HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

Interview Dave Feschuk talks about his last article in the Star. Burke wants credit

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-18-2013, 01:20 AM
  #176
Mork
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,603
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Mork
Brian Burke's definition of success is not making the playoffs; it's winning the Stanley Cup. That's what he was shooting for.

It's not fair to evaluate his work on a single criterion that is not relevant to his overall goal.

Mork is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 01:26 AM
  #177
legendinblue
NHL in Seattle
 
legendinblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Seattle/Europe
Posts: 6,257
vCash: 500
Brian you're done here in TO. Nobody cares about you, shut your yap and take care of business in Anaheim. I bet he would be ok with having his name on a Cup should we win one with the current core.

legendinblue is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 01:31 AM
  #178
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mork View Post
Brian Burke's definition of success is not making the playoffs; it's winning the Stanley Cup. That's what he was shooting for.

It's not fair to evaluate his work on a single criterion that is not relevant to his overall goal.
Well, if it took him 5 years to even make the playoffs... five years to even make the playoffs... when can we expect to see a cup?
2067?

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 02:15 AM
  #179
Krazy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
Well, if it took him 5 years to even make the playoffs... five years to even make the playoffs... when can we expect to see a cup?
2067?
Again why do people keep saying it was 5 years. It is not. Stop saying that

Krazy is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:25 AM
  #180
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazy View Post
Again why do people keep saying it was 5 years. It is not. Stop saying that
5 nhl seasons since Burke arrived.
If you want call it "nhl seasons" as opposed to "years", all the power to you.

So... if making the playoffs after 5 nhl seasons is considered "great", then what would you consider average? 9 nhl seasons?

I really am curious about this. Most people who liked Burke refuse to answer this.
I'm genuinely curious as to why.

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:32 AM
  #181
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mork View Post

You have picked the wrong measuring stick: instead of asking how long will it take to make the playoffs, you could instead be asking what will it take to win the Stanley Cup.
Numerous people in this thread are applauding Burke based on the fact that the leafs are about to clinch a playoff spot.
Burke himself is taking credit for the leafs making the playoffs.

So it's not ME that's using the wrong measuring stick.
I'm simply asking to those people... if you think Burke was "successful" for making the playoffs after 5 years, how many years would you consider "average"?

I have no idea why so many are terrified of that question.

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:34 AM
  #182
michael582
Registered User
 
michael582's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
5 nhl seasons since Burke arrived.
If you want call it "nhl seasons" as opposed to "years", all the power to you.

So... if making the playoffs after 5 nhl seasons is considered "great", then what would you consider average? 9 nhl seasons?

I really am curious about this. Most people who liked Burke refuse to answer this.
I'm genuinely curious as to why.
Cause when burke picked up the team, our top point get'er was jason blake

michael582 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 03:56 AM
  #183
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by michael582 View Post
Cause when burke picked up the team, our top point get'er was jason blake
Every team that decides to begin a rebuild is full of lousy players.
It's why the team decided to rebuild.

So now that we're in agreement that EVERY team that begins a rebuild is full of lousy players, what do you think is an "average" amount of years to make the playoffs?
If 5 years is "successful", then what would be "average"?

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:01 AM
  #184
ConnorTO
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,875
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
5 nhl seasons since Burke arrived.
If you want call it "nhl seasons" as opposed to "years", all the power to you.

So... if making the playoffs after 5 nhl seasons is considered "great", then what would you consider average? 9 nhl seasons?

I really am curious about this. Most people who liked Burke refuse to answer this.
I'm genuinely curious as to why.
i recall only 4 ex-Leafs are currently playing in the NHL or so


nuff said
for a team with nothing, Burke has done a GREAT JOB!

Burke haters are just butt hurt for no reason
GO LEAFS GO

ConnorTO is online now  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:01 AM
  #185
ITM
As Long As It Takes
 
ITM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,959
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
Numerous people in this thread are applauding Burke based on the fact that the leafs are about to clinch a playoff spot.
Burke himself is taking credit for the leafs making the playoffs.

So it's not ME that's using the wrong measuring stick.
I'm simply asking to those people... if you think Burke was "successful" for making the playoffs after 5 years, how many years would you consider "average"?

