HFBoards

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

Roenick - Canucks Quietly the Best in the West

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-04-2012, 12:58 PM
  #1
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,875
vCash: 500
Roenick - Canucks Quietly the Best in the West



While everyone in the US seems focused on the East, LA Kings and Pacific Division, the Canucks have quietly put up another stellar season winning 7 in row recently and moving to the top of the standings.

A return trip to the SCF is in the cards.
It doesn't surprise me. This team has been remolded, readjusted. They have built a tougher team, and that was one of the knocks against Vancouver last season.
...
This season they're tougher physically, tougher mentally, and they're a better all-round team despite the fact that Daniel and Henrik Sedin are below their average in production for a season.

The big positive for the Canucks has been the emergence of backup goalie Cory Schneider. He really has put the pressure on Roberto Luongo to perform at a higher rate.
The Canucks could quietly get up there, pounce, kick some teams in the butt and find themselves right back in the Stanley Cup Final.

It wouldn't shock me at all.
http://www.nhl.com/ice/blogpost.htm?id=8188

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:01 PM
  #2
Karl Hungus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,341
vCash: 833
Tell me something I don't know.

Karl Hungus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:05 PM
  #3
Royal Canuck
Ronnie Hockey!
 
Royal Canuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,473
vCash: 814
I think if the 2011 Canucks played the 2012 Canucks in a 7 game series, the 2011 Canucks would win in 6.

__________________

Twitter |HFBoards Contact | Blog
PSN - TBennz
"You're never a loser until you quit trying. " - Mike Ditka
Royal Canuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:11 PM
  #4
Outside99*
Sedins off Kas
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,347
vCash: 500
I'd agree. Honestly, we were having a "so-so" season relatively speaking until Keith woke us up (cue Rocky song) - does this fall under what doesn't kill you makes you stronger? Some people like this idea, others hate it. I haven't figure it out yet but leaning towards the latter being Daniel involved and everything.

PS - think the Hawks are the 2nd best team and if we have to face them again, it will be an epic series.

Outside99* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:13 PM
  #5
asdfman
Weeeee
 
asdfman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 1,287
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Crossbar View Post
I think if the 2011 Canucks played the 2012 Canucks in a 7 game series, the 2011 Canucks would win in 6.
Doubt it

asdfman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:15 PM
  #6
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
I'd agree. Honestly, we were having a "so-so" season relatively speaking until Keith woke us up (cue Rocky song) - does this fall under what doesn't kill you makes you stronger? Some people like this idea, others hate it. I haven't figure it out yet but leaning towards the latter being Daniel involved and everything.

PS - think the Hawks are the 2nd best team and if we have to face them again, it will be an epic series.
The Hawks have defensive, depth and goaltending issues and they no longer have the grit and toughness to grind things out.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:22 PM
  #7
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Outside99 View Post
I'd agree. Honestly, we were having a "so-so" season relatively speaking until Keith woke us up (cue Rocky song) - does this fall under what doesn't kill you makes you stronger? Some people like this idea, others hate it. I haven't figure it out yet but leaning towards the latter being Daniel involved and everything.

PS - think the Hawks are the 2nd best team and if we have to face them again, it will be an epic series.
I don't see this "Keith woke us up" talk at all...

We were badly outshot in the Chicago game.. eeked out a 2-1 win the following game against Dallas, then went on to be outshot significantly in the next 3 games... it was only the last Dallas game, a 5-2 win, where this team looked like they were in control at all... and then barely won in OT against a bad Calgary team the next game.

I think our goaltending (particularly Schneider) has carried the team more than anything... the team overall has still looked lethargic for the most part - outside a couple periods during that 7 game stretch (one of which was the 3rd period last night)... but the team overall has still been very inconsistent offensively and making tons of mistakes defensively... just look at last night as a prime example of too many bad defensive mistakes which could have cost us the game (if not for Schneider bailing us out - again!).

