Lt. Dan's Revenge Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Fact is the Colts need to start preparing for the post Manning era very soon...that doesn't mean ship him off to god knows where but to at least start considering draft prospects that could replace him in 4-7 years Excellent draft strategy. Spend a pick on a player that you see replacing another one in 5 or 6 years. Just stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 I don't have any idea who Bob Waterfield is, and being only 26 my knowledge of Sonny Jurgensen is from whatever I've read or seen on ESPN, etc., but did you ask me to "look at the stats and make a real opinion?" Why did you write this War & Peace version of Peyton's Manning future if you didn't want opinions? Or just ones that agree with yours? McNabb isn't a HOF QB. His accuracy has been extremely questionable at times, and he proved four years in a row not to be able to win the game BEFORE the "big" game. He is 1-5 in conference championship games and 0-1 in super bowls. On all the teams he had a phenomenal defense (with exceptional secondaries of players like Bobby Taylor, Troy Vincent, Brian Dawkins, Sheldon Brown, Asante Samuel, and Lito Sheppard) managed by potential HOF defensive coordinator Jim Johnson. Since you told me to do my "research," I did: Cmp Att Yds TD Int Lng Y/A Cmp% Rate Att Yds Lng Y/A 2008 NFC Championship game (lost 32-25): 28 47 375 3 1 62 8.0 59.6 97.4 2 31 21 15.5 2005 Super Bowl XXIX (lost 24-21) 30 51 357 3 3 40 7.0 58.8 75.4 1 0 0 0.0 2005 NFC Championship game (won 27-10): 17 26 180 2 0 45 6.9 65.4 111.1 10 32 8 3.2 2004 NFC Championship game (lost 14-3): 10 22 100 0 3 23 4.5 45.5 19.3 2 10 7 5.0 2003 NFC Championship game (lost 27-10): 26 49 243 0 1 24 5.0 53.1 58.5 3 17 11 5.7 2002 NFC Championship game (lost 29-24): 18 30 171 1 1 17 5.7 60.0 73.1 4 26 10 6.5 2001 Division Championship (lost 20-10): 20 41 181 1 1 21 4.4 48.8 59.1 5 17 7 3.4 The 2008 NFC Championship game was a joke, too. He was terrible until the 2nd half (they were down 24-6, if you recall). He turned it on but too little, too late. He threw three picks in the Super Bowl in addition to throwing up in the huddle. Again, he tried to turn it on at the end but to no avail. In the 2005 NFC Championship game he beat a gimmicky Falcons team that had no chance of winning. Michael Vick vs. Jim Johnson? Are you serious? No contest. Look at his stats in his other "big" games. HOF'er? No thanks. And spare me the Peyton Manning argument. Peyton has set so many records it's obscene. Donovan's only record set was complaining on black quarterbacks not getting a chance in this league. Why don't YOU do your research next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Are you kidding me? I only respond with "passion or articulation" to posts that actually deserve it. The 11 year old kid across the street could have written the same "article" that you just did. I'm sorry that I even wasted my time reading the entire collection of random thoughts that you presented in that OP. The 1999 New Orleans Saints quarterback depth chart as related to Jake Delhomme. Wow. How riveting, and completely relevant to the Buffalo Bills. Not that ONE POINT in your post was anyways. Daunte Culpepper is "reviving his career in Detroit"? Right. One would think that turning around a career would include winning at least a game or two. "If he does find himself a free agent or traded, Peyton will likely be a colt for at least another four seasons." What the hell does that even mean? I could go on and on, but the bottom line is that all you were doing was spewing out a bunch of irrelevant "facts", some of which were off base, in a completely incoherant and drawn out manner. If anyone on this board who read that post actually gained some insight or knowledge from it, I would love to know how you managed to do it. Kudos Romeo, great stuff. Excellent draft strategy. Spend a pick on a player that you see replacing another one in 5 or 6 years. Just stop. For once the guy is spot on. 100%. Why are you drafting someone to replace a player that far down the road??? And I like the "what does that even mean?" That could apply to the entire original post... