What Tennessee Must Do to Close Out Games Better in 2016

#2
#2
Between the players relaxing with a lead and the coaches getting conservative with a lead you get what you got. Lessons have been learned, it's gonna be a special year.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4
#4
Duncan, I liked parts of the article, but Brad Shepard makes the same mistake a lot of people do in the Oklahoma game. He blames play calling when it was mostly bad execution. I'll give one example.

Shepard says this:

First-year offensive coordinator Mike DeBord was far too conservative in late-game situations, especially early in the year, so he needs part of that blame, too. ...Ahead 17-3 and on Oklahoma's 29-yard line following an interception on the penultimate play of the third quarter, the Vols ran seven plays (five running) for negative-10 yards as the Sooners stormed back to force the game into overtime.
Click to expand...

Okay, it's hard to figure out which drive he means. The one after that interception was only 3 plays long: two runs and a pass (then a punt). So that's not his 7-play drive. There were actually seven Tennessee drives while the score was 17-3, two in the 2nd Qtr, four in the 3rd Qtr, and one in the early 4th Qtr. None of them were 7 plays long, as Shepard describes.

The one that comes closest was an 8-play (plus punt) drive in the 3rd Qtr. So let's look at it:
  • 1st & 10 - QB Draw - 5 yd gain
  • 2nd & 5 - RB run off-tackle - 7 yds, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - Screen pass to the flat, underthrown by Dobbs, incomplete
  • 2nd & 10 - Pass to 8 yd curl on left hash, gain of 9 yd
  • 3rd & 1 - RB run off-center - 2 yd gain, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - jet sweep, Pearson slipped and lost footing, loss of 3 yds
  • 2nd & 13 - QB sack - Dobbs dropped back to throw downfield, corner blitz got him, loss of 12 yds [note -- this goes in record books as a run, but was a called pass play]
  • 3rd & 25 - QB threw ball away out of bounds after no uncovered receivers - incomplete pass
  • 4th & 25 - punt

Note that this series included 4 pass plays, and 4 run plays. Hardly the 5 run, 2 pass that Shepard said. The record books would SHOW this series as 5 run, 3 pass because of the sack on one of the called pass plays. So this is probably the series Shepard misdiagnosed.

So bottom line is, DeBord was mixing it up well in the 3rd Qtr, good balance of pass and run, and [this is key] the run plays were generally working WELL...while the pass plays were mostly failing from poor execution (bad throw, broken protection, no receiver open). That's on the players. It's actually a bit surprising that DeBord was still dialing up pass plays as often as he was, given our greater success with the run plays (at least, to that point).

Bottom line: it was mostly about the players getting tired and sloppy later in the game, their execution getting worse (esp. the defenders not wrapping up tackles). Not the coaches' play calling going conservative.

So for the rest of our lives, we're going to see this over and over when Vols-Sooners 2015 comes up: reality (great execution early, going weak by the late 3rd Qtr and into the 4th) vs the fiction (coaches went conservative).

It's a pity that the "conventional wisdom" will not match the reality.

p.s. I think part of the fault for this is that 2 weeks later, the coaches DID go conservative in the 4th qtr...and we retrospectively apply our frustration from the Florida game to both of them. But that's just a theory of mine.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 11 people
#5
#5
VFL-82-JP said:
Duncan, I liked parts of the article, but Brad Shepard makes the same mistake a lot of people do in the Oklahoma game. He blames play calling when it was mostly bad execution. I'll give one example.

Shepard says this:



Okay, it's hard to figure out which drive he means. The one after that interception was only 3 plays long: two runs and a pass (then a punt). So that's not his 7-play drive. There were actually seven Tennessee drives while the score was 17-3, two in the 2nd Qtr, four in the 3rd Qtr, and one in the early 4th Qtr. None of them were 7 plays long, as Shepard describes.

