HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Eric Lindros vs. Mark Messier - Who was more dominant in his prime?

View Poll Results: Eric Lindros vs. Mark Messier - Who was more dominant in his prime?
Eric Lindros 159 67.66%
Mark Messier 76 32.34%
Voters: 235. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-24-2012, 06:53 PM
  #51
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Yes he missed games and yes he had a very short career. But his 1995-96 and 1998-99 seasons, and to perhaps a lesser extent 1995 was at such a level i feel that those stats and his physicality put him at a level of dominance that Messier never matched. Thus, in those peak seasons, where he did play many games, he was a more dominant player than Messier ever was. That was the question.
1995-96 when Mark Messier was 2nd in Hart voting in 74 GP and Lindros was 3rd in Hart voting in 73 GP?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2012, 06:54 PM
  #52
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForsbergForever View Post
What I take from this poll is that Lindros could have learned a lot from Mess and been that much more dominant. I'm sure the Big E could have added years to his longevity and been more productive with Messier showing him the ropes for a few years. Its even more frustrating because it was so close to happening with the decision of the arbitrator to award Lindros to Philly instead of NYR in 1992.
Agree. I think Lindros was more physically talented than Messier, but he didn't have the mind for the game that the Moose had.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2012, 07:22 PM
  #53
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,856
vCash: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
a lot of what you say is true but also the pace of the game was a bit slower in the 80's, 70's ect... where a guy like Lindros might have had a great chance not being injured as greatly as well.

Also if you are going to take health as an issue one should be consistent with everyone and just deal with what each player did, nothing less but also nothing more.
Not a chance. If a player was the target of vicious knees and attacks which caused them to miss games, I do not hold it against them because it was not their style that caused the injuries.

Lindros could be counted on to miss 20 games a season on average specifically because of the way he played the game. That can and is held against him.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
If you mean the combination of his regular season and playoffs yes you are right.

But if you are only looking at regular season and counting stats then you are wrong as Lindros played his entire career in a much lower scoring era and unless we do a more objective look at it aside from counting raw stats then it's an unfair and IMO an incomplete analysis.

What you say is true but we also saw in 95 as he played almost the whole of that season and tied for the lead in scoring and was the Hart winner and rightly so IMO.
In Lindros' best season in which he missed the fewest games, Messier still beat him in Hart voting(Despite being a step less than he used to be). As much as people now balk over that pick, it made sense to those who watched the season

Regarding 95, yes lucky Lindros got to play in a half season, unlike most years when his body eventually said "I need a break from this rough stuff" later in the season. That is fortuitous circumstance for him. He still never had a year as good as Messier's 1990 year. And yes I was counting only regular season for 1990. Playoff Messier obviously blows Lindros away. The guy raised it to a new level in the playoffs and inspired teammates to do the same.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2012, 07:25 PM
  #54
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
I am going to have to jump on the soapbox here.
Lindros played a game at that level at the cost of his body. He played a style harder than his body could tolerate which made it possible for him to be the force he was, and thus is personally responsible for his missing games.

Those missing games should be held against him. This is not a Bobby Orr who was getting his knees targeted by opposing players and missing games.


.
I detect a double standard here. Orr put himself out there too. He was notoriously reckless and he made himself an easy and willing target with his fearless rushes and willingness to play physical. Pat Quinn and crew must have licking their chops watching him rocket up the ice a few feet from the boards. It's no different than Lindros, they both played a super high risk style, with the risky aspects (physical play, fearless puck rushing) being defining aspects of their games. Even without the cheap shots, Orr would have taken a pounding. And he knew what he was getting into every time he decided to carry the puck through entire teams in that dirty era, and he paid the price when he kept doing it even after he was damaged goods. He could have played a much more conservative game and made himself less vulnerable, but he didn't.

revolverjgw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-24-2012, 07:54 PM
  #55
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 30,490
vCash: 500
I can only imagine what would have happened for Eric Lindros if he had Wayne Gretzky playing ahead of him in the 1997 finals. Mark Messier got more done in his prime but Lindros stood out more and for a brief moment the future was Eric Lindros. I don't think Mark Messier ever came close to that level of individual greatness in his 80s prime.

Stephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 04:10 AM
  #56
ot92s
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 726
vCash: 500
here are a ton of goals from mess...he could fly. and there was a lot more to his game than the goals.

