HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Washington Capitals
Notices

The Lockout (is over!!!!!)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-17-2012, 12:15 PM
  #401
BTCG
Registered User
 
BTCG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemisti View Post
Oh yes, forgot about that one. I'm getting old.

But srsly, Owners won but they didn't get all that they wanted.
But, from memory, isn't it 30 years old, not 27? I think I'm right. So they did get what they wanted.

BTCG is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:16 PM
  #402
Liberati0n*
Full Hammock
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,146
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTCG View Post
Correct.... which is why you must make sound business decisions: the owners do NOT!

As to the rest of your post, again, it's not the players who employ a socialist business model, it's the league. Franchises that are not solvent cannot be made solvent by taxation, which is what is employed. This never works.

Your last paragraph, I'm not buying. I'd remind you, that Tampa won the Cup with a payroll of $27-28 million, far below that years cap.

Just because you have a cap, doesn't mean you have to spend to its level.
There was no cap in 2004, the year before they had a lockout over whether to institute a cap.

But don't worry, everyone knows Mystlyfe is on Ted's payroll anyway.

Liberati0n* is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:19 PM
  #403
BTCG
Registered User
 
BTCG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sonsofcain View Post
There was no cap in 2004, the year before they had a lockout over whether to institute a cap.

But don't worry, everyone knows Mystlyfe is on Ted's payroll anyway.
That year's cap (from memory, when Tampa won) was $39/40 million. A big deal was made of the fact that they won while spending so little.

BTCG is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:30 PM
  #404
BTCG
Registered User
 
BTCG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,357
vCash: 500
Looking it up, I think you're correct on the cap. It's also stated that Tampa spent $33 million. Stiil: it was one of the lowest payrolls in the league that year.

BTCG is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:32 PM
  #405
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 40,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTCG View Post
Gotta agree with the players. Why should they foot the bill for the owner's stupidity?
my question with this idea is does once stupid preclude the owners from getting smarter? must they institutionalize the stupidity?

my take is that the owners got the salary cap that they wanted and the players got much better revenue than they expected from what they didnt want. right? now the owners want to adjust the system to more fair to the owners. 50-50.

personally, i would not be surprised if fehr is first and foremost interested in removing what the owners wanted from the last cba. but that hasnt been proven out as yet. it hasnt been dispelled either.

txpd is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:39 PM
  #406
BTCG
Registered User
 
BTCG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
my question with this idea is does once stupid preclude the owners from getting smarter? must they institutionalize the stupidity?
If it were only "once"... I might agree. But 2 of the examples I cited happened quite a few years ago, making this stupidity an ongoing problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
my take is that the owners got the salary cap that they wanted and the players got much better revenue than they expected from what they didnt want. right? now the owners want to adjust the system to more fair to the owners. 50-50.
I heard that the players proposed a 50-50, and the owners rejected it.

Source: http://www.freep.com/article/2012111...s|text|Detroit Red Wings

Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
personally, i would not be surprised if fehr is first and foremost interested in removing what the owners wanted from the last cba. but that hasnt been proven out as yet. it hasnt been dispelled either.
I see no evidence of that.

BTCG is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:56 PM
  #407
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 40,162
vCash: 500
a little negative bettman spin there in that article...eh? the owners rejected a 50-50 split that achieved 50-50 not immediately or in the near term but at the end of the proposed cba period. thus it would have little or no effect before the agreement expired.

so.....in the full term of that cba offer there would be nothing close to 50-50 in play there.

txpd is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:20 PM
  #408
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
There will never be 50-50 as long as the players want their current contracts honored in the way they've described before. Not saying they shouldn't want that, just saying there's no way to call that 50-50 unless they accept a make-whole that takes from their future share (which they won't).

brs03 is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:42 PM
  #409
Langway
Moderator
Intangibles
 
Langway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,692
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemisti View Post
Not quite. They didn't want UFA at 27. Was there arbitration before last CBA, not sure?
There was. This past CBA lowered FA to 27yo or seven years of service.

The cap also determines the floor and we've seen recently with Florida in particular how that further influenced UFA inflation.

A report of Snider wanting to get an agreement done bodes well if true. Lots on the line for NBC/Comcast IMO regardless of previous financial arrangements.