The one that comes closest was an 8-play (plus punt) drive in the 3rd Qtr. So let's look at it:
  • 1st & 10 - QB Draw - 5 yd gain
  • 2nd & 5 - RB run off-tackle - 7 yds, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - Screen pass to the flat, underthrown by Dobbs, incomplete
  • 2nd & 10 - Pass to 8 yd curl on left hash, gain of 9 yd
  • 3rd & 1 - RB run off-center - 2 yd gain, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - jet sweep, Pearson slipped and lost footing, loss of 3 yds
  • 2nd & 13 - QB sack - Dobbs dropped back to throw downfield, corner blitz got him, loss of 12 yds [note -- this goes in record books as a run, but was a called pass play]
  • 3rd & 25 - QB threw ball away out of bounds after no uncovered receivers - incomplete pass
  • 4th & 25 - punt

Note that this series included 4 pass plays, and 4 run plays. Hardly the 5 run, 2 pass that Shepard said. The record books would SHOW this series as 5 run, 3 pass because of the sack on one of the called pass plays. So this is probably the series Shepard misdiagnosed.

So bottom line is, DeBord was mixing it up well in the 3rd Qtr, good balance of pass and run, and [this is key] the run plays were generally working WELL...while the pass plays were mostly failing from poor execution (bad throw, broken protection, no receiver open). That's on the players. It's actually a bit surprising that DeBord was still dialing up pass plays that often, given that he was seeing more success out of the players with the run plays (at least, to that point).

Bottom line: it was mostly about the players getting tired and sloppy later in the game, their execution getting worse (esp. the defenders not wrapping up tackles). Not the coaches' play calling going conservative.

So for the rest of our lives, we're going to see this over and over when Vols-Sooners 2015 comes up: reality (great execution early, going weak by the late 3rd Qtr and into the 4th) vs the fiction (coaches went conservative).

It's a pity that the "conventional wisdom" will not match the reality.

p.s. I think part of the fault for this is that 2 weeks later, the coaches DID go conservative in the 4th qtr...and we retrospectively apply our frustration from the Florida game to both of them. But that's just a theory of mine.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
#6
#6
I too have noticed the difference in what happened at the time, versus what has been said since.
I have zero interest in blindly defending coaches, but the revision of the actual events is also something I can't support.
There was coaching decisions I disagreed with but it was not be
"Run, run, hail Mary" set of series that I've seen claimed since.
 
#7
#7
OU was neither players nor playcalling. Jones went into the football equivalent of the 4 corners against a team with too much horsepower.


The mistake was strategic.... not tactical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#8
#8
Not true, SJT. As you well know, that game has been dissected several times in these threads over the past ten months. The whole game boils down to 14 plays, any one of which could've flipped the game on its head. Any one of them. Twelve of the 14 were poor execution on the field. Two were play calls or coaching decisions. None of them were strategy, and only one of them could be traced back to strategic direction.

In fact, this is another conclusion that fits the Florida game better than Oklahoma. But we'll forever remember those two games as being "the same" because of the similar basic story line of "2-score lead lost in the fourth quarter."
 
#11
#11
VFL-82-JP said:
Duncan, I liked parts of the article, but Brad Shepard makes the same mistake a lot of people do in the Oklahoma game. He blames play calling when it was mostly bad execution. I'll give one example.

Shepard says this:



Okay, it's hard to figure out which drive he means. The one after that interception was only 3 plays long: two runs and a pass (then a punt). So that's not his 7-play drive. There were actually seven Tennessee drives while the score was 17-3, two in the 2nd Qtr, four in the 3rd Qtr, and one in the early 4th Qtr. None of them were 7 plays long, as Shepard describes.

The one that comes closest was an 8-play (plus punt) drive in the 3rd Qtr. So let's look at it:
  • 1st & 10 - QB Draw - 5 yd gain
  • 2nd & 5 - RB run off-tackle - 7 yds, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - Screen pass to the flat, underthrown by Dobbs, incomplete
  • 2nd & 10 - Pass to 8 yd curl on left hash, gain of 9 yd
  • 3rd & 1 - RB run off-center - 2 yd gain, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - jet sweep, Pearson slipped and lost footing, loss of 3 yds
  • 2nd & 13 - QB sack - Dobbs dropped back to throw downfield, corner blitz got him, loss of 12 yds [note -- this goes in record books as a run, but was a called pass play]
  • 3rd & 25 - QB threw ball away out of bounds after no uncovered receivers - incomplete pass
  • 4th & 25 - punt

Note that this series included 4 pass plays, and 4 run plays. Hardly the 5 run, 2 pass that Shepard said. The record books would SHOW this series as 5 run, 3 pass because of the sack on one of the called pass plays. So this is probably the series Shepard misdiagnosed.

