HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Sather and the Homegrown Rebuilding of the Rangers

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-20-2011, 11:28 AM
  #201
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
I dunno, I'm not sure he actually made the team worse.
I'm not so sure he could have made that era of Rangers hockey worse LOL. The only thing left for him to do would be to disavow all knowledge of young hockey players and claim to the world that he will never again allow a kid under 31 to play in a Rangers sweater!

But seriously, I don't think he made them worse. Just set them back. He took Smith's gameplan and ran with it for another half decade.

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 11:46 AM
  #202
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,305
vCash: 873
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyTheGr8 View Post
There's actually probably a lot of truth behind that. Remember what he said prior to becoming Rangers GM about how if he had the Rangers money to work with, he could win a Cup.
Actually his quote was "If I had the Rangers payroll, I would never lose a game"

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 11:59 AM
  #203
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
It hasn't been forgotten. But this team is nowhere near where it should be given the period of time since he took over.



But he didn't put a marketable product on the ice.
Wow. Almost like I never missed a day. Can I play in this debate as well?

No matter what, the proof is in the pudding. How many years and how many playoff appearances? how many years of leading teh league n payroll? Of the years in the playoffs, how many years past round 1? Exactly how long did it take for the team to develop top-6 forwards?

Well.....I feel better.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:02 PM
  #204
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
But seriously, I don't think he made them worse. Just set them back. He took Smith's gameplan and ran with it for another half decade.
One can make a case that setting someone back is, in fact, makign them worse. But let's face it, we ALL knew when he came here that the job was his for life.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:04 PM
  #205
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
One can make a case that setting someone back is, in fact, makign them worse. But let's face it, we ALL knew when he came here that the job was his for life.
Hehe, yeah, pretty much.

Good seeing you around these parts again. Hope life has been treating you well!

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:06 PM
  #206
TonyTheGr8
Window shut..for now
 
TonyTheGr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Morris County, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
Well look, you can also make the argument that whatever youth the Rangers actually had ready to plug into the lineup during the Jagr years, they did. Prucha, Moore, Ortmeyer, Hollweg, Betts, Dawes, Tyutin, Girardi and eventually Dubinsky, Callahan, Staal who all made the roster while Jagr was still here. The difference is that now we have a lot more young talent to put into the lineup than we did then. Our young players play a much larger role than they were capable of playing before.
Oh I couldn't agree more. The fact of the matter is a lot of those players you mentioned wouldn't have even been able to crack the line up pre-lockout. And if I remember correctly, Dubes and Cally were brought up cause of injuries mid-February in 07, and had an immediate impact. The philosophy is without a doubt different now, and because of that, there is more youth to work with, and that youth is given a chance, and in fact, encouraged. Took a long time to get to that point, but it's something I hope stays around for a long, long time. Tired of the Rangers being labeled as the place where careers go to die. And trust me, a lot of fans still see us as that kind of team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Actually his quote was "If I had the Rangers payroll, I would never lose a game"
Haha..really? I actually did not know that. I never heard or read where he actually said it, just have always heard that he said he could win a cup . But..taking his comment out of context, him saying he'd never lose a game with the Rangers payroll, means he would win a cup, because he would finish the season 98-0..right?!

TonyTheGr8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:07 PM
  #207
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
Hehe, yeah, pretty much.

Good seeing you around these parts again. Hope life has been treating you well!
Life is life, my friend. Gone are the says that I can idly spend countless daytime hourse on my favorite hockey forum. Which does not mean that I do not take reads here and there. Most of the old gang is gone, huh?

On the positive end, unlike way back in the dark days, Rangers are a cheerable squad. FAR different than teh Lindros/Bure days. Or Toms.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:07 PM
  #208
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
But seriously, I don't think he made them worse. Just set them back. He took Smith's gameplan and ran with it for another half decade.
yeah that's about right.