(thanks to youtubes's "great one" oilerfanaic1)



and yet I didn't vote for him. here is lindros "rag-dolling" the league for like 20 minutes worth of highlights...

ot92s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 10:59 AM
  #57
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,856
vCash: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
I detect a double standard here. Orr put himself out there too. He was notoriously reckless and he made himself an easy and willing target with his fearless rushes and willingness to play physical. Pat Quinn and crew must have licking their chops watching him rocket up the ice a few feet from the boards. It's no different than Lindros, they both played a super high risk style, with the risky aspects (physical play, fearless puck rushing) being defining aspects of their games. Even without the cheap shots, Orr would have taken a pounding. And he knew what he was getting into every time he decided to carry the puck through entire teams in that dirty era, and he paid the price when he kept doing it even after he was damaged goods. He could have played a much more conservative game and made himself less vulnerable, but he didn't.
This is apples and oranges.

Not even close to the same. Orr rarely missed time to the same degree season after season and often played full seasons(Discount his surgeries). Furthermore, Orr's "high risk" style was not high risk if the rules were followed and people were not sticking their legs out because they could not catch/Stop him and targeted his legs/knees instead of his upper body when he was passing.

Even so, Lindros averaged missing a 4th of each season before concussions, and most injuries were a result of his own initiative in collisions. I can't count how many times we saw "Lindros hobbling a bit after laying a crushing check in the corner", "Lindros out with a shoulder injury due from a crushing hit he delivered", "Lindros .....Sprain, sprain, wrist, eye, rib, shoulder, knees, bruised foot, etc"

Lindros put himself on the shelf with his hard nosed style ALL THE TIME. Orr was put on the shelf a few times, but still played several full seasons.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:06 AM
  #58
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 613
I dont understand the people claiming Messier was obviously better in his prime. Look at the poll for christs sake.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:14 AM
  #59
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
I dont understand the people claiming Messier was obviously better in his prime. Look at the poll for christs sake.
Why should we look at the poll?

Check who voted. 90% of the people who have voted are not even regular HoH posters. These polls always gets skewed because alot of random people votes for their favorite player.


Last edited by jkrx: 12-25-2012 at 11:51 AM.
jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:16 AM
  #60
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,269
vCash: 500
To put it another way - I'd prefer Lindros in a game against a random opponent. I'd prefer Messier in a game against a top defensive team like NJ or Detroit of the 90s

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:29 AM
  #61
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,856
vCash: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
I dont understand the people claiming Messier was obviously better in his prime. Look at the poll for christs sake.
We saw Messier's 1990 season.

That and i think I made it perfectly clear. Ill take messier for 75-79 games a season over Lindros for 60 games of the season.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 12:15 PM
  #62
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 613
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Why should we look at the poll?

Check who voted. 90% of the people who have voted are not even regular HoH posters. These polls always gets skewed because alot of random people votes for their favorite player.
You mean Lindros has more fans then Messier? Rock on homie.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
We saw Messier's 1990 season.

That and i think I made it perfectly clear. Ill take messier for 75-79 games a season over Lindros for 60 games of the season.
And people saw Lindros in the mid to late nineties. They obviously thought he was the more dominant, not to forget in the seasons he played more than those 60 games you mention. Make that over 70.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 12:23 PM
  #63
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Why should we look at the poll?

Check who voted. 90% of the people who have voted are not even regular HoH posters. These polls always gets skewed because alot of random people votes for their favorite player.
I don't think it's "favorite player," so much as a lot of fans on hfboards are of the age where they remember Lindros in his prime, but remember Messier mostly from his post-prime years. Lindros was definitely better than Messier from 1995-2000 or whatever. But Messier from 1990-1996 vs Lindros from 1995-2000? Much closer, and I prefer what Messier brought to the table.

(not that all votes for Lindros are younger fans - there are definitely some older fans who voted for Lindros).

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 12:29 PM
  #64
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,111
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I don't think it's "favorite player," so much as a lot of fans on hfboards are of the age where they remember Lindros in his prime, but remember Messier mostly from his post-prime years. Lindros was definitely better than Messier from 1995-2000 or whatever. But Messier from 1990-1996 vs Lindros from 1995-2000? Much closer, and I prefer what Messier brought to the table.

(not that all votes for Lindros are younger fans - there are definitely some older fans who voted for Lindros).
Thats why I said 90%. There are some respected voters too.

Quote:
You mean Lindros has more fans then Messier? Rock on homie.
Lindros might even have more fans than Red Kelly, doesnt make it right.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 12:40 PM
  #65
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,624
vCash: 613
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Thats why I said 90%. There are some respected voters too.
What are you talking about "respected voters"? You dont know that. I think some "respected voters" here are digging a bit too deep in the semantic trick bag and then vote Messier. The eye test would say Lindros.

Quote:
Lindros might even have more fans than Red Kelly, doesnt make it right.
Maybe than Kelly becouse of age, but i highly doubt Lindros has more fans than Messier.

Darth Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 12:53 PM
  #66
DisgruntledGoat
Registered User
 
DisgruntledGoat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,849
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
What are you talking about "respected voters"? You dont know that. I think some "respected voters" here are digging a bit too deep in the semantic trick bag and then vote Messier. The eye test would say Lindros.


