HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Notices

2/16/12 - Thrashy @ Minnesota - 7 PM CST - FSN

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-16-2012, 11:56 PM
  #626
Avder
Moderator
Is only game.
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Moorhead, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 27,724
vCash: 50
Yeah that about sums it up for the night.

Sigh...that was one amazing third period... wish the NHL had endless overtime like some other leagues do.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 11:57 PM
  #627
NHL1674
Whatever...
 
NHL1674's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 10,660
vCash: 50
This disturbed me.
Quote:
All seven goals on the homestand were scored by Setoguchi, Koivu and Dany Heatley. A forward besides those three hasn’t scored since Kyle Brodziak in Dallas six games ago.
Wow.

NHL1674 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 11:59 PM
  #628
blueandgoldguy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Greg's River Heights
Posts: 1,585
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 651 View Post
Read the link. You couldn't have possible read it all from when I posted it. It lays it out quite succinctly.

Of course you will sell out when you are the smallest rink in the league in a large Canadian metro.
I read that link and it's one of the biggest heaps of cow dung I've come across. Poorly researched, poorly thought out - especially when he talks about our lack of suites. I mean, Xcel only has 10 more suites than MtS center. Same with Pittsburgh and their new arena.

The whole premise of his article, that MTS Center is not an NHL facility is bs. After all, it is an NHL facility today with few modifications.

Oh, and as for your comment suggesting it's an easy building to sellout because it's the league's smallest. Well, try doing that with the third most expensive tickets in the league with 3 - 5 year commitments.

blueandgoldguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-16-2012, 11:59 PM
  #629
Avder
Moderator
Is only game.
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Moorhead, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 27,724
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL1674 View Post
This disturbed me.

Wow.
Yeah...thats friggin scary...the first line has been performing lately, but no one else has.

Also: 7,000.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 12:01 AM
  #630
SwimToTheMoon
Wild fan in WPG
 
SwimToTheMoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 648
vCash: 500
That was one hell of a game. Too bad we didnt get both points. I still think the shootout is the worst way to end a game, especially an intense game such as this one.

Lets see what happens against St Louis!

I had 5 of my buddies over all cheering for the Jets.....they were loud


Last edited by SwimToTheMoon: 02-17-2012 at 12:08 AM.
SwimToTheMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 12:30 AM
  #631
651*
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Capital of MN 651
Country: United States
Posts: 2,601
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
I read that link and it's one of the biggest heaps of cow dung I've come across. Poorly researched, poorly thought out - especially when he talks about our lack of suites. I mean, Xcel only has 10 more suites than MtS center. Same with Pittsburgh and their new arena.

The whole premise of his article, that MTS Center is not an NHL facility is bs. After all, it is an NHL facility today with few modifications.

Oh, and as for your comment suggesting it's an easy building to sellout because it's the league's smallest. Well, try doing that with the third most expensive tickets in the league with 3 - 5 year commitments.
Hahaha, look at the suites! Ours are like two- maybe three times as big and have better seating. Plus we have ten more. Look at the rest of the arena.

Also, and to reiterate for the umpteenth time, you LOST YOUR NHL FRANCHISE IN WINNIPEG, a 700K Canadian city thirsting for NHL - you would have sold out regardless. We lost the Stars and guess what, when the NHL came back we SOLD OUT EVERY GAME FOR 10 SEASONS.

TBH I was the FIRST person to support a return to Winnipeg, I loved the Jets and Selanne, so you don't need to attack me. I am glad you have NHL back and I look forward to visiting your province once again for a game some time down the road. Of all the cities on "the list" I wanted puck back in Winnipeg so we could finally have a border battle.

There is no offense meant here. I am with you guys, man.

651* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 01:21 AM
  #632
ps241
2.6% chance
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 9,038
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL1674 View Post
Okay, I'm going to pass along my thoughts on this, because I'm use to playing the role of "mother hen." These are my thoughts....do with them what you wish.

