMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vermont
Country: United States
Posts: 2,623
vCash: 500
I believe these boards also serve as a "source."

SupremefartMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:36 AM
  #53
Gardner McKay
Moderator
Niles, Pls.
 
Gardner McKay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Atlanta
Country: United States
Posts: 10,735
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by VaporTrail View Post
Just curious...I don't follow him at all but I know he is constantly quoted here...

So what was his final statistics for this deadline, or for the season up to this point ?

How many trades did he call ?
He had the Zanon trade at like 1:15ish.

Gardner McKay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:38 AM
  #54
tfong
Registered User
 
tfong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,413
vCash: 500
I posted a trade proposal in calgaryflames board like 4 years back and Eklund copied it word for word on his blog or w/e, I was quite impressed lol. Im considered a "source".

tfong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:55 AM
  #55
dashripdot
Registered User
 
dashripdot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 271
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pSoup View Post
he actually called zanon way before anyone else I was following did (twitter/sportsnet/tsn)
Maybe he's Zanon's agent.

dashripdot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:00 PM
  #56
brevard*
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Cocoa Beach, Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 1,891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medium Rare View Post
He seemed to have Zanon before anyone else I follow on twitter.

But I also think Eklund gets a bit of a raw deal, people ignore that he deals in rumors where as the deadline shows are there to break trades that have actually happened, not as much to report on rumors.

Even if Eklund is correct on 0.3% of his rumors, I would say that's actually pretty good. I have no statistical evidence but I think its safe to say that less than 1 in every 100 trades discussed actually happens. And that is a large chunk of what the guy says, that's why he words things like this:

"team X is interested in player Y"
"team Z is talking to team W"
....etc

by my math if 1 in every 100 trades discussed actually happens and Eklund is right 0.3% of the time, it means he could actually be right closer to 1/3 of the time. Since 99% of the talks he reports on wouldn't actually happen.
Agree fully!

What those in charge here need to do is step up and punish those who complain about an Eklund rumor in a correctly titled thread. Don't want to read it, don't click the link. To comment on the source rather than the rumor is trolling and should be punished.

brevard* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:13 PM
  #57
Lint07
Registered User
 
Lint07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,212
vCash: 500
If I go by memory alone, he did break the Richards trade this summer. I remember how he was ridiculed on here by everybody once he called it. He also broke the Pronger trade from EDM to ANH back then before the big guys did.

I'm not a fan and I don't pay for his services but I find the bashing on here quite annoying. Give it a rest, people. The guy DO have some connections and sources that you don't. That's a fact.

Lint07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:16 PM
  #58
Kevin Forbes
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judrix View Post
well a lot of his rumors are saying certain teams are interested in certain players which could easily be true and we just don't know.
That's exactly the point. We could never know. So it's impossible to say if his reports are credible or reliable or anywhere close to being true. Because everything he reports has to stand on its own.

To compare him to Bob McKenzie (which is a disservice to McKenzie), but if you'll allow: we know McKenzie, we read him in The Hockey News, we watch him on television, we read his articles online and his tweets, he has even participated on these boards. We know about his sons playing hockey, we've seen him interviewing GMs and coaches and players. This all adds up.
The likelihood of McKenzie reporting falsehoods or making things up is extremely low, if not for pure ethics alone, then at least because someone in his 25-30 years of work would have blown the house of cards over. The time he has put in and continues to put in establishes credibility.

Now let's look at Eklund. What do we know? Well, we don't really know his name (officially). We don't really know his background (depending on what version of his biography you've read, he's written best-selling books, worked for two, maybe three NHL teams, etc.). We've never "seen" him (shadowy figure in the rafters at Sportsnet while Darren Millard and Bill Watters ate pizza notwithstanding). He appeared pretty much out of no where and so we have no idea of his contacts, his connections, anything. Sure, we know from past reporting that he's buddies with Tim Pannacio and a few other guys, but that's never been presented by him. It's only been things dug up by real journalists actually doing the work. He presents his readers with nothing of himself and expects them to believe what he says. Where's the credibility?

