HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Off-Season Thread Part VI - Are we there yet? (Grabovski to Caps, 1 yr)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-22-2013, 12:53 PM
  #151
Grumpy Humphrey
Registered User
 
Grumpy Humphrey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,467
vCash: 500
Yeah I guess it is more reasonable that every player on the team is a gutless coward than Tortorella being an abrasive *******.

Grumpy Humphrey is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 12:55 PM
  #152
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,465
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
I guess I didn't realize how many people on the board know Torts personally.
Didn't see anyone make that claim.

If you're saying that we didn't have a significant insight into his personality, then I don't know what to tell you.

__________________


Rangers Unlimited
Hockey Graphs
Brian Boyle is online now  
Old
08-22-2013, 12:57 PM
  #153
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 15,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweet Gerald View Post
Yeah I guess it is more reasonable that every player on the team is a gutless coward than Tortorella being an abrasive *******.
Considering they were just coming off the most successful Rangers season in close to 20 years, I'd say that abrasive ******* was doing something right.

What changed last season? A lot of players, thats what.

So, I'd say its more reasonable to say a few players going the way of gutless cowards is what occurred.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 01:04 PM
  #154
Barbara Underhill
Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuke
 
Barbara Underhill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 13,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Considering they were just coming off the most successful Rangers season in close to 20 years, I'd say that abrasive ******* was doing something right.

What changed last season? A lot of players, thats what.

So, I'd say its more reasonable to say a few players going the way of gutless cowards is what occurred.
What changed is the players who responded to the abrasiveness The season before got tired of it. Not exactly shocking, people can only take so much of it.

Barbara Underhill is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 01:09 PM
  #155
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Considering they were just coming off the most successful Rangers season in close to 20 years, I'd say that abrasive ******* was doing something right.

What changed last season? A lot of players, thats what.

So, I'd say its more reasonable to say a few players going the way of gutless cowards is what occurred.
We don't know that Torts isn't lying, or at least giving us his version of the truth. We don't know what else was said behind closed doors. Really, we don't know anything for sure about what happened. Yet you have no problem casting judgement against the players.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 01:16 PM
  #156
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
That persona was rooted in toughness, at least in '11-12. I enjoyed that thoroughly. Now we've got a team that includes players whose argument seems to be that Tortorella was "too hard" on them. And, instead of confronting that head on after the season, they snake their way to the GM. This situation is a microcosm of how the team played most of last season - without any balls.

And no, Im not defending Tortorella here. If I was Sather, I probably would've fired him anyway. Thats a toxic atmosphere that he helped perpetuate. But I'd also do what I could to jettison the players that felt a coward's way out was the best way to express the issue. I wouldnt want players capable of that sort of thing on my team
Addressing the way Torts treats players directly with Torts would have been a general waste of time and energy on the players parts. He would have brushed it off as sour grapes and tried to explain his position and had he remaind in position would have done the same things.

Guys like that do not change when the people that are reporting to him do not like him. He's said it countless times. He's not there to make friends. He's there to do a job. He goes about doing that job a certain way, don't like it, tough.

Why is he all of a sudden going to change that because a few players voiced their opinions of him to him.

The issue would have been raised with him, and it would have died with him and nothing would have changed.

I think the Players did the right thing in by passing Torts altogether on this.

pld459666 is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 01:23 PM
  #157
Off Sides
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,008
vCash: 764
“I think I’m going to learn from him because he’s into the science of the game and that’s something where I’m a bit of a Neanderthal,” Tortorella said. “I want to learn more about it....

When you say ‘style of play’ I find it such an interesting subject,” Tortorella said. “When I was in New York, I was labelled a defensive coach because we didn’t score like Tampa.

“I don’t believe in a defensive style. I don’t believe in an offensive style. I believe in a complete style. You need that to get where you need to be.

“Am I going to get in the way of the Sedins’ creativity and offence and crawl all over them if they take a chance and make a mistake? Absolutely not.

“I don’t do that. I just want a two-way street when it comes to play without the puck. Because then it isn’t creativity, it isn’t talent, it is in a foundation of playing the proper way without the puck.

