HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Realignment: Did the CBA address this?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-24-2013, 12:43 PM
  #76
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNNumbers View Post
More,

I see what you are saying here. However, I am confused. Not arguing, just confused. In your prior post 63, your southern division didn't look like this at all. It was:
CHI, STL, NASH, TB, FLA, CAR, DAL

Now, you are exchanging Phil, Pitts, and Was in place of Chi and St L?

Not sure how to take that.

Otherwise, I agree. No way to get Pitts and Phil to even think of separating from the New York teams. And, those kind of strong opinions are part of the problem the BoG has.
That post at #63 wasn't referring to any "southern" Division. Relating to that other thread I created, I probably now wouldn't curse any Division with a "southern" label. That Division, as you can see it extends up to Chicago, I'd probably call something like the Central Division.

My post directy above is simply responding to your idea (which I've also presented before in other threads) about having all Divisions with 2 TZs and putting 2 CTZ teams in each of three eastern Divisions.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 01:01 PM
  #77
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
The only way to do it is to figure out what can't be done in realignment(splitting Phi/Pit, Bos/Mtl, can't be done), then what shouldn't be done in realignment(groupings that span 3 time zones), and create a system that works around that.

Looking at the current Western Conference, it's pretty clear that it's a situation where they tried to force a square peg into a round hole.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 01:04 PM
  #78
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
The only way to do it is to figure out what can't be done in realignment(splitting Phi/Pit, Bos/Mtl, can't be done), then what shouldn't be done in realignment(groupings that span 3 time zones), and create a system that works around that.

Looking at the current Western Conference, it's pretty clear that it's a situation where they tried to force a square peg into a round hole.
What do you say about my post #63 in that regard?
I think Detroit and Carolina could be flipped, but I prefer it as I posted it, otherwise it's Canadian border to Sunrise, Fl. ... (but then, we all know what idiocy the owners agreed on last year,... Though it wasn't idiocy in the minds of some, because their team isn't one of either the NE teams or the Florida teams).

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 01:12 PM
  #79
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,182
vCash: 540
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
If I'm remembering correctly... Tampa Bay, Florida, Montreal, and the Rangers.If that's correct, I believe the Rangers simply didn't like the most of the whole 4-Division/new scheduling format package; whereas Montreal, Tampa, and Florida hated the alignment.

Other teams might not have liked it either, but whereas it was an alignment that they saw as not effecting them badly, that's probably why they went along with it. And of course, probably a lot of teams liked it.
I remember hearing Pittsburg was a no in addition to Tampa, Montreal and the Rangers. The only definitive report I can find via google is a LeBrun article confirming Tampa and NYR and having strong suspicions that Montreal is one of them. At the time EJ Hraddeck said Pitts and Tampa were two of them.

cheswick is online now  
Old
01-24-2013, 01:14 PM
  #80
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
I remember hearing Pittsburg was a no in addition to Tampa, Montreal and the Rangers.
No, I'm quite sure Pittsburgh was fine with it (but I might be wrong), as it meant that talk of the Penguins and the Flyers possibly being separated got dropped.

I think some teams stuck with the observation that revenue is growing and the League has been doing well in that regard, so why mess with it. Obviously though, as we discovered more recently, revenue disparity, regardless of across the board growth, created significant problems for many teams.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 02:14 PM
  #81
Djp
Registered User
 
Djp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Seattle,WA
Posts: 6,255
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by knorthern knight View Post
This unnecessarily mixes time-zones. I've seen complaints on the Winnipeg sub-forum about early road starts on TV. 2 Florida teams in Central would be even worse than the "December alignment". Move Minnesota+Winnipeg to Central. Also the 2 Florida teams to Northeast, along with Columbus, who needs all the help they can get.
It actually makes sense...

winnipeg does not want to be the lone Canadian team in a conference (Thus at minnemum add Toronto). It also should be with its local rival pair in Minnesota.

Florida and Tampa Bay can be part of a South conference with Dallas, Nashville, and other teams.

I believe Columbus should be paired with Pittsburgh in the same conferehnce to help generate rivalries.