The idea of anonymity on the Internet flies almost directly in the face of credibility and ethics when it comes to reporting and journalism. There's a reason why my articles are written under my name, why I post here under my name, why I tweet under my name, etc. etc. In a way, it's branding, but more importantly it's trust too. Bob McKenzie is presenting his true self, his true name and from that truth comes the reasonably expectation that everything that goes along with that starting truth is likely to be true. That's a standard I try to follow myself.

Eklund doesn't provide any of that truth, which to me is the initial nugget of my problem with him. There are real writers, real journalists doing better work than him, providing more credible rumour and reporting, under their own name. But this "anonymous hockey blogger" crap continues.

I once read that "your name is the only thing you've got." Which sticks with me. If I screw up, if I report things that aren't true or make up a story, that's my name attached to it. I can't duck that. But if Eklund does, it doesn't matter as much to Dwight Keith Klessel.

__________________
Twitter / Blog / About.me

Last edited by Kevin Forbes: 02-28-2012 at 12:21 PM.
Kevin Forbes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:18 PM
  #59
Rush519
Registered User
 
Rush519's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 171
vCash: 500
its got to be hard because we dont get to see all of the actual rumours or proposals, as fans, that get shut down by GM's so maybe some of his rumours are. But i agree with most people in here I feel like he is a slimy *******, but if anyone can just make **** up and lie and make money on it, why dont we all...since we dont, he must have done something right...once or twice

Rush519 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:18 PM
  #60
ThisYearsModel
Registered User
 
ThisYearsModel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 7,011
vCash: 500
"Mister Blu..........Mis...ter....Blu....tar....ski....... .zero point zero.......

ThisYearsModel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:23 PM
  #61
ChocolateLeclaire
Registered User
 
ChocolateLeclaire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,157
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Forbes View Post
That's exactly the point. We could never know. So it's impossible to say if his reports are credible or reliable or anywhere close to being true. Because everything he reports has to stand on its own.

To compare him to Bob McKenzie (which is a disservice to McKenzie), but if you'll allow: we know McKenzie, we read him in The Hockey News, we watch him on television, we read his articles online and his tweets, he has even participated on these boards. We know about his sons playing hockey, we've seen him interviewing GMs and coaches and players. This all adds up.
The likelihood of McKenzie reporting falsehoods or making things up is extremely low, if not for pure ethics alone, then at least because someone in his 25-30 years of work would have blown the house of cards over. The time he has put in and continues to put in establishes credibility.

Now let's look at Eklund. What do we know? Well, we don't really know his name (officially). We don't really know his background (depending on what version of his biography you've read, he's written best-selling books, worked for two, maybe three NHL teams, etc.). We've never "seen" him (shadowy figure in the rafters at Sportsnet while Darren Millard and Bill Watters ate pizza notwithstanding). He appeared pretty much out of no where and so we have no idea of his contacts, his connections, anything. Sure, we know from past reporting that he's buddies with Tim Pannacio and a few other guys, but that's never been presented by him. It's only been things dug up by real journalists actually doing the work. He presents his readers with nothing of himself and expects them to believe what he says. Where's the credibility?

The idea of anonymity on the Internet flies almost directly in the face of credibility and ethics when it comes to reporting and journalism. There's a reason why my articles are written under my name, why I post here under my name, why I tweet under my name, etc. etc. In a way, it's branding, but more importantly it's trust too. Bob McKenzie is presenting his true self, his true name and from that truth comes the reasonably expectation that everything that goes along with that starting truth is likely to be true. That's a standard I try to follow myself.

Eklund doesn't provide any of that truth, which to me is the initial nugget of my problem with him. There are real writers, real journalists doing better work than him, providing more credible rumour and reporting, under their own name. But this "anonymous hockey blogger" crap continues.