Langway is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:02 PM
  #410
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 40,162
vCash: 500
i dont think it bodes anything. snider is willing to outspend any of his fellow owners if he can. a strike hurts snider's business in ways that effects only him. snider and flyers are on their own little island, is my take.

txpd is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:09 PM
  #411
Langway
Moderator
Intangibles
 
Langway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,692
vCash: 500
Snider, if turned, would be in the exact same boat as the Canadian franchises (with the exception of CGY) and other healthy, highly profitable franchises that are better served with the gates actually open. The NBCSN angle could be a compelling factor, even if self-interest is largely at play. Then again, that requires vision and it hasn't been overly abundant to this point.

That only seven franchises and a costly rubber stamp in Phoenix need to agree with Bettman is rather troubling.

Langway is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 06:23 PM
  #412
BTCG
Registered User
 
BTCG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
a little negative bettman spin there in that article...eh? the owners rejected a 50-50 split that achieved 50-50 not immediately or in the near term but at the end of the proposed cba period. thus it would have little or no effect before the agreement expired.

so.....in the full term of that cba offer there would be nothing close to 50-50 in play there.
I think it's important to remember that some hard-balling is going on.

My .02: the salary dump the last CBA allowed was supposed to be a one-time only deal. It appears though, that the owners wish to do it again, and if they do it again, contracts lose their meaning. And when you consider that it's the owners signing these deals, it's almost like they're telling the players 'stop me before I sin again.'

BTCG is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 06:46 PM
  #413
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 40,162
vCash: 500
i am not sure what you expect the owners to do? you blame them for signing the contracts. i'd guess that you would rip the capitals ownership for NOT signing the deals.

lets take leonsis for instance. he gets ripped by fans here for not being aggressively enough with his spending. many posts that it proves that he doesnt care about winning. yet he is cast as one of the hardliners trying to hold the line on spending.

many here hold the flyers up as the team that shows they want to win with their aggressive roster movement and their willingness to spend at a wild rate.

i'd be interested to see your solution

txpd is offline  
Old
11-18-2012, 09:43 AM
  #414
HSHS
Losing is a disease
 
HSHS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Redondo Beach, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 17,639
vCash: 500
Real revenue sharing...

That is all

HSHS is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 08:53 AM
  #415
BobRouse
Registered User
 
BobRouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
i am not sure what you expect the owners to do? you blame them for signing the contracts. i'd guess that you would rip the capitals ownership for NOT signing the deals.

lets take leonsis for instance. he gets ripped by fans here for not being aggressively enough with his spending. many posts that it proves that he doesnt care about winning. yet he is cast as one of the hardliners trying to hold the line on spending.

many here hold the flyers up as the team that shows they want to win with their aggressive roster movement and their willingness to spend at a wild rate.

i'd be interested to see your solution
Absolutely agree. I always refer back to the NFL system..fact is they are by far the most profitable league out of the major sports.

They have 50/50 split and salary cap, NON-guaranteed contracts, etc

Now if the NFL removed the cap then some teams like the Cowboys, Redskins etc would go buck wild b/c they can and face SEVERE pressure from their fanbases to do so.

Remember back in the Jagr days? The Caps were up there in terms of salary they were giving out and then didn't have enough money to sign a marginal Dman like Ken Klee and everyone was bitter at Ted for not doing so. The salary cap will help with this and if you have a salary cap what is wrong with a 50/50 split?

Especially if the players have bogus guaranteed contracts.

BobRouse is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 10:34 AM
  #416
Mystlyfe
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTCG View Post
Correct.... which is why you must make sound business decisions: the owners do NOT!

As to the rest of your post, again, it's not the players who employ a socialist business model, it's the league. Franchises that are not solvent cannot be made solvent by taxation, which is what is employed. This never works.
If anyone needed more proof that people will call anything they don't like "socialist," here it is. If there's anything that resembles socialism in this CBA debate, it's the Union's request for increased revenue sharing. And the irony of accusing the management side of socialism rather than the labor is rather amusing. But let's not contribute to the further dilution and abuse of the term. Socialism and hockey labor discussions are apples and oranges.

As for the owners not making sound business decisions, what you don't seem to understand is that it's a lose-lose situation for many markets. They're damned if they do, damned if they don't with this free agent market. The way that most markets make any sort of money is to reach the playoffs. If you don't have young stars on ELCs, the way to reach the playoffs generally involves spending a decent amount.