“That happens to be called defence. You have to be responsible.

“I talked about blocking shots in New York, so I get framed as a guy who just wants to block shots and play defence.

“It’s such a wrong thought.

“But it does need to be a part of your game.”



I think this had more to do with why he was fired than anything else. The Rangers were not playing a complete game. He is saying all the right things but the product on the ice did not reflect that.

Whether or not it was the players not being able, or refusing to play that way, or his coaching style causing the disconnect, it's up for debate, but ultimately as the head coach it was his responsibility to get them to play that way.

Off Sides is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 01:28 PM
  #158
Punxrocknyc19*
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 10,233
vCash: 500
Rumor::: Mikhail Grabovski nearing decision, Caps likely choice



http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-...-likely-choice

Punxrocknyc19* is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 02:27 PM
  #159
NYR Viper
Moderator
 
NYR Viper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: PA
Country: United States
Posts: 28,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Adam Vingan ‏@AdamVingan 6m
If true, that leaves just over $2.6 million w/o 90 signed. RT @IgorEronko: Per ONT report Grabovski will sign 1-year 3 mlk contract w/ #Caps
It's a bit of speculation it seems for now. Makes sense.

NYR Viper is online now  
Old
08-22-2013, 02:30 PM
  #160
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
You guys are playing fantasy league hockey again. Has that stuff ever worked for the Rangers or the Flyers or the other teams which are the big money teams? No. Its a new guy today and it will be a new guy tomorrow. Scout and draft the players. Give them time to develop. The Rangers need to stop trading top picks. They got nothing from the recent draft. Free agency is fools gold. It seems like the right move at the time and then you regret it for much longer.
Glad you are telling it like it is.
Have been suggesting we move some vets w/higher cap for better prospects with high chance of being productive/reasonable chance of being stellar, but unfortunately, this is too outside the box for many.

bernmeister is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 02:34 PM
  #161
bernmeister
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 8,559
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
http://www.theprovince.com/sports/ho...976/story.html



What I'm most confused about is the picture, however.



Do you think he's saying, "Oh please, you silly goose" or he's anticipating a high-five from some one walking behind him?

What catches my attention is how it looks like JT's got a pair of horns going on....

That's open at the center, it sure ain't a halo.

bernmeister is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 02:36 PM
  #162
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bernmeister View Post
Glad you are telling it like it is.
Have been suggesting we move some vets w/higher cap for better prospects with high chance of being productive/reasonable chance of being stellar, but unfortunately, this is too outside the box for many.
I think my brain just exploded. RB was railing against the fantasy hockey mindset and you agree with him? Your proposals are nothing but fantasy.

Making deals that make us a significantly worse team in the short term in the hopes that we will be better in the long term isn't thinking outside the box.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 02:43 PM
  #163
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Off Sides View Post
“I think I’m going to learn from him because he’s into the science of the game and that’s something where I’m a bit of a Neanderthal,” Tortorella said. “I want to learn more about it....

When you say ‘style of play’ I find it such an interesting subject,” Tortorella said. “When I was in New York, I was labelled a defensive coach because we didn’t score like Tampa.

“I don’t believe in a defensive style. I don’t believe in an offensive style. I believe in a complete style. You need that to get where you need to be.

“Am I going to get in the way of the Sedins’ creativity and offence and crawl all over them if they take a chance and make a mistake? Absolutely not.

“I don’t do that. I just want a two-way street when it comes to play without the puck. Because then it isn’t creativity, it isn’t talent, it is in a foundation of playing the proper way without the puck.

“That happens to be called defence. You have to be responsible.

“I talked about blocking shots in New York, so I get framed as a guy who just wants to block shots and play defence.

“It’s such a wrong thought.

“But it does need to be a part of your game.”



I think this had more to do with why he was fired than anything else. The Rangers were not playing a complete game. He is saying all the right things but the product on the ice did not reflect that.

Whether or not it was the players not being able, or refusing to play that way, or his coaching style causing the disconnect, it's up for debate, but ultimately as the head coach it was his responsibility to get them to play that way.
I think those comments are 100% spot on. Was his act worn out here? By all accounts. I wasn't in the room, I don't know. Are there aspects of his gameplan I wish he tweaked? Sure.

