HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > San Jose Sharks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

#12 - Sharks @ Columbus - It's... - 2/11/13 - 4:00pm - CSNCA KFOX

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-12-2013, 12:43 PM
  #901
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
If what you said is true, then it works both ways, McLellan is responsible for fixing the PK too, which is simply not the case. McLellan had every chance to fix the PK and completely fell on his face. Robinson and Johnson come in and wa-la, they are one of the best (if not the best) PK killing team in the league. That kind of immediate turn around (and obvious strategy change) implies someone knew what they were doing, not trial and error.
There is no doubt that McLellan is at fault for the previous two seasons. But like I said before, coaching is also a team game. All 3 coaches last season thought the passive PK was a good idea (God knows why). This year, two coaches thought differently so they changed it. Every coach gives his insight on both sides of the ice, so it's unfair to blame only McLellan for yesterday's loss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by wtfisthis View Post
Please, how many more years does this need to go on for until its not a knee-jerk reaction? They've lost 5 in a row, all while looking like the same team we've all been seeing for the past few years. Stop with the "one bad game" bs because it isnt just "one bad game" anymore.
Or you can stop it with the "blow up the team" BS. No team is going to play flawless for the entire season. It really has only been one bad game. If the Sharks get dominated today, then you might have an argument.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 12:44 PM
  #902
ChubbChubby
My life is a gym
 
ChubbChubby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,141
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by wtfisthis View Post
Please, how many more years does this need to go on for until its not a knee-jerk reaction? They've lost 5 in a row, all while looking like the same team we've all been seeing for the past few years. Stop with the "one bad game" bs because it isnt just "one bad game" anymore.
Losing one game and asking to blow up the entire team IS by definition a knee-jerk reaction. They got completely dominated in one game. Emphasis on one game. If you want to rewrite history and say they sucked like this over the last few years then go right ahead, but that is just wrong, and the numbers and playoff appearances will clearly tell you that. The self-entitlement in this topic is ridiculous.

The Sharks are slumping right now. Every team slumps. Calm down and don't hit the panic button yet.

ChubbChubby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 12:49 PM
  #903
Dicdonya
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Jose
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
I'm sorry but it really is tmac at this point. His system is too slow and too predictable. Defense is lovely and fine but this team is now full of two way players and zero scorers. Now I'm not saying noone on our team can score, just that they are all too focused on playing responsibly so are not taking chance. Last nights game was a great example, beyond them looking lethargic look at how Columbus shot from anywhere and with little to zero setup. Our team almost never enters the zone and just chucks the puck at the net. When we do do that it's usually when a line change is about to happen or is happening and the forward knows starting a cycle will be pointless.

They really need to start taking some chances that are not exactly "safe". We have a very good two way team so it would stand to reason that if we open up a little we still are going to be able to backcheck on most errant chances. This team was playing fast and loose at the start of the year and have now gone back to playing too tight and deliberate. I think it's affecting our passing as well because instead of just making the pass, they are thinking about the pass first, and as Larry pointed out last night and is so true, the second you start thinking is when you start failing. Just go out and play.

On a side note, anyone who thinks griess was a problem last night is moronic, to put it nicely, he was getting exactly zero help last night and still was able to keep it a game until really the third. He would have had to play like halak vs. Washington in the playoffs type game to have held the sharks in that game, they were just atrocious in front of him. His number before this game are far more indicative of his ability, you know the numbers he had when the team was actually playing like a NHL team.

Dicdonya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 12:54 PM
  #904
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,263
vCash: 500
One thing I found interesting is that McLellan didn't really take anything off of Greiss. When Niemi has a bad game, McLellan usually follows it with a "but the players around him never bailed him out".
Greiss will never play again.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 12:58 PM
  #905
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
There is no doubt that McLellan is at fault for the previous two seasons. But like I said before, coaching is also a team game. All 3 coaches last season thought the passive PK was a good idea (God knows why). This year, two coaches thought differently so they changed it. Every coach gives his insight on both sides of the ice, so it's unfair to blame only McLellan for yesterday's loss.



