HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

Rangers Officially Introduce Alain Vigneault As Coach

View Poll Results: What do you think of the hire?
Good hire 142 66.67%
Bad hire 7 3.29%
Neutral; will wait and see... 64 30.05%
Voters: 213. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-24-2013, 08:14 AM
  #126
Cresto
Much Disappoint
 
Cresto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Its not that. At all.

In fact, its simply asking you to justify your entire viewpoint. If you don't think that a different coach could've brought better results, then whats the point of the coaching change?

Now, keep in mind this is coming from someone who thinks this roster lacks championship talent/depth, you know, the real problem. But I digress, and I'd really like to know how you think a different coach will be capable of taking a good but not great roster past the final 4 or 8 teams left in the league.
It's been a few days since this thread of replies started so let me backtrack. Okay, I was objecting to the question of how many cups would we have won comment because its hypothetical, but I digress on that. So it started as Chosen stating JT was effective because of 2011-2012 and that Torts is effective as a coach in general(?). I then replied with the fact that 2011-2012 was mainly the product of Henrik and I then added in a post that followed that said 2011-2012 was in fact a positive reflection of Torts. My emphasis was on the fact that his one successful year in his tenure here should be taken into consideration of his other years and importantly why he had good and bad years.

In terms of addressing why I think a coaching change is beneficial? The game has become far more contingent upon strategically using your personnel in strategizing effective defensive, transition, and offensive zone play including breakouts, PKs, PPs. Overall, his inability to adapt is his greatest downfall. Anyone of us on this board can predict his game plan night in and night out. If I were an opposing coach, I would need to have better personnel and put them up against certain NYR players in certain situations to start the game with a systematic advantage that will expose NYR in various situations. 2011-2012 is the product of how hard we played and how everyone was playing their best (ill credit torts with that). We executed a strategically simple game plan perfectly night in and night out. When it came to the PO, the opponents were better, there was more strategizing within a series in terms of line up and style of plan and our dominance receded there and we did not make it to the ECF easily.

This year, Torts was unable to adapt in so many situation. Whether it's the dump and chase (despite much concern expressed by MGMT). His line ups was a mess all year long. He split up Stepan and Nash when they were absolute gold for us in favor of a line up that was more balanced in his mind. His inability to handle players showed this year. I mean, how the **** does a coach manage to end up with 3 all star calibre players in Gaborik, Nash, and Richards and make a well below average outcome out of them in the RS and then the PO. 40 goal scorer on the 4th line? #1 center (who was largely responsible for his downfall to be fair to Torts) ending up as a failure during the RS and scratched in PO elimination games and replaced by a center who isn't really a center.

The power play was worse than our EV. No real attempt beyond his concepts of revitalizing the PP which is obviously not very good. The PK has been largely attributed to Sully but to be fair, I will credit Torts with what was a decent PK last year and a good PK in 11-12.

It's not the specifics about Torts. It's his overall inability to adapt. Hockey is a dynamic game and that Dynamicism comes alive especially in a 7 game series. NYR under Torts has been a plane piloted in a straight line without regard for storms and thunder clouds that could otherwise been avoided by adapting to the situation. The "safe is death" Moto of 2004 torts is basically the problem. He's being safe within his comfort zone and I know people are objecting to the notion of a new NHL with a need for new strategies etc. even without the existence of these new systems, Torts is not a good strategist. We don't have and will not have that great of a team to win a cup without a good strategist at the helm.

Every game and series offers challenges and the coach can turn a negative into a positive. Torts's ability to do that is less than that of most other coaches and that's why to win a championship, torts has to be left out of the equation.

Bylsmas penguins were loaded with 2 good goalies, some of the best players in the world for gods sake and they were schooled by the bruins in fairly dramatic fashion and that is in part because of coaching. I don't think torts is capable of out coaching another coach on any given night. We've never won a smooth or at least turbulence free series under torts and to win 4 series in the toughest way possible makes a cup that much harder to attain

There are ideas on how to improve the team that we all can think of and would implement and I just don't think Torts allows for this team to extend beyond what they have now and what they are doing now. Torts wanted more grit to his team
And wanted grinders when he had a Rick Nash to work with and adapt his strategy around. If nothing else, utilizing your strength and overcoming weaknesses to a roster is a coaches primary responsibility and they can accomplish that in many ways and he struggled with that this year and show no sign or willingness to change.