So bottom line is, DeBord was mixing it up well in the 3rd Qtr, good balance of pass and run, and [this is key] the run plays were generally working WELL...while the pass plays were mostly failing from poor execution (bad throw, broken protection, no receiver open). That's on the players. It's actually a bit surprising that DeBord was still dialing up pass plays as often as he was, given our greater success with the run plays (at least, to that point).

Bottom line: it was mostly about the players getting tired and sloppy later in the game, their execution getting worse (esp. the defenders not wrapping up tackles). Not the coaches' play calling going conservative.

So for the rest of our lives, we're going to see this over and over when Vols-Sooners 2015 comes up: reality (great execution early, going weak by the late 3rd Qtr and into the 4th) vs the fiction (coaches went conservative).

It's a pity that the "conventional wisdom" will not match the reality.

p.s. I think part of the fault for this is that 2 weeks later, the coaches DID go conservative in the 4th qtr...and we retrospectively apply our frustration from the Florida game to both of them. But that's just a theory of mine.
Click to expand...
Nice work there, JP. I like Brad, but apparently he didn't do as much homework on DeBord's play calling as you did. May I add that DeBord's playbook didn't have the executable plans B and C, etc. that OU's did, and that's due to far fewer players who'd taken the reps and worked together on additional reads and late game adjustments that Bob Stoops group of veterans had practiced and come closer to perfecting. I also like Jancek. He's great at developing players, but time after time he seemed to lack the acumen for putting the right players and schemes into the impending situations. Shoop has demonstrated that, even with overmatched talent, he can out-coach most OCs and his schemes are based on relentless pressure and aggressiveness. If Butch is smart...and he is...then he's continually learning from his mistakes (like clock management...for one) and is patently aware of his own previous shortcomings. These aspects don't concern me regarding team 120. It's injuries and suspensions that remove key players from the roster that can stand in the way of UT at least winning the SEC east this year. As long as Tennessee can field our key guys, I believe everything else will take care of itself. GBO!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#12
#12
VFL-82-JP said:
Duncan, I liked parts of the article, but Brad Shepard makes the same mistake a lot of people do in the Oklahoma game. He blames play calling when it was mostly bad execution. I'll give one example.

Shepard says this:



Okay, it's hard to figure out which drive he means. The one after that interception was only 3 plays long: two runs and a pass (then a punt). So that's not his 7-play drive. There were actually seven Tennessee drives while the score was 17-3, two in the 2nd Qtr, four in the 3rd Qtr, and one in the early 4th Qtr. None of them were 7 plays long, as Shepard describes.

The one that comes closest was an 8-play (plus punt) drive in the 3rd Qtr. So let's look at it:
  • 1st & 10 - QB Draw - 5 yd gain
  • 2nd & 5 - RB run off-tackle - 7 yds, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - Screen pass to the flat, underthrown by Dobbs, incomplete
  • 2nd & 10 - Pass to 8 yd curl on left hash, gain of 9 yd
  • 3rd & 1 - RB run off-center - 2 yd gain, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - jet sweep, Pearson slipped and lost footing, loss of 3 yds
  • 2nd & 13 - QB sack - Dobbs dropped back to throw downfield, corner blitz got him, loss of 12 yds [note -- this goes in record books as a run, but was a called pass play]
  • 3rd & 25 - QB threw ball away out of bounds after no uncovered receivers - incomplete pass
  • 4th & 25 - punt

Note that this series included 4 pass plays, and 4 run plays. Hardly the 5 run, 2 pass that Shepard said. The record books would SHOW this series as 5 run, 3 pass because of the sack on one of the called pass plays. So this is probably the series Shepard misdiagnosed.

So bottom line is, DeBord was mixing it up well in the 3rd Qtr, good balance of pass and run, and [this is key] the run plays were generally working WELL...while the pass plays were mostly failing from poor execution (bad throw, broken protection, no receiver open). That's on the players. It's actually a bit surprising that DeBord was still dialing up pass plays as often as he was, given our greater success with the run plays (at least, to that point).

