HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NHLPA fires Paul Kelly (UPD: player review of firing completed)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-07-2009, 08:37 PM
  #326
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ike View Post
The people who are supporting Kelly aren't pro-union, they're anti-stupidity.

Something both Hargrove and Lindros are rather known for.
...placing Crazy_Ike firmly in Group a).

salzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2009, 08:56 PM
  #327
LeftCoast
Registered User
 
LeftCoast's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,806
vCash: 500
This doesn't bode well for the next round of CBA negotiations.

The PA has now successfully dumped 3 executive directors in the last 5 years. With the governance structure that Kelly has alluded to, the next ED is sure to be a lame duck and the player reps (and influential non-reps) are now highly factionalized.

This doesn't mean that the NHLPA will be a push over in the next round of CBA negotiations. On the contrary, it means that it will be almost impossible to get any deal done. What ever proposal is on the table, some faction will surely oppose it. With the NHLPA track record in the last 5 years, it would be foolish for any executive director to stick his neck for far out as to recommend approval of any offer.

The most difficult negotiations are when the other side either doesn't know what they want or lack the ability to make a decision.

LeftCoast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-07-2009, 10:34 PM
  #328
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
The most difficult negotiations are when the other side either doesn't know what they want or lack the ability to make a decision.
Maybe that's the NHLPA's secret strategy - be so unable to come to any kind of solid position that the owners give up in frustration after another lost season.


  Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2009, 02:55 AM
  #329
Major4Boarding
Global Moderator
Suit and Tie Guy
 
Major4Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Heaven
Country: Scotland
Posts: 2,114
vCash: 500
I just want it stated for the record I am not anti-union. I do not hold a grudge against Eric Lindros because he chose not to play for either the Greyhounds or the Nordiques. Either those decisions never bothered me really. Even my favorite player (Lemieux) had his draft day "issues".

I've even taken issues with Kelly regarding his troubled franchises remarks, as I'll make no secret about it, I'm "one of those fans in the God forsaken sunbelt".

What I am concerned about is, public perception of this Union. That it's a "laughing stock" because there's no cohesiveness. The League's perception of this Union. The possibility of the League when it comes re-negotiation time to either blast them apart or even go for the throat with the constant inner-turmoil... or a knee jerk reaction by the League/Owners because, although they may have a figurehead, who are they really dealing with? Plus a "perceived hard-liner stance" has me cringing that another stoppage is imminent.

Who's going to be willing to pony up any $$$ for that oh-so-coveted "National TV Contract" when the PA is never on the same page, constant turnover, and perceptions of hard-liners loom and everyone thinks "lockout inevitable" all the time?

Now with that said, I still believe that '94 and '04-'05 was a necessity to ultimately spawn the current CBA. Is it still flawed? To some degree, yes. That said, and also said within this thread, it could've been much much worse economically for the players, the fans, and the League had there not been the current CBA, or a majority of the safeguards removed.

My point of contention with this current issue involving Kelly and the Union is... this was, in my opinion, their best chance to go into re-negotiations on a gradual basis, without ruffled feathers all at once, and plenty of lead time to hammer out several issues. For both sides to take the next big step and grow the sport even further, amicably. "Dismissing" Kelly just reset the clock by 2 years and it keeps ticking without anyone at the helm.

My overall aggrevation in this is... I'm willing to bet my life that this is not what Ted Lindsay and Doug Harvey invisioned the PA would become. It was established to protect the interests of the players from the League and the Owners, not from itself or within. Which, unfortunately, has become the reality of it all with Eagleson, warring factions from within (Linden/Saskin/Goodenow/Chelios), Saskin and "email-gate", now this and the still evident "factions".

Let's look at what I've been able to dig up (Player/Staff quotes, media, etc) as the discussion points for 2011

Guaranteed Contracts
Escrow Allocation
Long Term Deals and Buyouts
Economic Ebb and Flow - Strong Protection
Drug Testing (WADA Standards)
Equal Say - Relocation and Expansion
Olympic and International Events
National TV Contract
Eliminating Pre-Season (or at least scaled back to 6 instead of 9 games)
Transfer Agreement (or lack thereof) / KHL

Lengthy list, and I'm sure there's more somewhere. I beg you, do any of these really strike you as having to have a hardliner stance to accomplish the means?