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 I don't have any idea who Bob Waterfield is, and being only 26 my knowledge of Sonny Jurgensen is from whatever I've read or seen on ESPN, etc., but did you ask me to "look at the stats and make a real opinion?" Why did you write this War & Peace version of Peyton's Manning future if you didn't want opinions? Or just ones that agree with yours? McNabb isn't a HOF QB. His accuracy has been extremely questionable at times, and he proved four years in a row not to be able to win the game BEFORE the "big" game. He is 1-5 in conference championship games and 0-1 in super bowls. On all the teams he had a phenomenal defense (with cxeptional secondaries of players like Bobby Taylor, Troy Vincent, Brian Dawkins, Sheldon Brown, Asante Samuel, and Lito Sheppard) managed by potential HOF defensive coordinator Jim Johnson. Since you told me to do my "research," I did: Cmp Att Yds TD Int Lng Y/A Cmp% Rate Att Yds Lng Y/A 2008 NFC Championship game (lost 32-25): 28 47 375 3 1 62 8.0 59.6 97.4 2 31 21 15.5 2005 Super Bowl XXIX (lost 24-21) 30 51 357 3 3 40 7.0 58.8 75.4 1 0 0 0.0 2005 NFC Championship game (won 27-10): 17 26 180 2 0 45 6.9 65.4 111.1 10 32 8 3.2 2004 NFC Championship game (lost 14-3): 10 22 100 0 3 23 4.5 45.5 19.3 2 10 7 5.0 2003 NFC Championship game (lost 27-10): 26 49 243 0 1 24 5.0 53.1 58.5 3 17 11 5.7 2002 NFC Championship game (lost 29-24): 18 30 171 1 1 17 5.7 60.0 73.1 4 26 10 6.5 2001 Division Championship (lost 20-10): 20 41 181 1 1 21 4.4 48.8 59.1 5 17 7 3.4 The 2008 NFC Championship game was a joke, too. He was terrible until the 2nd half (they were down 24-6, if you recall). He turned it on but too little, too late. He threw three picks in the Super Bowl in addition to throwing up in the huddle. Again, he tried to turn it on at the end but to no avail. He beat a gimmicky Falcons team that had no chance of winning. Michael Vick vs. Jim Johnson? Are you serious? No contest. Look at his stats in his other "big" games. HOF'er? No thanks. And spare me the Peyton Manning argument. Peyton has set so many records it's obscene. Donovan's only record set was complaining on black quarterbacks not getting a chance in this league. Why don't YOU do your research next time. Well done, I take my hat off to you. You're right I chose McNabb based on some of the thrills hes given the game over the years and the fact he never really had good receivers(but T.O.)...but I am man enough to say you replied well with great facts and I can state that you're right.... Based on the facts you've presented he doesn't deserve to be there...I'd like to see him end up there though, he's such a great player in terms of how hard he plays and the abuse he takes.... well done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 For once the guy is spot on. 100%. Why are you drafting someone to replace a player that far down the road??? And I like the "what does that even mean?" That could apply to the entire original post... Wow it's that type of thought process that left the Bills with Rob Johnson and Doug Flutie after Jim Kelly retired. I gave you credit for your last response and I'm surprised someone who researched as well as you did has an opinion such as this. Well fact is I think you're wrong about preparing for the future, but maybe I'm wrong. Bring on Jim Sorgi the savior of the Colts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Wow it's that type of thought process that left the Bills with Rob Johnson and Doug Flutie after Jim Kelly retired. I gave you credit for your last response and I'm surprised someone who researched as well as you did has an opinion such as this. Well fact is I think you're wrong about preparing for the future, but maybe I'm wrong. Bring on Jim Sorgi the savior of the Colts! What? I really think you have no idea what you're talking about. But let's analyze: You think Manning has anywhere from 4-7 years left, correct? That's pretty broad. Let's narrow it down to 5-6. When was the last time it took a QB 5-6 years to develop? The only ones that come to mind are Delhomme and Warner who spent time in NFL Europe, and in Warner's case, Arena Football. It should never take that long to develop a QB, and if it does, he's probably not worth drafting. On the contrast, let's take a look at other QB's development (straight off the top of my head, so correct me if I'm wrong). These are the years until he is a bonafide starter in the NFL: Philip Rivers: two years Eli Manning: two/three years Trent Edwards: two years (hopefully) Jamarcus Russel: never/bust Peyton Manning: immediate starter/one year Tom Brady: two years Drew Brees: three years J.P. Losman: never/bust Chad Pennington: two/three years Jay Cutler: one year Matt Cassel: two years(?) Ben Roethlisberger: immediate starter/one year Tim Couch: never/bust Carson Palmer: immediate starter/one year Aaron Rodgers: two/three years Donovan McNabb: one year Matt Ryan: immediate