HFBoards

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

20 Greatest Red Wings (#6)

View Poll Results: Who is the #6 Red Wing of All-Time?
Sergei Fedorov 32 56.14%
Kris Draper 0 0%
Sid Abel 3 5.26%
Alex Delvecchio 8 14.04%
Norm Ullman 0 0%
Brendan Shanahan 0 0%
Marcel Dionne 0 0%
Syd Howe 0 0%
Pavel Datsyuk 4 7.02%
Henrik Zetterberg 0 0%
Larry Aurie 0 0%
Marty Barry 0 0%
Mickey Redmond 0 0%
Igor Larionov 0 0%
Bob Probert 1 1.75%
Jack Stewart 0 0%
Ebbie Goodfellow 0 0%
Bill Quackenbush 0 0%
Chris Chelios 1 1.75%
Red Kelly 7 12.28%
Vladimir Konstantinov 0 0%
Paul Coffey 0 0%
Chris Osgood 1 1.75%
Voters: 57. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-08-2012, 09:26 AM
  #26
lazerbullet
Registered User
 
lazerbullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 684
vCash: 500
Red Kelly:

13 seasons as a Red Wing.
4 Stanley Cups as #1 Dman in Detroit.
Won first ever Norris Trophy in 1954. Would have won in 1951, 1952, 1953. That's 4 Norris-worthy seasons.
Also was named First Team All-Star on defence in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955 and 1957.
Second Team All-Star on defence in 1950 and 1956.
Hart runner-up in 1954.
Lady Byng in 1951, 1953 and 1954.


As good as Fedorov was... Kelly had a great, great career as a Red Wing. And quite frankly Fedorov really has a weak case against him. And that's just during their time as a Red Wing. Anything post-Detroit and Kelly is so much better than it's not even funny. Which proves a point that Kelly was simply a better player.

lazerbullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 11:00 AM
  #27
Bench
Moderator
Realgud!
 
Bench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Monk's
Posts: 7,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Post number #1. PA are retards. --- 10 people agree.
Post number #2. NHL owners are retards -- 5 point infraction.
Take it easy, Ann Coulter.

Bench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 01:14 PM
  #28
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bench View Post
Take it easy, Ann Coulter.
Now to me, given what I think of Ann Coulter, you should be permabanned

I am guessing, remembering our past conversation, that you have a developmentally disabled relative or friend. As do I.

And the term is offense.
But if you cal the owners or players "brain-dead" that's offensive to someone who has a relative in a vegetative state.
If you call the PA or owners stupid, that could be offensive to someone who has a relative that is stupid.

The point isn't about the word, The point is that the BOH board is 90 percent player-hater. And about 80 percent of those people are not very intelligent, just stopping in to say "Blame Fehr," or "Fehr Brainwashed the Players." or "Players are idiots. They're the same type who report every marginal rule violation. And since the mods over there either don't care or are biased, they're really onesided in their punishment

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 02:30 PM
  #29
newfy
Registered User
 
newfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
They do their research!!!
Good lord.
Yeah what else do you do to look up things? They have old newspaper clippings, archived google games and a lot of other resources. Thats what you need when you do historical analysis of something. Check the post below, thats short work to easily show how much better Kelly was. Fedorov doesnt have an argument over that, except for some people here actually watched him play and are fan boys of his.

For the most part he was a 65 point center with a really high peak, Kelly had a trophy made for him. And even as versatile as Fedorov was, Kelly was too. He ended up leaving Detroit and playing a good chunk of his career on Toronto so that point is negligible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazerbullet View Post
Red Kelly:

13 seasons as a Red Wing.
4 Stanley Cups as #1 Dman in Detroit.
Won first ever Norris Trophy in 1954. Would have won in 1951, 1952, 1953. That's 4 Norris-worthy seasons.
Also was named First Team All-Star on defence in 1951, 1952, 1953, 1954, 1955 and 1957.
Second Team All-Star on defence in 1950 and 1956.
Hart runner-up in 1954.
Lady Byng in 1951, 1953 and 1954.


