HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Messier overrated?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-05-2013, 02:20 AM
  #301
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Machinehead View Post
I find him to be underrated. For the NHL's 2nd all-time leading scorer to be outside of many top 20 lists, I think says it all.
Where do you rank Marcel Dionne? Ron Francis?

How about this one:

Bobby Orr has 8 Norris wins.

Doug Harvey and Nicklas Lidstrom each have seven.

Red Kelly win the first Norris trophy, but was dominating at the position well before it was put in place.

Eddie Shore won four Harts as a defenseman, but played long before the Norris was around.

Who are your top five defensemen? Why?

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 02:43 AM
  #302
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Where do you rank Marcel Dionne? Ron Francis?

How about this one:

Bobby Orr has 8 Norris wins.

Doug Harvey and Nicklas Lidstrom each have seven.

Red Kelly win the first Norris trophy, but was dominating at the position well before it was put in place.

Eddie Shore won four Harts as a defenseman, but played long before the Norris was around.

Who are your top five defensemen? Why?
What exactly does all this have to do with the topic of Mark Messier?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 12:40 PM
  #303
GWOW
Two Pucks, One Cup
 
GWOW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 16,033
vCash: 500
Messier wasn't deserving of the Hart in 1992. The Rangers were on a rapid path to Cup contending two seasons before Messier arrived.

The won their first Division title in 50 years in 1990 without Messier and with a subpar sophomore season from Leetch, who missed the entire
postseason.

In 1991, the Rangers were one of the better teams in the league for 3/4 of the season. Leetch was Norris-caliber, Richter was a Vezina finalist
and they were on pace for a 2nd division title until they traded for Joe Kocur and somehow the wheels fell apart the last month of the season.

Messier's arrival was not as impactful IMO. That year also featured the Rangers debut of Jeff Beukeboom, Adam Graves, Tony Amonte, Sergei
Nemchinov and Doug Weight. While Messier provided top-cover and was easily one of the elite players in the league, the Rangers won the
President's trophy because of their goaltending and scoring depth.

I agree that some of his seasons post 1990 were "overrated", but you can say that for every superstar who's ever played the game. Lots of
superstars win awards and merit based off of reputation. The writers habitually vote for players they see play twice a year.

IMO, Messier's best season was 1990. Easily. People forget how crushing the 1989 loss to the Kings were, and that Edmonton team was on the verge of a mutiny. Muckler was a terrible coach, terrible at developing players and a terrible tactician. As good as Ranford was, Messier was
the catalyst in all four series.

Sorry, but some people just sound ******** in this thread. Messier could have retired in 1990 and still be considered one of the top-20 players
of all time (up to that point). He was a 1st team all-NHL at two positions. People seem to forget that.

GWOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:03 PM
  #304
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
What exactly does all this have to do with the topic of Mark Messier?
It was a response to "The second-place scorer of all-time is ranked outside of the top 20? He's underrated."

Maybe I should have included this:

Just during Messier's career, he's ranked 27th in PPG among all players with 300+ GP.

Players in the top ten? Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Mike Bossy, Marcel Dionne, Peter Forsberg, Jaromir Jagr, Peter Stastny, Kent Nilsson, Eric Lindros, Joe Sakic, Dale Hawerchuk, Bernie Federko, Steve Yzerman, Pat LaFontaine, Jari Kurri, Denis Savard, Pavel Bure, Brett Hull, Real Cloutier, Paul Coffey, Gilbert Perreault, Rick Middleton, Teemu Selanne, Charlie Simmer, Guy Chouinard, and Paul Kariya.

I've bolded guys who I can recall being *generally* considered better than him on lists, such as what HF puts together.

I've underlined guys whose career isn't complete in the Messier era AND who drop behind Messier overall (if they remain above Messier, no underline). As you can see, it's only the top two who are generally considered above Messier, and only the bottom six whose career PPG overall was worse than Messier's. This also doesn't include players who might have improved to pass Messier.

So let's consider. If we divide it up on average by position, a "top-18" list should include nine forwards, six defensemen, and three goalies. Generally the bias is towards forwards, so we'll say the top-20 includes 11 forwards.

Removing Coffey and the guys who are underlined, Messier is the 21st forward. At least 18 were legit star players for a good while. That means the highest he could go on the offense argument that was made by Machinehead, just for players who played DURING HIS CAREER, is 27th. Add in another goalie and three defenseman, and he's in 31st. For players during his career. Add in the "non-stars" and the underliners, and he drops to 65th as the highest if we're using the "even distribution" model I mentioned earlier.

Making the "Messier's second on the all-time scoring list, that means he's a top-20 player" argument is pretty shoddy when you consider the number of players who were better scorers than him at the same time.