And the competitive marketplace even drives up the cost of your home grown talent. Just look at almost any of the RFA deals signed in the past couple seasons. John Carlson's contract was looked at as a "steal" by many, yet we still gave a 22 year old defenseman coming off of a down year a $23.8M contract. GMs are forced to choose between spending to retain their talent and remain competitive, or completely alienating their fanbase.

Look at the teams that don't spend. The Islanders are relocating into a venue that wasn't built for hockey and will have, by far, the lowest capacity in the league because they couldn't build a new venue. There's a massive cloud of uncertainty surrounding Phoenix's future, as many assume they're bound to relocate soon. Atlanta couldn't retain Savard, Hossa, or Kovalchuk and ended up relocating to Winnipeg. The Lightning are on their fifth ownership group in the past fifteen years (though this one likes to spend and things are looking up). The Blue Jackets have sputtering attendance and have traded away their two best forwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BTCG View Post
Your last paragraph, I'm not buying. I'd remind you, that Tampa won the Cup with a payroll of $27-28 million, far below that years cap.

Just because you have a cap, doesn't mean you have to spend to its level.

There wasn't a cap in the 2003-2004 season. The Tampa Bay payroll was $34M. The reason they were so successful with a payroll beneath the league average ($44.4M) was because they had their star players on contracts that pre-dated them breaking out. And it's the reason their payroll immediately went up when the NHL resumed play, despite the 24% rollbacks during the lockout. Lecavalier, Richards, and St. Louis were all on contracts of less then Khabibulin's $4.4M. Young talent, early in their career, is affordable.They would all sign contracts of $6.5M+ shortly after as the Lightning became a cap ceiling team then eventually shedding payroll.

Sometimes you get lucky and have a guy like St. Louis become a breakout player alongside your young stars. Most of the time you don't. You can't build your franchise around the hope you find a future hall of fame player in the garbage heap. Otherwise a lot more people would be happy with McPhee's dumpster diving.

Mystlyfe is offline  
Old
11-20-2012, 08:11 PM
  #417
BrooklynCapsFan
Waiting on the Isles
 
BrooklynCapsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 14,492
vCash: 500
So the NHLPA and owners met on Monday.

But that's really not important lockout news. What's important is that Ovechkin thinks banging a tennis player constitutes a fitness plan.

BrooklynCapsFan is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 06:37 AM
  #418
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 40,162
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynCapsFan View Post
So the NHLPA and owners met on Monday.

But that's really not important lockout news. What's important is that Ovechkin thinks banging a tennis player constitutes a fitness plan.
until you've banged a professional tennis player, you have no idea what level of intense workout that is.

txpd is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 06:56 AM
  #419
BiPolar Caps
Emotionally Wounded!
 
BiPolar Caps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 5,751
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by txpd View Post
until you've banged a professional tennis player, you have no idea what level of intense workout that is.
I thought Danica Patrick would be more your "speed", since she's now available.

BiPolar Caps is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 08:18 AM
  #420
txpd
Registered User
 
txpd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 40,162
vCash: 500
professional female tennis players are numerous and i lived many years in sarasota fl, where about half of all professional tennis players live. so......

i dont know personally a single nascar or indycar driver, male or female. i know more than a dozen current and former top 200 female professional tennis players, though. they were my neighbors. i ran into them in the publix. i also could have been in line with a couple of the 9-11 attackers at the same publix. you take the bad with the good, i guess. that still creeps me out.


Last edited by txpd: 11-21-2012 at 08:23 AM.
txpd is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 05:16 PM
  #421
SimplySensational
Heard of Hough
 
SimplySensational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: VA
Country: United States
Posts: 16,536
vCash: 888
Quote:
"I am disgusted. We have to push Fehr to the wall to get the deal. Time is against us. We lost 1/4 season, it is $425 million. Who will give it back to us? Mr. Fehr?"

"There should be voting between players. Four questions - YES or NO - then count it. If half of players say let's play, then they should sign new CBA. If there is no season he should leave and we will find someone new. Time is our enemy."
From Hamrlik.

SimplySensational is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 07:48 PM
  #422
Bure
Registered User
 
Bure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 3,136
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberation View Post
From Hamrlik.
He wants to make his paycheck because he knows he'll never make anything close to that again.