Maybe than Kelly becouse of age, but i highly doubt Lindros has more fans than Messier.
Lindros is the fourth most overrated player on these boards behind the Holy Trinity of Overrated: Fedorov, Bure, Forsberg.

DisgruntledGoat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 05:32 PM
  #67
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Not a chance. If a player was the target of vicious knees and attacks which caused them to miss games, I do not hold it against them because it was not their style that caused the injuries.

Lindros could be counted on to miss 20 games a season on average specifically because of the way he played the game. That can and is held against him.
That's a double standard if I have ever seen one, players targeted Orr's knees because of his style of play since they couldn't skate with him in a severely watered down NHL.

I'm sorry but this pick and choose type of standard applying hurts the credibility of your argument, which is quite good and well presented I must say.




Quote:
In Lindros' best season in which he missed the fewest games, Messier still beat him in Hart voting(Despite being a step less than he used to be). As much as people now balk over that pick, it made sense to those who watched the season.
96 is a weird year where the Hart voters, as is usually the case picks the guy with the most points. Mario was back after missing almost 2 complete seasons and was a measly plus 10 on a team that was plus 78 in GF on the year. for all of the talk about Mario dominating and controlling the play, at even strength he was 5th in plus/minus (of all forwards) a full 27 behind Nedved of all players.

the big 3 in the west, Sakic, Forsberg and Federov got a measly combined 118 points which goes to show how much value to put into the voting of the hart in that year IMO.

The voters had Moose ahead of Lindros by 62 points but one could make an extremely strong argument that Lindros had more impact that year IMO.

It might have been a swansong type of year for the voters much like it was for Lidstrom in 11 for the Norris.

Quote:
Regarding 95, yes lucky Lindros got to play in a half season, unlike most years when his body eventually said "I need a break from this rough stuff" later in the season. That is fortuitous circumstance for him. He still never had a year as good as Messier's 1990 year. And yes I was counting only regular season for 1990. Playoff Messier obviously blows Lindros away. The guy raised it to a new level in the playoffs and inspired teammates to do the same.
96 is as good or better than Mosse in 90, Hart voters be damned.

There is no doubt that Lindros was playing with a target on his head, like had never been seen before and this and his style of play diminshed what a great career he could have had but even with his missed games Eric's prime in the regular season from 93-99 is one of the msot impressive debut peaks of any forward in history not named Wayne, Mario, Alex or Sid.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 07:41 PM
  #68
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,856
vCash: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
And people saw Lindros in the mid to late nineties. They obviously thought he was the more dominant, not to forget in the seasons he played more than those 60 games you mention. Make that over 70.
I think you are mistaking peak(Best individual year) for prime(Best string of years while playing your best hockey)
Lindros on average missed 20 games a season. And he missed those games before his concussion problems due to small accumulated injuries that his style caused him to suffer.

Mark Messier not only had a longer healthier prime, but he was more of a force in hart voting(And I am not counting his time with Gretzky on the same team, which puts him way over the top)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
That's a double standard if I have ever seen one, players targeted Orr's knees because of his style of play since they couldn't skate with him in a severely watered down NHL.
I'm sorry but this pick and choose type of standard applying hurts the credibility of your argument, which is quite good and well presented I must say.
Sorry, no dice. People had to resort to breaking the rules to stop Orr much of the time, and dirty, leg targeting hits. Despite this, Orr had 5 of the greatest full seasons ever seen with few to no games missed. Lindros injured himself usually with no need for players to target him dirty. Often and regularly and often with cumulative effects that appeared later in the season. He would play his hard nosed game, go into corners drilling people and subsequently damaging himself with reckless abandon. He was responsible for injuring himself 90% of the time and managed to do it every season.

It is not even close to the same. One, a guy who players targeted dirty, another who charged into corners with reckless abandon. He managed to tear his ACL in both knees in his first 2 seasons, on separate occasions, in the league by barreling into the corner for a hit, finishing the hit, but trashing his leg on the boards in the process. He pulled his groin more times than I can count, and the same goes for injuring his shoulder with his big hits, bruising his foot and ankles, etc etc.


Even if you ignore seasons when Orr missed games(which you easily can since he played several healthy seasons), he still managed 5 full, powerhouse seasons. Lindros never managed this except in a season where he played half as many games as normal(And he was often injuring himself)
All his own self inflicted injuries aside......
The guy seemed almost cursed. I still remember him being put out from an eye injury in his hart year which involved his own shot ricochet back into his eye off another players arse.