In the 4 conference alignment separate the west from discusion for the moment. You have 8 teams out west. If Phoenix stays and Seattle gets a team then colorado is free to leave.


With the remaining teams it doesnt really matter how you split them up. the 4 conference teams leads nicely to a 32 team league.

Assume Houston and Seattle get expansion clubs and Phoenix moves to Quebec City....

You can create numerous city pairs thus a division consists of 2 pairings. If there is an issue with competitive balance you can flip team pairs.

Seattle-Vancouver
Calgary-Edmonton
LA-Anaheim
San Jose-Colorado

Dallas-Houston
Florida-Tampa Bay
Nashville-Carolina
Detroit-Columbus

Winnipeg-Minnesota
Chicago-St Louis
Washigton-Pittsburgh
Philadlphia-NJ

NY Rangers-Brooklyn
Boston-Montreal
Qubec-Ottawa
Buffalo-toronto

Djp is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 02:16 PM
  #82
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,803
vCash: 500
Except that Pittsburgh and Philadelphia want to be paired together...

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 02:27 PM
  #83
KingsFan7824
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
What do you say about my post #63 in that regard?
I think Detroit and Carolina could be flipped, but I prefer it as I posted it, otherwise it's Canadian border to Sunrise, Fl. ... (but then, we all know what idiocy the owners agreed on last year,... Though it wasn't idiocy in the minds of some, because their team isn't one of either the NE teams or the Florida teams).
I've had pretty much the same thought as post #63.

I'd keep the NE, Atlantic, and Central intact though, since those divisions work by themselves. Although I could see Columbus going with Pittsburgh. I think Carolina and Columbus could go either way, or both in the old Patrick.

The other 3 divisions though, something needs to be done. The SE has a perception problem, and the NW and Pacific span 3 time zones. Group the SE teams with franchises that you can't discount, and relieve Dallas and Minnesota of their suffering. An added bonus of Winnipeg with other Canadian teams without breaking up any of the other Canadian teams, and I think it's golden.

KingsFan7824 is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 03:21 PM
  #84
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 15,040
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
It actually makes sense...

winnipeg does not want to be the lone Canadian team in a conference (Thus at minnemum add Toronto). It also should be with its local rival pair in Minnesota.

Florida and Tampa Bay can be part of a South conference with Dallas, Nashville, and other teams.

I believe Columbus should be paired with Pittsburgh in the same conferehnce to help generate rivalries.

In the 4 conference alignment separate the west from discusion for the moment. You have 8 teams out west. If Phoenix stays and Seattle gets a team then colorado is free to leave.


With the remaining teams it doesnt really matter how you split them up. the 4 conference teams leads nicely to a 32 team league.

Assume Houston and Seattle get expansion clubs and Phoenix moves to Quebec City....

You can create numerous city pairs thus a division consists of 2 pairings. If there is an issue with competitive balance you can flip team pairs.

Seattle-Vancouver
Calgary-Edmonton
LA-Anaheim
San Jose-Colorado

Dallas-Houston
Florida-Tampa Bay
Nashville-Carolina
Detroit-Columbus

Winnipeg-Minnesota
Chicago-St Louis
Washigton-Pittsburgh
Philadlphia-NJ

NY Rangers-Brooklyn
Boston-Montreal
Qubec-Ottawa
Buffalo-toronto
THERE will be no Brooklyn, ONCE THE NY Islanders vacate Nassau Coliseum, tht's been known since the Islanders lease announcement.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 04:34 PM
  #85
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingsFan7824 View Post
I've had pretty much the same thought as post #63.

I'd keep the NE, Atlantic, and Central intact though, since those divisions work by themselves. Although I could see Columbus going with Pittsburgh. I think Carolina and Columbus could go either way, or both in the old Patrick.