I always wonder how much of all that was Dolan behind the scenes pushing for a team built that way. Hard to say for sure unless someone comes out and talks about it, but it does seem kind of funny how the team kept getting run the same way for years

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:13 PM
  #209
NikC
Registered User
 
NikC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 3,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shadowtron View Post
I disagree. I don't think people are conveniently forgetting the state of the team in 2000 (how could we forget those "fun times" ). I think it has more to do with what Tawnos said about Sather coming in an making the franchise worse for the first 4-5 years he was here. As distant as that era may seeem now, could it be argued that pre-lockout Sather set post-lockout Rangers back a decade with bad drafts/trades/signings?
The farm system was devoid of talent when Sather became GM. We could of iced the equivalent of a beer league. High priced mercenaries were the only option for a hockey team on madison ave.
I'm not saying those were good times or that i enjoyed it, but i accept it or what it was. I can't fault Sather for trying to buy a team when he was left with nothing to build upon.



Quote:
Originally Posted by SingnBluesOnBroadway View Post
It hasn't been forgotten. But this team is nowhere near where it should be given the period of time since he took over.



But he didn't put a marketable product on the ice.
I would like to think we would be closer as well if we weren't distracted by the success of Jagr as a NYR. As much as he revitalized the franchise, I think we were led to believe were were a lot better than we were at the time. We were one scoring Line and Henrik.

Again with no franchise players left to build upon Sather proceeded to buy talent. you know the story. those were bad times. What would you suggest that Sather should have done when he came in here? Rebuild?

NikC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:15 PM
  #210
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NikC View Post
What would you suggest that Sather should have done when he came in here? Rebuild?
Why not?

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:21 PM
  #211
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,659
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Why not?
What if the answer is "Dolan wouldn't let him"?


I just always wonder if it would have made any difference who the Rangers hired as GM at that point

Levitate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 12:25 PM
  #212
Shadowtron
Registered User
 
Shadowtron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
What if the answer is "Dolan wouldn't let him"?


I just always wonder if it would have made any difference who the Rangers hired as GM at that point
I dunno. I have a hard time seeing Sather as Dolan's puppet. That's not to say Dolan wasn't entirely in his ear, of course. But I think these two men were made for each other LOL.

Shadowtron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 01:10 PM
  #213
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
What if the answer is "Dolan wouldn't let him"?


I just always wonder if it would have made any difference who the Rangers hired as GM at that point
Dolan was listening to whatever Sather told him. Sather could have told him to bring Lafleur out of retirement, and he would have done it. Bettman introduced them. Sather gave out bad contract after bad contract and had Dolan buy them out. Dolan was not preventing Sather from doing anything. Sather has had as much autonomy as any GM in ANY sport.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 01:33 PM
  #214
TonyTheGr8
Window shut..for now
 
TonyTheGr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Morris County, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
Dolan was listening to whatever Sather told him. Sather could have told him to bring Lafleur out of retirement, and he would have done it. Bettman introduced them. Sather gave out bad contract after bad contract and had Dolan buy them out. Dolan was not preventing Sather from doing anything. Sather has had as much autonomy as any GM in ANY sport.
Ugh..THANK YOU. That's the point I think people are missing here. Dolan knows nothing about hockey, and what's more..cares little about it. He owns the team, he needs them to make money. That's pretty much where it starts and ends with him. So basically what happened was Bettman introduced the 2 of them, touted how Sather was this "architect" behind the great Edmonton Dynasty of Gretzky and Messier, both who play(ed) for the Rangers. Dolan gets an instant hard on, brings him aboard and says, "Glen..you have full autonomy, an open check book, and a guarantee of NO meddling from me. How can I meddle? I know DICK about hockey. You're the mastermind behind the great Edmonton Oilers. Do your thing." Meanwhile, Glen gets an even BIGGER hard on at the thought of having money to BURN, because he hasn't had that EVER in 20 plus years in Edmonton, sees how Smith won a Cup here 6 years before, and thinks this will be a piece of cake, forgetting that Smith had a young core of Leetch, Richter, Zubov and Kovalev, a star in his prime in Messier and REAL coach in Keenan. Meanwhile, Glen keeps feeding Dolan the, "It's gonna take some time here, we have nothing here to work with." bit, and Dolan puts no pressure on him, because again, he knows NOTHING about the sport. It's really that plain and simple.


