HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

CBA Talk II: Shut up and give me YOUR money!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-29-2012, 04:18 PM
  #201
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Florida is a great example of what I'm talking about. They finally hired a quality GM. Tallon spent to the floor on a team that won the division title, that's a good investment. It didn't turn into a profit this season, making the playoffs 4 times in 18 years isn't going to be turned around overnight.
You can't tell me those contracts are money well spent. Florida improved massively on the strength of their young group and some other very shrewd deals (picking up Brian Campbell, banking on Jose Theodore having a successful season, acquiring Versteeg, etc) and then filled out the roster with ridiculously inflated contracts.

Did they overperform their total cap number? Of course, but that doesn't mean they don't have some truly awful free agent contracts.

And my point is that they had to sign them (or other similar contracts) because of the structure of the CBA. They can't just refuse to meet the cap floor because there aren't any players left worth their money so even a well run team like the Panthers (are now) have to hand out bad contracts that inflate salaries further and set precedent for future signings.

Quote:
Columbus, on the other hand, spent to the cap and were terrible. They have an incompetent GM, have since they came into the league. They've lost loads of money in that time... makes sense to me.
I don't think I ever said that no team should ever lose money. I said that teams are in something of a prisoners dilemma that forces each team to overpay to sign players or resign themselves to likely be among the League's worst teams for a few years (like the Panthers were), some teams can do that but if all teams did it would be collusion.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 04:21 PM
  #202
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
I don't think you necessarily need to grow the game to non-traditional hockey markets. There are more markets in Canada available to the NHL than any other professional sports league (aside from the CFL which is 100% Canadian).
No need to do it but it makes sense. The US market offers a lot more potential than the Canadian market. The people in Quebec and Hamilton etc are already hockey fans, likely contributing already to national TV numbers and spending their money on NHL merchandise etc.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 04:32 PM
  #203
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
No need to do it but it makes sense. The US market offers a lot more potential than the Canadian market. The people in Quebec and Hamilton etc are already hockey fans, likely contributing already to national TV numbers and spending their money on NHL merchandise etc.
Not nearly as much as they would if they had teams though. Also the gate revenues generated from these cities would trump the value gained from Florida's 3000 fans who watch their team on TV (poorer ratings than infomercials).

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 04:37 PM
  #204
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Not nearly as much as they would if they had teams though. Also the gate revenues generated from these cities would trump the value gained from Florida's 3000 fans who watch their team on TV (poorer ratings than infomercials).
Short term, yes. Long term you hope that you can recruit a small percentage of the millions of sports fans there that don't have a clue what hockey is right now. A fraction of the US pie is huge numbers to the NHL.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 04:51 PM
  #205
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
You can't tell me those contracts are money well spent. Florida improved massively on the strength of their young group and some other very shrewd deals (picking up Brian Campbell, banking on Jose Theodore having a successful season, acquiring Versteeg, etc) and then filled out the roster with ridiculously inflated contracts.

Did they overperform their total cap number? Of course, but that doesn't mean they don't have some truly awful free agent contracts.

And my point is that they had to sign them (or other similar contracts) because of the structure of the CBA. They can't just refuse to meet the cap floor because there aren't any players left worth their money so even a well run team like the Panthers (are now) have to hand out bad contracts that inflate salaries further and set precedent for future signings.
Tallon overpaid some mid level hockey players by 500k or 1m a season on short term deals. Thomas Kopecky's contract is no more inflating than Manny Malhotra's was. I'm not even sure which contracts you're so offended by. He didn't have to sign all those deals either, didn't he trade Booth to lose some money?

Of course that's money well spent. Sure you'd like every guy to outplay their contract but that doesn't happen for any team, Canucks included. You spend that money to get wins, that's what puts butts in the seats, that's what makes your owner money.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
I don't think I ever said that no team should ever lose money. I said that teams are in something of a prisoners dilemma that forces each team to overpay to sign players or resign themselves to likely be among the League's worst teams for a few years (like the Panthers were), some teams can do that but if all teams did it would be collusion.
The Panthers and Blue Jackets have been terrible because their drafting and developing has been terrible. They've had tons of money to spend in FA because they haven't drafted or developed anyone worth paying. A team like Nashville developed players worth paying and haven't had to overpay anyone in FA to put wins together or get to the floor.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 05:07 PM
  #206
dave babych returns
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,234
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Tallon overpaid some mid level hockey players by 500k or 1m a season on short term deals. Thomas Kopecky's contract is no more inflating than Manny Malhotra's was. I'm not even sure which contracts you're so offended by. He didn't have to sign all those deals either, didn't he trade Booth to lose some money?

Of course that's money well spent. Sure you'd like every guy to outplay their contract but that doesn't happen for any team, Canucks included. You spend that money to get wins, that's what puts butts in the seats, that's what makes your owner money.