As good as Fedorov was... Kelly had a great, great career as a Red Wing. And quite frankly Fedorov really has a weak case against him. And that's just during their time as a Red Wing. Anything post-Detroit and Kelly is so much better than it's not even funny. Which proves a point that Kelly was simply a better player.

newfy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 04:02 PM
  #30
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,728
vCash: 500
In addition to being runner-up for the Hart in 1954, Kelly was 3rd in Hart voting in 1951 and 1953 plus 4th in 1956.

I consider him the 3rd best Red Wing of all-time and think it is an outrage his number has never been retired.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 04:27 PM
  #31
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by newfy View Post
Yeah what else do you do to look up things? They have old newspaper clippings, archived google games and a lot of other resources. Thats what you need when you do historical analysis of something. Check the post below, thats short work to easily show how much better Kelly was. Fedorov doesnt have an argument over that, except for some people here actually watched him play and are fan boys of his.

For the most part he was a 65 point center with a really high peak, Kelly had a trophy made for him. And even as versatile as Fedorov was, Kelly was too. He ended up leaving Detroit and playing a good chunk of his career on Toronto so that point is negligible.
Look, this entire poll is proof that it's pretty dumb to try and compare players from vastly different eras.
Which is why I'm not casting any votes in these polls.

To even begin the compare players, you have to define how you're doing so. And that in itself is something that can lead to major arguments. Are you comparing players? Are you comparing the players vs. their peers? Are you comparing their relative value?
Does a Norris Trophy mean jack when there are 6 teams? That's like having a Best Defensemen in the Central Division trophy.
Do you take into account the fact that Fedorov was ordered by Bowman to curtail his offensive game? Does that factor into his 65-point seasons?

What about Kelly? Were his stats made worse by his coach? Or were they made better?

Are you checking to see what seasons Kelly was a forward and what seasons he was a defenseman?

I see people list Eddie Shore as one of the game's great defensemen. Well, I love to read old hockey books. But I'm 41, and I never saw Eddie Shore. How the hell can you compare Eddie Shore to Bobby Orr or Nick Lidstrom.

That's why I like to keep my rankings to within the era I watched.

My all time Wings team:

Yzerman Fedorov Shanahan
Zetterberg Datsyuk Probert
Gallant Filppula Ogrodnick
Matlby Draper McCarty

Lidstrom Konstantinov
Larson Chelios
Kronwall Rafalski

Hasek/Osgood

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 09:32 PM
  #32
irishock
In the sunset
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 378
vCash: 50
agree with above lines, but I'd probably have Franzen in there instead of Flip.

irishock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 10:41 PM
  #33
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedWings19405 View Post
Fedorov has the MVP and four straight 20 point playoff seasons. The second one being something nobody except him has ever done in NHL history.
Mike Bossy and Bryan Trottier beg to differ.

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 10:55 PM
  #34
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,706
vCash: 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadekuuro View Post
Mike Bossy and Bryan Trottier beg to differ.
That would be correct, I remember reading that somewhere else and checking it against the big Oilers. For shame on my part, fully admit that. Is interesting that of all his peers Sergei was the only one to do it though.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-08-2012, 11:51 PM
  #35
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,220
vCash: 500
Don't sweat it. And I think it's a coincidence. If Steve Smith doesn't nerf that puck into his own net in '86, those Oilers end up with 6+ year streaks, to use but one example.

Not to take anything away from Sergei's consistent playoff greatness in the 90s, of course.

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 12:05 AM
  #36
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadekuuro View Post
Don't sweat it. And I think it's a coincidence. If Steve Smith doesn't nerf that puck into his own net in '86, those Oilers end up with 6+ year streaks, to use but one example.