Last edited by TonyTheGr8: 09-20-2011 at 01:42 PM.
TonyTheGr8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 01:57 PM
  #215
Tawnos
A guy with a bass
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyTheGr8 View Post
Ugh..THANK YOU. That's the point I think people are missing here. Dolan knows nothing about hockey, and what's more..cares little about it. He owns the team, he needs them to make money. That's pretty much where it starts and ends with him. So basically what happened was Bettman introduced the 2 of them, touted how Sather was this "architect" behind the great Edmonton Dynasty of Gretzky and Messier, both who play(ed) for the Rangers. Dolan gets an instant hard on, brings him aboard and says, "Glen..you have full autonomy, an open check book, and a guarantee of NO meddling from me. How can I meddle? I know DICK about hockey. You're the mastermind behind the great Edmonton Oilers. Do your thing." Meanwhile, Glen gets an even BIGGER hard on at the thought of having money to BURN, because he hasn't had that EVER in 20 plus years in Edmonton, sees how Smith won a Cup here 6 years before, and thinks this will be a piece of cake, forgetting that Smith had a young core of Leetch, Richter, Zubov and Kovalev, a star in his prime in Messier and REAL coach in Keenan. Meanwhile, Glen keeps feeding Dolan the, "It's gonna take some time here, we have nothing here to work with." bit, and Dolan puts no pressure on him, because again, he knows NOTHING about the sport. It's really that plain and simple.
I think it was more mutual than that. Sather is the guy deciding which people to bring in and he wants high caliber players, but Dolan is the one saying "we need to have star power on this team. It will bring in more money." Dolan may not be the most knowledgeable hockey man, but he knows how to make money and a broad directive from him is still a directive. I think Levitate's point is right. At that point in Rangers history, check that: Madison Square Garden history, it would not have mattered who the GM was.

However, your point about having a real coach in Keenan is important too. After Colin Campbell, the Rangers didn't have a decent coach until Renney. Sather made bad hires, including assistant coaches and scouting staff. Low, Trottier... himself. Yet another thing that's been different about Sather post-lockout.

PS How was your interview?

Tawnos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 02:14 PM
  #216
TonyTheGr8
Window shut..for now
 
TonyTheGr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Morris County, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
I think it was more mutual than that. Sather is the guy deciding which people to bring in and he wants high caliber players, but Dolan is the one saying "we need to have star power on this team. It will bring in more money." Dolan may not be the most knowledgeable hockey man, but he knows how to make money and a broad directive from him is still a directive. I think Levitate's point is right. At that point in Rangers history, check that: Madison Square Garden history, it would not have mattered who the GM was.

However, your point about having a real coach in Keenan is important too. After Colin Campbell, the Rangers didn't have a decent coach until Renney. Sather made bad hires, including assistant coaches and scouting staff. Low, Trottier... himself. Yet another thing that's been different about Sather post-lockout.

PS How was your interview?
Lol..yeah, I suppose that's true. It's funny...I joke all the time that Dolan doesn't even know the Rangers exist, but I know that's probably not true. I don't think I'm off base though about him not caring about winning, but more about making money, and "star power" as you put it. And Sather probably isn't just a guy who fell into a whole bunch of stars with the Oilers, got to the Rangers and didn't have a clue. But I do feel he got caught up in finally having a lot of money to play with, and lost sight of what made him a winner in Edmonton.

Campbell in my opinion wasn't that great a coach. He still had a pretty good team to work with after they won the cup in 94.
I could have led that team to a playoff berth (yes, I know..I sound like Glen here. )

Haha..interview is actually Thursday at 12. I was doing some prepping as far as reading up on the company. Plus I have a list of typical job interview questions, and answers that I look over and try to memorize, so I have a clue of what I'm talking about when I go in there. Thanks for asking though..I'll keep you posted!