Major4Boarding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2009, 03:04 AM
  #330
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Maybe that's the NHLPA's secret strategy - be so unable to come to any kind of solid position that the owners give up in frustration after another lost season.

Or perhaps decertify the union and let the owners lose their anti-trust shield?

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2009, 08:54 AM
  #331
cleduc
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,801
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftCoast View Post
This doesn't bode well for the next round of CBA negotiations.

The PA has now successfully dumped 3 executive directors in the last 5 years. With the governance structure that Kelly has alluded to, the next ED is sure to be a lame duck and the player reps (and influential non-reps) are now highly factionalized.

This doesn't mean that the NHLPA will be a push over in the next round of CBA negotiations. On the contrary, it means that it will be almost impossible to get any deal done. What ever proposal is on the table, some faction will surely oppose it. With the NHLPA track record in the last 5 years, it would be foolish for any executive director to stick his neck for far out as to recommend approval of any offer.

The most difficult negotiations are when the other side either doesn't know what they want or lack the ability to make a decision.
As the players reviewed the lockout, many came to the conclusion they were not as informed as they should have been. There was a great distrust of Levitt's numbers which have since withstood the test of time. A different approach could have overcome that much better and sooner than they did.

A part of the purpose of the formation of this advisory council was to interject informed expertise and understanding into the consideration for decisions to be made by the 30 reps. This is not a bad thing as it's tougher for one hardliner to sway the group who are being provided with cold, hard facts presented by people qualified to do so.

If that had been in place before the lockout, I question whether there would have been a lockout because some common sense and smart expertise would have entered into the mix of the decision process and probably been able to tamp it down.

I happen to feel that most of the reps and players in the NHL are a pretty decent bunch as a whole. The vast majority do not strike me as greedy at all costs. The vast majority don't seem to mind doing what is best for their game and for their fellow players. I don't think that's changed nor do I sense that the reps in place now are more prone to that. If anything, I get the sense that it's less the case because the players are more in charge, have thought deeply about where they went wrong last time, have taken steps to make sure they are better informed and they have embraced a theme to work first towards a decent relationship with the league as a starting point.

The present CBA also did something that has helped eliminate future distrust: the books of the teams are getting audited by a 3rd party designated by the NHLPA and the NHL. There are far fewer questions about the numbers. Both parties know after years of these audits what the revenue pie really looks like. They also know that the NHL owners haven't all been making out like bandits at the players expense. I think that's going to help next time substantially as a much better starting point.

Several of the reps have spoken out about this and that letting Kelly go was not because they wanted a hardliner. In fact some cited that as a problem during their last negotiations. That's not the starting point they desire this time around.

What I do expect to see next time is a smarter negotiation by the players. This time around, they'll be better informed and will have done their homework and highlighted where they can reasonably make their case to improve their lot.

Like any CBA contract negotiations, this one upcoming will be tough. By the very nature of the process, it has to be in order to get the most for the players - their 'fair' share. They'll probably take it to the brink to squeeze as much as they can fairly. But there is no substantiated concrete reason to conclude that we're going to see a repeat of the lockout. Because if anything, many of the factors that caused it last time have been addressed.

cleduc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2009, 09:37 AM
  #332
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 37,284
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleduc View Post
Like any CBA contract negotiations, this one upcoming will be tough. By the very nature of the process, it has to be in order to get the most for the players - their 'fair' share. They'll probably take it to the brink to squeeze as much as they can fairly. But there is no substantiated concrete reason to conclude that we're going to see a repeat of the lockout. Because if anything, many of the factors that caused it last time have been addressed.
I'm still at a loss as to why so many people are so certain this development is going to lead to a lockout. First of all, a lockout would imply that the owners/NHL are not satisfied with this CBA to the point where they are unwilling to continue playing under its terms after it has expired, which would be somewhat bizarre considering this is supposedly exactly what they wanted (revenue linkage, "triple cap", etc.). If a lot of the conjecture and speculation being passed off as fact is true, it would still point more towards a player strike than a lockout. Moreover, the tone of what some people are writing (both here and in the press) is insinuating that the NHL would be justified in locking the players out over this decision in and of itself, as if it is somehow their purview to determine who the NHLPA hires for its executive staff.