Or you can stop it with the "blow up the team" BS. No team is going to play flawless for the entire season. It really has only been one bad game. If the Sharks get dominated today, then you might have an argument.
As usual, the devil is in the details, I'm not basing my opinion purely, or even primarily, on wins. The Sharks barely made the playoffs last season, that happened because they had an abysmal PK, and because of work ethic, and because of a lack of details in their game. They've fixed the PK this year, but everything else is still exactly as it was last year. The players are still floating, standing around, and the details of the game are pretty much non-existent. They looked pretty good for the first couple games, but I attribute a lot of that to playing very rusty teams and the Sharks having very little turn over. Even the last several wins the team looked very poor on the ice, and they have only gotten worse since then. The situation is not improving. They are not just slumping, they are degrading from game to game (mostly at offense, defense has been good overall most games).

You can be patient all you like, but the Sharks suffer from a lot of the same problems they did last season. It's either the players as a group, or the head coach at this point. It doesn't even matter if they win tonight and go on a winning streak again, if they continue playing like they are, win or otherwise, the cup is totally out of reach.

If you want specifics, which I've talked about before, these are where I would focus my efforts as a coach:

1) Stop turning the puck over. Stop turning the puck over. Stop turning the puck over. Stop turning the puck over. Stop turning the puck over. Stop turning the puck over.

2) Anyone caught not moving their feet at any point in the game will be benched, or scratched, no exceptions. I don't care if it's Jumbo, you are caught standing around you are done for the night. It might cost us a win, but it's going to cost us a lot more if it doesn't stop. Players that are out their working hard every minute of every shift are getting the ice time.

3) Chemistry. Pick a set of lines and stick to it. Constantly juggling them means there is no chemistry on the team. No one knows what to expect form anyone else and no one can establish any kind of rhythm. If you are going to mess with the lines, keep it to a minimum. Move a player around and let them be for a game, or two. You cannot even tell what you have when you keep switching the lines every 2 minutes.

4) Scoring on the rush. Goals in this league are scored when the defense is unprepared. The defense is most unprepared when they are still trying to setup against a rush. Get into the zone with speed and get the puck on net as quickly as possible. Have players ready behind the lead player ready to catch rebounds or drop passes at all times. Once the puck is on net, collapse to the net.

None of this stuff is rocket science. It is what successful teams do in the modern NHL and it's what the Sharks seem unable to implement. This is the head coaches responsibility. If he doesn't know how to implement it, that is his fault. If he can't get the players to follow his instructions, that is also his fault.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 01:06 PM
  #906
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
As usual, the devil is in the details, I'm not basing my opinion purely, or even primarily, on wins. The Sharks barely made the playoffs last season, that happened because they had an abysmal PK, and because of work ethic, and because of a lack of details in their game. They've fixed the PK this year, but everything else is still exactly as it was last year. The players are still floating, standing around, and the details of the game are pretty much non-existent. They looked pretty good for the first couple games, but I attribute a lot of that to playing very rusty teams and the Sharks having very little turn over. Even the last several wins the team looked very poor on the ice, and they have only gotten worse since then. The situation is not improving. They are not just slumping, they are degrading from game to game (mostly at offense, defense has been good overall most games).
I disagree that the Sharks looked very poor on the ice. Poor compared to the first few games, but they've still been outplaying the opposition. The Sharks dominated play against Anaheim, Nashville, and Phoenix. Against Chicago, the defense was the problem (mainly Murray and Braun). Even then, the game was even and very back-and-forth until the bad major call.

I agree with your other points, but I'm not sure about benching the players. Not that I'm against it, but I don't think it'll work (has to do with the personnel than the coaching). Pavelski and Couture sure, but Thornton and Marleau don't seem like the type of players to play better after they're benched. They'll just sulk. We all know what happened before when a coach had a problem with Marleau.