Last edited by TonyTheGr8: 09-21-2011 at 05:57 AM.
TonyTheGr8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 04:10 PM
  #217
vipernsx
Flatus Expeller
 
vipernsx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 6,520
vCash: 566
Its the guys around Glen and the Direct of Player Personnel is a huge one. We had a terrible one in the past and have a fantastic one now.

vipernsx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-20-2011, 11:39 PM
  #218
Brooklyn Ranger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Brooklyn, of course
Posts: 7,825
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
What if the answer is "Dolan wouldn't let him"?


I just always wonder if it would have made any difference who the Rangers hired as GM at that point
Sather came here boasting of the fact that he had complete control over the team--said he wouldn't have signed unless he had that control. Plus, I really don't think the Dolans would have missed the fact that the a lot of factors--season ticket sales especially--that made them money when they first bought the team, were getting worse and worse as the Sather years dragged on.

To take an easy example--I became a season ticket holder in the fall in 1998--I had put my name on the list back in late 1993 (or early 1994)--I waited over 4 seasons to be called (and no I did not turn down the opportunity to get 100 or 200 level seats). By the time 2001 rolled around, you could get season tickets by going to a desk at the Garden between periods and by the next game you were sitting in your very own seats for the rest of the season. Furthermore, in 1995, 1996 and 1997 (the last year I purchased individual tickets), all games sold out the day they were put on sale. By the fall of 1997, I was getting to the Garden by 4pm the day before tickets went on sale--people who lined up after 6pm that year, were not able to buy tickets to any games, they were all sold out by the time they got to the window the next day.

And just to push the point a little further--from 1998 to the beginning of the lockout, there was one price increase (which I think happened after my first or second year as a season ticket holder). And of course, by 2004, Dolan was promising that the Rangers would make the playoffs, or ticket prices would be reduced by 10% (which, did indeed happen when play resumed after the lockout).

While I can't prove it, my bet would be that every year from the time Sather came here up until the lockout, the Rangers lost money--they had the highest payroll in the league, no playoff revenue and decreasing fan interest.

Sather can claim whatever he wants, but the results--or lack of results--is on him. And now, unless he wins a Stanley Cup before he "retires", his reputation as a Hockey God has been seriously tarnished by his years with the Rangers. Cold comfort for this Ranger fan.

PS: Welcome Back TB!


Last edited by Brooklyn Ranger: 09-20-2011 at 11:53 PM.
Brooklyn Ranger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2011, 07:20 AM
  #219
Blueshirt Special
Registered User
 
Blueshirt Special's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 3,095
vCash: 500
That's a great post BR and it really puts things into context.

I became a STH right after the lockout and I was surprised at the ease, after being on that list through most of the 90's.

Blueshirt Special is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2011, 07:35 AM
  #220
BBKers
Registered User
 
BBKers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: South Koster, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 5,697
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to BBKers
Quote:
Originally Posted by TonyTheGr8 View Post
Oh I couldn't agree more. The fact of the matter is a lot of those players you mentioned wouldn't have even been able to crack the line up pre-lockout. And if I remember correctly, Dubes and Cally were brought up cause of injuries mid-February in 07, and had an immediate impact. The philosophy is without a doubt different now, and because of that, there is more youth to work with, and that youth is given a chance, and in fact, encouraged. Took a long time to get to that point, but it's something I hope stays around for a long, long time. Tired of the Rangers being labeled as the place where careers go to die. And trust me, a lot of fans still see us as that kind of team.



Haha..really? I actually did not know that. I never heard or read where he actually said it, just have always heard that he said he could win a cup . But..taking his comment out of context, him saying he'd never lose a game with the Rangers payroll, means he would win a cup, because he would finish the season 98-0..right?!
He could in theory miss the playoffs with a bunch of OTL:s in the right column that would not qualify as regulation losses. Not sure if this was relevant though...

BBKers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2011, 08:52 AM
  #221
TonyTheGr8
Window shut..for now
 
TonyTheGr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Morris County, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BBKers View Post
He could in theory miss the playoffs with a bunch of OTL:s in the right column that would not qualify as regulation losses. Not sure if this was relevant though...
Haha..good point, but he would still technically "lose" games. That theory would've been more applicable back when there were ties!