I do, however, agree that these events have made it more likely there could be a lockout in the future. Specifically, the media and fan reaction has no doubt emboldened the owners because they can see clear as day that they will have the majority of media/fan support no matter what, so they can simply choose to lockout the players for any reason. It's pretty sad that we could possibly have an onwer-initiated work stoppage where the players will again be made out as the bad guys, and yet the main issues the owners are likely to raise revolve around their GMs being so collectively stupid that they need a CBA to fix their managerial mistakes.

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2009, 11:25 AM
  #333
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,126
vCash: 500
It's unlikely you'll see a lockout.

The NHL would have ramped up its rhetoric already for the PR war. We've heard whimpers here and there individual owners but nothing from the league, in contrast to the last time around.

I think it's the uncertainty with the union that has a lot of people concerned. If one faction installs its chosen leader, what kind of positions will he take? Will he try to re-fight the last lockout?

What's become evident in the NHLPA is that nobody in the joint has much time for doing things "right". Whether that's a deficiency with the way the union is set up, or just reflects on the individuals in it, it is unsettling for everyone involved.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2009, 11:47 AM
  #334
Lion Man
Registered User
 
Lion Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Windsor
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by marknuck311 View Post
Buzz Hargrove unhappy?
What a shocker!!!

The guy NEVER sees the glass as half full.....
I can not stand that ****. Just had to throw that in there./


Last edited by Fugu: 09-08-2009 at 02:06 PM. Reason: filter
Lion Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-08-2009, 01:24 PM
  #335
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
It's unlikely you'll see a lockout.
I wouldn't expect a preemptive lockout by the owners - on the whole they are satisfied with the Status Quo.

Where you may see a lockout (assuming the NHLPA doesn't actively call a strike) is if the NHLPA does not make a no strike commitment during the 2011-12 season if there is no new CBA and negotiations are still in progress.

The previous CBA had expired before the 1991-92 season, but the season started with no new CBA in place. The players then went on strike in April, when they felt they had the most leverage with the threat of wiping out the playoffs. The strike lasted 10 days and a new 2-yr ('91-'92 & '92-'93) CBA was agreed to.

After that CBA expired, the NHL & NHLPA make no-lockout / no-strike pledges for the '93-'94 season, that year was played without a CBA (the terms of the old CBA were deemed to be extended), and negotiations continued.

When the NHLPA would not make a no-strike pledge before the 1994-95 season, the owners opted for a lockout. They would not allow a repeat of 1992.

Similarly, if no new CBA is in place before the 2011-12 season and there is no commitment from the NHLPA to play the entire season, the NHL would very likley lockout the players rather than risk a late season strike. A strike that wipes out the playoffs really only hurts the owners - since the players have already been paid their salaries for the year.

kdb209 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 05:00 AM
  #336
Artyukhin*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,831
vCash: 500
Andrew Ference brought down the NHLPA house

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/article/693438


Quote:
veteran defenceman Andrew Ference of the Boston Bruins has been clearly identified by several sources as the key player who led the charge against Kelly that culminated in his 4 a.m. firing in Chicago 11 days ago

Quote:
Ference was identified by multiple sources as the loudest voice in the room in Chicago, the player who pushed hardest for a vote on Kelly's dismissal in the early hours of the morning against the wishes of veteran players like Chris Chelios

Quote:
Ference was adamant during the marathon Chicago meeting that the executive council needed to vote immediately on Kelly's future


Quote:
Ference is viewed by many as a Lindros confidante. Many believe Lindros will soon rejoin the union after quitting eight months ago.

"My only question is, do they wait one month to rehire (Lindros), or six months? In my opinion, everything that happened proves he never really left," said one respected NHL veteran.


Last edited by Artyukhin*: 09-10-2009 at 05:08 AM.
Artyukhin* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 06:56 AM
  #337
kyle747
Registered User
 
kyle747's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,486
vCash: 500
- this is what happens when an uneducated group of clods is given access to hundreds of millions of dollars

- on the other side an egomaniac smurf is playing roulette with a hyperactive billionaire.