I have no idea why so many are terrified of that question.
Numerous people are praising Burke because the assets he brought in have turned the club around. And that includes Randy Carlyle and Dave Nonis.

A better question is, what's the average turnaround time for a bottom ranked team to become a playoff team? And before the question is asked, you'd need some reasonable definition of what kind of a playoff team is considered a successful rebuild/retool/etc...So when you commit to a few definitions, and abide by them, and ask the question against a accurate data with accurate representation (5 years includes offseasons as well as seasons, and Burke wasn't afforded that, so it's not semantics, it's about correct information vs incorrect) you'll have a legitimate part in the discussion.

Factor in the kind of organization lack, Burke was given, what he brought in, the age of the team, a top tier goalie, three top 10 players (At one time or another in the last calendar year: Lupul/Kessel ; Kessel/Kadri) and two top 20 defencemen with blue chip talent in the pipeline , you have nothing less than the kind of Herculean product, few if any could have accomplished.

How you can continue to have the opinions you do, astonishes me.

Want to ask about questions, assets and justified displeasure...The Edmonton boards are just below Toronto's.

ITM is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:08 AM
  #186
Krazy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
5 nhl seasons since Burke arrived.
If you want call it "nhl seasons" as opposed to "years", all the power to you.

So... if making the playoffs after 5 nhl seasons is considered "great", then what would you consider average? 9 nhl seasons?

I really am curious about this. Most people who liked Burke refuse to answer this.
I'm genuinely curious as to why.
Because it's not. He had 4 drafts and 4 ufa periods.
Show me a
Team that has started a rebuild in 2009 and has done better???
Teams like Columbus Winnipeg Edmonton Florida islanders have been rebuilding since the 90s.

Also I posed u numerous seguin predictions to quote to see how right you are. Will u answer?

Krazy is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:10 AM
  #187
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aplayaz2000 View Post
i recall only 4 ex-Leafs are currently playing in the NHL or so


nuff said
for a team with nothing, Burke has done a GREAT JOB!

Burke haters are just butt hurt for no reason
GO LEAFS GO
Yes, I get it.
You think taking 5 years to rebuild and make the playoffs was a "GREAT JOB"!!!!

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:10 AM
  #188
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
Yes, I get it.
You think taking 5 years to rebuild and make the playoffs was a "GREAT JOB"!!!!
I can't edit...

Meant to add...

Being that you think 5 years to rebuild is a "GREAT JOB", how many years would you consider to be "average"?

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:13 AM
  #189
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazy View Post
Because it's not. He had 4 drafts and 4 ufa periods.
Show me a
Team that has started a rebuild in 2009 and has done better???
Teams like Columbus Winnipeg Edmonton Florida islanders have been rebuilding since the 90s.

Also I posed u numerous seguin predictions to quote to see how right you are. Will u answer?
But he could immediately start trading and signing players the moment he got here.

And he arrived like 2 months into the 2008 season.

I guess we could write "5 years minus 2 months" just to keep you happy...

I don't recall the seguin questions.
But I'm sure they will be very easy to answer.

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:16 AM
  #190
Krazy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
I can't edit...

Meant to add...

Being that you think 5 years to rebuild is a "GREAT JOB", how many years would you consider to be "average"?
I think if the worst move you made was to add a 22 year old who has not missed a game and is a top 5
Scorer in the league over the past 2 years even before his prime. I'm pretty sure that is a good way to define a great job.

Krazy is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:20 AM
  #191
Krazy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
But he could immediately start trading and signing players the moment he got here.

And he arrived like 2 months into the 2008 season.

I guess we could write "5 years minus 2 months" just to keep you happy...

I don't recall the seguin questions.
But I'm sure they will be very easy to answer.
Umm lets not pretend that the months don't matter. He couldn't sign ufas or draft before at most the deadline. That's just being foolish. If he had gotten here in the may of 2008 and got canned in like last November I would say 5'years.

If you amended your posts to 4 drafts and 4 ufa periods I would agree with your timeline.

Krazy is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:20 AM
  #192
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITM View Post
Numerous people are praising Burke because the assets he brought in have turned the club around. And that includes Randy Carlyle and Dave Nonis.