And again, how is it only the head coaches fault? Scoring on the rush, turnovers, etc should be on all the coaches.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 01:19 PM
  #907
Alaskanice
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: 1 1/2 hours away
Country: United States
Posts: 465
vCash: 500
It terrifies me to think of the moves that would be made in panic. We'd fire a coach every other week and trade players on a daily basis.
This game was a matter of 'Ole Mr. Murphy, nothing could go right. It happens, especially against a team that gets overlooked. Every professional sports team goes through it.

Alaskanice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 01:20 PM
  #908
Dicdonya
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: San Jose
Posts: 746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
And again, how is it only the head coaches fault? Scoring on the rush, turnovers, etc should be on all the coaches.
You're right but also wrong in a sense. Even though all the coaches have a hand in the teams play this is a classic example where all blame goes to the one in charge. Just like at a job, even if your employees are the real problem, the manager gets the axe if the store can't produce enough money, goods, etc. This is also why some people are so upset with Wilson too, lots of new employees same result, you start to only have one way to point the finger after a while. The assistant coaches have to coach within the confines of the head coaches gameplan, so even though they have some blame it's really not the same.

There is also the point to be made that even if some of the other coaches wanted to implement something new it's up to the head coach to allow it to happen, with how apparently stubborn tmac can be it would not surprise me if a few system changes did not get put into practice/play because tmac didn't think it fit his system. I have zero proof of that, just saying it wouldn't shock me of it were to be true.

Dicdonya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 01:31 PM
  #909
Fistfullofbeer
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Fistfullofbeer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Whidbey Island, WA
Country: India
Posts: 8,607
vCash: 500
Just listened to TMac

After what he said, if the team comes out flat today (don't care about W/L as much as effort) then to me that shows what HB was saying earlier. i.e he has lost the room/players. At that time I don't see if there is any quicker (not necessarily right) solution than replacing TMac.

__________________
What?! Look, he thinks he's people!
Fistfullofbeer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 01:34 PM
  #910
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dicdonya View Post
You're right but also wrong in a sense. Even though all the coaches have a hand in the teams play this is a classic example where all blame goes to the one in charge. Just like at a job, even if your employees are the real problem, the manager gets the axe if the store can't produce enough money, goods, etc. This is also why some people are so upset with Wilson too, lots of new employees same result, you start to only have one way to point the finger after a while. The assistant coaches have to coach within the confines of the head coaches gameplan, so even though they have some blame it's really not the same.
I agree that the HC has to get the most of the blame since that comes with the position. However, I'm sensing that a lot of people here (not directing it at you HB) are practically saying "McLellan is bad, Robinson is God". None of the coaches should be fault-free.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 01:52 PM
  #911
wtfisthis
Registered User
 
wtfisthis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 2,831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
Losing one game and asking to blow up the entire team IS by definition a knee-jerk reaction. They got completely dominated in one game. Emphasis on one game. If you want to rewrite history and say they sucked like this over the last few years then go right ahead, but that is just wrong, and the numbers and playoff appearances will clearly tell you that. The self-entitlement in this topic is ridiculous.

The Sharks are slumping right now. Every team slumps. Calm down and don't hit the panic button yet.
This isnt a reaction based off of one game. I dont know about the other people but I had these feelings before the season even started and during the 7 game win streak. Im a firm believer in that this current core wont win anything. Even if they win the rest of their games from here on out, that wont change. So no, these arent knee-jerk reactions asking to blow the team up after "one bad game".

wtfisthis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 02:23 PM
  #912
Gene Parmesan
Spider 2 Y Banana.
 
Gene Parmesan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 43,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fistfullofbeer View Post
Just listened to TMac

After what he said, if the team comes out flat today (don't care about W/L as much as effort) then to me that shows what HB was saying earlier. i.e he has lost the room/players. At that time I don't see if there is any quicker (not necessarily right) solution than replacing TMac.
If that is the case than TMac has to be relieved of his duties.