If that's waking up, then we're doomed in the playoffs... we've won 7 in a row while being offensively inconsistent, defensively horrendous, and really only goaltending carrying this team. This *team* (ie. not just goaltending) will have to be significantly better to get anywhere in the playoffs... we're not likely to have a 7-game series in the playoffs, where the level of play against that opponent will be at the same level as we've seen in these past 7 games - where 6 of them were against teams that are likely to be out of the playoffs.. and we got outshot badly in several of those games.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:30 PM
  #8
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
I don't see this "Keith woke us up" talk at all...

We were badly outshot in the Chicago game.. eeked out a 2-1 win the following game against Dallas, then went on to be outshot significantly in the next 3 games... it was only the last Dallas game, a 5-2 win, where this team looked like they were in control at all... and then barely won in OT against a bad Calgary team the next game.

I think our goaltending (particularly Schneider) has carried the team more than anything... the team overall has still looked lethargic for the most part - outside a couple periods during that 7 game stretch (one of which was the 3rd period last night)... but the team overall has still been very inconsistent offensively and making tons of mistakes defensively... just look at last night as a prime example of too many bad defensive mistakes which could have cost us the game (if not for Schneider bailing us out - again!).

If that's waking up, then we're doomed in the playoffs... we've won 7 in a row while being offensively inconsistent, defensively horrendous, and really only goaltending carrying this team. This *team* (ie. not just goaltending) will have to be significantly better to get anywhere in the playoffs... we're not likely to have a 7-game series in the playoffs, where the level of play against that opponent will be at the same level as we've seen in these past 7 games - where 6 of them were against teams that are likely to be out of the playoffs.. and we got outshot badly in several of those games.
Wow, a terribly negative and misinformed post. Would you rather the Canucks were outshooting their opponents and losing consistently or vice versa? Remember the days when the Canucks made every goalie in the NHL look like Vezina candidates? You can have it.

While the Canucks, at times, have given up a lot of shots, the scoring chances have been limited. For instance, during the Kings game the team gave up 38 shots, but save the last few moments the Kings were held to the outside almost all game. Was their victory a work of art? No. Does that matter? No.

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:30 PM
  #9
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Crossbar View Post
I think if the 2011 Canucks played the 2012 Canucks in a 7 game series, the 2011 Canucks would win in 6.
Tough to say. We have better depth at forward this year with the additions of Booth and Pahlsson and also Ebbett and Kassian. We really lost Torres and Glass. Our fourth line depth is better as is our toughness. Personally, I think our forwards are really built for the playoffs with players like Higgins, Lapierre, Hansen and Pahlsson. I think that we probably get some key goals from our third and fourth lines and can cover for injuries much better.

On defence, it really depends on health. We lost a key guy in Ehrhoff and we really didn't replace him. But if our defence can stay healthier we have our top 4 of Edler, Hamhuis, Salo and Bieksa with Rome, Tanev, Ballard, Alberts and Gragnani filling out a depth of nine defencemen. If we have an injury to one of our top 4 then it gets dicier.

In goal, I think we're better as Luongo (minus last night) has looked steadier and Schneider is definitely much improved.

Special teams have taken a step back this year for sure.

In the end, playoff success will depend on health, a little luck and whether this team has another gear that they don't turn on until the games matter. I suspect that they do have another gear but if they don't then I think we could be in trouble.

vanwest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:35 PM
  #10
Frankiedarling
Registered User
 
Frankiedarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Seattle, Washington
Country: Canada
Posts: 825
vCash: 500
What is with the shot fixation? Ask the sharks how well their multitude of perimeter shots works for them.

Frankiedarling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:38 PM
  #11
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankiedarling View Post
What is with the shot fixation? Ask the sharks how well their multitude of perimeter shots works for them.
It's an easily attainable stat that when taken at face value appears to offer support for the writer's opinion. When not taken at face value his argument collapses like a house of cards, but I suppose that is beside the point.