Last edited by Cresto: 06-24-2013 at 08:22 AM.
Cresto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 08:44 AM
  #127
Thesensation19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,391
vCash: 500
Under Renneys system, so those 4 or so years, Hank was up and coming young goalie who played out of his mind to get us in the playoffs when very few thought we had a chance to even come close. Yet, under his system and I guess inexperience included, I felt that Hank was getting scored on a lot by deflections and rebounds.

Under Torts, I did not see that much at all during his 4 year tenure. Yet what we all realized was that Hank was getting shot on ALOTTTTTT. A whole lot. Bad chances, good chances, rebounds... A ton of shots had Hank at the top of Shots against every year!

I dont know about deflections though. I thought as far as 3 years ago the Rangers defense did a good job on making sure shots were not deflected. A really smart shot blocking team.

Anyway, under two systems... Hank always impressed.

I dont see any different now. He is one year older and one year smarter.

I watched some highlights of the Canucks to see what were getting in AV system and the team moves the puck fast and more efficiently. I mean, didnt they kick our *** a few times in the last few years too.

Without the puck, it seems as though the Nucks just collapsed as a team and made sure to apply pressure. AV said it best, he loves a strong defense. Its important. What we were lacking though is control.

Hopefully under AV system, Hank and Biron will face less shots and less quality shots a game. We will have more possession and control and thus we will have more efficient offense.




I heard though our team will be very similar to last years and I hated that roster.
Pyatt has to go. Asham is back and forth with me, he is useful but could use someone else probably.

I think even with JT Miller. and hopefully healthier players, the Rangers still lack centers. Or depth at it. Maybe Derek Roy? Idk how much i like his playing but I know hes skilled, and AV liked him in Vancouver for that brief time I believe

Thesensation19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 08:55 AM
  #128
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 14,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCresty View Post
It's been a few days since this thread of replies started so let me backtrack. Okay, I was objecting to the question of how many cups would we have won comment because its hypothetical, but I digress on that. So it started as Chosen stating JT was effective because of 2011-2012 and that Torts is effective as a coach in general(?). I then replied with the fact that 2011-2012 was mainly the product of Henrik and I then added in a post that followed that said 2011-2012 was in fact a positive reflection of Torts. My emphasis was on the fact that his one successful year in his tenure here should be taken into consideration of his other years and importantly why he had good and bad years.

In terms of addressing why I think a coaching change is beneficial? The game has become far more contingent upon strategically using your personnel in strategizing effective defensive, transition, and offensive zone play including breakouts, PKs, PPs. Overall, his inability to adapt is his greatest downfall. Anyone of us on this board can predict his game plan night in and night out. If I were an opposing coach, I would need to have better personnel and put them up against certain NYR players in certain situations to start the game with a systematic advantage that will expose NYR in various situations. 2011-2012 is the product of how hard we played and how everyone was playing their best (ill credit torts with that). We executed a strategically simple game plan perfectly night in and night out. When it came to the PO, the opponents were better, there was more strategizing within a series in terms of line up and style of plan and our dominance receded there and we did not make it to the ECF easily.

This year, Torts was unable to adapt in so many situation. Whether it's the dump and chase (despite much concern expressed by MGMT). His line ups was a mess all year long. He split up Stepan and Nash when they were absolute gold for us in favor of a line up that was more balanced in his mind. His inability to handle players showed this year. I mean, how the **** does a coach manage to end up with 3 all star calibre players in Gaborik, Nash, and Richards and make a well below average outcome out of them in the RS and then the PO. 40 goal scorer on the 4th line? #1 center (who was largely responsible for his downfall to be fair to Torts) ending up as a failure during the RS and scratched in PO elimination games and replaced by a center who isn't really a center.

The power play was worse than our EV. No real attempt beyond his concepts of revitalizing the PP which is obviously not very good. The PK has been largely attributed to Sully but to be fair, I will credit Torts with what was a decent PK last year and a good PK in 11-12.