TonyTheGr8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2011, 08:59 AM
  #222
JimmyStart*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,569
vCash: 500
My only problem with the "we haven't made the PO's enough" has been explained a LOT from a lot of different people and yet people keep bringing that point up like its never been brought up before...then again a lot of people keep bringing up the point that we've been pretty successful post lockout and that a core you can go to war with has been put in place.

Fact is none of us can see the future. BR and Gabs could tank and we'll have failed or those two could be perenial 80 point guys while Dubs, Call, Staal, McD, etc all reach near their potential all while hank is Hank and voila you'll have yourself a very very successful and enjoyable next 4 years or so. Not many would argue against the point that Sather was awful here for most of his tenure and that even when experiencing moderate success with Jagr and Hank he still bungled massively with Redden and Drury. But then he's made a plethora of moves that the consensus is "good-excellent" ever since those signings. As people have been saying we went through that awful 95-04 era by selling the house for a cup and it was all worth it. If we win in the next 3 years or so then it will have all been worth it and whats more we'll be able to hold our heads high that we didn't tank for half a decade or more. Fact is IF we win a cup Sather automatically does go down as one of the best we've ever had. The other fact is we are watching and waiting b/c though the core is built the cup is not ours yet. But to discount the fact that we have a legitamate chance is wrong, more wrong than discounting all the bad Sather has done prior to the last few years.

What's more is so many seem hell bent on taking away any and all credit Sather could get, or does deserve. I guess it's up to them to feel that way. I do agree that it should be pointed out that because of the circumstances Sather does NOT deserve a boatload of credit and that he is overall just average at best however the future still needs to play out here and I do at least credit Sather for not getting in the way of letting that future have a chance of occurring.

One question...why does this same exact thread keep popping up over and over and why are we compelled to make the same points over and over with each other lol?

JimmyStart* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2011, 11:12 AM
  #223
chosen
Registered User
 
chosen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 5,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tawnos View Post
I think it was more mutual than that. Sather is the guy deciding which people to bring in and he wants high caliber players, but Dolan is the one saying "we need to have star power on this team. It will bring in more money." Dolan may not be the most knowledgeable hockey man, but he knows how to make money and a broad directive from him is still a directive. I think Levitate's point is right. At that point in Rangers history, check that: Madison Square Garden history, it would not have mattered who the GM was.

However, your point about having a real coach in Keenan is important too. After Colin Campbell, the Rangers didn't have a decent coach until Renney. Sather made bad hires, including assistant coaches and scouting staff. Low, Trottier... himself. Yet another thing that's been different about Sather post-lockout.

PS How was your interview?
Dolans's dad knew how to make money.

chosen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2011, 11:28 AM
  #224
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooklyn Ranger View Post
Sather can claim whatever he wants, but the results--or lack of results--is on him. And now, unless he wins a Stanley Cup before he "retires", his reputation as a Hockey God has been seriously tarnished by his years with the Rangers. Cold comfort for this Ranger fan.
Cold comfort indeed. Being "right" after all these years does scarcely little.

Quote:
PS: Welcome Back TB!
Thanks, BRF. Been a while. But how could I NOT joint a Sather (Jackass) discussion? Bring out the old Purinton vs. Lefebvre or the uselesness of Jeff Toms, and I am right back in the swing of things.

True Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
09-21-2011, 11:58 AM
  #225
Jersey Girl
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyStart View Post
One question...why does this same exact thread keep popping up over and over and why are we compelled to make the same points over and over with each other lol?
Because some people rationalize away Sather's past, and like the fact that the Rangers look like they may be developing good home grown players for a change. They want to give Sather credit for that.

Others think credit is not earned by what may be, credit is earned by the results on the ice. They want to see us rise above fighting for the 7-10 spot every year, and become legitimate solid playoff contenders, winning divisions and winning playoff series.

It's an argument where one side will never convince the other, so we'll just keep disagreeing about it.

Jersey Girl 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 04:48 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.