CommonMeans* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 01:57 PM
  #12
skg
Registered User
 
skg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,180
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Crossbar View Post
I think if the 2011 Canucks played the 2012 Canucks in a 7 game series, the 2011 Canucks would win in 6.
I'd like to hear your reasons why. IMO, the 2012 team is superior. Assuming everyone is healthy, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th lines are better to last years team. I don't believe losing Ehrhoff on the back end is enough to offset the increased depth of the forward lines.

skg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 02:02 PM
  #13
pitseleh
Registered User
 
pitseleh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
We were badly outshot in the Chicago game.. eeked out a 2-1 win the following game against Dallas, then went on to be outshot significantly in the next 3 games... it was only the last Dallas game, a 5-2 win, where this team looked like they were in control at all... and then barely won in OT against a bad Calgary team the next game.
Quote:
Let's turn to our in-house chance data to further illustrate the Canucks' "more conservative than Rand Paul" systems play of late. While the Canucks have been out-shot consistently during this winning streak, in terms of "quality-shots" they're playing their opponents about even. Overall, the club has controlled 49.7% of even-strength scoring chances over the past seven games, which, is a significantly higher rate of event control than their shots on goal% (see the first table).

The chance data makes even more conspicuous the difference between the Canucks play with the score tied, versus their performance in other game-state situations. Vancouver's club has controlled 62% of scoring chances with the score-tied over the last seven games, but only 43.7% of scoring chances once they've attained the lead. I may not like it philosophically, but if it works, it works.
http://canucksarmy.com/2012/4/3/vign...efensive-shell

Basically the Canucks are playing a Nashville-esque game once they have a lead. They're playing the same style they did last year when the score is tied or when they're behind, controlling the play and dominating the shot count. Once they're ahead by a goal though, they're shutting things down. They're cutting back on their own scoring chances more than they're cutting down the other teams, but given that another goal is worth a lot more to the other team, they're arguably coming out ahead by reducing the total number of chances either team gets.

pitseleh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 02:13 PM
  #14
Frankiedarling
Registered User
 
Frankiedarling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Seattle, Washington
Country: Canada
Posts: 825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
It's an easily attainable stat that when taken at face value appears to offer support for the writer's opinion. When not taken at face value his argument collapses like a house of cards, but I suppose that is beside the point.
No, no, that's exactly the point I was getting at. Well done

Frankiedarling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 02:13 PM
  #15
Petey Cee
reel gud
 
Petey Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,595
vCash: 500
I think they're the best team but whether they can physically survive 3 rounds is the main issue

Petey Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 02:52 PM
  #16
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
Wow, a terribly negative and misinformed post. Would you rather the Canucks were outshooting their opponents and losing consistently or vice versa? Remember the days when the Canucks made every goalie in the NHL look like Vezina candidates? You can have it.

While the Canucks, at times, have given up a lot of shots, the scoring chances have been limited. For instance, during the Kings game the team gave up 38 shots, but save the last few moments the Kings were held to the outside almost all game. Was their victory a work of art? No. Does that matter? No.
Uh? How was my post "uninformed"? Were the Canucks not badly outshot in several of their past 7 wins? Did they not give up a lot of quality scoring chances in that? Were the goals against Luongo last night not high quality chances taken in the slot where their dmen missed coverages? Did they not give up odd-man rushes in every one of those games?

And weren't 6 of their 7 wins in that stretch against teams not currently in the playoffs? Did we really play that tough a 7 game stretch?

Has their offense through that stretch not been inconsistent? That 2nd line is sure produces as we should expect, right? Our top scorers in recent games are Higgins and Lapierre. That's not a cause for concern? Especially when, while only being without 1 of our top-6 guys (Daniel) the other 5 have combined for how many goals in the past 7 games? That inconsistency of offense doesn't concern anyone?

I've seen a lot of defensive breakdowns, odd-man rushes against, spectacular saves, and key offensive players we rely on gone cold, to not think there are some concerns in front of our goal right now.

If you take a 7-game win streak and ignore all that, then I think you're being far too positive for a team that simply doesn't look that strong.

And maybe the best indicator of that is how AV is handling his lines. When things are going great we don't see the constant line shuffling and key players being benched for long stretches. Instead AV has stapled Booth and Raymond - 2 of our top-6 guys - to the bench for long stretches, is playing a 4th liner on the top line, giving PP time to Ebbett, while on defense he's split up the top-4 long before Bieksa was out and has a rookie in Tanev next to Hamhuis on the top shutdown unit.