I know we're all (myself included) extra sensitive on here, because we've been through h-e-double hockey sticks these past two and a half months. That said, I truly didn't see many Jets' fans being disrespectful on here tonight. Don't get me wrong, there may have been one (or even two), but they don't represent the others. And as someone who has checked out other team's forums on here after Wild wins (which were ages ago ), we've had some people go over and shake their feathers in their faces just as well. But they don't represent all of us either, right?

Only my personal opinion, but if other fans come over here (and are fairly respectful), then I don't have a problem with it. In fact, a little bit of friendly debates and disagreements is fine as long as the line isn't crossed.

Maybe to you, it seemed like they were gloating tonight. Maybe I'm too tired to pick up on it or have become numb after losing so many games. I would LOVE to have our fans make a showing in another team's arena like the Jets' fans did tonight. Were they loud? Yes. Were they in your face? Yes. It's like when Habs and Leafs fans come to the Xcel. There are tons of them, but I've personally only had good experiences around them. Like it or not, Minnesota is like Canada's cousin living in the basement. We're pretty passionate about the game (though Wild fans can be somewhat reserved), and have the same understanding about the sport. If anything, Winnipeg and Minnesota fans have a lot in common. We lost our teams, and the mistakes were finally corrected. And note, each fan base (ours included) is going to have some bad apples in the bunch. But these Jets' fans were certainly not behaving like Canucks' fans.

I just don't want to see some good fans chased away for no reason is all. If we're gonna see some rivalries born in the new conference, then get use to interacting with each other. Get use to "hating" each other, but we can do so without having threads closed.

Remember all of the fun on the official boards during the 2003 playoffs? I want those battles back!


Amen. It's why I've still got a Vikings' plaque up on the wall. Till death do us part...
Very nice post

I thought this game was going to be brutal because it was two cold teams that can't find the back of the net. I thought it was a very entertaining game and I would have said the same had we lost in the shoot out. So far this year our games have been very entertaining.

Looking forward to the rivalry

ps241 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 04:22 AM
  #633
Randy BoBandy
Cheeseburger Party
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,062
vCash: 500
Schultz once again played like ****. Man is he bad. I love how Greenlay tries to explain Shultz missing a great scoring opportunity by saying that Schultz was try to pick a corner but just missed, when in actuality the guy shot it straight into Mason's breadbasket without a second thought. Schultz has absolutely no idea how to score or how to keep the opponents from scoring on him. Hes just as bad as Zids but with no hands or a shot, their brains are of equal mush.

Randy BoBandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 08:29 AM
  #634
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 22,781
vCash: 500
Sounds like I didn't miss much, although watching the first half of the second Twilight film might have been more boring than a Wild game.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 08:41 AM
  #635
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueandgoldguy View Post
I read that link and it's one of the biggest heaps of cow dung I've come across. Poorly researched, poorly thought out - especially when he talks about our lack of suites. I mean, Xcel only has 10 more suites than MtS center. Same with Pittsburgh and their new arena.

The whole premise of his article, that MTS Center is not an NHL facility is bs. After all, it is an NHL facility today with few modifications.

Oh, and as for your comment suggesting it's an easy building to sellout because it's the league's smallest. Well, try doing that with the third most expensive tickets in the league with 3 - 5 year commitments.
While the article he's referencing is rather poor, the complaints about MTS are valid. MTS is an NHL arena in the sense that Mile One Centre is an AHL arena. Winnipeg is flying high right now on the revenue and sellout front, but once the honeymoon is over (and it will end) they're going to need some safety net, especially if the exchange rate continues to arbitrage. I know the location of MTS is a double edged sword. It's great positioning within the city, but with how heavily developed the surrounding area is, it's not really feasible to expand. The early strong sales are great for Winnipeg, but if TNSE sits on their heels and expects everything to work like this, we'll likely see the Houston Jets in 10 years.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 08:43 AM
  #636
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
Sounds like I didn't miss much, although watching the first half of the second Twilight film might have been more boring than a Wild game.
Might have been? Might?