But I have a really tough time with the narrative of "he got the job preaching safe is death, but switched to 6 goalie system! Lol what an idiot! Torts why u no practice offense??" Like he just decided to switch because he felt like it. Not because he, ya know, evaluated the talent of his team. I'm not saying YOU are saying this...but spend 5 min reading the comments of the broader fanbase on the nyr facebook page...

I have an even tougher time envisioning a new coach coaxing a lot more offense out of this group - and by a lot I mean enough offense to make any defensive trade offs worth it in terms of Ws and Ls. I think some people are expecting AV to catapult this team into a top 5-10 offense. Maybe if he brings the Sedins in his suitcase.

Sorry to be such a wet blanket. I will always have hope and I really do hope I'm wrong...

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame

Last edited by HatTrick Swayze: 08-22-2013 at 02:48 PM.
HatTrick Swayze is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 03:15 PM
  #164
Off Sides
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,008
vCash: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
I think those comments are 100% spot on. Was his act worn out here? By all accounts. I wasn't in the room, I don't know. Are there aspects of his gameplan I wish he tweaked? Sure.

But I have a really tough time with the narrative of "he got the job preaching safe is death, but switched to 6 goalie system! Lol what an idiot! Torts why u no practice offense??" (not saying YOU are saying this...but spend 5 min reading the comments of the broader fanbase on the nyr facebook page) I have a tougher time envisioning a new coach coaxing a lot more offense out of this group - and by a lot I mean enough offense to make any defensive trade offs worse it in terms of Ws and Ls. I think some people are expecting AV to catapult this team into a top 5-10 offense. Maybe if he brings the Sedins in his suitcase.
I am not sure how much the goals and assist totals change under a new coach, not even sure their playing style changes that much but I don't think they were changing the way they played under Torts at all.

All coaches want their players to be defensively responsible away from the puck. However Torts did not just have them playing that way. Getting trapped in their own zone for long periods of time and surviving by blocking shots is not responsible, it's attempting to stop goals by last resort.

I fully understand trying to rush the puck through the neutral zone is inherently dangerous, turnovers happen. Does not mean they can not improve at it to the point it gives them another option beyond the tip, chip, dump and chase.

I don't think Torts was a bad coach and I certainly can not argue with the results, the team finished about where I think they should have the past two seasons.

My difference of opinion is from those who think he was the right coach going forward. The Rangers were not adding anything to their game that they did not already have the past two years. Other coaches were predicating on the predictability.

While many of the players stats may have been as good if not better than they have been, while some player were developing just fine, as a team was their play really improving? Were they adding new wrinkles to their game that were catching the other team off guard causing them to be trapped in their own zone? Were they forcing the other team to adjust to their play, if that team had comparable talent to the Rangers. Were they improving on being able to rush the puck up ice? Was the power play improving?

Seemed to me more like the Rangers were just stagnating. No idea if they will evolve under a new coaching regime, but I just did not get the feeling they were going to under Torts.

Off Sides is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 03:21 PM
  #165
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,989
vCash: 500
The Rangers offense during the regular season hasn't really been as big of a problem as people claim, in terms of numbers. The year they finished first in the East, they did it because they were 2nd in 3+ goal games in the entire league. They had enough offense, even if it wasn't overwhelming.

The real problem is that during the playoffs, the rest of the teams tighten up and the Rangers had a harder time scoring. The rigidity of the coach's mindset didn't allow for them to push as hard, offensively, as they could have. This caused friction between the team and the coach.

It isn't about the team's offensive capabilities. It's about opening up just enough to score some goals in the playoffs. After watching three playoffs under this coach, I was starting to believe that his system was at fault, by it's very nature. That's why I'm excited about a coaching change, more than anything else.