Clearly those are signs of a coach happy with the performances in his lineup, right? Or maybe AV is as clueless and misinformed as I seem to be?

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 02:52 PM
  #17
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,433
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Crossbar View Post
I think if the 2011 Canucks played the 2012 Canucks in a 7 game series, the 2011 Canucks would win in 6.
If we're talking a one game season and playoffs I would agree, but if we're taking the grind of the playoffs and injuries into consideration I think the 2012 squad is better equipped.

silvercanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 02:57 PM
  #18
aandbreatheme
Registered User
 
aandbreatheme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
And maybe the best indicator of that is how AV is handling his lines. When things are going great we don't see the constant line shuffling and key players being benched for long stretches. Instead AV has stapled Booth and Raymond - 2 of our top-6 guys - to the bench for long stretches, is playing a 4th liner on the top line, giving PP time to Ebbett, while on defense he's split up the top-4 long before Bieksa was out and has a rookie in Tanev next to Hamhuis on the top shutdown unit.

Clearly those are signs of a coach happy with the performances in his lineup, right? Or maybe AV is as clueless and misinformed as I seem to be?
Why does AV keeping benching Booth? Did he have some blatant giveaways or what? I see him working his ass of in the first period and then he's suddenly benched.

aandbreatheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 02:59 PM
  #19
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,433
vCash: 500
It's hard to say if they are coasting and need motivation but either way the Canucks have not really looked good for the last 3 months. The Canucks absolutely do need to get their game in order for the playoffs.

That said I think there are positives: their even strength offense looks much better than it did a month ago. The defense is a little shaky but I wonder how much of that can be attributed to all the odd defense pairings and the bid to get Gragnani to 80 games. The most glaring issue is obviously the powerplay. The Canucks need to draw up something better soon because they have looked absolutely dreadful. They need to fix that.

silvercanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 03:00 PM
  #20
PRNuck
Retain Kevin Lowe
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,172
vCash: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
http://canucksarmy.com/2012/4/3/vign...efensive-shell

Basically the Canucks are playing a Nashville-esque game once they have a lead. They're playing the same style they did last year when the score is tied or when they're behind, controlling the play and dominating the shot count. Once they're ahead by a goal though, they're shutting things down. They're cutting back on their own scoring chances more than they're cutting down the other teams, but given that another goal is worth a lot more to the other team, they're arguably coming out ahead by reducing the total number of chances either team gets.
Sure would be a lot easier with a couple of Nashville's D-men

PRNuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 03:05 PM
  #21
aandbreatheme
Registered User
 
aandbreatheme's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 9,248
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
U



Has their offense through that stretch not been inconsistent? That 2nd line is sure produces as we should expect, right? Our top scorers in recent games are Higgins and Lapierre. That's not a cause for concern? Especially when, while only being without 1 of our top-6 guys (Daniel) the other 5 have combined for how many goals in the past 7 games? That inconsistency of offense doesn't concern anyone?
That's not really fair. Henrik has been great, as has Burrows (especially in these last couple of games). It's the second line (especially Kesler) that has been the problem. They are not pulling their weight.

aandbreatheme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 03:09 PM
  #22
thepuckmonster
Global Moderator
Professional Winner.
 
thepuckmonster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Victoria, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,300
vCash: 50
I'd rather fanbases continue to think that we're the easiest contender in the league, it'll make our victories so much better.

thepuckmonster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 03:09 PM
  #23
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitseleh View Post
http://canucksarmy.com/2012/4/3/vign...efensive-shell

Basically the Canucks are playing a Nashville-esque game once they have a lead. They're playing the same style they did last year when the score is tied or when they're behind, controlling the play and dominating the shot count. Once they're ahead by a goal though, they're shutting things down. They're cutting back on their own scoring chances more than they're cutting down the other teams, but given that another goal is worth a lot more to the other team, they're arguably coming out ahead by reducing the total number of chances either team gets.
I don't see how this is a positive at all? Is it not concerning that we're basically trading quality chances with some of the weaker competition in the conference in recent games?