Bure is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 12:54 AM
  #423
Dream Big
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,316
vCash: 500
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409973

Letter from NHLPA updating Canadian Parliament on the lockout.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992

NHLPA 's proposals.
Quote:
The NHLPA's Negotiating Committee today provided the NHL Owners with a comprehensive 6 page proposal on the key issues (see below). As you will read in the proposal, the players have made substantial moves in order to address all of the owners' concerns, end the owners' lockout and get the game back on the ice. Our proposal works off the league's proposed language/structures and moves off our position that there be a guaranteed players' share. These are major moves in the owners' direction. Regarding player contractual issues, we have also addressed the owners concerns regarding back-diving contacts and NHL contacts being "buried" in the minors.

Now that we have made this proposal, there is no longer any doubt as to how far apart the parties are in dollars. As you will recall, we had previously said we thought the gap was less than $200M, while the owners had said that the gap was much larger and close to $1B. Under our proposal, it is now undisputed that the gap is only $182 M over 5 years. Now it is up to the owners to finally make a move towards the players.

At the same time, we have protected player rights by refusing to accept their proposals restricting free agency and salary arbitration.

Here are a few significant details from our proposal:

Players' Share: A major move in the owners' direction by removing guarantees or fixed targets for Players' share.

Honouring Players' Contracts/Transition payments: Players' Share will equal 50 percent of HRR plus fixed payments in the first four years to partially honour player contracts and ease the transition to 50/50:

2012-13 - $182M
2013-14 - $128M
2014-15 - $72M
2015-16 - $11M

Total $393 M

*The owners had previously proposed $211M

Long-term back-diving contracts – Cap benefit recapture rule so clubs no longer benefit from front-loading contracts (move in the owners' direction)

Contracts in the minors – Clubs take a cap hit on contracts in the minors over $1M (move in the owners' direction)

Four Recall Rule – Unlimited recalls after regular season (move in the owners' direction)

Salary Arbitration – Elimination of walk-away from arbitrator's decision, but clubs can still "walk-away" by not qualifying a player

Please read through the proposal below and contact the NHLPA if you have any questions. The league indicated that they plan to respond to our proposal later today. We will provide a further update following this meeting.

Regards, Don

NHLPA Proposal - 21 November 2012

This proposal addresses significant open issues concerning revenue sharing, player contracting, the players' share, and certain other open areas, as reflected below. This proposal does not address other items upon which we have agreed or are pending, such as health and safety, hockey issues, the "jock tax", and international.

1) Revenue Sharing

- Pool of $200 Million at $3.303 B of HRR. Varies year to year with HRR.

- Contributions to be raised per NHL formula. No discretion to increase individual team contributions beyond what formula provides

- Existing level of distributions to be protected for 2 years. If additional funds needed, raised pro-rata from all teams

- Revenue Sharing Oversight Committee (RSOC) has discretion to adjust amounts for Phase One distributions by up to +/- 15% per team, provided that all such adjustments are considered and decided upon at one time

- RSOC by unanimous vote may move beyond +/- 15% limitation towards but not exceeding the straight pool value for regular season HRR. (Must therefore compute straight pool every year.)

- Industry Growth Fund to be managed by the RSOC.

- IGF will have callable dollars of up to $20M in first year, $40M in second year, and $60M in each subsequent year of the agreement.

- Need to establish criteria for which teams may apply for IGF funding and/or will submit plans.

- IGF funding is available to any team by unanimous consent of RSOC

- IGF funding also available for industry-wide programs or projects

- RSOC has seven (7) members selected by the parties in their sole discretion, as follows

- Four employer representatives, at least one of which must by an owner

- Three (3) player representatives, at least one of which must be a player

- Parties may name up to 2 Alternate RSOC representatives who will serve in the event of absence of a member

- Need to spell out in drafting the process of the RSOC, and limited arbitral review of decisions

2) Defined Benefit Pension Plan

- The parties will establish a defined benefit pension plan under US law per the NHLPA proposal.

3) Discipline

- For on-ice discipline, there will be an appeal to a neutral arbitrator or to a panel of three arbitrators (one appointed by each side and one neutral). The standard of review will be whether the League's finding of a violation of the League Playing Rules was supported by substantial evidence, and, if so, whether the penalty imposed was within the League's reasonable discretion and consistent with past practice

- For off-ice discipline, there will be an appeal to the impartial arbitrator. The issue will be whether the discipline was for just cause.

4) Player Contracting and System Issues

- NHLPA liability for escrow is eliminated from the side letter.

- NHLPA may set a higher percentage for escrow in a given year than the formula would provide. The NHL may also set a higher percentage than the formula would provide in the last year of the agreement, provided that any number so set is not unreasonable.