Tawnos is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 03:41 PM
  #166
SingnBluesOnBroadway
Retired
 
SingnBluesOnBroadway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 29,967
vCash: 500
Awards:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
The Rangers offense during the regular season hasn't really been as big of a problem as people claim, in terms of numbers. The year they finished first in the East, they did it because they were 2nd in 3+ goal games in the entire league. They had enough offense, even if it wasn't overwhelming.
They also benefitted from the majority of their biggest rivals lose their best players for long periods of time (Crosby)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
The real problem is that during the playoffs, the rest of the teams tighten up and the Rangers had a harder time scoring. The rigidity of the coach's mindset didn't allow for them to push as hard, offensively, as they could have. This caused friction between the team and the coach.
The problem is also, there's not confidence in the offense. The team (at least under Torts) was built to play with the lead. If they got down there they started gripping. Torts was right when he said the power play woes took on a life of their own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
It isn't about the team's offensive capabilities. It's about opening up just enough to score some goals in the playoffs. After watching three playoffs under this coach, I was starting to believe that his system was at fault, by it's very nature. That's why I'm excited about a coaching change, more than anything else.
Chicken or egg. The system or the talent.

__________________
SingnBluesOnBroadway is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 03:46 PM
  #167
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
The Rangers offense during the regular season hasn't really been as big of a problem as people claim, in terms of numbers. The year they finished first in the East, they did it because they were 2nd in 3+ goal games in the entire league. They had enough offense, even if it wasn't overwhelming.

The real problem is that during the playoffs, the rest of the teams tighten up and the Rangers had a harder time scoring. The rigidity of the coach's mindset didn't allow for them to push as hard, offensively, as they could have. This caused friction between the team and the coach.

It isn't about the team's offensive capabilities. It's about opening up just enough to score some goals in the playoffs. After watching three playoffs under this coach, I was starting to believe that his system was at fault, by it's very nature. That's why I'm excited about a coaching change, more than anything else.
Exactly. It also felt like Torts required even harder adherence to the system in the POs which made the team more predictable and easier to shut down.

Look at the Rangers-Caps series in 2013, all indications from the regular season was that the Rangers would own, maybe even dominate, even strength play while the Caps would rely on their deadly PP. What happened was that the Caps owned the Rangers 5v5 most of the series. And it was similar throughout the 2012 playoffs, Hank carried us big time.

It seemed like the Tortorella Rangers ability to control the game went into the toilet as soon as the playoffs arrived, and to my eyes it seemed to come from a compete adherence to the system.

Blue Blooded is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 03:47 PM
  #168
Brian Boyle
portnor, pls
 
Brian Boyle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,465
vCash: 420
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
Chicken or egg. The system or the talent.
The chicken.

Brian Boyle is online now  
Old
08-22-2013, 03:56 PM
  #169
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
The chicken.
U sure?

pld459666 is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 03:57 PM
  #170
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,989
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
They also benefitted from the majority of their biggest rivals lose their best players for long periods of time (Crosby)



The problem is also, there's not confidence in the offense. The team (at least under Torts) was built to play with the lead. If they got down there they started gripping. Torts was right when he said the power play woes took on a life of their own.



Chicken or egg. The system or the talent.
Well, it turns out I misremembered slightly. I went and double checked because I thought I remember the Pens ahead of them. They finished 5th. They hit 3+ 49 times during the regular season. Pittsburgh did it 51 times. Nashville (another deceptive team), Philadelphia, and Vancouver did it 50 times a piece. What's crazy, and kind of goes to your point about playing with the lead, is that the Rangers got 93.9% of the possible points they could've gotten when scoring 3 or more. That's second. The only two other teams over 90% were LA (90.3%, but they were 29th in GF3+) and St Louis (95%, but they were 19th in GF3+). The Rangers had an above average group offensively in the regular season. It was in the playoffs that things changed. Talent doesn't suddenly change in the playoffs, but the ability to use that talent has an effect.

By the way, evolutionarily speaking, the egg came first.

Tawnos is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 05:14 PM
  #171
Glen Teflon Sather
Like A Boss
 
Glen Teflon Sather's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 5,122
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Glen Teflon Sather
Quote:
Originally Posted by -31- View Post
The chicken.
I'd rethink that if I was you. This team's offensive talent is mediocre at best! And on top of that they're small and not physical enough. The bottom 6 is still a trouble spot IMO, and the top 6 you have one legitimate first liner.