Bottom line: it was mostly about the players getting tired and sloppy later in the game, their execution getting worse (esp. the defenders not wrapping up tackles). Not the coaches' play calling going conservative.

So for the rest of our lives, we're going to see this over and over when Vols-Sooners 2015 comes up: reality (great execution early, going weak by the late 3rd Qtr and into the 4th) vs the fiction (coaches went conservative).

It's a pity that the "conventional wisdom" will not match the reality.

p.s. I think part of the fault for this is that 2 weeks later, the coaches DID go conservative in the 4th qtr...and we retrospectively apply our frustration from the Florida game to both of them. But that's just a theory of mine.
Click to expand...

Thank you sir. It is for this reason that I come to VN.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#14
#14
Butch Jones must simply believe in his team.

It seemed like at times he was surprised they got big leads and instead of continuing doing what was working, he tries to just hang on for dear life.

He needs to believe he has the best team every time they step on the field and coach with that sort of confidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#15
#15
CoaxialOrange said:
Also kicked a field goal from like 6 mouse hairs from the goal line
Click to expand...

When that happened I felt we would lose the game.

Calls like that just show the lack of faith Butch had in his team. He coached like he didn't want to get embarrassed rather than coaching to win.

Nobody goes for a FG that early in a game from the 6 inch line. Even if we got stopped, we would've had Oklahoma backed up in their goaline.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#17
#17
It's interesting to see everyone agree with VFL82JP that the problem the OU game after taking a 17-0 lead wasn't playcalling or coaching but execution.

It's as simple this:
After having our way w the OU defense in the first 18 minutes of the game, our offense did nothing. But don't take my word for it, here are the stats from ESPN:

Upon taking a 17-0 lead early in the second quarter, UT had a total of 61 yards of total offense on the remaining 9 possessions in regulation (not including the kneel to run out the clock for OT). Of that 61 yards, 51 came from the first two plays in the opening possession of the second half. In other words, if you didn't account for those first two plays, UT's offense only amassed 10 more net yards in 8 entire possessions and a fresh set of downs on its opening possession.

That's on the players? Everyone's free to their opinion but the playcalling with the lead compared to playcalling to start the game couldn't have been more different in our toughest matchups last year.

And about passing the ball proving we still kept the offense open...there's a difference in passing down field in an attacking manner and throwing dink-and-dunk passes and screens. That's not balanced, especially when 10 of the 11 defenders on the field are within 5-6 yards of the LOS. On that drive JP82 was talking about (12th drive of the game), 3 of those 4 passes were within 4-5 yards of the LOS. The longest play of that drive was a 9 yard completion to Josh Smith on an excellent pass. It was the only route thrown after taking a 17 point lead that wasn't short yardage, a screen, or a desperation heave on 3rd-and-long. And it looked good and had the desired result. I should also mention that there was one other pass that was downfield and looked great. It was a wheel route to Alex Ellis on the ninth drive of the game. The throw was a bit high but Ellis still should have caught it. He would have scored a TD had he caught it. Another incomplete pass later and we settle for a 48-yard field goal attempt that was missed.

Anyway, simply noting that there were a few passes in a drive does not constitute aggressive playcalling. The offense starting the the sixth drive culmuniating with the fourteenth was beyond dismal (like I said, 61 yards).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#18
#18
VFL-82-JP said:
Duncan, I liked parts of the article, but Brad Shepard makes the same mistake a lot of people do in the Oklahoma game. He blames play calling when it was mostly bad execution. I'll give one example.

Shepard says this:



Okay, it's hard to figure out which drive he means. The one after that interception was only 3 plays long: two runs and a pass (then a punt). So that's not his 7-play drive. There were actually seven Tennessee drives while the score was 17-3, two in the 2nd Qtr, four in the 3rd Qtr, and one in the early 4th Qtr. None of them were 7 plays long, as Shepard describes.