It's not the specifics about Torts. It's his overall inability to adapt. Hockey is a dynamic game and that Dynamicism comes alive especially in a 7 game series. NYR under Torts has been a plane piloted in a straight line without regard for storms and thunder clouds that could otherwise been avoided by adapting to the situation. The "safe is death" Moto of 2004 torts is basically the problem. He's being safe within his comfort zone and I know people are objecting to the notion of a new NHL with a need for new strategies etc. even without the existence of these new systems, Torts is not a good strategist. We don't have and will not have that great of a team to win a cup without a good strategist at the helm.

Every game and series offers challenges and the coach can turn a negative into a positive. Torts's ability to do that is less than that of most other coaches and that's why to win a championship, torts has to be left out of the equation.

Bylsmas penguins were loaded with 2 good goalies, some of the best players in the world for gods sake and they were schooled by the bruins in fairly dramatic fashion and that is in part because of coaching. I don't think torts is capable of out coaching another coach on any given night. We've never won a smooth or at least turbulence free series under torts and to win 4 series in the toughest way possible makes a cup that much harder to attain

There are ideas on how to improve the team that we all can think of and would implement and I just don't think Torts allows for this team to extend beyond what they have now and what they are doing now. Torts wanted more grit to his team
And wanted grinders when he had a Rick Nash to work with and adapt his strategy around. If nothing else, utilizing your strength and overcoming weaknesses to a roster is a coaches primary responsibility and they can accomplish that in many ways and he struggled with that this year and show no sign or willingness to change.
I've read the exchanges. And, like this post, I just see a meandering laundry list of complaints - some legitimate, many mundane. Im just trying to keep it simple. Is it fair to say you just want to see something different even if the results wind up being the same, or worse?

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 08:59 AM
  #129
Cresto
Much Disappoint
 
Cresto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,470
vCash: 500
True, some legitimate, some mundane but I tried to answer a question posed to the best of my ability to 6AM

It's not that I want to see something different for the hell of it. In fact, I don't necessarily need to want to see immediate success. My position is that I just don't see Torts ever taking us through 4 series. We play to win the cup and if I don't think torts is a coach that can work with the current group to achieve that goal, I am very willing, almost too willing to accept any other coach with promise and variability in their coaching that will give us a different and more viable shot at the cup.

Cresto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 09:42 AM
  #130
mschmidt64
Registered User
 
mschmidt64's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCresty View Post
I love all the rationalizing that's happening. Unless AV is really really charismatic or people changed their minds over night, there is no way that the thought and verdict on AV was 15-0-4. If AV is second to Eakins, then Eakins would have been Jesus in NYC.
Poll question doesn't ask if he was the best hire, it asks if he was a good hire.

Implying there could have been multiple good hires.

mschmidt64 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 10:19 AM
  #131
Cresto
Much Disappoint
 
Cresto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mschmidt64 View Post
Poll question doesn't ask if he was the best hire, it asks if he was a good hire.

Implying there could have been multiple good hires.
there were many anti-AV people it seems. Maybe it was just the favoring toward Eakins

Cresto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 11:26 AM
  #132
Championship*
#Joel&Ellie
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,503
vCash: 500
Forgive me if this was posted already, but :

Quote:
Q: Sixty-four games with the Salt Lake Golden Eagles, you had a mere 266 penalty minutes. Could you explain that?

A: You know what? Hockey was different back then. There was more fighting. It was in a different era. So I was probably considered more of a physical player back then. Now and then, I dropped the gloves. I was thinking of that yesterday (chuckle). In my 42 of the best NHL games in the world, I had a fight with Mark Messier! ... He was playing in Edmonton at the time. And I think accidentally, I hit this French guy with my stick — and ... he came boltin’ after me. It was an accident. I did all right, he did all right (smile), it wasn’t a real long fight.

Championship* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 11:32 AM
  #133
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,721
vCash: 659
True story:

http://www.hockeyfights.com/players/...htcard/reg1982

I bet Messier challenges him to a rematch...

__________________
Rangers Unlimited
Hockey Graphs
Brian Boyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 11:56 AM
  #134
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,721
vCash: 659
I'll offer a free hug (S&H not included) to anyone who can dig up video of that fight.

Brian Boyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 12:42 PM
  #135
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCresty View Post
In terms of terminology, "holding back" is fairly loaded. When a coach who is suppose to propel a team is said to be holding a team back, it's quite dramatic.