A better question is, what's the average turnaround time for a bottom ranked team to become a playoff team? And before the question is asked, you'd need some reasonable definition of what kind of a playoff team is considered a successful rebuild/retool/etc...So when you commit to a few definitions, and abide by them, and ask the question against a accurate data with accurate representation (5 years includes offseasons as well as seasons, and Burke wasn't afforded that, so it's not semantics, it's about correct information vs incorrect) you'll have a legitimate part in the discussion.

Factor in the kind of organization lack, Burke was given, what he brought in, the age of the team, a top tier goalie, three top 10 players (At one time or another in the last calendar year: Lupul/Kessel ; Kessel/Kadri) and two top 20 defencemen with blue chip talent in the pipeline , you have nothing less than the kind of Herculean product, few if any could have accomplished.

How you can continue to have the opinions you do, astonishes me.

Want to ask about questions, assets and justified displeasure...The Edmonton boards are just below Toronto's.
My point is that after 5 years of bottom 10 finishes, how could you NOT improve the teams assets?

ANY gm would have improved their assets after 5 freaking years of bottom 10 finishes. It's ridiculous how low peoples expectations are.
"After 5 years of bottom 10 finishes, we're better now. Good job Burke!"

Burke has reached the bare minimum of expectations. His team will make the playoffs on the 5th nhl season since he was hired.

That's not anywhere near the vicinity of being "successful".

You also fail to mention Burke's NUMEROUS financial advantages. I have no idea why people downplay this.

Imagine someone went to the GM of the Florida Panthers and said "Do you think it would help you create a successful team if you were given an additional 16 million dollars and an almost unlimited amount of money front office assistance, top of the line scouting, etc?"

It's an offensive question to ask him.
Do you really see him saying "Uh, well... I don't think any of that would really help".

Then our GM with all of those ridiculous advantages takes 5 FREAKING YEARS to even make the playoffs, and it's seen as "successful".

It's so ridiculous....

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:22 AM
  #193
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazy View Post
I think if the worst move you made was to add a 22 year old who has not missed a game and is a top 5
Scorer in the league over the past 2 years even before his prime. I'm pretty sure that is a good way to define a great job.
Doesn't everybody always get mad at me when I change the subject to the Kessel trade?
I'm not going to be baited this time.

Why won't you answer the question?
If you think 5 years to even make the playoffs is "successful", what should it take an "average" gm?

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:24 AM
  #194
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krazy View Post
Umm lets not pretend that the months don't matter. He couldn't sign ufas or draft before at most the deadline. That's just being foolish. If he had gotten here in the may of 2008 and got canned in like last November I would say 5'years.

If you amended your posts to 4 drafts and 4 ufa periods I would agree with your timeline.
So we should subtract an ENTIRE SEASON AS GM because he missed the first 2 months?
This is becoming too much for me.
I need to take a minute to cool down.

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 04:56 AM
  #195
Adversary
Registered User
 
Adversary's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,093
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
I can't edit...

Meant to add...

Being that you think 5 years to rebuild is a "GREAT JOB", how many years would you consider to be "average"?
5 years is probably the average, but there are a lot of factors you don't seem to be taking into account. The Leafs are a team with a fan base that has been through mediocre years before. While a team like Calgary delayed their rebuild by a couple of years, so did Burke.

The team Burke inherited was like an expansion team. 1 decent prospect and zero real players. In 5 years we are now not only a playoff team, but we have a much better future in the AHL to supplement the big team. All this while being one of the youngest teams in the league and he was fired after setting the team up with great cap flexibility going forward.

Not all is roses however. It took Nonis to rid the team of its cancer (LACK). Did Burke bring McClement? I honestly can't remember.

Anyways, how long do you think Calgary will be rebuilding for?

The LA Kings missed 6 years in a row under the same management.

Islanders, Flames and Rangers all missed 7 consecutive years in recent memory.

The oilers are at 6 years and counting

Has Columbus ever made the playoffs? Maybe this year for the first time? Do you think they are better than the Leafs?

The islanders are rebuilding again, Florida has been trying to rebuild for how long? Atlanta/Winnipeg?