The Panthers and Blue Jackets have been terrible because their drafting and developing has been terrible. They've had tons of money to spend in FA because they haven't drafted or developed anyone worth paying. A team like Nashville developed players worth paying and haven't had to overpay anyone in FA to put wins together or get to the floor.
My original point is that it's unfair to criticize the owners for poor spending because they absolutely have to spend much of it, whether it is "good spending" or not.

Regardless of how much you like Dale Tallon's work (or whether you think Tomas Kopecky is a better player than Manny Malhotra was ), all teams need to spend a certain amount of money and that inflates every year. Furthermore teams need to compete for a limited number of top players in free agency and the effect of that is to contribute to inflation.

In short my point is that this poor spending is often the result of exterior pressures on teams rather than entirely on bad decision making by management and ownership.

dave babych returns is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 05:19 PM
  #207
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
In short my point is that this poor spending is often the result of exterior pressures on teams rather than entirely on bad decision making by management and ownership.
I understand your point and disagree. Can you point to a team that you would consider well run that has had to sign a contract like that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by dave babych returns View Post
(or whether you think Tomas Kopecky is a better player than Manny Malhotra was )
30 point 3rd liner with some size. Manny didn't really blossom until after we gave him that contract and role.


Last edited by Scurr: 10-29-2012 at 05:26 PM.
Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 06:14 PM
  #208
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Short term, yes. Long term you hope that you can recruit a small percentage of the millions of sports fans there that don't have a clue what hockey is right now. A fraction of the US pie is huge numbers to the NHL.
A team like Phoenix has been around for 15 years and is still failing despite recent success on the ice. Florida had a SCF appearance and the only time attendance went up was for the opening of their new arena. They've been around 20 years without support. Nashville has been around for over a decade and has had success but low-ish support.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 06:29 PM
  #209
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
A team like Phoenix has been around for 15 years and is still failing despite recent success on the ice. Florida had a SCF appearance and the only time attendance went up was for the opening of their new arena. They've been around 20 years without support. Nashville has been around for over a decade and has had success but low-ish support.
Ownership in Phoenix built the arena in the wrong city and has been jerking the fans around for 5+ years, Florida made the playoffs 4 times in 18 years. No city is going to do well in those circumstances.

Nashville draws well I thought?

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 07:31 PM
  #210
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,331
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
That too. I think you can grow the game anywhere, it's that good, but it takes time. If the owners are serious about it they need to help give Nashville the time to do it. More hockey markets means bigger TV deals means everyone makes more money.

NHL owners want the players to pay for these teams to grow the game in non hockey markets. Seems ass backwards for the employee's to be the ones investing in the leagues future when they likely aren't going to be the ones around to reap the benefit.
more teams = more jobs
more jobs = more demand for talent
more demand for talent = higher wages

On the surface it seems bad for the players but those lower income southern teams help raise the value of all the players by increasing demand. If you got rid of the worst 10 revenue or so team you would probably end up sacking 33% of the workforce and only raise the cap by $5-8m while forcing the remain players who kept jobs would have to take pay cut (ie 3rd liners become the new 4th liners etc).

You could argue relocating those franchises and that would raise the HRR a small amount but at the expense of a longer term goal of growing hockey. You could also talk about increasing revenue sharing. Both legitimate argument to make as well, but the to say tho the players do not reap the benefit from those weak revenue teams is false IMHO.

me2 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 07:55 PM
  #211
Lard_Lad
Registered User
 
Lard_Lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Nashville draws well I thought?
Attendance has improved to the point where it's crept out of the bottom third of the league (both in overall numbers and percent of capacity), but I'm not sure I'd call that "drawing well." And they get a subsidy from local government that's something like $8-10 million, otherwise they'd be in serious trouble. If they weren't getting that, they'd be losing more money than anyone except Phoenix.

Lard_Lad is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 08:05 PM
  #212
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
Ownership in Phoenix built the arena in the wrong city and has been jerking the fans around for 5+ years, Florida made the playoffs 4 times in 18 years. No city is going to do well in those circumstances.

Nashville draws well I thought?
Travel time from Phoenix to Glendale is less than it takes to get from Surrey/Cloverdale to Downtown Vancouver. No excuse.

Even when Florida was doing well in the 90's they weren't supported that well. Even when they had the league's most exciting player (Bure) they weren't supported. That team is outdrawn in ratings by informercials. It's a dead organization.

You're right about Nashville...they were at 97.5% of capacity this season (I originally looked at the hard attendance number which is around 16k and figured it wasn't that good). Although given they have a smaller arena, and the fact that their average ticket price is below the league average and league median, I would expect a complete sell-out.