I'd only rank a handful of those guys above Messier, but there are other forwards from 1980-2004 I might put above him also. And then there's the 60+ seasons of hockey that aren't accounted for that include guys like Howe, Richard, Lafleur, Clarke, Hull, Mikita, etc.

And of course there are defensemen and goalies. Putting Messier in the top 20 is silly; he wasn't THAT good. Maybe if his play from 1990 had been his prime level and lasted a few more years, but it didn't. It was an outlier.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:09 PM
  #305
I Hate Chris Butler
Backlund Fan Club
 
I Hate Chris Butler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Saskatchewan
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,164
vCash: 150
Messier was everything Lindros could have been.

Messier was the pinnacle of human fitness, a huge power forward who could hit, score, and set up plays, and had INSANE longevity. To top it off, Messier has a Smythe, two Harts and two Lindsays. There is nothing undeserved about his praise.

I Hate Chris Butler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:30 PM
  #306
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GWOW View Post
Messier wasn't deserving of the Hart in 1992. The Rangers were on a rapid path to Cup contending two seasons before Messier arrived.

The won their first Division title in 50 years in 1990 without Messier and with a subpar sophomore season from Leetch, who missed the entire
postseason.

In 1991, the Rangers were one of the better teams in the league for 3/4 of the season. Leetch was Norris-caliber, Richter was a Vezina finalist
and they were on pace for a 2nd division title until they traded for Joe Kocur and somehow the wheels fell apart the last month of the season.

Messier's arrival was not as impactful IMO. That year also featured the Rangers debut of Jeff Beukeboom, Adam Graves, Tony Amonte, Sergei
Nemchinov and Doug Weight. While Messier provided top-cover and was easily one of the elite players in the league, the Rangers won the
President's trophy because of their goaltending and scoring depth.

I agree that some of his seasons post 1990 were "overrated", but you can say that for every superstar who's ever played the game. Lots of
superstars win awards and merit based off of reputation. The writers habitually vote for players they see play twice a year.

IMO, Messier's best season was 1990. Easily. People forget how crushing the 1989 loss to the Kings were, and that Edmonton team was on the verge of a mutiny. Muckler was a terrible coach, terrible at developing players and a terrible tactician. As good as Ranford was, Messier was
the catalyst in all four series.

Sorry, but some people just sound ******** in this thread. Messier could have retired in 1990 and still be considered one of the top-20 players
of all time (up to that point). He was a 1st team all-NHL at two positions. People seem to forget that.
Messier might have a better case for top-20 all-time if he retired in 1990 (or 1992, or 1994) than when he did. Why?

See: Bobby Orr, Mike Bossy

Those two were literally cut down in their prime, as elite players. Many believe that this affects how they are viewed; had Bossy played another ten years and turned into a 30-goal scorer, would he be "the best sniper ever" like some say? If Orr plays ten more years and doesn't win another Norris, is he considered on the level of Gretzky/Howe/Lemieux? Is he considered the "indisputable best defenseman ever" as he currently is? What happens if Messier abruptly retires in 1992, having won two of the past three Hart trophies?

He'd be a four-time first-teamer, 15th all-time in scoring, among the top 20 in goals and assists.

After 1994, he's 9th all-time in scoring and just led the Rangers to the Cup. He has the "guarantee" on his resume. Just shy of 500 goals. He's probably considered better then than he is now.

It's like if Yzerman had retired after 2002; he ends with over 650 goals, top-ten in scoring, three Cups, a Selke, a first-team selection, and a better PPG than Guy Lafleur. And he ends his career on an incredible playoff run.

How is Yzerman remembered then?

How would Yzerman be remembered if he had retired after 1993 (58-79-137, behind only Gretzky, Lemieux, Bossy, Malone, and Orr in PPG), or 1996 (95 pts+Selke nom), or 1998 (2nd consecutive Cup) or even 2000 (1st team+Selke+top-ten in scoring)?

It's interesting to think about how players might be perceived had they retired at a different point.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:33 PM
  #307
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Hate Chris Butler View Post
Messier was everything Lindros could have been.

Messier was the pinnacle of human fitness, a huge power forward who could hit, score, and set up plays, and had INSANE longevity. To top it off, Messier has a Smythe, two Harts and two Lindsays. There is nothing undeserved about his praise.
Messier was a great player. But had Lindros hit his prime in the 80s and early 90s, all of the "Next One" stuff would not have been just talk... he would have destroyed the league.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 01:39 PM
  #308
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Messier was a great player. But had Lindros hit his prime in the 80s and early 90s, all of the "Next One" stuff would not have been just talk... he would have destroyed the league.
Oh please. If anyone's overrated on these boards it's Lindros ffs.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 07:03 PM
  #309
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Hate Chris Butler View Post
Messier was everything Lindros could have been.
... a daddy's boy whose dad helped, not hindered, his career.

