HFBoards

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

Salary Cap issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-02-2007, 10:55 PM
  #76
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I might be mistaken, but I think Shanahan's age is the reason why they can do incentives and not have it count against the cap as hard.

For example you couldn't do a 25 year old to a deal like that, but due to the fact that Shanahan is 38 I think they can.
Well that makes sense. I mean there has to be a logical explanation for that...otherwise why wouldn't we have signed Gomez for a $1 million base contract and $500k for each goal he scores? Our cap hit would only be $1 million, and Scott would end up with more cash then he's getting under this deal (based on his $7.35 cap hit.)

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2007, 11:15 PM
  #77
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
Well that makes sense. I mean there has to be a logical explanation for that...otherwise why wouldn't we have signed Gomez for a $1 million base contract and $500k for each goal he scores? Our cap hit would only be $1 million, and Scott would end up with more cash then he's getting under this deal (based on his $7.35 cap hit.)
I'm trying to remember and I could be totally wrong so I'd need someone to clarify this, but I think there is a certain option to sign older players to more incentive laden contracts to minimize the "risk". I want to say the age limit is like 35 or 36, but I seem to remember that was where the talk of signing Shanahan came from. After seeing moves like these, I'd imagine Shanahan hasn't changed his mind on the incentive approach because he see's that the Rangers are serious.

Of course it's also worth pointing out that if I am correct that Shanahan would still be a pretty rare exception. Most guys want the guranteed money. Even if a team wants to sign a guy to an incentive based contract, the player still has to ultimately go for it.

As for why a player wouldnt do it, well for the same reasons that a guy switches teams for a slightly bigger salary even when it doesn't really matter when you're talking about $6-million vs. $7-million.

Edge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-02-2007, 11:30 PM
  #78
incident
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Country: England
Posts: 44
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I might be mistaken, but I think Shanahan's age is the reason why they can do incentives and not have it count against the cap as hard.

For example you couldn't do a 25 year old to a deal like that, but due to the fact that Shanahan is 38 I think they can.
Having just read through the relevant sections of the CBA, it's permitted to offer performance bonuses to players over 35 who sign single year contracts, and there's a provision in there which says teams are allowed to exceed the upper limit by up to 7.5 in order to pay Performance Bonuses.

But the bonuses do seem to count against the cap - I could have understood this wrong, but it seems to say that if a team does use some of that 7.5% cushion, then they'll have the same amount deducted from their upper limit the following season.

So basically the Rangers could indeed sign Shanahan on a 0.5 million contract with 4 million worth of bonuses, and exceed the cap that way, but it'd come back and bite them in a years time..

incident is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 01:41 AM
  #79
dwoj99
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 269
vCash: 500
what if a team offers Lundquist an RFA offer sheet? A team could offer him a contract worth up to 5.8 mill/year and only pay 2 1st rounder and 2nd and a 3rd as comp. If i am a rival GM with cap space and a bunch of picks and prospects and a 38 year goaltender(EDM) I would does that for sure....I might even offer him more money and give up 4 1st rounders, Lundquist is that good.

dwoj99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 02:47 AM
  #80
Chimp
Registered User
 
Chimp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my food garden.
Country: Sweden
Posts: 10,476
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I'm trying to remember and I could be totally wrong so I'd need someone to clarify this, but I think there is a certain option to sign older players to more incentive laden contracts to minimize the "risk"...
I think the biggest minimization of a risk if offering a bonus heavy contract to an older player is that the player might suck and not reach the incentives.

Now I'm not saying for 100% sure that there isn't such a clause (since I haven't read the whole piece), but all logic says it would be very strange if there was. Why would the creators of this piece leave a huge glitch and loophole for clubs and GMs to misuse? For if it's true, it's a glitch, not a choice.

I mean, which GM wouldn't be happy if he can make the player happy by paying him alot of money which doesn't count against the cap? It's like a company owner who doesn't have to pay taxes for having an employee - legally.