I once read that "your name is the only thing you've got." Which sticks with me. If I screw up, if I report things that aren't true or make up a story, that's my name attached to it. I can't duck that. But if Eklund does, it doesn't matter as much to Dwight Keith Klessel.
/THREAD

This is the problem that most people have with Eklund summed up perfectly. He can't be trusted at face value because he has nothing to gain or lose by having his credibility come into question. The fact that some sheep take his "I have sources" at face value is discouraging, as there is nothing to stop an anonymous poster here with a friend or two in the NHL from staking himself as an "Insider".

ChocolateLeclaire is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:32 PM
  #62
Kevin Forbes
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChocolateLeclaire View Post
/THREAD

This is the problem that most people have with Eklund summed up perfectly. He can't be trusted at face value because he has nothing to gain or lose by having his credibility come into question. The fact that some sheep take his "I have sources" at face value is discouraging, as there is nothing to stop an anonymous poster here with a friend or two in the NHL from staking himself as an "Insider".
Which is a larger problem in itself.
Now there are people following this "Eklund" model. Whether for financial gain or just attention or whatever, there's such a clutter of "rumour" and "speculation" that it is becoming increasingly difficult to separate what's true and what is false. And the only people who suffer are the fans who just want news and the actual serious writers who are trying to do the right thing and report true facts, only to either get bogged down chasing these dead-ends or to have their voice lost in the noise.

Look no further than the deadline coverage: Marc Crawford got duped by one of these make-believe "sources" that Steve Staios was sent to Vancouver and reported it on the air. I'm pretty sure Gord Miller and Bob McKenzie were stifling laughter when he said it. That's the effect that this crap has had on legitimate sports journalism.

And somehow this is a good thing?

That people can just report so many outright lies and not be held accountable, not stand behind it and if ever brought into question only have to retreat behind the platitude of "oh, well talks were happening/negotiations behind closed doors".

Look at who you follow and where you get your news. Have you ever seen legitimate journalists behave in that manner?

Kevin Forbes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:33 PM
  #63
middletoe
Why am I me?
 
middletoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Northern Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,802
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medium Rare View Post
i can't believe I am looking this up, but i am so sick of people calling others a liar just because they have to believe eklund is wrong

1:07pm Eklund said Zanon traded to Boston
1:11pm Bob McKenzie said Zanon traded to Boston

I am not saying he "broke it", I am saying he posted it before TSN and McKenzie tweeted his before they said it on air.
So for whatever time you spent on following Eklund, the best thing you got out of it was Zanon to Boston 4 minutes before Bob McKenzie reported it?

middletoe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:52 PM
  #64
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by middletoe View Post
So for whatever time you spent on following Eklund, the best thing you got out of it was Zanon to Boston 4 minutes before Bob McKenzie reported it?
This is basically what I was trying to say in my earlier post.

How does this tiny lead on the mainstream media (which truly can be chalked up to sitting there with his thumbs on his phone, ready to tweet) constitute "breaking" a story in any substantial way?

And even if you still consider him to be the one who "broke" it, what does a 4 minute head start matter anyway? It's 4 friggin' minutes.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:26 PM
  #65
Kevin8se7en
Unregistered User
 
Kevin8se7en's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ottawa, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,353
vCash: 500
Well, he was at just over 3% a few years ago, so I assume its similar now.

His accuracy is less than pulling a name out if a hat (if all 30 teams were in the hat)

http://hockeybuzzhogwash.com/

Kevin8se7en is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:33 PM
  #66
dma0034
Registered User
 
dma0034's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sabresfan3383 View Post
He was tweeting about how the Sabres were trying to resign Gaustad...during his post deadline presser GM DR then came out and said no extension was ever discussed
That is not true and Regier was on the local Radio show on Friday and said he met with Gaustad's agent. Some people think that Regier was informing him he'd be traded but they wanted to resign him in the offseason.

dma0034 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:37 PM
  #67
JVR21
G
 
JVR21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 7,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Forbes View Post
That's exactly the point. We could never know. So it's impossible to say if his reports are credible or reliable or anywhere close to being true. Because everything he reports has to stand on its own.