The other 3 divisions though, something needs to be done. The SE has a perception problem, and the NW and Pacific span 3 time zones. Group the SE teams with franchises that you can't discount, and relieve Dallas and Minnesota of their suffering. An added bonus of Winnipeg with other Canadian teams without breaking up any of the other Canadian teams, and I think it's golden.
So essentially, your difference from me is that in regards to the Central you see only Columbus as being flexible to align, and I also see Detroit as a potential flexibly aligned team.
In fact, some may also see Nashville's alignment as not being carved in stone.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CHRDANHUTCH View Post
THERE will be no Brooklyn, ONCE THE NY Islanders vacate Nassau Coliseum, tht's been known since the Islanders lease announcement.
OT: Speaking of renamed teams, if the Coyotes are still around for next Season aren't they to be renamed the Arizona Coyotes?

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 05:55 PM
  #86
MNNumbers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,248
vCash: 500
Perhaps also slightly OT:

What would have happened with this 48 game season if the 4 conference realignment had gone through?

Remember, there was no Western and Eastern Conference.

I don't have any idea myself, except that I am sure there would have more than only divisional (or 7/8 team conference) play.

MNNumbers is offline  
Old
01-24-2013, 11:22 PM
  #87
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djp View Post
It actually makes sense...

winnipeg does not want to be the lone Canadian team in a conference (Thus at minnemum add Toronto). It also should be with its local rival pair in Minnesota.

Florida and Tampa Bay can be part of a South conference with Dallas, Nashville, and other teams.

I believe Columbus should be paired with Pittsburgh in the same conferehnce to help generate rivalries.

In the 4 conference alignment separate the west from discusion for the moment. You have 8 teams out west. If Phoenix stays and Seattle gets a team then colorado is free to leave.


With the remaining teams it doesnt really matter how you split them up. the 4 conference teams leads nicely to a 32 team league.

Assume Houston and Seattle get expansion clubs and Phoenix moves to Quebec City....

You can create numerous city pairs thus a division consists of 2 pairings. If there is an issue with competitive balance you can flip team pairs.

Seattle-Vancouver
Calgary-Edmonton
LA-Anaheim
San Jose-Colorado

Dallas-Houston
Florida-Tampa Bay
Nashville-Carolina
Detroit-Columbus

Winnipeg-Minnesota
Chicago-St Louis
Washigton-Pittsburgh
Philadlphia-NJ

NY Rangers-Brooklyn
Boston-Montreal
Qubec-Ottawa
Buffalo-toronto
I like your way of thinking here. Pairs that shouldn't be separated, but then potentially mixing and matching those pairs with other pairs.

But as CHRDANHUTCH posted commented,... forget that "Brooklyn" angle. They're still the Islanders, the NY Islanders.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 12:00 AM
  #88
CHRDANHUTCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Auburn, Maine
Country: United States
Posts: 15,040
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via MSN to CHRDANHUTCH Send a message via Yahoo to CHRDANHUTCH
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
So essentially, your difference from me is that in regards to the Central you see only Columbus as being flexible to align, and I also see Detroit as a potential flexibly aligned team.
In fact, some may also see Nashville's alignment as not being carved in stone.



OT: Speaking of renamed teams, if the Coyotes are still around for next Season aren't they to be renamed the Arizona Coyotes?
I can't say either way, MO, but it wouldn't surprise me.

CHRDANHUTCH is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 05:30 AM
  #89
cup4blues
Sarcasm galore
 
cup4blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 120
vCash: 500
The only thing I never liked about the NHL 4 conference proposal is giving teams a statistical advantage of making the playoffs and going deep by being placed in a division with fewer teams.

cup4blues is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 07:32 AM
  #90
The Right Price
Registered User
 
The Right Price's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,083
vCash: 500
Detroit or Columbus are moving to the EC before Nashville since they are ET and Nashville CT.


Best, most logical solution, IMO.

Columbus --> Southeast
Minnesota --> Central
Winnipeg --> Northwest

The only problem this creates is that Northwest would have four Canadian teams + Colorado.

If that would be the case then

Vancouver --> Pacific
Dallas --> Central
Minnesota --> Northeast

Although Vancouver will oppose this.

The Right Price is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 08:20 AM
  #91
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Right Price View Post
Detroit or Columbus are moving to the EC before Nashville since they are ET and Nashville CT.