If there indeed was such a clause about incentives, I think we would have seen alot of GM's using it in a truly abusing way already. We've already seen GM's use their creativity and thinking outside the box - like Holmgren in Philly when he got the discussion rights to Hartnell and Timonen, or their former GM offering a contract to a RFA even though it was considered forbidden as an unwritten law - so it's not like they're not afraid to push the limits.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackZdenoCiger View Post
what if a team offers Lundquist an RFA offer sheet? A team could offer him a contract worth up to 5.8 mill/year and only pay 2 1st rounder and 2nd and a 3rd as comp. If i am a rival GM with cap space and a bunch of picks and prospects and a 38 year goaltender(EDM) I would does that for sure....I might even offer him more money and give up 4 1st rounders, Lundquist is that good.
Lundqvist has said he'll stay as a Ranger and that he means it, mentioning his agent would automatically turn down any RFA offerings. And I don't think the management would trade away their franchise goalie for a bunch of prospects, when they have just shown that they want to make a cup run this season.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/06232007...rry_brooks.htm
Quote:
Other athletes might play it differently in order to maximize their negotiating leverage, but Don Meehan, the agent for Henrik Lundqvist, yesterday told The Post the Rangers goaltender has no interest in either soliciting or receiving potential offer sheets if he reaches NHL Group II free-agent status July 1.

"There's a sense that offer sheets will become a grudging part of the business and [that] is something both the Rangers and we are aware of, but that's not going to be a factor in our negotiations," Meehan said here prior to last night's first round of the NHL Entry Draft. "To be frank, I'd have serious concerns regarding the teams that would be pinpointed as those who might be interested in making an offer sheet for Henrik, anyway."


Last edited by Chimp: 07-03-2007 at 02:55 AM.
Chimp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 04:30 AM
  #81
Irish Blues
____________________
 
Irish Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country: St Helena
Posts: 21,804
vCash: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edge View Post
I might be mistaken, but I think Shanahan's age is the reason why they can do incentives and not have it count against the cap as hard.

For example you couldn't do a 25 year old to a deal like that, but due to the fact that Shanahan is 38 I think they can.
Folks, ALL bonuses count against the cap. Signing, reporting, performance ... they all count. As mentioned, there are three (3) categories of players who can get performance bonuses:
  • Guys on entry-level contracts,
  • Guys with 400 or more NHL games played who spent at least 100 days the prior season on IR and who sign a 1-year contract, and
  • Guys 35 and older as of July 1 in the League Year for which the contract is to be effective, who sign a 1-year contract.

That's it. If you're not signing an ELC, and you're signing a multi-year contract, you can't get performance bonuses in your contract.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringBackZdenoCiger View Post
what if a team offers Lundquist an RFA offer sheet? A team could offer him a contract worth up to 5.8 mill/year and only pay 2 1st rounder and 2nd and a 3rd as comp. If i am a rival GM with cap space and a bunch of picks and prospects and a 38 year goaltender(EDM) I would does that for sure....I might even offer him more money and give up 4 1st rounders, Lundquist is that good.
A team saying, "here's an offer sheet" means squat. Lundqvist actually has to sign it for it to become valid. No signature? No offer sheet.

__________________
No promises this time.
Irish Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 08:11 AM
  #82
EnticeTheMasses*
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 54
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redwingsdude View Post
No **** I don't know, that's why I asked. You yourself said Montoya might be moved, which is what I was interested in. The thread is "salary cap issues", and when you have two goalies who could both be starters (soon enough for Al), and your team just spent $15 million on two players, my questions are more than reasonable, even if I don't know the in's and out's of the Rangers, which apparently you do.

And Lundqvist costing more than $4.5-5 million and Avery/Prucha/Hossa costing more than $3.5 million isn't outlandish either. Then there's Shanny. You honestly think that you'll sign all those guys for under $10 million? It's possible, for sure, I'm just wondering about possible moves. Face it, the Rags spent a lot of money, it's not going to be as easy as you think to re-sign everybody, and I asked if somebody might be moved. I can't believe how apprehensive you are about this.
This is what I mean. The RANGERS HAVE 13 MILLION DOLLARS left to play with. Sheesh. Get a clue.

EnticeTheMasses* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 10:25 AM
  #83
94now
Registered User
 
94now's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Snow Belt, USA
Country: United Nations
Posts: 6,445
vCash: 500
Shanny may be cut. Unless Cullen is moved. Also Lundy's contract could be either backloaded or just have lower $$ to upcoming season.