Looking at the numbers, the following teams have average attendances below 90% capacity, as well as average ticket prices ranked in the bottom half of the league:

1) Phoenix
2) Dallas
3) New York Islanders
4) Colorado
5) New Jersey
6) Anaheim
7) Columbus
8) Carolina
9) Florida

The Islanders are moving to Brooklyn, and have a new arena there so that should hopefully help that problem.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 08:21 PM
  #213
LuckyDay
Registered User
 
LuckyDay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: The Uncanny Valley
Posts: 282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Not nearly as much as they would if they had teams though. Also the gate revenues generated from these cities would trump the value gained from Florida's 3000 fans who watch their team on TV (poorer ratings than infomercials).
Don't keep kidding yourself. Half of all season ticket holders in Buffalo live in Hamilton.

The problem with the "more teams in Canada" idea is it just bleeds tickets, merchandise, etc. from the other teams. The Canadian market was saturated with two teams - if that wasn't so than Grandpa wouldn't still be shouting go habs go at Canucks games. Any increase in revenue for Canadian teams is marginal at best. Its why Bettman charge $150 million to Winnipeg for a relocation fee.

LuckyDay is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 08:57 PM
  #214
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,227
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyDay View Post
Don't keep kidding yourself. Half of all season ticket holders in Buffalo live in Hamilton.

The problem with the "more teams in Canada" idea is it just bleeds tickets, merchandise, etc. from the other teams. The Canadian market was saturated with two teams - if that wasn't so than Grandpa wouldn't still be shouting go habs go at Canucks games. Any increase in revenue for Canadian teams is marginal at best. Its why Bettman charge $150 million to Winnipeg for a relocation fee.
Canadian fans also pay more to go to a game than fans of US teams. A lot more. Adding more Canadian teams would see HRR skyrocket.

y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 09:16 PM
  #215
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Travel time from Phoenix to Glendale is less than it takes to get from Surrey/Cloverdale to Downtown Vancouver. No excuse.

Even when Florida was doing well in the 90's they weren't supported that well. Even when they had the league's most exciting player (Bure) they weren't supported. That team is outdrawn in ratings by informercials. It's a dead organization.

You're right about Nashville...they were at 97.5% of capacity this season (I originally looked at the hard attendance number which is around 16k and figured it wasn't that good). Although given they have a smaller arena, and the fact that their average ticket price is below the league average and league median, I would expect a complete sell-out.

Looking at the numbers, the following teams have average attendances below 90% capacity, as well as average ticket prices ranked in the bottom half of the league:

1) Phoenix
2) Dallas
3) New York Islanders
4) Colorado
5) New Jersey
6) Anaheim
7) Columbus
8) Carolina
9) Florida

The Islanders are moving to Brooklyn, and have a new arena there so that should hopefully help that problem.
Dallas, Colorado, Columbus and Carolina are all orgs that can turn it around though.

LickTheEnvelope is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 10:09 PM
  #216
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
You're right about Nashville...they were at 97.5% of capacity this season (I originally looked at the hard attendance number which is around 16k and figured it wasn't that good). Although given they have a smaller arena, and the fact that their average ticket price is below the league average and league median, I would expect a complete sell-out.

I have no idea how hard hit Nashville has been specifically but we have to keep in mind that the US has been in the middle of a recession. Nashville is doing the right thing imo, make demand drive up the price of tickets. 97.5% capacity is nice, I imagine they'll start raising ticket prices slowly to keep interest high.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 10:12 PM
  #217
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
Dallas, Colorado, Columbus and Carolina are all orgs that can turn it around though.
Teams that have ownership issues don't have a chance because the marketing money etc dries up. Remember the Grizzlies? Dallas was a model franchise in the US at one point, they've got a great chance to make it back with good ownership. It all starts at the top.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 10:16 PM
  #218
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,381
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
You could argue relocating those franchises and that would raise the HRR a small amount but at the expense of a longer term goal of growing hockey. You could also talk about increasing revenue sharing. Both legitimate argument to make as well, but the to say tho the players do not reap the benefit from those weak revenue teams is false IMHO.
I was talking about struggling markets vs Canadian markets. I'm pretty confident the players right now would be way better off with those teams in Canadian markets. Long term the non hockey markets may end up increasing the players piece but these players aren't likely to still be around. I'm probably still not explaining that well, sorry.

Scurr is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 10:20 PM
  #219
Hammer79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
Travel time from Phoenix to Glendale is less than it takes to get from Surrey/Cloverdale to Downtown Vancouver. No excuse.

Even when Florida was doing well in the 90's they weren't supported that well. Even when they had the league's most exciting player (Bure) they weren't supported. That team is outdrawn in ratings by informercials. It's a dead organization.

You're right about Nashville...they were at 97.5% of capacity this season (I originally looked at the hard attendance number which is around 16k and figured it wasn't that good). Although given they have a smaller arena, and the fact that their average ticket price is below the league average and league median, I would expect a complete sell-out.