To compare him to Bob McKenzie (which is a disservice to McKenzie), but if you'll allow: we know McKenzie, we read him in The Hockey News, we watch him on television, we read his articles online and his tweets, he has even participated on these boards. We know about his sons playing hockey, we've seen him interviewing GMs and coaches and players. This all adds up.
The likelihood of McKenzie reporting falsehoods or making things up is extremely low, if not for pure ethics alone, then at least because someone in his 25-30 years of work would have blown the house of cards over. The time he has put in and continues to put in establishes credibility.

Now let's look at Eklund. What do we know? Well, we don't really know his name (officially). We don't really know his background (depending on what version of his biography you've read, he's written best-selling books, worked for two, maybe three NHL teams, etc.). We've never "seen" him (shadowy figure in the rafters at Sportsnet while Darren Millard and Bill Watters ate pizza notwithstanding). He appeared pretty much out of no where and so we have no idea of his contacts, his connections, anything. Sure, we know from past reporting that he's buddies with Tim Pannacio and a few other guys, but that's never been presented by him. It's only been things dug up by real journalists actually doing the work. He presents his readers with nothing of himself and expects them to believe what he says. Where's the credibility?

The idea of anonymity on the Internet flies almost directly in the face of credibility and ethics when it comes to reporting and journalism. There's a reason why my articles are written under my name, why I post here under my name, why I tweet under my name, etc. etc. In a way, it's branding, but more importantly it's trust too. Bob McKenzie is presenting his true self, his true name and from that truth comes the reasonably expectation that everything that goes along with that starting truth is likely to be true. That's a standard I try to follow myself.

Eklund doesn't provide any of that truth, which to me is the initial nugget of my problem with him. There are real writers, real journalists doing better work than him, providing more credible rumour and reporting, under their own name. But this "anonymous hockey blogger" crap continues.

I once read that "your name is the only thing you've got." Which sticks with me. If I screw up, if I report things that aren't true or make up a story, that's my name attached to it. I can't duck that. But if Eklund does, it doesn't matter as much to Dwight Keith Klessel.


Yet, this site still has him pegged as a "credible source" and even has "Eklund" and "HockeyBuzz" titles for threads. It's amazing what a little $ will do. I wouldn't have a problem with it if HFB would just be upfront with us about the situation.

JVR21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:02 PM
  #68
Kevin Forbes
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,193
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVR21 View Post


Yet, this site still has him pegged as a "credible source" and even has "Eklund" and "HockeyBuzz" titles for threads. It's amazing what a little $ will do. I wouldn't have a problem with it if HFB would just be upfront with us about the situation.
I don't know anymore than you do about the internals of that situation, but I don't think money was exchanged to place Eklund as a credible source. I think it was more proof of identity/verification. Frankly, I think he had one of his media buddies vouch for him.

As for the Eklund/HockeyBuzz tags for threads, that was done in direct response to people saying they didn't want to read those threads/wanted to avoid them, so it was dictated that they would be marked appropriately so that people could avoid them if they chose to.

EDIT:
To clarify my above posts a bit: I don't think Eklund makes up most of the things he reports. That is to say, I don't think he sits at home and intentionally publishes lies. I think in part, he looks at situations and makes "educated" (using the term loosely) guesses about what situations might result in player movement and what players might be good fits for other teams etc. I think he might start with a nugget of truth (guy unhappy with his coach/playing time) and then pads it out a bit to make a story (if he's dealt, here's some teams that would likely be interested). I also think that he operates as basically a pipeline without a filter (either knowingly or not, although I'm going to assume he knows).

I remember when the Valerie Plame/CIA/Yellowcake uranium thing was going on in the States (if you're unaware of the reference, don't worry about it). Anyway, there was a reporter, Robert Novak (he has since passed away) who ran with the story of Plame being a CIA analyst, basically publicly revealing it in his column.

Now the criticism at the time for Novak was that he ran with every story, regardless of the source, regardless of the quality, regardless of how true it was (or wasn't). Anything someone mentioned to him that seemed juicy was printed. There was no filter, no verification, no double-checking. If it crossed his radar, it made it to print. This is pretty dangerous journalism. It's real live by the sword kind of thing. It allowed Novak to break a number of stories but it also led to him being manipulated a bit as a pawn in the Washington political scene.