To say that Burke didn't do a great job is petty IMO. Also a bit disingenuous, as he has done much better with much less than at least those 7 other teams just off the top of my head. I'm sure I could come up with many more examples but the evidence is just so obvious that I think it would just be beating a dead horse.

In 5 years Burke took a team that finished 29th overall in his first year, with only Schenn a worthwhile prospect in the cupboard and turned it into a team that was almost in the discussion to compete with the Bruins for the division title, will comfortably make the playoffs, is among the youngest teams in the league with great cap management and has a farm team that competes for AHL conference titles and league championships.


Adversary is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:13 AM
  #196
Disgruntled Observer*
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adversary View Post
5 years is probably the average, but there are a lot of factors you don't seem to be taking into account. The Leafs are a team with a fan base that has been through mediocre years before. While a team like Calgary delayed their rebuild by a couple of years, so did Burke.

The team Burke inherited was like an expansion team. 1 decent prospect and zero real players. In 5 years we are now not only a playoff team, but we have a much better future in the AHL to supplement the big team. All this while being one of the youngest teams in the league and he was fired after setting the team up with great cap flexibility going forward.

Not all is roses however. It took Nonis to rid the team of its cancer (LACK). Did Burke bring McClement? I honestly can't remember.

Anyways, how long do you think Calgary will be rebuilding for?

The LA Kings missed 6 years in a row under the same management.

Islanders, Flames and Rangers all missed 7 consecutive years in recent memory.

The oilers are at 6 years and counting

Has Columbus ever made the playoffs? Maybe this year for the first time? Do you think they are better than the Leafs?

The islanders are rebuilding again, Florida has been trying to rebuild for how long? Atlanta/Winnipeg?

To say that Burke didn't do a great job is petty IMO. Also a bit disingenuous, as he has done much better with much less than at least those 7 other teams just off the top of my head. I'm sure I could come up with many more examples but the evidence is just so obvious that I think it would just be beating a dead horse.

In 5 years Burke took a team that finished 29th overall in his first year, with only Schenn a worthwhile prospect in the cupboard and turned it into a team that was almost in the discussion to compete with the Bruins for the division title, will comfortably make the playoffs, is among the youngest teams in the league with great cap management and has a farm team that competes for AHL conference titles and league championships.

You compare the leafs to the worst managed teams and say "we're better than them".
But my expectations are much higher than yours.
I compare the leafs to the BEST managed teams and say "WHY CAN'T OUR GM'S DO THAT?????"

Most of the teams you cited above suffer from FINANCIAL PROBLEMS, and that's a main cause to their suffering (florida, islanders, atlanta, columbus)
Toronto is the richest team. A 5 year rebuild is mediocre for even poor teams. For the richest team? It's the bare minimum of expectations.
Again, imagine if you asked Florida's GM if an extra 16 million dollars for players would help. Plus all the extra money for front office workers, scouting, etc.
It's a patronizing question that would literally offend Florida's GM. OF COURSE THOSE THINGS WOULD HELP!!!
And Burke has all of them.

Yet you still claim that the worst of the worst of the worst managed teams took 7 years to rebuild.
So if 7 years is worst of the worst of the worst, what is 5 years?
Hardly anything to brag about.

And yes, every team that begins rebuilding is terrible. EVERY TEAM. If they weren't terrible, they wouldn't start rebuilding. So saying the team that Burke inherited was terrible doesn't mean much of anything. (lets not bother mentioning that you didn't include Grabovski, Reimer, Kulemin, Frattin, and Tlusty as other talented young players he inherited...)

So you think making the playoffs after 5 years is mediocre. But because you "like" Burke, you make up a whole bunch of lame excuses for him to try and make it appear it was harder for him than other gm's that took that long.
I think it's a pretty silly argument.

Disgruntled Observer* is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:14 AM
  #197
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
My point is that after 5 years of bottom 10 finishes, how could you NOT improve the teams assets?

ANY gm would have improved their assets after 5 freaking years of bottom 10 finishes. It's ridiculous how low peoples expectations are.
"After 5 years of bottom 10 finishes, we're better now. Good job Burke!"