Watching the games, it's becoming frustrating seeing the number of quality chances the team seems to be giving up.. And when your goalie isn't there to bail you out, we see the effect of that - like we saw last night. The Anaheim goals last night were all a result of weak coverage in our own zone (Gragnani the victim of that on multiple occasions).

And again, as mentioned in the post above, it seems to be concerning for AV as well, given the constant line shuffles both up front and on defense (even before Bieksa's and Daniel's injuries). Clearly the team isn't playing as he wants them to.

Going into the playoffs, it's very concerning to me that we're still seeing the lines changed constantly, players being benched and an overall lack of chemistry throughout the lineup outside the 3rd line (the only line that has remained intact through the past 10 or so games).

I just don't see the positive in trading quality scoring chances against some of the weakest teams in the conference. Don't see the positive in the constant line changes to find some chemistry with a week to go before the playoffs. This team to me has issues they need to resolve going into the playoffs. Their level of play - in front of their goal - has been concerning to me for a team we're hoping is good enough to win 4 rounds in the playoffs.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 03:14 PM
  #24
NFITO
hockeyinsanity*****
 
NFITO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,934
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by andbreatheme View Post
That's not really fair. Henrik has been great, as has Burrows (especially in these last couple of games). It's the second line (especially Kesler) that has been the problem. They are not pulling their weight.
You're right... Burrows has been fine and Henrik is racking up the assists (though it's damn frustrating when he passes every time even when he has a prime shooting opportunity).

The problem is with the 2nd unit - all of them. When you rely on your shutdown line to contribute offensively because your 2nd line is MIA, it is a cause for concern.

Maybe AV should be giving Kesler the last 2 games off? He's not playing all that well as it is and could probably use the rest.

NFITO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-04-2012, 03:19 PM
  #25
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFITO View Post
Uh? How was my post "uninformed"? Were the Canucks not badly outshot in several of their past 7 wins? Did they not give up a lot of quality scoring chances in that? Were the goals against Luongo last night not high quality chances taken in the slot where their dmen missed coverages? Did they not give up odd-man rushes in every one of those games?
In short, no. They have been outshot and at times have looked to be giving up a few too many quality chances. However, on aggregate they have been playing better team defence in my opinion. This has been restated by the coaching staff. Shots on goal do not account for quality scoring chances.

Last night they played a poor first half but managed to shut it down midway through the second period. It's a long season. It happens. Schneider came in, gave the team a wake-up call, and they battled back and won in OT. Whatever shortcomings were illustrated by the first half of the game were easily negated by the character shown by the team in the latter half.

It is rare that there is not at least one odd man rush given up in any given game. If you expect perfect 60 minute hockey then you are destined to a lifetime of subpar hockey.

Quote:
And weren't 6 of their 7 wins in that stretch against teams not currently in the playoffs? Did we really play that tough a 7 game stretch?
This is an extremely dishonest assertion. Dallas and Colorado are both out of the playoffs, but when playing the Canucks they were very much alive and in desperation mode. In fact, they had far more to play for than a team missing their top scorer and working on potential line combos.

The Canucks are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Saving for a string of 5-0 victories simply winning versus "subpar" teams is not good enough.

Quote:
Has their offense through that stretch not been inconsistent? That 2nd line is sure produces as we should expect, right? Our top scorers in recent games are Higgins and Lapierre. That's not a cause for concern? Especially when, while only being without 1 of our top-6 guys (Daniel) the other 5 have combined for how many goals in the past 7 games? That inconsistency of offense doesn't concern anyone?
The second line has been struggling of late. Moreover, their PP has been downright awful. As a whole however I would suggest that the Canucks have begun to found their scoring touch of late. This does not excuse the previous two points, as they are indeed areas for concern. Having said that, I take a small amount of comfort in the fact that they can still win games in spite of these problems.

Quote:
I've seen a lot of defensive breakdowns, odd-man rushes against, spectacular saves, and key offensive players we rely on gone cold, to not think there are some concerns in front of our goal right now.
I disagree with this point and to be honest do not see any need to respond with the rest of your post.

Are the Canucks a well-oiled machine firing on all cyclinders; dismantling every opponent they face? No. To that point I will agree with you.

CommonMeans* 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 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.