I think this is how Eklund operates (obviously to a smaller, less important scale). Which explains the instances where he's "copying" rumours off message boards or what have you. He simply reports everything, not caring about whether it's coming from a good source or it's true. There's no self-moderation.

I saw Spector's name mentioned earlier in this thread and he operates in a similar fashion, but with one key difference: almost everything Spector/Lyle Richardson posts is sourced back to a beat writer or columnist somewhere. Spector's Hockey is just an aggregate.

Spector's Hockey operates as a clearinghouse of the rumours published in newspapers/mainstream media columns etc across the country.
Eklund operates as a clearinghouse of that same spectrum, but also anything else he comes across. To me, that's the huge difference between the two.


Last edited by Kevin Forbes: 02-28-2012 at 02:23 PM.
Kevin Forbes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:16 PM
  #69
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 71,183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pSoup View Post
he actually called zanon way before anyone else I was following did (twitter/sportsnet/tsn)
He was calling Zanon to Vancouver though, I think. He went to Boston.

Shrimper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:19 PM
  #70
JVR21
G
 
JVR21's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 7,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Forbes View Post
I don't know anymore than you do about the internals of that situation, but I don't think money was exchanged to place Eklund as a credible source. I think it was more proof of identity/verification. Frankly, I think he had one of his media buddies vouch for him.

As for the Eklund/HockeyBuzz tags for threads, that was done in direct response to people saying they didn't want to read those threads/wanted to avoid them, so it was dictated that they would be marked appropriately so that people could avoid them if they chose to.
My problem with this explanation is that there is no thread marker for ***************, ***********, bleacher report, and other BS "sources" that truly are just as credible as Eklund. They're simply censored by the site.

JVR21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:34 PM
  #71
mygameworn
Registered User
 
mygameworn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 1,933
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to mygameworn
Quote:
Originally Posted by JVR21 View Post
My problem with this explanation is that there is no thread marker for ***************, ***********, bleacher report, and other BS "sources" that truly are just as credible as Eklund. They're simply censored by the site.
That's my concern. There are reputable sources that are out there that HF doesn't like or won't allow them to compete with Eklund.

mygameworn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 03:36 PM
  #72
Joe T Choker
Roll Wide Roll
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Melrose
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pens1566 View Post
Didn't know that. I just thought I remembered a poster here who trolled him into stealing his exact post and running with it like it was insider info.
Luongo for LeCavalier (e5) is probably the trade rumor that is infamous amongst the old guard around here

Joe T Choker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 04:00 PM
  #73
Uhmkay
Weber2Canucks2013
 
Uhmkay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,376
vCash: 500
I had one guy on twitter that called the Zanon deal before Eklund and then several minutes later Eklund posted it on his twitter.

It's pretty well known that all Eklund is doing is following virtually EVERYONE on twitter and just refreshing non-stop. Then when anyone credible calls something, he immediatly reports it so it makes it look like he is 'in the know'.

The fact that anyone thinks this guy is 'credible' is laughable. But kudos to him for paying off his home with this crap. Wish I'd thought of it.

Uhmkay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 04:04 PM
  #74
M Moulson Ale
Brockoli
 
M Moulson Ale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 2,756
vCash: 500
He should just reveal his true "identity" (even thought most people know it) and should just stick to his sources in Philly. He should have a Flyers based rumor site.

For example, he got the Carter, Richards, Grossman deals (off the top of my head).

M Moulson Ale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 04:14 PM
  #75
ZDH
Registered User
 
ZDH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,355
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garth Wang Clan View Post
He should just reveal his true "identity" (even thought most people know it) and should just stick to his sources in Philly. He should have a Flyers based rumor site.

For example, he got the Carter, Richards, Grossman deals (off the top of my head).
Then he wouldnt have as many followers, and thus less money.

And I absolutely believe he makes up most of the stuff he publishes.

How this site makes him a credible source is laughable, they have to be getting some money from him.

ZDH 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 08:57 PM.

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.