Best, most logical solution, IMO.

Columbus --> Southeast
Minnesota --> Central
Winnipeg --> Northwest

The only problem this creates is that Northwest would have four Canadian teams + Colorado.

If that would be the case then

Vancouver --> Pacific
Dallas --> Central
Minnesota --> Northeast

Although Vancouver will oppose this.
You appear to be running yourself into the vicious circle which is attempting NHL realignment...
1) put Columbus in the East, and Detroit will fight it
2) put Detroit in the East and the rest of the West will fight it
3) put Winnipeg in the Northwest and Minnesota or Colorado will fight it (whichever is still left there, though that team should absolutely be Minnesota, not Colorado)
4) put Vancouver in the Pacific and Vancouver will fight it
5) just put Winnipeg in the Central and both Minnesota and Dallas will fight it
6) and back to the beginning of this circle, if you put Columbus in the SE, then either the other SE teams won't be happy receiving yet another unestablished hockey market in their Division, or, vice versa, Columbus might just possibly think that being in the Central would be better for the franchise than being in the SE.


But this is how I'd handle it regardless:

Option 1
Make the simple swap of putting Columbus in the SE and Winnipeg in the CE (if the West then can't agree on any further changes, then just leave it that way until whevever expansion comes along).

Option 2
Put Columbus in the SE, Winnipeg in the NW, Vancouver in the PA, Dallas in the CE (and say to Minnesota,... now you have only two 2 TZs in your Division and a much closer potential rival; and say to Vancouver,... you've given up Canadian Divisional rivals but got a better TZ arrangement, but hey, you're a big market team, you can handle it,... at least until expansion).

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 10:20 AM
  #92
MNNumbers
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,248
vCash: 500
MO - Remember when we were discussing unbalanced conferences and imbalanced schedules last year, in regard to realignment?

If I remember correctly, we ended up with 2 things in mind:

One - by numbers of teams in each division, there is a 50% or 57% chance of making the playoffs. That seems 'wrong' in an ethical sense to many people.

Two - However, the imbalance in schedule between conferences may have a bigger effect than that. In other words, who you play might be more "unfair" than how many teams are in your division/conference.

So, do you remember if we had a way to quantify that?

MNNumbers is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 10:27 AM
  #93
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MNNumbers View Post
MO - Remember when we were discussing unbalanced conferences and imbalanced schedules last year, in regard to realignment?

If I remember correctly, we ended up with 2 things in mind:

One - by numbers of teams in each division, there is a 50% or 57% chance of making the playoffs. That seems 'wrong' in an ethical sense to many people.

Two - However, the imbalance in schedule between conferences may have a bigger effect than that. In other words, who you play might be more "unfair" than how many teams are in your division/conference.

So, do you remember if we had a way to quantify that?
Sorry, MNN, but I think you must have had that particular discussion with someone else, as it doesn't ring a bell with me at all.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 10:49 AM
  #94
MotorCityBoy
Registered User
 
MotorCityBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 13
vCash: 500
To those who are claiming that certain teams absolutely cannot be broken up: the Wings and Leafs were not only separated, but placed in separate conferences.

MotorCityBoy is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 11:11 AM
  #95
wildthing202
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Douglas, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 697
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to wildthing202 Send a message via Yahoo to wildthing202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MotorCityBoy View Post
To those who are claiming that certain teams absolutely cannot be broken up: the Wings and Leafs were not only separated, but placed in separate conferences.
And the Penguins & Flyers were broken up not once but twice.

wildthing202 is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 11:43 AM
  #96
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 56,803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
6) and back to the beginning of this circle, if you put Columbus in the SE, then either the other SE teams won't be happy receiving yet another unestablished hockey market in their Division, or, vice versa, Columbus might just possibly think that being in the Central would be better for the franchise than being in the SE.
And/or Columbus will be the new 300 pound gorilla in the SE as they have had to fight/play so hard in West and will find it much easier to succeed in SE.