Last edited by 94now: 07-03-2007 at 10:30 AM.
94now is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 10:37 AM
  #84
n_a_c
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 372
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by incident View Post
Having just read through the relevant sections of the CBA, it's permitted to offer performance bonuses to players over 35 who sign single year contracts, and there's a provision in there which says teams are allowed to exceed the upper limit by up to 7.5 in order to pay Performance Bonuses.

But the bonuses do seem to count against the cap - I could have understood this wrong, but it seems to say that if a team does use some of that 7.5% cushion, then they'll have the same amount deducted from their upper limit the following season.

So basically the Rangers could indeed sign Shanahan on a 0.5 million contract with 4 million worth of bonuses, and exceed the cap that way, but it'd come back and bite them in a years time..

I just read through the CBA and I agree. That seems like a bad idea - to pay Shanahan this year with next year's cap money. Drat.

Well, if Miller and Ward got 3year/$8 million deals - then perhaps Lundqvist will have to settle for about $3 million a year - and we'd still be able to fit everyone in with a number that I think is appropriate. I had originally penciled Henrik with $4.75 per year and Shanahan with only $1.8 against the cap.

n_a_c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 11:49 AM
  #85
dwoj99
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irish Blues View Post
Folks, ALL bonuses count against the cap. Signing, reporting, performance ... they all count. As mentioned, there are three (3) categories of players who can get performance bonuses:
  • Guys on entry-level contracts,
  • Guys with 400 or more NHL games played who spent at least 100 days the prior season on IR and who sign a 1-year contract, and
  • Guys 35 and older as of July 1 in the League Year for which the contract is to be effective, who sign a 1-year contract.

That's it. If you're not signing an ELC, and you're signing a multi-year contract, you can't get performance bonuses in your contract.

A team saying, "here's an offer sheet" means squat. Lundqvist actually has to sign it for it to become valid. No signature? No offer sheet.

You guys are so cute...LUNDQUIST WILL TAKE THE CAKE!!!If the a team is to offero lets say an 8 year 60mill contract and the Rangers are offering a 3 year 15 million contract, which one are you going to take...get real money talks especially for young players. BTW Prucha is at least a 1.5 mill/year player, he could get traded?

dwoj99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 12:11 PM
  #86
dank
Registered User
 
dank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,867
vCash: 500
Lundqvist will still be an RFA in 2(?) years, so you could give him a contract to whet his appetite and tide him over till next year when we have more $$'s off the books, or what not..

dank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 12:21 PM
  #87
ZenBaja
Registered User
 
ZenBaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 429
vCash: 500
I'm not sure what more Lundqvist and Shanny can do to squelch the doubters besides signing a contract - they both have come out and said they will not play for another team. Shanahan was freakin practicing with Gomez before he was signed - this tells me he wants to be in NY and he wanted Gomez there. He has said about 3 separate times to the media - that he will be back in NY and this is exactly what he wanted. Lundqvist has said he will not except any offer sheets from other teams and will not seek arbitration. So, if that isn't enough - then the only thing that will work to kill these rumors is when they both sign in the next couple of weeks. Shanahan isn't stupid - he's got his $$$ no matter what - just through endorsements and being in the NY limelight. The King knows where he wants to be. This is the magic that NY has right now - the team is coming together and they feel like they have something special right now. This may or may not be the actual case, but the players are buying into it - straka took less money to stay, shanny will do the same. What is amazing is that the Rangers were dead in the water about 4 years ago. And now they've turned the attitude of the organization in something very positive.

-Z

ZenBaja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 01:28 PM
  #88
Forechecker
Registered User
 
Forechecker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: Netherlands
Posts: 4,322
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Forechecker
I wonder if all these long deals are done with the CBA expiring in a few years in mind? What if the CBA gets blown up like it did two years ago, and teams like the Flyers & Rags get a one-time buyout of player contracts as in 2005? Maybe there is a certain amount of gambling going on with the knowledge that there could well be another lock-out in a few years?

Forechecker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 02:42 PM
  #89
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 94now View Post
Shanny may be cut. Unless Cullen is moved. Also Lundy's contract could be either backloaded or just have lower $$ to upcoming season.
How does backloading a long term contract help when it's the [B]average[B] that counts against the cap?