The one that comes closest was an 8-play (plus punt) drive in the 3rd Qtr. So let's look at it:
  • 1st & 10 - QB Draw - 5 yd gain
  • 2nd & 5 - RB run off-tackle - 7 yds, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - Screen pass to the flat, underthrown by Dobbs, incomplete
  • 2nd & 10 - Pass to 8 yd curl on left hash, gain of 9 yd
  • 3rd & 1 - RB run off-center - 2 yd gain, 1st down
  • 1st & 10 - jet sweep, Pearson slipped and lost footing, loss of 3 yds
  • 2nd & 13 - QB sack - Dobbs dropped back to throw downfield, corner blitz got him, loss of 12 yds [note -- this goes in record books as a run, but was a called pass play]
  • 3rd & 25 - QB threw ball away out of bounds after no uncovered receivers - incomplete pass
  • 4th & 25 - punt

Note that this series included 4 pass plays, and 4 run plays. Hardly the 5 run, 2 pass that Shepard said. The record books would SHOW this series as 5 run, 3 pass because of the sack on one of the called pass plays. So this is probably the series Shepard misdiagnosed.

So bottom line is, DeBord was mixing it up well in the 3rd Qtr, good balance of pass and run, and [this is key] the run plays were generally working WELL...while the pass plays were mostly failing from poor execution (bad throw, broken protection, no receiver open). That's on the players. It's actually a bit surprising that DeBord was still dialing up pass plays as often as he was, given our greater success with the run plays (at least, to that point).

Bottom line: it was mostly about the players getting tired and sloppy later in the game, their execution getting worse (esp. the defenders not wrapping up tackles). Not the coaches' play calling going conservative.

So for the rest of our lives, we're going to see this over and over when Vols-Sooners 2015 comes up: reality (great execution early, going weak by the late 3rd Qtr and into the 4th) vs the fiction (coaches went conservative).

It's a pity that the "conventional wisdom" will not match the reality.

p.s. I think part of the fault for this is that 2 weeks later, the coaches DID go conservative in the 4th qtr...and we retrospectively apply our frustration from the Florida game to both of them. But that's just a theory of mine.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking he meant that UT ran a total of 7 plays the rest of the game after that interception. Not just on one single drive. I looked at the play by play of the game and that is what happened.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#19
#19
junder13 said:
It's as simple this:
After having our way w the OU defense in the first 18 minutes of the game, our offense did nothing.

...UT's offense only amassed 10 more net yards in 8 entire possessions and a fresh set of downs on its opening possession.

That's on the players?

...there was one other pass that was downfield and looked great. It was a wheel route to Alex Ellis on the ninth drive of the game. The throw was a bit high but Ellis still should have caught it. He would have scored a TD had he caught it. Another incomplete pass later and we settle for a 48-yard field goal attempt that was missed.
Click to expand...

Junder, the evidence is staring you in the face...you present it yourself. Consider what you wrote:

Eight offensive series (that's at least 24 plays not counting punts at the end of each) that went for net 10 yards.

It doesn't matter what the OC was calling, the players could've come up with more than 10 yards on 24 plays if they were playing well. He could call precisely the wrong play every single time, and the players should be able to make more of it than 0.4 yards per play. Clear proof that their execution was the problem.

Remember the fumbles? By Dobbs? By Dobbs again? By Hurd. Losses of 8-12 yards each time? That's how you end up netting only 10 yards on 24 plays. And that's not on the coaches on the sidelines...no play in the play book says fumble, or underthrow the ball into the turf, or get sacked, or throw the ball out of bounds after finding no players open, or fail to tackle the opposing quarterback four times in a single play (let's don't forget that the defense was getting weak in its execution as well; it's not just on the O).

The offensive coordinator could call any set of plays in the world, run or pass, and the players should be able to get a whole lot more than 10 yards off of 24 plays. Clear proof that our execution fell apart in the late 3rd and 4th Qtrs.

You yourself point out several plays that had great potential but went nowhere because of poor execution. I bolded those for you.

I do need to correct an error in one particular part of your response:

junder13 said:
...On that drive JP82 was talking about (12th drive of the game), 3 of those 4 passes were within 4-5 yards of the LOS.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. One of the 4 plays was a screen, near the LOS. The other three were all meant to be downfield. One succeeded (9 yard gain)...one was a sack, so we'll never know who his #1 target was, but he was dropping back to give the receiver time to run a route...and the final one Dobbs threw out of bounds when his receivers (who were all downfield) were all covered. So only one of the four was within 4-5 yards of the LOS. Only one. Not 3 of 4.