- Tampa owner joining 'Boots' in jail ?

- Danny ****ing Heatley will show up in camp

- Ovetchkin thanks the 'caps for making him super rich by stating he'll leave the team without permission to play in the Olympics in 4 years

Is there any more down for the NHL ? or has it hit rock bottom ?

kyle747 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 07:20 AM
  #338
CanadaBacon
 
CanadaBacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kyle747 View Post
- this is what happens when an uneducated group of clods is given access to hundreds of millions of dollars

- on the other side an egomaniac smurf is playing roulette with a hyperactive billionaire.

- Tampa owner joining 'Boots' in jail ?

- Danny ****ing Heatley will show up in camp

- Ovetchkin thanks the 'caps for making him super rich by stating he'll leave the team without permission to play in the Olympics in 4 years

Is there any more down for the NHL ? or has it hit rock bottom ?

as oppose to its members shooting themselves, fighting dogs, running over people and in general going to jail.
as oppose to a huge number of members testing positive for illegal substances.
as oppose to its members "flashing" gang signs.
as oppose to its members being in court on numerous **** charges.
etc
etc
etc

You are right the NHL is the worst of the worst.

CanadaBacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 08:04 AM
  #339
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanadaBacon View Post
as oppose to its members shooting themselves, fighting dogs, running over people and in general going to jail.
as oppose to a huge number of members testing positive for illegal substances.
as oppose to its members "flashing" gang signs.
as oppose to its members being in court on numerous **** charges.
etc
etc
etc

You are right the NHL is the worst of the worst.
Because all NFL players have also faced domestic violence and multiple DUIs as well right. And lets not forget hiring hitmen.

The NHL is the worst of the bunch. Leave Vick out of the this.

Melrose Munch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 09:00 AM
  #340
FlyerFan
Registered User
 
FlyerFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 219
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
Or perhaps decertify the union and let the owners lose their anti-trust shield?
Now we're negotiating!

FlyerFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 09:19 AM
  #341
CanadaBacon
 
CanadaBacon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Hamilton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
Because all NFL players have also faced domestic violence and multiple DUIs as well right. And lets not forget hiring hitmen.

The NHL is the worst of the bunch. Leave Vick out of the this.
Actual quite a few have (by quite a few i mean a hell of a lot)

CanadaBacon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 10:40 AM
  #342
Bluefan75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doug mckenzie View Post
Very interesting. Between those who have been very presumptuous as to why some people have an issue with Lindros(no, it's not because he wouldn't sign in 1991), and those who inststed he had nothing to do with it, this article really calls into question just how clean Lindros is in this matter.

Hmmm....

Bluefan75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 11:12 AM
  #343
discostu
Registered User
 
discostu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nomadville
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,396
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by doug mckenzie View Post
Very interesting article. This quote had me scratching my head:

Quote:
Interestingly, in an echo of the Saskin email snooping controversy, current ombudsman Buzz Hargrove apparently retrieved copies of Kelly's personal emails and used them as evidence in Chicago that union information has been inappropriately accessed.
and
Quote:
Kelly, as the chairman of the executive committee, was constitutionally bound to be in the meeting during which Penny's new contract was discussed, but was excluded.
So, putting everything in context, Kelly was fired with his major error was reading meeting minutes that

a) Were from a meeting that he was constitutionally bound to be a part of, but, was intentionally excluded.

b) The evidence that he read these meeting minutes were obtained by getting his personal emails, an offence that got the previous Chairman fired.

I get the sense that Kelly's unfair dismissal case is going to be pretty easy.

discostu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 03:23 PM
  #344
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 57,392
vCash: 500
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=290602
NHLPA has contact MLBPA head Donald Fehr

Fehr is currently extracting himself from 25 years with MLB union and could advise NHLPA, but nothing will be finalized until he finishes up his time with baseball.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-10-2009, 10:25 PM
  #345
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 57,392
vCash: 500
http://www.thehockeynews.com/article...aftermath.html
THN's Proteau on the aftermath

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-11-2009, 10:55 PM
  #346
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefan75 View Post
Very interesting. Between those who have been very presumptuous as to why some people have an issue with Lindros(no, it's not because he wouldn't sign in 1991), and those who inststed he had nothing to do with it, this article really calls into question just how clean Lindros is in this matter.