Brooklyn Ranger is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 06:24 PM
  #90
redwingsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Grand Rapids
Country: United States
Posts: 1,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by broadwayblue View Post
If you're in the habit of rounding numbers at least use convention...we spent $14 million on two players. Or, if you prefer exactness, we spent $14.4 million on two players.
Sorry Mr. Stickler, but that wasn't the point. The point was you just spent a ******** of money on two players when you still have some key players to sign.

And since when do you round money down? You think you get a $400,000 pass over the cap, or what?

And after all these cute little jabs from you and EnticeTheMasses, I still haven't heard what the prospects of losing Montoya and Shanahan. Looks like some other Rangers fans are more realistic and realize that someone might have to go, but you prefer to complain about my $600,000 exaggeration? I'm just saying money is tight, there's no denying that.

So what is the actual remaining money like? I've heard from between $10 million to $13 million, which is it? If Lundqvist is signed for, say, $5 million, and Hossa and Prucha combine for, say, $2 million, that leaves either $3 million or $6 million. Avery is a damn solid third liner, and had a pretty good playoff, I really don't see him taking less than $2 million with the current market, and I think planning on Shanny taking less than a $2 million base is nuts, look at what an unproven/oft-injured Bertuzzi just got!

redwingsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 06:50 PM
  #91
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redwingsdude View Post
Sorry Mr. Stickler, but that wasn't the point. The point was you just spent a ******** of money on two players when you still have some key players to sign.

And since when do you round money down? You think you get a $400,000 pass over the cap, or what?

And after all these cute little jabs from you and EnticeTheMasses, I still haven't heard what the prospects of losing Montoya and Shanahan. Looks like some other Rangers fans are more realistic and realize that someone might have to go, but you prefer to complain about my $600,000 exaggeration? I'm just saying money is tight, there's no denying that.

So what is the actual remaining money like? I've heard from between $10 million to $13 million, which is it? If Lundqvist is signed for, say, $5 million, and Hossa and Prucha combine for, say, $2 million, that leaves either $3 million or $6 million. Avery is a damn solid third liner, and had a pretty good playoff, I really don't see him taking less than $2 million with the current market, and I think planning on Shanny taking less than a $2 million base is nuts, look at what an unproven/oft-injured Bertuzzi just got!
Plenty of people on this board have presented the calculations and, using the numbers you suggest for estimated salaries (which are probably accurate), it does work. Furthermore, Shanny has laid BROAD hints (I'm only coming back to the Rangers, they were in constant commucination with me over the weekend during the process, etc.) that he will structure his contract to make it work.

And, even if we are the itty-bitty amount over the cap that you suggest, that's fine - we've got the 10% summertime exception and then we move a player like Cullen or Malik (both of whom are very affordable under the current cap) to free up $2MM+.

Slats knows what he's doing.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 07:26 PM
  #92
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redwingsdude View Post
Sorry Mr. Stickler, but that wasn't the point. The point was you just spent a ******** of money on two players when you still have some key players to sign.

And since when do you round money down? You think you get a $400,000 pass over the cap, or what?

And after all these cute little jabs from you and EnticeTheMasses, I still haven't heard what the prospects of losing Montoya and Shanahan. Looks like some other Rangers fans are more realistic and realize that someone might have to go, but you prefer to complain about my $600,000 exaggeration? I'm just saying money is tight, there's no denying that.

So what is the actual remaining money like? I've heard from between $10 million to $13 million, which is it? If Lundqvist is signed for, say, $5 million, and Hossa and Prucha combine for, say, $2 million, that leaves either $3 million or $6 million. Avery is a damn solid third liner, and had a pretty good playoff, I really don't see him taking less than $2 million with the current market, and I think planning on Shanny taking less than a $2 million base is nuts, look at what an unproven/oft-injured Bertuzzi just got!
Yes, we spent a bunch of money. But while your rounding of numbers to the tune of $600k/year may seem insignificant to you, to me that's a Ryan Hollweg.

As far as how much we have remaining, it's about 12 million by my calculation. So assuming:

Lundqvist - 5m
Shanny - 3m
Avery - 2m
Prucha - 1.2m
Hossa - .8m

You can see that even if these estimates are off a bit, it's well within reason that we re-sign all 5 and remain under the cap. If we want a little relief, we can alway try to move one of Cullen (3m) Malik (2.5m) or Mara (3m).