Gene Parmesan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 02:39 PM
  #913
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
I agree that the HC has to get the most of the blame since that comes with the position. However, I'm sensing that a lot of people here (not directing it at you HB) are practically saying "McLellan is bad, Robinson is God". None of the coaches should be fault-free.
I think it goes beyond that. No one is fault free, players included. It is integrated between coaches, players and team composition. The Sharks want possession. That requires that the back end be stocked with puckhandlers. Vlasic and Murray don't get passes for their defensive ability alone. Braun has to be involved in more than just defense and the forwards have to help the dmen. One forward needs to be way back to support the d on the breakout and be trail support. The forwards aren't doing it. The dmen are way too slow moving the puck and when they do the passes aren't sharp. When they are sharp, I have seen a bunch of fumbles by the wings coming out. The Marleau/Clowe swap actually helped Couture gain more o-zone time as Marleau probably has fumbled the least and has been one of the most ready on pass receptions whether up the boards or through the middle. Kudos to Gomez (not my favorite player) for doing well on breakouts.

The coaches have promoted change. There have been more middle exits but it has hurt when the d selects it at the wrong time or the forward fumbles the puck. Vlasic has been awful on moving the puck quickly. His passing goes into a blackhole under any type of pressure. The comment from Johnson about sharp last night was spot on. The fix is work in practice at speed on the issue. I don't know about speed in practice, but my guess is that practice is limited with the short season and that a lot of vets are reluctant to wear themselves out when they do practice. TM may know this, but is between Scylla and Charybdis in terms of implementing it (wear and tear and team resistance). An additional fix is to push on guys like Vlasic through ice time; improve the passing game or lose TOI. The same goes for JT regarding providing low puck support (a lot more skating as I have noticed Pavs taking that role frequently). JT has been taking the wing's spot in the d zone a lot. I do think TMs reluctance to use TOI pressure on top players plays into the issues. The lack of speed in the top lines puts more pressure on execution.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 02:47 PM
  #914
hockeyball
Registered User
 
hockeyball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 18,256
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
I agree that the HC has to get the most of the blame since that comes with the position. However, I'm sensing that a lot of people here (not directing it at you HB) are practically saying "McLellan is bad, Robinson is God". None of the coaches should be fault-free.
I'm not saying that, but Robinson just got here, I am not going to pass judgment on the guy after a few weeks of hockey. McLellan has been here for years, years of failure, and many of the same problems are still there. He's had plenty of time to right the ship, multiple assistant coaching staff (one that now includes a hall of fame player and cup winning head coach) and a significant player turnover. He's run out of excuses basically.

hockeyball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 03:31 PM
  #915
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubbs View Post
Come on guys, the Sharks only lost 1 bad game in this stretch. Every other game was close and wasn't due to a lack of effort (aside from a few passengers).

If this trend keeps going then I'd be worried, but every team has slumps and it's stupid to make knee-jerk reactions.
This.

Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyball View Post
McLellan has been here for years, years of failure,
Tmac has won at the highest rate of all Sharks coaches and has had the greatest number of deep playoff runs. Confirmation bias is biased.

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 03:44 PM
  #916
DarrylshutzSydor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: California
Country: Palestine
Posts: 988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post



Tmac has won at the highest rate of all Sharks coaches and has had the greatest number of deep playoff runs. Confirmation bias is biased.
Deep Playoff runs with a team that arguably should have won it all and failed.

DarrylshutzSydor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 03:52 PM
  #917
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrylshutzSydor View Post
Deep Playoff runs with a team that arguably should have won it all and failed.
Sorry, you don't have a point here. The only team that "should have won it all" is the team that wins it all. There is way too much luck and circumstance involved in winning the Cup. And for good measure, we were beaten both times by better teams, so no, we "shouldn't" have won it all.

To look at it from the opposite angle, the Kings' success last season would lead a person of your logical incompetency to believe that it's a good idea to start the season with a woefully inadequate roster and barely make the playoffs. That would be foolishness.

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-12-2013, 03:55 PM
  #918
Clowe Me
Registered User
 
Clowe Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 530
Country: Uzbekistan
Posts: 21,860
vCash: 500
People are overvaluing the influence of coaches on players. Coaches can teach and motivate the players, but it's up to the players to outplay the guys in front of them and win more battles. He can yell all he wants, but it's up to the defense to not allow so many point blank chances, it's up to the forwards to get dirty and score ugly, it's up to the goalies to not allow weak one-time shots beat them to essentially end the game.