Glen Teflon Sather is online now  
Old
08-22-2013, 05:25 PM
  #172
PIM
Registered User
 
PIM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 173
vCash: 500
First off, this is all speculation, just my opinions. But I really think my view on the Torts situation depends on who was complaining.

If it was Callahan, McDonagh, Boyle, Hagelin, Stepan, Girardi, any of those guys... Torts is one of the main reasons that they turned into the players they did and had the spots they had, some of them being slotted way above their talent level and played in key situations where they didn't belong. So for them to turn around and complain about him behind his back, that's pretty lame. Good luck getting those opportunities in the future.

If it was Nash, Hank, Kreider, Richards, Zuc, well that'd be more understandable. They were really at a point where they didn't owe Torts anything in my opinion, and there could be an argument that he was a detriment to how they were playing.

As to the issue of someone standing up to Torts, I think there's a bit of a leadership debacle in the locker room. Callahan wears the C, but he's a third line grinder that got the honor of team captain by being Torts lapdog. Richards is too softspoken and basically as far from "assertive" as I think a person can get. I really don't see him staging a coup.

I think Lundqvist is the only guy in the room with a leadership role and a backbone, and I think he knew (rightfully so) that he's more valuable to the team than Torts, and anyone else for that matter. So I wouldn't be surprised if he voiced some displeasure to Sather about the situation. He said he didn't ask for Torts to be fired and I completely believe him, but that doesn't mean he didn't ask Sather to get him to loosen up a bit.

PIM is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 05:57 PM
  #173
Blue Blooded
Registered User
 
Blue Blooded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Knows Best View Post
I'd rethink that if I was you. This team's offensive talent is mediocre at best! And on top of that they're small and not physical enough. The bottom 6 is still a trouble spot IMO, and the top 6 you have one legitimate first liner.
5v5 the Rangers have a great roster, even in regard to forwards. Our issues stems from special teams.

We DO have a legit 1st line. Hagelin-Stepan-Nash. They are respectively 36th, 69th, and 31st in zone start adjusted 5v5 scoring over the past 2 years. They were a top 5 line in the league this past season.

Some players are in the top 100 due to playing easy minutes, like Mathieu Perreault (47th), Matt Halischuk (54th), Matt Read (34th), or even our very own Benoit Pouliot (28th!). But Hagelin, Stepan, and Nash has put up their numbers against top competition.

People look at point totals and give out labels such as "1st liner" when point totals are often quite misrepresentative of the players ability in certain roles. Hagelin is a top 5v5 LW in this league but he stinks on the PP, therefore he will never reach the point totals most people will want from their 1st liner. But someone else will play on the PP in their stead and put up those points, like say Ryan Callahan - who is a 2nd/3rd line tweener 5v5, but a fantastic special teams player.

Players like Brown, Perry, Getzlaf, Marleau, Oshie, Backes, BrassGOD primarily score on the PP while not being very effective ES scorers.

The Rangers have 5 players with 2+ ZS adj. P/60 over the past two seasons 5v5: Pouliot, Nash, Hagelin, Stepan, Richards. Only Boston, Pittsburgh, Detroit, and Carolina can say the same.


Last edited by Blue Blooded: 08-22-2013 at 06:07 PM.
Blue Blooded is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 06:01 PM
  #174
JeffMangum
~Dylan~
 
JeffMangum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Listening to music
Country: United States
Posts: 57,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clowe Knows Best View Post
I'd rethink that if I was you. This team's offensive talent is mediocre at best! And on top of that they're small and not physical enough. The bottom 6 is still a trouble spot IMO, and the top 6 you have one legitimate first liner.
You realize the Rangers problem last year was that they had nothing past their high end offensive talent, right? They were carried by two forwards, their defense, and goaltending.

Health, a full year of Brassard, a bounce back year from Richards, and the additions of Moore/Boyle improve the forward group greatly, and combined with the elite blueline, makes the Rangers a very good team.

__________________


Everything about you is bringing me misery.
JeffMangum is offline  
Old
08-22-2013, 06:26 PM
  #175
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,621
vCash: 500
Richards is the X factor along with CK

Lundsanity30 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 03:55 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.