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 10:24 PM
  #93
redwingsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Grand Rapids
Country: United States
Posts: 1,212
vCash: 500
All I wanted to know, thank you.

redwingsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 10:31 PM
  #94
broadwayblue
Registered User
 
broadwayblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 15,619
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redwingsdude View Post
All I wanted to know, thank you.
You're welcome. Not to get ahead of ourselves here, but maybe we see each other in the Finals. We owe you one from 1950.

broadwayblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-03-2007, 11:08 PM
  #95
redwingsdude
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Grand Rapids
Country: United States
Posts: 1,212
vCash: 500
Getting a bit cocky 2 days into free agency huh? I wouldn't mind the matchup, Shanny's still my favorite player, so I could stand losing, but that wouldn't happen if they actually squared off. The ratings would be killer too.

redwingsdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2007, 06:34 AM
  #96
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,574
vCash: 500
Matt Cullen to Atlanta

Quote:
Waddell said the big contracts being signed means teams are looking to move salaries through trades. If Kozlov signs elsewhere, the chances of the Thrashers becoming a team willing to deal greatly increases
http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sp...thrashers.html

Atlanta was one of the teams bidding on Cullen last summer along with the Rangers,Leafs,Sens and Preds.Atlanta also lost Ken Belanger who they wanted to re-sign

Carolina is looking for another center to replace Cullen.They haven't replaced him.Why not correct a mistake in on re-signing him last summer?

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-04-2007, 11:44 AM
  #97
dank
Registered User
 
dank's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,867
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Matt Cullen to Atlanta



http://www.ajc.com/sports/content/sp...thrashers.html

Atlanta was one of the teams bidding on Cullen last summer along with the Rangers,Leafs,Sens and Preds.Atlanta also lost Ken Belanger who they wanted to re-sign

Carolina is looking for another center to replace Cullen.They haven't replaced him.Why not correct a mistake in on re-signing him last summer?
what do you think a deal could look like then?

dank is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2007, 11:50 AM
  #98
Finest
Puck Fittsburg
 
Finest's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Long Island
Country: United States
Posts: 5,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
I think they'll be fine. They know what they're doing.
Its been a while since anyone could say that about the Rangers lol. But I feel confident as well, since the lockout I have been very happy with the moves/non-moves this team has made, and my faith has just gotten even stronger with them resigning Prucha.

Finest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2007, 04:37 PM
  #99
JRZ DVLS
Try Brubag*****
 
JRZ DVLS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NC,ILL,NorNJ,Roch
Country: United States
Posts: 4,252
vCash: 500
I would have thought Shanahan would sign by now, but i keep coming back to this:

I see Shanny being the Team player here. He obviously had something to do with Gomer coming over, which also lends me to think he will sign with the Rags now. It comes down to Dollars and cents though. I feel he is waiting to see what amount of Money the Rangers will have left over after they sign all the other significant players. Then he will sign for a discount knowing there may be something here....

I originally heard a rumor the Rangers were in the Market for Souray too. I don't think it will happen since he was looking for at least 4-5 mil, so that really is a shot in the dark.

Shanny will sign, he is just waiting to se what scraps will be left over to be a team player. And whuy not, he has made a ton of money, if he wants to be a winning team someone has to sacrifice, and lead by example. (in NJ, Brodeur and Elias both signed lower to keep the team under the cap.)

JRZ DVLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2007, 06:43 PM
  #100
Edge
Registered User
 
Edge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sin City
Country: United States
Posts: 13,196
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by incident View Post
Having just read through the relevant sections of the CBA, it's permitted to offer performance bonuses to players over 35 who sign single year contracts, and there's a provision in there which says teams are allowed to exceed the upper limit by up to 7.5 in order to pay Performance Bonuses.

But the bonuses do seem to count against the cap - I could have understood this wrong, but it seems to say that if a team does use some of that 7.5% cushion, then they'll have the same amount deducted from their upper limit the following season.

So basically the Rangers could indeed sign Shanahan on a 0.5 million contract with 4 million worth of bonuses, and exceed the cap that way, but it'd come back and bite them in a years time..
Interesting, time will tell if they can swing it. Of course this is where actually developing some more top line talent bites you in the ass because you had to sign guys to contracts now.

Unfortunatly this is where some of those lean years with drafting hurt you.

Edge 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 12:33 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.