The team simply has to start outworking their opponents, something they haven't done consistently over the last 6 games.

Clowe Me is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 04:09 PM
  #919
DarrylshutzSydor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: California
Country: Palestine
Posts: 988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by juantimer View Post
Sorry, you don't have a point here. The only team that "should have won it all" is the team that wins it all. There is way too much luck and circumstance involved in winning the Cup. And for good measure, we were beaten both times by better teams, so no, we "shouldn't" have won it all.

To look at it from the opposite angle, the Kings' success last season would lead a person of your logical incompetency to believe that it's a good idea to start the season with a woefully inadequate roster and barely make the playoffs. That would be foolishness.
Sorry, but you just missed the point. Ther have been lots of teams throughout history that should have won it all.

1971 Boston Bruins
1986 Edmonton Oilers
1999 Buffalo Sabres
2004 Calgary Flames
2010 San Jose Sharks

I disagree we were a better team, but didn't put the effort in, so yes we should've won it all.
I don't see how that would be the opposite angle, but you can keep trying to "poison the well" all you want.

DarrylshutzSydor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 04:17 PM
  #920
Fistfullofbeer
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Fistfullofbeer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Whidbey Island, WA
Country: India
Posts: 8,607
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrylshutzSydor View Post
Sorry, but you just missed the point. Ther have been lots of teams throughout history that should have won it all.

1971 Boston Bruins
1986 Edmonton Oilers
1999 Buffalo Sabres
2004 Calgary Flames
2010 San Jose Sharks

I disagree we were a better team, but didn't put the effort in, so yes we should've won it all.
I don't see how that would be the opposite angle, but you can keep trying to "poison the well" all you want.
I don't agree.
Maybe semantics but you mean skilled team. A 'better' team may lose a game because of luck here or there but should not lose a series.

Also .. Teams are based on skill + will. Just because we had one didn't make us better.

Fistfullofbeer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 04:25 PM
  #921
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrylshutzSydor View Post
2010 San Jose Sharks
Uh, the team with Keith, Seabrook, Campbell, and Hjalmarsson as their Top-4, along with Byfuglien, Bolland, Ladd, Versteeg, and Brouwer as depth players were the best team in the league that season.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 04:29 PM
  #922
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,997
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Uh, the team with Keith, Seabrook, Campbell, and Hjalmarsson as their Top-4, along with Byfuglien, Bolland, Ladd, Versteeg, and Brouwer as depth players were the best team in the league that season.
The '10 team wasn't even that good.

TheJuxtaposer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 04:33 PM
  #923
WTFetus
Moderator
Most popular combo
 
WTFetus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 12,263
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheJuxtaposer View Post
The '10 team wasn't even that good.
Yeah. If he said the 11 team, I might've sided with him. Vancouver's defense was a lot better, but I'd give the edge to San Jose's forwards.

WTFetus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 04:39 PM
  #924
Phu
Registered User
 
Phu's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 7,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrylshutzSydor View Post
Sorry, but you just missed the point. Ther have been lots of teams throughout history that should have won it all.

1971 Boston Bruins
1986 Edmonton Oilers
1999 Buffalo Sabres
Not that these can't be analyzed more closely, but anything prior to the salary cap era is irrelevant. The salary cap changed everything.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarrylshutzSydor View Post
2004 Calgary Flames
I'm sorry, WHAT?

Phu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-13-2013, 04:55 PM
  #925
TheJuxtaposer
#Shorks
 
TheJuxtaposer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: San Diego, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 27,997
vCash: 691
Quote:
Originally Posted by WTFetus View Post
Yeah. If he said the 11 team, I might've sided with him. Vancouver's defense was a lot better, but I'd give the edge to San Jose's forwards.
If we were healthy/icing Demers, I 100% believe we could have won the Cup that year. Vancouver was completely healthy until the Finals. Boston was healthy the whole way.

TheJuxtaposer 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 10:22 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.