starter Joe Flacco: immediate starter/one year Get my point? I can't think of a player who has ever, EVER been groomed for 5-6 years. Jim Sorgi is not being groomed to be the starter. Steve Young was a starter on a horrendous Tampa Bay team before being signed by the 49ers to back up Montana before the salary cap existed. This has nothing to do with what brought Flutie/Johnson to Buffalo. Johnson had a seemingly bright future and the Bills made the move. He obviously busted. Flutie was well into his 30's when he came to Buffalo and was seen as nothing more than a stop gap. Why Donahoe shipped him out in favor of an obvious bust at that point and why we continued to struggle at the QB position had nothing to do with us not drafting a QB to supplant Kelly in 1990. If anything, the FO forced him out too early. Get your facts straight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Cold Bruschi Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Peyton is never winning another ring he was lucky to have even gotten one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrags Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Very nice read Romeo. I just disagree with the fact that Mcnabb is a sure HOF'er. I know alot of players at his position have accomplished less than he has. I just dont know if that makes it right that he will get the exception too. Art Monk is in the HOF, but Andre Reed had better numbers and Reed might not make it in. Thats all im saying. And later on in the post you wrote that Rob Johnson was the QB brought in after Kelly. You are correct that he was brought in after Kelly but forgot that we lived with Todd Collins right after Kelly until Johnson. And Im not sure Payton will play another 10 years, I do think he will play until he is about 38 and will probobly go down as more accomplished as Farve (Waiting to be scolded by all the Farve fans) Very nice read tho. I enjoyed it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Peyton is never winning another ring he was lucky to have even gotten one. hahaha, another bitter peasant Patriots fan. He wouldn't have gotten one if you hadn't given up the biggest lead in Championship game history... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 What? I really think you have no idea what you're talking about. But let's analyze: You think Manning has anywhere from 4-7 years left, correct? That's pretty broad. Let's narrow it down to 5-6. When was the last time it took a QB 5-6 years to develop? The only ones that come to mind are Delhomme and Warner who spent time in NFL Europe, and in Warner's case, Arena Football. It should never take that long to develop a QB, and if it does, he's probably not worth drafting. On the contrast, let's take a look at other QB's development (straight off the top of my head, so correct me if I'm wrong). These are the years until he is a bonafide starter in the NFL: Philip Rivers: two years Eli Manning: two/three years Trent Edwards: two years (hopefully) Jamarcus Russel: never/bust Peyton Manning: immediate starter/one year Tom Brady: two years Drew Brees: three years J.P. Losman: never/bust Chad Pennington: two/three years Jay Cutler: one year Matt Cassel: two years(?) Ben Roethlisberger: immediate starter/one year Tim Couch: never/bust Carson Palmer: immediate starter/one year Aaron Rodgers: two/three years Donovan McNabb: one year Matt Ryan: immediate starter Joe Flacco: immediate starter/one year Get my point? I can't think of a player who has ever, EVER been groomed for 5-6 years. Jim Sorgi is not being groomed to be the starter. Steve Young was a starter on a horrendous Tampa Bay team before being signed by the 49ers to back up Montana before the salary cap existed. This has nothing to do with what brought Flutie/Johnson to Buffalo. Johnson had a seemingly bright future and the Bills made the move. He obviously busted. Flutie was well into his 30's when he came to Buffalo and was seen as nothing more than a stop gap. Why Donahoe shipped him out in favor of an obvious bust at that point and why we continued to struggle at the QB position had nothing to do with us not drafting a QB to supplant Kelly in 1990. If anything, the FO forced him out too early. Get your facts straight. The Quarterbacks you mentioned...How many of them were 1st round selections? All but five is the answer. Steve Young still wasn't pollished, even his preseason games with San Fran brought worry to Bill Walsh, it wasn't until Montana taught him how to "dictate" the safties, read Bill Walsh's biography. Jim Sorgi comment was a JOKE, wow surprised someone of your great genius didn't get that. The Bills front office didn't push him out, they would've stuck with him. But he realized they were going in another direction, Rob Johnson was a mistake whichever way you put it. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing with me. Make a real point, the Colts need to prepare, just like every team in the NFL. You always want a top level back up quarterback, if he is traded or released in 5-6 years...then that time is enough to find someone in the next FEW drafts which would make Peyton between 34-37 during those drafts...So when should they find a replacement? When he's 38? No, I'd be looking in the next few drafts for a mid to late round guy who has something special and will sit and learn from Peyton. So tell me how I'm wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 Had the Bills front office been preparing for Kelly leaving since he was Peyton's age, they would've started in 1992. Let's just see the late round guys they could've had... 1992(Jeff Blake and Brad Johnson) 1993(Mark Brunell, Elvis Grbac and Trent Green) 1994-1996 didnt have too many low round guys worthy of grooming, but wait we selected Todd Collins? 2nd Round and evetually got Rob Johnson who was in the same draft... They could've built around Jim Kelly in those remaining years, Kelly should have retired in 1998-2001 not the end of the 1996 season. Eitherway it was bad planning on their part. Thats my point, prepare for the worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 The Quarterbacks you mentioned...How many of them were 1st round selections? All but five is the answer. Steve Young still wasn't pollished, even his preseason games with San Fran brought worry to Bill Walsh, it wasn't until Montana taught him how to "dictate" the safties, read Bill Walsh's biography. Jim Sorgi comment was a JOKE, wow surprised someone of your great genius didn't get that. I assumed it was. Why are you such a dick? The Quarterbacks you mentioned...How many of them were 1st round selections? All but five is the answer. Steve Young still wasn't pollished, even his preseason games with San Fran brought worry to Bill Walsh, it wasn't until Montana taught him how to "dictate" the safties, read Bill Walsh's biography. Jim Sorgi comment was a JOKE, wow surprised someone of your great genius didn't get that. Should I go through the QB's who were drafted in the late rounds? Name me ONE that took 5 years to develop. The Bills front office didn't push him out, they would've stuck with him. But he realized they were going in another direction, Rob Johnson was a mistake whichever way you put it. Stop arguing for the sake of arguing with me. Make a real point, the Colts need to prepare, just like every team in the NFL. You always want a top level back up quarterback, if he is traded or released in 5-6 years...then that time is enough to find someone in the next FEW drafts which would make Peyton between 34-37 during those drafts...So when should they find a replacement? When he's 38? Trust me when I saw I'm not arguing with you for the sake of arguing you. You wrote a disseration on Manning's retirement. Did you not want comments? How about when you call me out on my comments? Do you not expect responses? Come on, dude. No, I'd be looking in the next few drafts for a mid to late round guy who has something special and will sit and learn from Peyton. So tell me how I'm wrong? There's a difference between looking for a QB in this draft and looking for a developmental prospect three years from now. I agree that maybe three years from now - depending on Manning's health - you could do something like that. But you were inferring that they should be looking for one now, which is absurd. They shouldn't be forcing Manning out the door, and drafting a QB before he turns 35 would be, on the surface at least, doing just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonidas Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Had the Bills front office been preparing for Kelly leaving since he was Peyton's age, they would've started in 1992. Let's just see the late round guys they could've had... 1992(Jeff Blake and Brad Johnson) 1993(Mark Brunell, Elvis Grbac and Trent Green) 1994-1996 didnt have too many low round guys worthy of grooming, but wait we selected Todd Collins? 2nd Round and evetually got Rob Johnson who was in the same draft... They could've built around Jim Kelly in those remaining years, Kelly should have retired in 1998-2001 not the end of the 1996 season. Eitherway it was bad planning on their part. Thats my point, prepare for the worse. 