Junder, you made my point even stronger with your observations, once we correct that bit. The 3rd and 4th Qtr of the Oklahoma game was all about execution falling apart. Period.

You want to call out the coaches, that's fine, do it...concerning the Florida game. That's where they deserve it.

This game, this was about the players not finishing well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#20
#20
You have not won the game after 55 minutes and 30 seconds. You have not won the game after 59 minutes and 30 seconds. You have the won the game after 60 minutes and 30 seconds. Games like salami are won and lost in the last few minutes. You HAVE TO BE THERE at the end of the game. That comes with experience. That's something young players learn the hard way.
 
#22
#22
VonVol said:
I'm thinking he meant that UT ran a total of 7 plays the rest of the game after that interception. Not just on one single drive. I looked at the play by play of the game and that is what happened.
Click to expand...

Ah, good catch, Von, you're right, that makes sense.

But still, Shepard is mis-reading what he sees. The fact that we only got the ball twice in more than 15 minutes of game time, that says a whole lot more about our defense's poor execution (allowing OK's offense to stay on the field all that time) than it does about the offensive play-calling.

Those seven plays went like this:

run
run
pass
<punt>
---
run
run
pass
<punt>
---
run
<end of game>

Remember that drive in mid-3rd Qtr that I mentioned earlier? The drive that started with a QB draw for 5 yards, followed by a Hurd run for 7 yards, followed by a pass play for 9 yards, followed by another Hurd run for 2 yards?

We got 23 yards in those four plays. And the sequence was:

run
run
pass
run

So when it was working, up to the middle of the 3rd Qtr, when our players were executing, no one was faulting the OC for calling a blend of run and pass.

Now, if one wanted to blame DeBord for getting too predictable, maybe. That's an entirely different accusation than getting conservative, but it might have merit. Before we can know, one would have to present evidence. Haven't seen anyone say that, or try to prove it.

For now, what we have seen is people claiming the OC went conservative and that cost us the game. And it's just not true.

Thanks for finding the meaning in Shepard's "7 plays", Von, it was bugging me that I couldn't find anything to match it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#23
#23
VFL-82-JP said:
Ah, good catch, Von, you're right, that makes sense.

But still, Shepard is mis-reading what he sees. The fact that we only got the ball twice in more than 15 minutes of game time, that says a whole lot more about our defense's poor execution (allowing OK's offense to stay on the field all that time) than it does about the offensive play-calling.

Those seven plays went like this:

run
run
pass
<punt>
---
run
run
pass
<punt>
---
run
<end of game>

Remember that drive in mid-3rd Qtr that I mentioned earlier? The drive that started with a QB draw for 5 yards, followed by a Hurd run for 7 yards, followed by a pass play for 9 yards, followed by another Hurd run for 2 yards?

We got 23 yards in those four plays. And the sequence was:

run
run
pass
run

So when it was working, up to the middle of the 3rd Qtr, when our players were executing, no one was faulting the OC for calling a blend of run and pass.

Now, if one wanted to blame DeBord for getting too predictable, maybe. That's an entirely different accusation than getting conservative, but it might have merit. Before we can know, one would have to present evidence. Haven't seen anyone say that, or try to prove it.

For now, what we have seen is people claiming the OC went conservative and that cost us the game. And it's just not true.

Thanks for finding the meaning in Shepard's "7 plays", Von, it was bugging me that I couldn't find anything to match it.
Click to expand...

It was bugging me too. Haha!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#24
#24
Dobbs 4 Heisman said:
Butch Jones must simply believe in his team.

It seemed like at times he was surprised they got big leads and instead of continuing doing what was working, he tries to just hang on for dear life.

He needs to believe he has the best team every time they step on the field and coach with that sort of confidence.
Click to expand...

The dumbness in your posts continue to elevate.
 
#25
#25
To answer the OP. UT did what they need to do. They gave Jancek the boot and brought in a top notch DC.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top