vadim sharifijanov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 07:10 PM
  #310
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DisgruntledGoat View Post
I presume you have the same objection to Fedorov winning the Hart in 1994, over Gretzky despite being beaten in the scoring race by 10 points, right?
Or how about 1996 when Messier was runner-up for the Hart with 99pts and Fedorov was a far distant 5th with 107pts, despite also winning the Selke.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 09:42 PM
  #311
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Or how about 1996 when Messier was runner-up for the Hart with 99pts and Fedorov was a far distant 5th with 107pts, despite also winning the Selke.
1996 Rangers
With Messier: 40-21-13
Without Messier: 1-6-1

1996 Red Wings
With Fedorov: 59-12-7
Without Fedorov: 3-1-0

quoipourquoi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 10:50 PM
  #312
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
1996 Rangers
With Messier: 40-21-13
Without Messier: 1-6-1

1996 Red Wings
With Fedorov: 59-12-7
Without Fedorov: 3-1-0
Well that convinced me
I personally hate the literal definition of the Hart (who the hell cares who is most valuable to "his" team - I care more about who is the most valuable player in the league, regardless of team. It just seems Messier has benefitted more than most from that literal definition). But I would love to hear a case for Messier being a better player than Sergei Fedorov in 1996.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 10:53 PM
  #313
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Well that convinced me
I personally hate the literal definition of the Hart (who the hell cares who is most valuable to "his" team - I care more about who is the most valuable player in the league, regardless of team. It just seems Messier has benefitted more than most from that literal definition). But I would love to hear a case for Messier being a better player than Sergei Fedorov in 1996.
I remember 1996 very well and it did not surprise me at all that he was the Hart runner-up.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 10:58 PM
  #314
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by seventieslord View Post
I remember 1996 very well and it did not surprise me at all that he was the Hart runner-up.
So despite Fedorov being better defensively and offensively you bought into the media-fueled broadway hype. That's cool, obviously many did the same despite actual on-ice performance. Personally, I am not sure I would put Messier's performance that year in the Top 10.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:01 PM
  #315
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Oh please. If anyone's overrated on these boards it's Lindros ffs.
Not disagreeing with Lindros being overrated on HF. But I think if he had started in 79-80, he'd have slaughtered the league. He owned the DPE, and he had a ridiculous level of skill. Consider the fact that Lindros was on pace for 100 points in his rookie year of 92-93. Consider that he was a very good skater and had excellent puck skills, and also happened to be physically dominant to the point where he could just bulldoze through a defense. How would that work out in the 80s? Stevens was around, but he wasn't the stay-at-home guy. And there was no trap being played. Lindros would have been free to roam and crush the opposition. Put him on the 1980s Flyers and you might have competition for the Oilers dynasty with Howe, McCrimmon, Lindros, Kerr, Lindbergh/Froese/Hextall, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
1996 Rangers
With Messier: 40-21-13
Without Messier: 1-6-1

1996 Red Wings
With Fedorov: 59-12-7
Without Fedorov: 3-1-0
Who were the opponents? Were any other notable players missing? Who was in net? The W/L record from a few games doesn't tell us anything if we don't have details.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:06 PM
  #316
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
So despite Fedorov being better defensively and offensively you bought into the media-fueled broadway hype. That's cool, obviously many did the same despite actual on-ice performance. Personally, I am not sure I would put Messier's performance that year in the Top 10.
Personally I rank Messier as the 9th-best forward for 1995-96, although he would be in the top-five for most valuable forwards.

Although IMO, the two most valuable players that season weren't even forwards. I think Hasek should have won the Hart, with Chelios in 2nd and Lemieux in 3rd.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:13 PM
  #317
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
But I think if he had started in 79-80, he'd have slaughtered the league.
And THAT'S overrating him. Basically you're claiming he was better than Gretzky and Lemieux. That's laughable. Even when perfectly healthy Lindros was never in their class as a player.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:20 PM
  #318
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Well that convinced me
I personally hate the literal definition of the Hart (who the hell cares who is most valuable to "his" team - I care more about who is the most valuable player in the league, regardless of team. It just seems Messier has benefitted more than most from that literal definition). But I would love to hear a case for Messier being a better player than Sergei Fedorov in 1996.
The literal definition is fine.

The problem is that Messier is one of if not the only player in recent history to win the Hart based on the "MVP" definition rather than the "best player" idea.

Wayne Gretzky as MVP nine of ten seasons? Hardly. I can believe that the writers considered him the best player. But in more than one year there are multiple players with near-infallible arguments as to why they were more valuable to their team.