Having that said, Torts did in fact hold the Rangers back this past season. The Eastern conference finish two seasons ago was to Torts's credit. Neither is completely on Torts however.

Asking whether a team would have won a cup with a better coach is unfair because you're just setting me up to counter me in a straw man. If I say, yes we would have, you can easily question my judgement on NYR's capability and my apparently harsh judgement of Torts. If I say no, then you can easily say what is wrong with Torts then, if a different coach cannot win the cup either and Torts's efforts to get to the ECF and ECSF in the past two year is probably as close as one can get to, within reason, without winning the cup.

Am I avoiding the question? The question is loaded and a set up and you know it and that's why you are explicitly stating the "avoiding the question" clause. It's no good.

You're forcing an answer of "Do you think NSA should spy on citizens for reason of national security?"Yes or No?

If you say yes, then you disregard the rights and freedoms and ethics and morals.

If you say no, then you are unpatriotic and place the security of the lives of citizens at stake.

the 80% and 90% statement is conceptual, not empirical or factual.
All I have asked you is if a "better" coach would have gotten better results. That is not a loaded question. It goes to the heart of your argument.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 03:17 PM
  #136
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,714
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Championship View Post
Forgive me if this was posted already, but :
Why is so hard not to post a link?

Brooklyn Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 05:33 PM
  #137
Cresto
Much Disappoint
 
Cresto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
All I have asked you is if a "better" coach would have gotten better results. That is not a loaded question. It goes to the heart of your argument.
The cups yes and no is kind of dramatic. A better coach would get better results, hence better coach. If a better coach doesn't get better result, then what makes the coach better? I just don't think the question makes sense and why did you put quotations around "better"?Are you suggesting that a better coach according to me isn't actually better and so you've use the quotations? If that's the case, the better coach (in my opinion) would in fact produce better results by logic and if you disagree with the notion that a new coach is better, then I would assume you would then disagree that a better [different] coach would not be better. I just can't make sense of the question.

Would a better coach have won us a cup, maybe, maybe not, cups can't be won because you've made a coaching upgrade and I think everyone would answer the same if they were realistic.
Would a better coach have produce better results? By logic, yes.

Cresto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 06:04 PM
  #138
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCresty View Post
The cups yes and no is kind of dramatic. A better coach would get better results, hence better coach. If a better coach doesn't get better result, then what makes the coach better? I just don't think the question makes sense and why did you put quotations around "better"?Are you suggesting that a better coach according to me isn't actually better and so you've use the quotations? If that's the case, the better coach (in my opinion) would in fact produce better results by logic and if you disagree with the notion that a new coach is better, then I would assume you would then disagree that a better [different] coach would not be better. I just can't make sense of the question.

Would a better coach have won us a cup, maybe, maybe not, cups can't be won because you've made a coaching upgrade and I think everyone would answer the same if they were realistic.
Would a better coach have produce better results? By logic, yes.
Okay. we are getting somewhere. Since you believe Vigneault is a better coach than Torts, if he had been coaching the Rangers the last two years, you are saying they would have done better.

In 2011-12, that means, at the very least making the finals and perhaps winning the Cup. Correct?

Otherwise, you are saying there would be no net gain from the coaching switch.

What makes Vigneault a better coach, by the way?

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 06:18 PM
  #139
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,721
vCash: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Okay. we are getting somewhere. Since you believe Vigneault is a better coach than Torts, if he had been coaching the Rangers the last two years, you are saying they would have done better.

In 2011-12, that means, at the very least making the finals and perhaps winning the Cup. Correct?

Otherwise, you are saying there would be no net gain from the coaching switch.

What makes Vigneault a better coach, by the way?
Because of course, a better coach would garner better results than a lesser coach every single season....

This is why probability should be taught to everyone.

Brian Boyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 06:36 PM
  #140
Cresto
Much Disappoint
 
Cresto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chosen View Post
Okay. we are getting somewhere. Since you believe Vigneault is a better coach than Torts, if he had been coaching the Rangers the last two years, you are saying they would have done better.

In 2011-12, that means, at the very least making the finals and perhaps winning the Cup. Correct?