Your man card has been revoked.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 08:45 AM
  #637
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 22,781
vCash: 500
It was the girlfriend's house and she wanted to watch a movie. And before that I lifted and then she made me dinner, so I think it evens out

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 08:49 AM
  #638
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 20,717
vCash: 50
it's a good thing our overrated third liner is scoring.

and Twilight is so full of lulz it's not boring. i still find it fascinating that there are adults out there who enjoy the books.

rynryn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:01 AM
  #639
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
It was the girlfriend's house and she wanted to watch a movie. And before that I lifted and then she made me dinner, so I think it evens out
It's not the watching that's the problem. It's the implication that there's a chance it was more entertaining than a hockey game. I mean, I'd be offended at the implication that it might be more entertaining than staring at a blank wall for 45 minutes.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:06 AM
  #640
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 22,781
vCash: 500
The first movie was hilarious because it was so bad. The springing about "flying" through the air and crappy visual effects, terrible acting, terrible writing, I mean that was entertainment.

The second movie was just a sad "emo" girl moping around and then some ugly dude takes his shirt off in the middle of the movie, and I got bored and fell asleep.

Anyways, back on topic.

Sucks that the league still does these shootouts. Should have been a tie every time, and that's something to build on. Instead, everyone gets all pissy and mopey because they lost a skills comp. I wouldn't be surprised to see the team be deflated next game, even though they should build on scoring 3 goals.

And there shouldn't be any doubt by now about Cullen, Brodziak, Christensen, etc. They aren't top sixers. That's abundantly clear.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:16 AM
  #641
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
I don't get the shootout crying. I know it's the hip thing to do around these parts, but from the league perspective it's crucial. I think too many people get hung up on "I don't like this, therefore anything else must be better" rather than comparing things. Ties are bad. Nobody likes a game that ends in a tie because there aren't any winners. Because of TV contracts and time constraints, we can't simply play until one team wins, and that wouldn't be an optimal outcome either. Sure, you're still playing "hockey" in the third OT, but it's really just a question of which dead tired from playing 35 minutes player screws up the worst.

The league 1) wants every game to end with a winner (for good reasons) and 2) has time constraints. So what options are there that satisfy both?

Now if you want to move to a 3 point regulation win system, you won't get any argument from me, but I just don't get the complaints about the shootout.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:31 AM
  #642
Northland Wild Man
Run The Goalie!
 
Northland Wild Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Country: United States
Posts: 6,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
I don't get the shootout crying. I know it's the hip thing to do around these parts, but from the league perspective it's crucial. I think too many people get hung up on "I don't like this, therefore anything else must be better" rather than comparing things. Ties are bad. Nobody likes a game that ends in a tie because there aren't any winners. Because of TV contracts and time constraints, we can't simply play until one team wins, and that wouldn't be an optimal outcome either. Sure, you're still playing "hockey" in the third OT, but it's really just a question of which dead tired from playing 35 minutes player screws up the worst.

The league 1) wants every game to end with a winner (for good reasons) and 2) has time constraints. So what options are there that satisfy both?

Now if you want to move to a 3 point regulation win system, you won't get any argument from me, but I just don't get the complaints about the shootout.
I think a lot of people ,myself included, just don't feel that it's an appropriate way to determine who gets an extra point and wins a tie game. Hockey is a team game and should be decided with the team on the ice, not just a goalie and a shooter. If last night's game ended as a tie I would have been fine with that.

Northland Wild Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:36 AM
  #643
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 22,781
vCash: 500
Not to mention if the locker room / leadership wasn't such a disaster, they might build on a tie, but instead they seem to beat themselves up over a SOL.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:41 AM
  #644
SwimToTheMoon
Wild fan in WPG
 
SwimToTheMoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 648
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
I don't get the shootout crying. I know it's the hip thing to do around these parts, but from the league perspective it's crucial. I think too many people get hung up on "I don't like this, therefore anything else must be better" rather than comparing things. Ties are bad. Nobody likes a game that ends in a tie because there aren't any winners. Because of TV contracts and time constraints, we can't simply play until one team wins, and that wouldn't be an optimal outcome either. Sure, you're still playing "hockey" in the third OT, but it's really just a question of which dead tired from playing 35 minutes player screws up the worst.