Not to take anything away from Sergei's consistent playoff greatness in the 90s, of course.
And if Osgood plays the entire playoff in 1994 and 1999, Fedorov has a six year streak. What's your point?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 03:42 AM
  #37
lazerbullet
Registered User
 
lazerbullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Does a Norris Trophy mean jack when there are 6 teams? That's like having a Best Defensemen in the Central Division trophy.
LOL. Norris Trophy at that time was the exact same thing as it's now. The best defenseman in the NHL. The fact that you had 6 teams back then doesn't change it. It's okay if you value current trophies more, because there are more teams and you have much bigger talent pool competing. But Red Kelly was the best defenseman in the world in the early 50s. In other words... nobody was better than him, six teams or not.

Quote:
Do you take into account the fact that Fedorov was ordered by Bowman to curtail his offensive game? Does that factor into his 65-point seasons?
I call that a BS. I can't imagine Bowman telling to Fedorov: "Listen Sergei, don't score too much. Take it easy."


Frankly, I don't see a point in such polls, if people can't appreciate what the old-timers did back then. Sure there were fewer teams and hockey was different. And if one wishes to think that modern players are so much better than 50-60 years ago, then they probably right. I mean... Filppula>Howe, Kronwall>Kelly, Howard>Sawchuk. But what's the point? None of those modern players are greater than those old-timers and probably never will be.

lazerbullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 04:00 AM
  #38
lazerbullet
Registered User
 
lazerbullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
In addition to being runner-up for the Hart in 1954, Kelly was 3rd in Hart voting in 1951 and 1953 plus 4th in 1956.

I consider him the 3rd best Red Wing of all-time and think it is an outrage his number has never been retired.
I have been puzzled by this for years. And I haven't even seen a strong hypothesis why it has not been retired.

Everything I have read is pointing out that Kelly was a class-act, both on and off the ice. Hell... even very troubled Sawchuk got his number retired. Also Kelly never left himself Detroit, but was shipped out by crazy Jack Adams. The same thing happened to Lindsay and his number is retired. Frankly, I don't understand why Kelly is not up there with others. Maybe had too much success with Toronto? Big rivalry and all.

lazerbullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 02:37 PM
  #39
Bench
Moderator
Realgud!
 
Bench's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Monk's
Posts: 7,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Now to me, given what I think of Ann Coulter, you should be permabanned
Good to hear that!

Just making a quip given her recent comments and the backlash. I know you meant no offense. And ,on point, I generally agree with you on the lockout issue.

Bench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 02:41 PM
  #40
RaySheppard
Registered User
 
RaySheppard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post

My all time Wings team:

Yzerman Fedorov Shanahan
Zetterberg Datsyuk Probert
Gallant Filppula Ogrodnick
Matlby Draper McCarty

Lidstrom Konstantinov
Larson Chelios
Kronwall Rafalski

Hasek/Osgood
I assume you omitted Coffey strictly on length of tenure.

RaySheppard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 04:09 PM
  #41
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
And if Osgood plays the entire playoff in 1994 and 1999, Fedorov has a six year streak. What's your point?
My point is that unless you believe Fedorov and those other two guys are the only three players that have ever performed at a high level in the playoffs for four years in a row, it's not a very informative stat. It's interesting but way too dependent on one's team situation.

Incidentally, I also believe you are wrong. Osgood in '94 wasn't ready to carry the Wings deep enough (and if memory serves, he did play most of that series anyway), and you clearly don't remember Patrick Roy's lights out performance against the Wings in '99. Yes, Ranford was awful in Games 3 and 4, but Detroit dominated for long stretches of that series and got shut down anyway. So aggravating.

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 04:23 PM
  #42
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazerbullet View Post
I have been puzzled by this for years. And I haven't even seen a strong hypothesis why it has not been retired.

Everything I have read is pointing out that Kelly was a class-act, both on and off the ice. Hell... even very troubled Sawchuk got his number retired. Also Kelly never left himself Detroit, but was shipped out by crazy Jack Adams. The same thing happened to Lindsay and his number is retired. Frankly, I don't understand why Kelly is not up there with others. Maybe had too much success with Toronto? Big rivalry and all.
I recall reading years ago that Mr. I is opposed. I don't think it's known precisely why, as Kelly's obviously worthy as a player, but that would explain the org dragging their feet.