Otherwise, you are saying there would be no net gain from the coaching switch.

What makes Vigneault a better coach, by the way?
you are slippery sloping. Do you believe Vigeault is worse than Torts? Since you believe that he is worse than Torts, if he were to coach the Rangers this upcoming season and the one after that, you are saying they would never pass get to the ECF or the 2nd round. Correct?

Cresto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 07:23 PM
  #141
Kwayry
Take the damn deal
 
Kwayry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Plano
Country: United States
Posts: 2,914
vCash: 500
Torts was a good coach for 4.5 years, he brought a lot of good things to the team, discipline, accountability and a sense of identity.
After 4.5 years, the team needed a change.
They brought in AV to move the team in a new direction, more offensively oriented, without forgetting about the defensive side.

Interesting fact:
Since 2008-2009,
Offensively:
Canucks averaged 3.07 goals/game, fifth in the NHL.
Rangers were 19th, averaging 2.72 goals/game.
Defensively:
Rangers were second in the NHL with 2.48 goals allowed/game.
Canucks were third in the league at 2.52.

I find it interesting that the so called defensive system under Torts was barely better than the Canucks under AV, and this with Hank backstopping the Rangers.

Kwayry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-24-2013, 07:57 PM
  #142
Zamboner
Your move, creep.
 
Zamboner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,648
vCash: 500
Remember when people wanted Pierre McGuire? AV is Herb Brooks, in comparison.

I'm not a huge AV guy, but I voted good hire, just because of who he was competing with. It's not like Mike Babcock was available. AV's at worse, a solid coach, and at best a very good one, so I think it's a low risk, safe pick, that could pay dividends. As a whole, we'll be a better hockey team with him behind the bench than Tortorella (thinking of the inadvertent coach swap with Vancouver, just like '94, Rangers win). A Stanley Cup capable coach, I'm not sure, but it's progress, and progress is good.

Zamboner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 03:31 PM
  #143
JeffMangum
Ra shi da
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 55,630
vCash: 300
Torts just said he's been exchanging notes with AV for two weeks.

ohgod.jpg

__________________

#TannerGlass2014
SEEN YOUR VIDEO!
#SheWentToHarvard
JeffMangum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 03:32 PM
  #144
poeman
Fixing Rangers PP
 
poeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 4,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BB v2 0 View Post
Torts just said he's been exchanging notes with AV for two weeks.

ohgod.jpg
Hagelin better make sure he is bringing coffee for AV in the morning lol

poeman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 03:43 PM
  #145
BroadwayBlues
oxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxo
 
BroadwayBlues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York City
Country: United States
Posts: 7,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BB v2 0 View Post
Torts just said he's been exchanging notes with AV for two weeks.

ohgod.jpg
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

BroadwayBlues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 04:03 PM
  #146
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,721
vCash: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by poeman View Post
Hagelin better make sure he is bringing coffee for AV in the morning lol
Torts expressed some regret about putting some players in a tough situation with his dealings with the press. Not hard to imagine who he was talking about.

Brian Boyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 04:15 PM
  #147
Cresto
Much Disappoint
 
Cresto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
Torts expressed some regret about putting some players in a tough situation with his dealings with the press. Not hard to imagine who he was talking about.
OMGOMG stalp blowing up the Hagelin situationomgomg.

Cresto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 04:23 PM
  #148
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,721
vCash: 659
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCresty View Post
OMGOMG stalp blowing up the Hagelin situationomgomg.
stalp?

Brian Boyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 04:54 PM
  #149
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,721
vCash: 659
I also think its funny how Torts said he's spoken with AV every other day for two weeks, but whenever a specific question came, he claimed to know nothing about the players.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS SOMETIMES.

Brian Boyle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2013, 04:55 PM
  #150
Richter Scale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JCresty View Post
you are slippery sloping. Do you believe Vigeault is worse than Torts? Since you believe that he is worse than Torts, if he were to coach the Rangers this upcoming season and the one after that, you are saying they would never pass get to the ECF or the 2nd round. Correct?
I really don't want it to be true...

But for next year at least, if Sather doesn't rework the roster or our young guys don't explode; yea, I would take that bet. And add that VAN makes it out of the first round.

Richter Scale 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 04:48 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.