Quote:
96 is a weird year where the Hart voters, as is usually the case picks the guy with the most points. Mario was back after missing almost 2 complete seasons and was a measly plus 10 on a team that was plus 78 in GF on the year. for all of the talk about Mario dominating and controlling the play, at even strength he was 5th in plus/minus (of all forwards) a full 27 behind Nedved of all players.

the big 3 in the west, Sakic, Forsberg and Federov got a measly combined 118 points which goes to show how much value to put into the voting of the hart in that year IMO.

The voters had Moose ahead of Lindros by 62 points but one could make an extremely strong argument that Lindros had more impact that year IMO.

It might have been a swansong type of year for the voters much like it was for Lidstrom in 11 for the Norris.
Oh I have no doubt you could make a case for Lindros that year. but Messier, despite being past his prime and best hockey, was a beast that year as well and no argument will convince me it was not close between them.

People continually try to put down Messier and revise history when all of us who were watching him were saying "jeeeeees*&. look at this guy play"

Quote:
[96 is as good or better than Mosse in 90, Hart voters be damned.

There is no doubt that Lindros was playing with a target on his head, like had never been seen before and this and his style of play diminshed what a great career he could have had but even with his missed games Eric's prime in the regular season from 93-99 is one of the msot impressive debut peaks of any forward in history not named Wayne, Mario, Alex or Sid.
Not a chance. 1990 was a ridiculously good year for Messier. Better than anything I ever saw from Lindros. While I think he should have been runner up for the Hart to Bourque, that does not decrease his monumental season.
Along with being better in general than Lindros, Messier was a top Pker in the league that year.

How is it so many people forget the Messier that as soon as he jumped on the ice, the opposing team tucked back in the neutral zone a bit more, eased up on the forecheck and crossed their fingers? A lot of time, all you could see when he had the puck was panic on the opposing team.


Last edited by Dark Shadows: 12-25-2012 at 07:57 PM.
Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 09:48 PM
  #69
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 13,021
vCash: 500
Messier was faster, smarter, better ice vision, more agile, more durable and equally as lethal a shooter. I would even say he was a better fighter and open-ice hitter.

Lindros, to me, seemed like he was targeted and often intimidated by the targeting. Kasparaitis, Jovanovski, Stevens....

I mean, who the hell ever intimidated Mark Messier? In his prime?

Never saw it.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 10:10 PM
  #70
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,856
vCash: 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Messier was faster, smarter, better ice vision, more agile, more durable and equally as lethal a shooter. I would even say he was a better fighter and open-ice hitter.

Lindros, to me, seemed like he was targeted and often intimidated by the targeting. Kasparaitis, Jovanovski, Stevens....

I mean, who the hell ever intimidated Mark Messier? In his prime?

Never saw it.
Can't say I ever saw Lindros intimidated. I saw him lose his mind and make stupid mistakes when guys like that targeted him, but for the most part, he could knock around anyone in the league in a fight. Stevens got the last laugh with that knockout check, but physically, Lindros often handled him.

Agreed nobody ever intimidated Messier, and he kept his head in the game and translated his anger into intensity and more productive play no matter who was playing him.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 10:12 PM
  #71
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 37,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Can't say I ever saw Lindros intimidated. I saw him lose his mind and make stupid mistakes when guys like that targeted him, but for the most part, he could knock around anyone in the league in a fight. Stevens got the last laugh with that knockout check, but physically, Lindros often handled him.

Agreed nobody ever intimidated Messier, and he kept his head in the game and translated his anger into intensity and more productive play no matter who was playing him.
Lindros was physically stronger than Stevens, but Stevens was close enough to Lindros that Lindros couldn't just bowl him over, which took Lindros off his game.

I don't know if I ever saw anyone take Messier off his game.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-25-2012, 11:53 PM
  #72
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
Lindros is the fourth most overrated player on these boards behind the Holy Trinity of Overrated: Fedorov, Bure, Forsberg.
The only one thats really wildly overrated between those three would be Forsberg.

monster_bertuzzi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 12:33 AM
  #73
Jafar
Keep it logical
 
Jafar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,695
vCash: 50
Define dominant.Lindros was probably a bit more physical than Messier but on the other hand Messier was more vicious.Messier was also a superior player and leader.

My vote goes to Messier.

Jafar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 01:25 AM
  #74
Hawkman
Moderator
A Man and The Blues
 
Hawkman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,767
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchBrawl View Post
Define dominant.Lindros was probably a bit more physical than Messier but on the other hand Messier was more vicious.Messier was also a superior player and leader. My vote goes to Messier.
Agreed. Messier's prime is really under rated for Lindros to have a 2 to 1 advantage in the poll. I realize this poll is just about prime but Messier went 28 in the last ATD and Lindros went 128!

Hawkman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-26-2012, 11:25 AM
  #75
seventieslord
Registered User
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,328
vCash: 500
17-16 for Lindros if I count just the votes of people I recognize.

seventieslord 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 03:30 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.