LadyStanley is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 11:58 AM
  #97
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
And/or Columbus will be the new 300 pound gorilla in the SE as they have had to fight/play so hard in West and will find it much easier to succeed in SE.
Could well be, LadyStanley. I was just posting a pessimistic idea that even having Columbus in the SE would probably make someone unhappy. But then, that could maybe just be the best thing that could happen to Columbus.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 12:48 PM
  #98
HugoSimon
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 246
vCash: 500
This is my proposal.

I think it would only effect american franchises for the better. Of course nashville and Dallas, would play the majority of their games out side of their time zone. However they would be in the east, and in the south. I can't imagine them being against this.

The caps would be moved to the north east.

The big price to be payed is by montreal vancouver and Toronto.

Vancouver will be the only canadian team in it's division, however it will have much better timezone benefits, and will prevent a single american team being trapped in a canadian division. However with the addition of Toronto and Winnipeg they aren't loosing any national games. When you do the math of two in division versus four outside.

Montreal will loose toronto, that's a given and their's no way around it, however it does benefit Ottawa being the only anglo team in the east.

Toronto gets screwed royally, however they can handle it they're by far the biggest team in the league, and they will help bring balance to the west.

I think it'll make the lake states happy, to have another original six, and will calm down detroits desire to be in the east, and help stabilize CBJ.

In all I think at the very least, you'll have a better balance between east and west, atleast in terms of the net value of each conference.

So here they are

Pacific * Mountain * Lake states * Dixie * Atlantic * Eastern

Van *** Edmonton * Chicago * Dallas * Phili * Montreal

SJ *** Calgary * Columbus * Nashville * Pitsburg * Ottawa

LA **** Minnesota * Detroit * Florida ** NYI ** Boston

Anaheim * Colorado * St Louis * Tampa ** NYR ** Washington

Phoenix * Winnipeg * Toronto * Carolina * NJD ** Buffalo
Attached Images
File Type: jpg 450px-National_Hockey_League_team_locations.jpg‎ (38.0 KB, 9 views)


Last edited by HugoSimon: 01-25-2013 at 01:01 PM.
HugoSimon is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 01:01 PM
  #99
Grudy0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 1,141
vCash: 500
I hate to burst the bubble...

If keeping the current six-division, two-conference setup with the 6-4-18 scheduling were possible, wouldn't the NHL BoG's have approved it? No matter how much bellyaching, the divisional and scheduling status quo are no longer options (as long as the NHLPA agrees).

It strains the mind that there are complaints with the NHL-approved four-conference setup because the two Florida teams are inserted into the current Northeast Division, simply because the Lightning and Panthers would be flying over all seven of the former "Patrick Division" conference teams. However, some of the proposals here have the exact same problem, such as putting Minnesota and Winnipeg with the current Northeast Division teams, where the Wild and Jets would then be flying over many teams closer to them.

The end goal would be to create an alignment and scheduling matrix (and even playoff format) that would be approved by 20 franchises, realizing that it is a political process. We know how political it is due to the fact that Ed Snider, the most tenured of the owners, has swung his weight to make sure the 1980's Patrick Division stays intact.

Grudy0 is offline  
Old
01-25-2013, 01:10 PM
  #100
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,135
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugoSimon View Post
So here they are

Pacific * Mountain * Lake states * Dixie * Atlantic * Eastern

Vancouver * Edmonton * Chicago * Dallas * Philidelphia * Montreal

SJS *** Calgary * Columbus * Nashville * Pittsburgh * Ottawa

LAK *** Minnesota * Detroit * Florida * NYI *** Boston

Anaheim * Colorado * St Louis * Tampa * NYR *** Washington

Phoenix * Winnipeg * Toronto * Carolina * NJD *** Buffalo
I'd switch Buffalo, Carolina, and St Louis.
But it doesn't matter, extremely unlikely that such an alignment would be accepted, plus that "Dixie" Division is trouble waiting to happen, though St Louis in the Division might make it work. And with St Louis, renaming it the Central would be a good idea.

MoreOrr is offline  
Closed Thread

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 07:44 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.