Hmmm....
.....unless....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle1283339/

Boston Bruins defenceman Andrew Ference finds it "laughable" that he's being labelled an Eric Lindros ally and key player in a coup d'état-like ousting of former NHLPA executive director Paul Kelly.

....

"I don't know where [sports writers] are coming up with [their] assumptions," Ference said. "Of course I spoke [at the meeting]. I was part of a 30-person board and part of the four-man group [that reviewed Kelly's work]. What was left out was that we took a secret-ballot vote. That was urged on by Robyn Regehr and myself because I've been in meetings with a mob mentality where hands go up and guys feel they have to do the same. We did a secret ballot vote so nobody felt pressured."

salzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 12:59 AM
  #347
Major4Boarding
Global Moderator
Suit and Tie Guy
 
Major4Boarding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: South of Heaven
Country: Scotland
Posts: 2,114
vCash: 500
Now wait a minute... if they conducted the vote by "secret ballot", how could they have done so with some reps attending the meeting by phone?

"If you are in favor of removing Paul Kelly as Executive Director, press 1 for 'Yes' or 2 for 'No' please."

Or were they excluded and that's why the vote count shows 3 unknowns, 5 voting No, 22 voting Yes.

Major4Boarding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 03:37 AM
  #348
Crazy_Ike
Cookin' with fire.
 
Crazy_Ike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,795
vCash: 715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Major4Boarding View Post
Now wait a minute... if they conducted the vote by "secret ballot", how could they have done so with some reps attending the meeting by phone?
"Let the record show that the counselor is holding up two fingers!"


Crazy_Ike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-12-2009, 06:25 PM
  #349
Bluefan75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salzy View Post
.....unless....

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle1283339/

Boston Bruins defenceman Andrew Ference finds it "laughable" that he's being labelled an Eric Lindros ally and key player in a coup d'état-like ousting of former NHLPA executive director Paul Kelly.

....

"I don't know where [sports writers] are coming up with [their] assumptions," Ference said. "Of course I spoke [at the meeting]. I was part of a 30-person board and part of the four-man group [that reviewed Kelly's work]. What was left out was that we took a secret-ballot vote. That was urged on by Robyn Regehr and myself because I've been in meetings with a mob mentality where hands go up and guys feel they have to do the same. We did a secret ballot vote so nobody felt pressured."
So Andrew Ference, who is being held out as the bad guy, says he isn't a bad guy, and so we're to believe he isn't? He had sound reasons for this "secret ballot" which others have already called into question, I'm sure, just like he has sound rasons for not allowing guys to sleep on the vote.

Athletes lie. Hasn't enough come out in this whole affair to figure out that when someone who is reputed to have done bad things, comes out and says they haven't, they are covering their butts, and not telling the truth. Do you really expect Ference would say anything different?

Bluefan75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-13-2009, 12:23 AM
  #350
salzy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Windsor
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefan75 View Post
So Andrew Ference, who is being held out as the bad guy, says he isn't a bad guy, and so we're to believe he isn't? He had sound reasons for this "secret ballot" which others have already called into question, I'm sure, just like he has sound rasons for not allowing guys to sleep on the vote.

Athletes lie. Hasn't enough come out in this whole affair to figure out that when someone who is reputed to have done bad things, comes out and says they haven't, they are covering their butts, and not telling the truth. Do you really expect Ference would say anything different?
I'd suggest you read up a little on Andrew Ference's background before you question his character and integrity. Particularly his work with Right to Play as well as his environmental work with David Suzuki.

These will get you started:

http://membershipus.righttoplay.com/...a_andrew_steve

http://www.davidsuzuki.org/latestnew...ws12070702.asp

Furthermore, do people understand that the work these reps are basically doing volunteer work for the good of the union and their fellow players? I'm amused by these conspiracy theories that they're just a bunch of morons with selfish agendas.

salzy 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 11:26 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.