Here's a picture of the two of them shaking hands... but he's in Leaf regalia and captioned "Maple Leafs legend Red Kelly."
http://www.freep.com/article/2012021...ic-festivities

Digging further, I found this:

Quote:
Kelly, the first Norris Trophy winner in 1954, was selected eight times as an NHL All-Star defensemen in his seasons with Detroit, six as a first-team All-Star.

Yet the Ilitches and Jimmy Devellano refuse to hang Kelly's No. 4 where it belongs.

Tradition hangs heavy with the Red Wings, it seems. In 1959, Kelly broke a bone in his ankle. He continued to play with the injury. His injury was kept secret.

The next season Kelly explained to a journalist why he had not played was well as usual at the end of the 1959 schedule. He admitted he'd had a broken ankle.

The fiery and often angry Jack Adams was then general manager of the Red Wings. Adams was furious at Kelly for revealing the secret.

In spite, Adams traded Kelly to the New York Rangers. Kelly refused to go and said he would retire. So Adams traded Kelly to the Maple Leafs — and on to four more Cup championships.
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...ON03/206020399

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 04:55 PM
  #43
RaySheppard
Registered User
 
RaySheppard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
And if Osgood plays the entire playoff in 1994 and 1999, Fedorov has a six year streak. What's your point?
'93 and '94 were painful to be sure..but they were first round exits. Osgood wasn't ready in '94. Bryan Murray was an idiot for obvious reasons.

RaySheppard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-09-2012, 11:10 PM
  #44
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaySheppard View Post
'93 and '94 were painful to be sure..but they were first round exits. Osgood wasn't ready in '94. Bryan Murray was an idiot for obvious reasons.
The Cheveldae trade was a stupid deal. Chevy and Essensa were both inconsistent goalies potentially capable of playing at a high level. The deal was ultimately Drake for Bautin... which is completely dumb. But Cheveldae couldn't stay; Bowman wanted a veteran goalie and Osgood had made it clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was the starter ahead of Cheveldae. So it had to be a *new* veteran goalie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadekuuro View Post
Incidentally, I also believe you are wrong. Osgood in '94 wasn't ready to carry the Wings deep enough (and if memory serves, he did play most of that series anyway), and you clearly don't remember Patrick Roy's lights out performance against the Wings in '99. Yes, Ranford was awful in Games 3 and 4, but Detroit dominated for long stretches of that series and got shut down anyway. So aggravating.
In 1994, Fedorov would have only needed another long round, maybe two short (he had 8 in 7gp, playing with a concussion) and Osgood posted a 2.35 GAA (fifth-best of all goalies in the playoffs) compared to Essensa's 4.95 (third-worst), with Osgood's .891 being significantly better than Essensa's .791.

In 1999, Osgood again posted a 2.35 GAA (8th of all goalies with 60+ mins) and a .919 (9th of goalies 60+ mins). Roy posted a .920 (8th) and 2.66 (13th). Ranford posted .905 (13th) and 3.28 (17th).

So yes, having Osgood in net would have made a significant difference in both cases. Having Osgood in 1999 puts the Wings in threepeat territory.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 12:31 AM
  #45
RaySheppard
Registered User
 
RaySheppard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 261
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The Cheveldae trade was a stupid deal. Chevy and Essensa were both inconsistent goalies potentially capable of playing at a high level. The deal was ultimately Drake for Bautin... which is completely dumb. But Cheveldae couldn't stay; Bowman wanted a veteran goalie and Osgood had made it clear beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was the starter ahead of Cheveldae. So it had to be a *new* veteran goalie
I agree for the most part. However Bryan Murray had years to bring in a quality nhl starter and he failed to deliver. Murray very well may have cost us two cups.