Burke has reached the bare minimum of expectations. His team will make the playoffs on the 5th nhl season since he was hired.

That's not anywhere near the vicinity of being "successful".

You also fail to mention Burke's NUMEROUS financial advantages. I have no idea why people downplay this.

Imagine someone went to the GM of the Florida Panthers and said "Do you think it would help you create a successful team if you were given an additional 16 million dollars and an almost unlimited amount of money front office assistance, top of the line scouting, etc?"

It's an offensive question to ask him.
Do you really see him saying "Uh, well... I don't think any of that would really help".

Then our GM with all of those ridiculous advantages takes 5 FREAKING YEARS to even make the playoffs, and it's seen as "successful".

It's so ridiculous....
For starters, he wasn't here for 5 years. For seconders....ah, ah, ahhhhhh.....the only thing that matters to club reality is results and his team has them in spades right now...pacing for a near 100 year franchise record in points while having one of the greatest current abundances of young talent in the game (once again being evidenced both by team and individual results).

eyeball11 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:16 AM
  #198
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
You compare the leafs to the worst managed teams and say "we're better than them".
But my expectations are much higher than yours.
I compare the leafs to the BEST managed teams and say "WHY CAN'T OUR GM'S DO THAT?????"

Most of the teams you cited above suffer from FINANCIAL PROBLEMS, and that's a main cause to their suffering (florida, islanders, atlanta, columbus)
Toronto is the richest team. A 5 year rebuild is mediocre for even poor teams. For the richest team? It's the bare minimum of expectations.
Again, imagine if you asked Florida's GM if an extra 16 million dollars for players would help. Plus all the extra money for front office workers, scouting, etc.
It's a patronizing question that would literally offend Florida's GM. OF COURSE THOSE THINGS WOULD HELP!!!
And Burke has all of them.

Yet you still claim that the worst of the worst of the worst managed teams took 7 years to rebuild.
So if 7 years is worst of the worst of the worst, what is 5 years?
Hardly anything to brag about.

And yes, every team that begins rebuilding is terrible. EVERY TEAM. If they weren't terrible, they wouldn't start rebuilding. So saying the team that Burke inherited was terrible doesn't mean much of anything. (lets not bother mentioning that you didn't include Grabovski, Reimer, Kulemin, Frattin, and Tlusty as other talented young players he inherited...)

So you think making the playoffs after 5 years is mediocre. But because you "like" Burke, you make up a whole bunch of lame excuses for him to try and make it appear it was harder for him than other gm's that took that long.
I think it's a pretty silly argument.
Actually we're currently better than almost every team in Leaf history.

eyeball11 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:17 AM
  #199
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
But he could immediately start trading and signing players the moment he got here.

And he arrived like 2 months into the 2008 season.

I guess we could write "5 years minus 2 months" just to keep you happy...

I don't recall the seguin questions.
But I'm sure they will be very easy to answer.
...except it would be "5 years minus 10 months".

eyeball11 is offline  
Old
04-18-2013, 05:19 AM
  #200
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITM View Post
Numerous people are praising Burke because the assets he brought in have turned the club around. And that includes Randy Carlyle and Dave Nonis.

A better question is, what's the average turnaround time for a bottom ranked team to become a playoff team? And before the question is asked, you'd need some reasonable definition of what kind of a playoff team is considered a successful rebuild/retool/etc...So when you commit to a few definitions, and abide by them, and ask the question against a accurate data with accurate representation (5 years includes offseasons as well as seasons, and Burke wasn't afforded that, so it's not semantics, it's about correct information vs incorrect) you'll have a legitimate part in the discussion.

Factor in the kind of organization lack, Burke was given, what he brought in, the age of the team, a top tier goalie, three top 10 players (At one time or another in the last calendar year: Lupul/Kessel ; Kessel/Kadri) and two top 20 defencemen with blue chip talent in the pipeline , you have nothing less than the kind of Herculean product, few if any could have accomplished.

How you can continue to have the opinions you do, astonishes me.

Want to ask about questions, assets and justified displeasure...The Edmonton boards are just below Toronto's.
Should be stickied somewhere.

eyeball11 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 12:53 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.