Looking at the numbers, the following teams have average attendances below 90% capacity, as well as average ticket prices ranked in the bottom half of the league:

1) Phoenix
2) Dallas
3) New York Islanders
4) Colorado
5) New Jersey
6) Anaheim
7) Columbus
8) Carolina
9) Florida

The Islanders are moving to Brooklyn, and have a new arena there so that should hopefully help that problem.
Phoenix just isn't a hockey town, they are more into their NFL and MLB team. Glendale is stuck with a white elephant arena and Bettman is trying to make the best out of it, partly for ego's sake, partly to save the NHL's reputation. It's tough to convince other cities to build NHL arenas if they get a reputation as a cut-and-run league like the NBA.

Dallas is a Cowboy's town. They might show up for a contender. I also think that division re-alignment and getting them out of the Pacific division would do wonders.

You're right, a move to the Barclay's Center will likely help turn the Islanders around.

Colorado fans got spoiled early on by getting a relocated team that was a Cup contender for several seasons. Now that they are out of that contending cycle, the fans appear to have little patience for a rebuild. This is a strong argument against the Oilers moving to Seattle.

New Jersey is in a saturated NY-NJ area market during a stagnant economy. Arena debt has really saddled that team.

Anaheim hasn't got an excuse other than the broader 'it's a bad economy' excuse. They won the cup a few years ago, and still have a strong core to build around. They aren't in a rebuild. I think the LA-Anaheim area is just a fringe NHL market in general.

Columbus has had one playoff appearance in it's existence, a sweep loss against a then powerful Red Wings squad. Columbus is more of a college sports town anyway. I'd like to see their attendance figures in a season with a good on-ice product before passing judgement.

Carolina is also a recent cup winner with a decent core that isn't in a rebuild. Another 'it's a bad economy' excuse may apply here. They are a likely playoff team again, so once hockey is back I expect a rebound.

Florida is playing in the shadow of a powerhouse Miami Heat team. Last season was their first playoff appearance in a decade. A bad on-ice product can lead to apathy, especially in non-traditional hockey markets.

Hammer79 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 10:37 PM
  #220
Reverend Mayhem
Freeway's closed man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,814
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
Dallas, Colorado, Columbus and Carolina are all orgs that can turn it around though.
Not sure about C-bus. They haven't really had any success so it's hard to tell.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
10-30-2012, 12:18 AM
  #221
billvanseattle
Registered User
 
billvanseattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bellingham
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,027
vCash: 500
The NHL "sucess" is debatable ... how much of the revenue increase is due to the Canadian teams *****ing their fans over ... I know how much my VCR season tickets have gone up ... is there any revenue increase outside of increased ticket prices by the azzhole owners in Canada????

billvanseattle is offline  
Old
10-30-2012, 12:44 AM
  #222
opendoor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,101
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billvanseattle View Post
The NHL "sucess" is debatable ... how much of the revenue increase is due to the Canadian teams *****ing their fans over ... I know how much my VCR season tickets have gone up ... is there any revenue increase outside of increased ticket prices by the azzhole owners in Canada????
Between 05-06 and 10-11 revenue increased by about $825 million. Of that, 64% was from US based teams and 36% was from Canadian teams. And some of that Canadian increase in revenue was due to the Canadian dollar rising 15% in that span.

opendoor is offline  
Old
11-01-2012, 09:18 AM
  #223
Hammer Time
Registered User
 
Hammer Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,490
vCash: 533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Not sure about C-bus. They haven't really had any success so it's hard to tell.
Howson just has to stop shooting himself in the foot. With him it's like one step forward, two steps back.

Hammer Time is offline  
Old
11-01-2012, 10:43 AM
  #224
ItsAllPartOfThePlan
Registered User
 
ItsAllPartOfThePlan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Not sure about C-bus. They haven't really had any success so it's hard to tell.
I find it amazing they get that number of fans out despite putting on a ****** product. I don't think they are a problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meteor View Post
Howson just has to stop shooting himself in the foot. With him it's like one step forward, two steps back.
Hopefully John Davidson fixes that problem.

ItsAllPartOfThePlan is offline  
Old
11-01-2012, 01:55 PM
  #225
Wisp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 4,823
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billvanseattle View Post
The NHL "sucess" is debatable ... how much of the revenue increase is due to the Canadian teams *****ing their fans over ... I know how much my VCR season tickets have gone up ... is there any revenue increase outside of increased ticket prices by the azzhole owners in Canada????
The fans are the ones ****ing themselves. If you don't feel ticket prices are reasonable, don't buy them. Prices adjust accordingly.

Why should NHL teams think their prices are anything but reasonable when people are constantly fighting to get tickets?

Wisp 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 04:46 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.