RaySheppard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-10-2012, 04:57 PM
  #46
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaySheppard View Post
I agree for the most part. However Bryan Murray had years to bring in a quality nhl starter and he failed to deliver. Murray very well may have cost us two cups.
Cheveldae finished 10th in voting for the all-star team in 1990-91, 5th for the Vezina and all-star team in 1991-92, and 7th for the Vezina in 1992-93. At the beginning of the 1991-92 season, Murray had traded for Vincent Riendeau, who had finished 6th (all-star) and 7th (Vezina) the year before. Riendeau was injured halfway through his first start as a Wing.

Wings teams before that 1991-92 team had many more problems than clutch goaltending; acquiring a goaltender wouldn't have won them a Cup. In 1992-93, Cheveldae had comparable RS numbers to Patrick Roy, and was clearly considered one of the league's better goalies at the time. He wasn't money in the playoffs, but nobody was when compared to Roy. It wasn't until Osgood showed up the next fall and ripped the starting job from his hands that people looked at him and said "WTF?" and questioned his career-to-date. Essensa, who had been a Vezina finalist in 1992, was pretty comparable to Cheveldae as I had said before. So that deal didn't make much sense. Osgood was ejected from the starter role after the deal, but stole it back for the remainder of the RS, until Bowman put the vet in for the playoffs (and Essensa dropped the ball) before realizing how much better Osgood was than Essensa. Murray wasn't perfect, but he did a pretty decent job. That Drake trade does grate on my nerves though because there was no need to give him up.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2012, 12:43 AM
  #47
Sadekuuro
Registered User
 
Sadekuuro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
In 1999, Osgood again posted a 2.35 GAA (8th of all goalies with 60+ mins) and a .919 (9th of goalies 60+ mins). Roy posted a .920 (8th) and 2.66 (13th). Ranford posted .905 (13th) and 3.28 (17th).

So yes, having Osgood in net would have made a significant difference in both cases. Having Osgood in 1999 puts the Wings in threepeat territory.
Baloney. Both games Osgood played, in what was a 2-2 series, the Wings lost by three goals.

Citing overall playoff stats to argue someone's performance in one series is misleading at best. Ranford was very good in the first two games and abysmal in the next two. Roy put up a .938 in the Detroit series and a combined .973 in the two deciding games while Osgood didn't hit .900 in either game.

Sadekuuro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2012, 02:46 AM
  #48
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sadekuuro View Post
Baloney. Both games Osgood played, in what was a 2-2 series, the Wings lost by three goals.

Citing overall playoff stats to argue someone's performance in one series is misleading at best. Ranford was very good in the first two games and abysmal in the next two. Roy put up a .938 in the Detroit series and a combined .973 in the two deciding games while Osgood didn't hit .900 in either game.
Osgood was also playing injured, as a healthy Ranford hadn't managed to hit .800 in either of his previous two games. He posted a .789 across two games; 5 on 24 shots in Game 3, then 3 on 14 shots before being pulled for Norm Maracle, who gave up another 3 on 10 shots. Osgood kept Detroit in the game as best as an injured goalie could be expected to, and much better than Ranford did. Ranford choked away the Wings' chances to go up 3-0 on the Avs, and then blew the lead entirely in game 4. Had he not done so, Osgood doesn't take the ice in that series. A healthy Osgood would have led the Wings past the Avs, because Roy was beatable until Ranford melted down and Roy smelled blood.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-11-2012, 10:56 AM
  #49
newfy
Registered User
 
newfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 5,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Osgood was also playing injured, as a healthy Ranford hadn't managed to hit .800 in either of his previous two games. He posted a .789 across two games; 5 on 24 shots in Game 3, then 3 on 14 shots before being pulled for Norm Maracle, who gave up another 3 on 10 shots. Osgood kept Detroit in the game as best as an injured goalie could be expected to, and much better than Ranford did. Ranford choked away the Wings' chances to go up 3-0 on the Avs, and then blew the lead entirely in game 4. Had he not done so, Osgood doesn't take the ice in that series. A healthy Osgood would have led the Wings past the Avs, because Roy was beatable until Ranford melted down and Roy smelled blood.
Shouldve strapped the pads on Hudler, he can probably stop a puck

newfy 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 10:53 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.