- The Playoff Pool is increased per the NHLPA proposal

- Liquidated damages provisions in SPCs are prohibited. This applies only to new contracts, i.e., contracts entered into after a new CBA is in effect.

- Prompt mutual disclosure of European loan agreements, ATOs and PTOs.

- NHLPA proposal on no trade / no move clauses

- NHL proposal to prevent a team playing with less than the minimum of 18/2 is accepted provided limitation is the NHL minimum + $100,000; counts against the share but not the cap.

- Waivers

- Re-entry waivers are eliminated

- Waivers will be required to loan a player who is on emergency recall if that player has played 10 games

- NHLPA proposal on 13.23 waivers

- Four Recall Rule

- After the conclusion of the Regular Season, a Club may exercise an unlimited number of additional Regular Recalls provided that it may have no more than three (3) Players on its Active Roster who were recalled by way of Regular Recall after the Trade Deadline

- Minimum salary continues to increase on the same schedule as previous CBA, $25,000 every second year

- Goepfert Rule as proposed by NHLPA

- Performance bonus cushion in each year of the agreement

- The Lower limit must be satisfied without consideration of performance bonuses.

- Players and cash/cap trading. A team may have an unlimited number of Retained Salary Transactions up to 15% of the Upper Limit in any League year

- The amount in excess of $1M paid to a player while in the minor leagues or in Europe on an NHL contract counts against the cap (none counts against the share). This applies only to new contracts, i.e., contracts entered into after a new CBA is in effect.

- NHLPA cap benefit recapture proposal.

- Applies only to new contracts, i.e., contracts entered into after a new CBA is in effect.

- Applies to contracts of 9 years or longer

- 35 year old rule changed to provide that the cap charge taken will be as per cap benefit recapture

- Salary Arbitration

- Walk away eliminated

- Second buyout period will continue in its current form except that

- A Club may not buy out a player who was not on its Reserve List as of the most recent Trade Deadline

- A Club may not buy out a player who has a cap hit of less than $3 M

- Critical dates calendar

- Sec. 12.3(a) election moved per NHLPA proposal

- Free agency interview period per NHLPA proposal

- Salary Cap and Payroll Range

- Growth Factor, Performance Bonus Cushion, Long-Term, injury continue except for any changes already agreed to or contained in this proposal

- +8M/-8M payroll range becomes +/- 20% of midpoint beginning in 2013/14

- The Upper Limit may not fall below 67.25 M in any year of the agreement. This is half way between the 11/12 Upper Limit (64.3 M) and the 12/13 UL (70.2 M).

5) Players' Share

- Our players' share proposal is identical to yours in all material respects except for the amount of the transition payments added to the 50% share. There are no guarantees or fixed targets, other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players' share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season. This proposal allows us to determine players' share regardless of the effects of the lockout and its aftermath.

- Player share will equal 50% of HRR, plus these fixed dollar payments attributable to the first four years of the agreement:

- 2012/13: $ 182M
- 2013/14: $ 128M
- 2014/15: $ 72M
- 2015/16: $ 11M

- Payment of these amounts may be deferred for one year (specific payment date to be agreed upon), with the deferral accumulating interest rate equal to the sum of the prime interest rate in effect at The J.P. Morgan Chase Bank on the next June 15, plus 1%. Payment of these fixed dollar amounts is guaranteed by the League.

- In years two through five of this Agreement, the players' share in dollars may not be less than it was in the previous year.

- Attached are charts which show this proposal against your last in the format you provided after our last proposal.

6) Term of CBA

- The term of the CBA will be for 5 years/seasons, and will end on September 15, 2017.

7) Transition Rules to be negotiated

- May cover, among other things, compliance buyouts, pro-ration of status/service and statistical criteria/thresholds based on the length of the season, movement of deadlines, and any other relevant matters.


Last edited by Dream Big: 11-22-2012 at 01:00 AM.
Dream Big is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 05:49 AM
  #424
Liberati0n*
Full Hammock
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 8,146
vCash: 50
Quote:
Propagandhi ‏@propagandhi
Somewhere in the Czech republic, Roman Hamrlik is passed out on a toilet with barf on his shirt and a copy of Atlas Shrugged at his feet.
That settles that.

Liberati0n* is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:07 AM
  #425
Mystlyfe
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,437
vCash: 500
I was surprised until I saw that was tweeted by Propaghandi.

Mystlyfe 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 03:16 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.