The league 1) wants every game to end with a winner (for good reasons) and 2) has time constraints. So what options are there that satisfy both?

Now if you want to move to a 3 point regulation win system, you won't get any argument from me, but I just don't get the complaints about the shootout.

Very good points. I hate the shootout yes, but I'd rather see it come into play after 10min of 4 on 4. If the game goes to a shootout, have the winner get 2 points and the loser 1 point. If the game ends in OT, 3 points for the winner, 0 for the loser.

I want games decided by normal means instead of a skills comp such as the shootout. It's no way to finish a game. I understand the time constraints so they should go with 10min OT THEN the shootout.

How does the NBA manage going to like triple OT's and such? (it's a serious question as I don't follow basketball)

SwimToTheMoon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:43 AM
  #645
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 22,781
vCash: 500
They score about 30-40 times as often, which means that there are far fewer tie games.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:46 AM
  #646
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwimToTheMoon View Post
Very good points. I hate the shootout yes, but I'd rather see it come into play after 10min of 4 on 4. If the game goes to a shootout, have the winner get 2 points and the loser 1 point. If the game ends in OT, 3 points for the winner, 0 for the loser.

I want games decided by normal means instead of a skills comp such as the shootout. It's no way to finish a game. I understand the time constraints so they should go with 10min OT THEN the shootout.

How does the NBA manage going to like triple OT's and such? (it's a serious question as I don't follow basketball)
Those games are pretty rare. It's much harder to break a tie in hockey than it is in basketball. You would have more instances of 2-3 OTs in hockey than in basketball, and those would add up over the course of the season. How many OT/SO games have the Wild been in this year? 12 or 15? Imagine if 4-5 had to go into 2-3 OTs... players would be shot by the time the playoffs came around.

Dr Jan Itor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 09:59 AM
  #647
Puckschmuck*
Doan Shall Be Boo'ed
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,917
vCash: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
While the article he's referencing is rather poor, the complaints about MTS are valid. MTS is an NHL arena in the sense that Mile One Centre is an AHL arena. Winnipeg is flying high right now on the revenue and sellout front, but once the honeymoon is over (and it will end) they're going to need some safety net, especially if the exchange rate continues to arbitrage. I know the location of MTS is a double edged sword. It's great positioning within the city, but with how heavily developed the surrounding area is, it's not really feasible to expand. The early strong sales are great for Winnipeg, but if TNSE sits on their heels and expects everything to work like this, we'll likely see the Houston Jets in 10 years.
I really don't get comments like this. Maybe this was the sentiment when Minnesota first got it's team back (fear of losing it again), but rest assured this team will never, and let me repeat this, EVER, leave Winnipeg again. Ever. Like Minnesota, Winnipeg has learned it's lesson in terms of supporting it's team and doing whatever it takes never to let it go again. Yes, the "honeymoon" will end, like it did in Minnesota when you got your team back, but why would Winnipeg be any different than Calgary, Edmonton or Ottawa? The answer is because it's not. These are all small-market Canadian teams that are at the top of league revenue generators. And I'm not saying that will not fluctuate, but we are strong, passionate markets who know that Mr. Bettmen would love to pull all our plugs and move our teams to the US to "grow the game", so that is why we fight to show that we are strong markets who will not allow ourselves to be pried out of our communities. Not to mention that TNSE is a very intelligent and wealthy ownership group, of which Mark Chipman had tried to save the Jets back in 95-96 but didn't have the financial capacity to do it at the time. He is very passionate about our city and team, and would rather cut off his limbs before ever letting this team leave Winnipeg again.

Trust me, Winnipeg isn't in anymore danger of relocating than teams like Minnesota is. In other words, neither team will be relocated again. Ever. Peace.