Slightly related: The 1988 Hart, which is the only one of ten Gretzky didn't win, has always amused me. Gretzky finished third in voting, behind Lemieux and teammate Grant Fuhr. Fourth was Steve Yzerman. Both Yzerman and Gretzky missed 16 games. The only other example I can think of where two of the top four played so little (in an 80+ game season) is 1993-94, where 2nd-place Hasek and 3rd-place John Vanbiesbrouck both played just shy of 60. 1988 is the only instance I am aware of involving skaters.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:23 PM
  #319
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
And THAT'S overrating him. Basically you're claiming he was better than Gretzky and Lemieux. That's laughable. Even when perfectly healthy Lindros was never in their class as a player.
I didn't say he'd be Gretzky and Lemieux.

Bossy and Stastny slaughtered the league. Are they Gretzky and Lemieux? Hawerchuk, Savard, Messier, Yzerman.

I didn't say "He'd be the best player in the world."

You're putting words in my mouth and then arguing against them.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:24 PM
  #320
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The literal definition is fine.

The problem is that Messier is one of if not the only player in recent history to win the Hart based on the "MVP" definition rather than the "best player" idea.

Wayne Gretzky as MVP nine of ten seasons? Hardly. I can believe that the writers considered him the best player. But in more than one year there are multiple players with near-infallible arguments as to why they were more valuable to their team.

Slightly related: The 1988 Hart, which is the only one of ten Gretzky didn't win, has always amused me. Gretzky finished third in voting, behind Lemieux and teammate Grant Fuhr. Fourth was Steve Yzerman. Both Yzerman and Gretzky missed 16 games. The only other example I can think of where two of the top four played so little (in an 80+ game season) is 1993-94, where 2nd-place Hasek and 3rd-place John Vanbiesbrouck both played just shy of 60. 1988 is the only instance I am aware of involving skaters.
And now you're going after Gretzky? Oooookaaaaay.....

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:25 PM
  #321
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 41,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
The literal definition is fine.

The problem is that Messier is one of if not the only player in recent history to win the Hart based on the "MVP" definition rather than the "best player" idea.
Corey Perry? Jose Theodore?

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:26 PM
  #322
reckoning
Registered User
 
reckoning's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,417
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Just during Messier's career, he's ranked 27th in PPG among all players with 300+ GP.

Players in the top ten? Wayne Gretzky, Mario Lemieux, Mike Bossy, Marcel Dionne, Peter Forsberg, Jaromir Jagr, Peter Stastny, Kent Nilsson, Eric Lindros, Joe Sakic, Dale Hawerchuk, Bernie Federko, Steve Yzerman, Pat LaFontaine, Jari Kurri, Denis Savard, Pavel Bure, Brett Hull, Real Cloutier, Paul Coffey, Gilbert Perreault, Rick Middleton, Teemu Selanne, Charlie Simmer, Guy Chouinard, and Paul Kariya.
You do realize of course, that a players PPG will decline the longer his career goes on? Comparing the career PPG of someone who played well into his 40s with players who were retired by their early 30s will obviously favour the player with the shorter career. It's incredibly misleading.

And if you still feel that PPG is a valid comparison tool, shouldn't it also be pointed out that Messier's career playoff PPG is higher than all the players you listed except for Gretzky and Lemieux?

reckoning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:27 PM
  #323
Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates
 
Morgoth Bauglir's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Angband via Utumno
Posts: 3,329
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
I didn't say he'd be Gretzky and Lemieux.

Bossy and Stastny slaughtered the league. Are they Gretzky and Lemieux? Hawerchuk, Savard, Messier, Yzerman.

I didn't say "He'd be the best player in the world."

You're putting words in my mouth and then arguing against them.
The only players who "slaughtered" the league in that time period were Gretzky and Lemieux. They were far and away above the rest in the numbers they put up. If you're going to engage in uncalled for hyperbole you can expect someone to take notice and say something.

Morgoth Bauglir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-05-2013, 11:40 PM
  #324
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Ohashi_Jouzu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 23,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
1996 Rangers
With Messier: 40-21-13
Without Messier: 1-6-1

1996 Red Wings
With Fedorov: 59-12-7
Without Fedorov: 3-1-0
My problem with stats like that, is that things like who those games were played against, and either team's record against those opponents with either guy in the lineup, gets thrown in the wash. It matters, too (imo), that the Rangers, for example, were ~12 points clear of 8th place Tampa Bay by the time Messier went down for the final stretch of the '95/96 regular season. Compounding that problem was dealing with having replaced Ferraro and Laperriere with 1 goal of Kurri, McSorley, and Churla - loading up at the deadline... but that's yet another tangent.

Point is, how deep are we willing to go to see if those records actually mean anything or not? I mean, observation alone is a pretty valuable tool, too. Does it play second fiddle to trivia?

Ohashi_Jouzu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-06-2013, 12:01 AM
  #325
Giacomin
Registered User
 
Giacomin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,919
vCash: 500
We will win tonight!
Enough Said

Giacomin 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 03:05 AM.

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.