Last edited by Puckschmuck*: 02-17-2012 at 10:05 AM.
Puckschmuck* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 10:01 AM
  #648
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwimToTheMoon View Post
Very good points. I hate the shootout yes, but I'd rather see it come into play after 10min of 4 on 4. If the game goes to a shootout, have the winner get 2 points and the loser 1 point. If the game ends in OT, 3 points for the winner, 0 for the loser.

I want games decided by normal means instead of a skills comp such as the shootout. It's no way to finish a game. I understand the time constraints so they should go with 10min OT THEN the shootout.

How does the NBA manage going to like triple OT's and such? (it's a serious question as I don't follow basketball)
The problem with that is, while winning a shootout would net fewer points than winning in OT, losing the shootout would result in more than losing in OT. That's going to lead to far more defensive play in OT. Teams ahead in the standings would rather have 1 guaranteed point with a shot at another than nothing guaranteed but a shot at 3 points. In that scenario, you're better off keeping the loser point for OTL. Want fewer shootouts without adjusting to a 3 point win? Keep the loser point in OT but get rid of it in the shootout. That will encourage more offensive play and risk taking during the OT as screwing up to allow a goal in OT is worth more than losing in the "skills competition."

Someone on the main board was mentioning (though I don't have the data to support this claim) that OT G/60 is far lower than regulation G/60. That implies that teams playing 4v4 are either more defensive (I haven't seen regulation 4v4 stats) or OT teams are playing for the shootout. Take away the incentive and you'll see the frequency drop dramatically.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 10:13 AM
  #649
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckschmuck View Post
I really don't get comments like this. Maybe this was the sentiment when Minnesota first got it's team back (fear of losing it again), but rest assured this team will never, and let me repeat this, EVER, leave Winnipeg again. Ever. Like Minnesota, Winnipeg has learned it's lesson in terms of supporting it's team and doing whatever it takes never to let it go again. Yes, the "honeymoon" will end, like it did in Minnesota when you got your team back, but why would Winnipeg be any different than Calgary, Edmonton or Ottawa? The answer is because it's not. These are all small-market Canadian teams that are at the top of league revenue generators. And I'm not saying that will not fluctuate, but we are strong, passionate markets who know that Mr. Bettmen would love to pull all our plugs and move our teams to the US to "grow the game", so that is why we fight to show that we are strong markets who will not allow ourselves to be pried out of our communities.

Trust me, Winnipeg isn't in anymore danger of relocating than teams like Minnesota is. In other words, neither team will be relocated again. Ever. Peace.
The reasons Winnipeg relocated in the first place didn't have much (if anything) to do with a lack of fan support. At current exchange rates, with rabid support willing to pay exhorbitant ticket prices (if necessary) the team can survive with an arena that only seats 15k people. If that exchange rate takes a nose dive (and considering the arbitrage situation, either both countries will see major economic shifts or the exchange rate will move) Winnipeg will slide back down into that range where the team needs to make the playoffs every 2 out of 3 years or they fall back into the red.

I don't doubt the support Winnipeg has for its team. I was in Winnipeg for the first home game (watching the game from my hotel) and know about the reaction and support. But fan support doesn't determine exchange rates. Player salaries are paid in US dollars, and the salary cap is going to keep rising. A 5% slip in the exchange rate (which would be a moderate change over a year) would be up to a $4MM shift in player salaries at the expected 2012-2013 salary cap. Assuming 100% sellouts, that's a shift of $6.50 per ticket per game at MTS. Couple that with the equivalent increased cost of living from a negative shift in exchange rate with Canada's primary trade partner and it doesn't take too many bumps to drive ticket prices out of the range Winnipeggers can afford.

I don't expect TNSE to just sit on their heels, but if they were to, this franchise would be just a couple monetary shocks away from serious financial issues.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-17-2012, 10:15 AM
  #650
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
I'm not going to do the math again this year, but the difference between a true 3 point system and the current system is exceptionally minimal.

The last four years I've done the math, no one gets bumped out of a play off spot and only twice have the standings actually changed. The change is normally a swap between 6 and 7 or 7 and 8.

It would make more mathematical sense to have true 3 point games, but the math just doesn't change the standings that much.

bozak911 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 09:38 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.