2001?? Jim Kelly would have been 45 years old for crying out loud! Was he rushed out at the end of '96? Yes. Could he have played a few more years? Certainly. But was his production declining? Definitely. The numbers don't lie, dude: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/K/KellJi00.htm Are you suggesting we would have been saved by Jeff Blake or Elvis Grbac? Really? For the record, we did draft two "developmental" QB's prior to Todd Collins. Neither really panned out for us: 1986: Brian McClure, Bowling Green (12th round) 1992: Matt Rodgers, Iowa (12th round) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 2001?? Jim Kelly would have been 45 years old for crying out loud! Was he rushed out at the end of '96? Yes. Could he have played a few more years? Certainly. But was his production declining? Definitely. The numbers don't lie, dude: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/K/KellJi00.htm Are you suggesting we would have been saved by Jeff Blake or Elvis Grbac? Really? For the record, we did draft two "developmental" QB's prior to Todd Collins. Neither really panned out for us: 1986: Brian McClure, Bowling Green (12th round) 1992: Matt Rodgers, Iowa (12th round) He would have been 41! Not 45? Where do you buy your crack? I mentioned the Todd Collins mistake, I'm not saying they would've saved us but they would've been better options than what we chose. Here are some facts buddy McClure and Rodgers weren't "Developmental" if you've read their reports you'd know that. So please make sure to check your facts, especially if they are your "Checkmate" facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 I assumed it was. Why are you such a dick? Should I go through the QB's who were drafted in the late rounds? Name me ONE that took 5 years to develop. Trust me when I saw I'm not arguing with you for the sake of arguing you. You wrote a disseration on Manning's retirement. Did you not want comments? How about when you call me out on my comments? Do you not expect responses? Come on, dude. There's a difference between looking for a QB in this draft and looking for a developmental prospect three years from now. I agree that maybe three years from now - depending on Manning's health - you could do something like that. But you were inferring that they should be looking for one now, which is absurd. They shouldn't be forcing Manning out the door, and drafting a QB before he turns 35 would be, on the surface at least, doing just that. When did I say 5 years to develope? I said during the next 5-7 years TRY drafting someone who COULD replace him, let him sit for a FEW(Meaning the usual 2-4) years. As for calling you out, you called yourself out by not trying to respond but by trying to attack. I also gave you credit when you proved me wrong, how come you don't look at that and say...hmmm when he's wrong he admits it. Im not saying draft a guy this april and prep him for 20 years from now. Im saying prepare yourself by drafting quarterbacks that you feel have something special, so that you can ease the transition better, or perhaps free agency is the answer...point is to prepare! You are arguing for the sake of arguing, by quoting my responses to you and having a comeback doesn't make them valid or relatable to this text, jesus christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo Posted April 16, 2009 Author Share Posted April 16, 2009 When did I say 5 years to develope? I said during the next 5-7 years TRY drafting someone who COULD replace him, let him sit for a FEW(Meaning the usual 2-4) years. As for calling you out, you called yourself out by not trying to respond but by trying to attack. I also gave you credit when you proved me wrong, how come you don't look at that and say...hmmm when he's wrong he admits it. Im not saying draft a guy this april and prep him for 20 years from now. Im saying prepare yourself by drafting quarterbacks that you feel have something special, so that you can ease the transition better, or perhaps free agency is the answer...point is to prepare! You are arguing for the sake of arguing, by quoting my responses to you and having a comeback doesn't make them valid or relatable to this text, jesus christ. To be honest, I'd say Brad Johnson would've been a great fit. Pocket passer, very accurate, good leadership skills and as we saw throughout his career wherever he went he did very well(lets not count his last few years...he'd lost it by then honest) But I'd say Elvis Grbac and Brad Johnson could've been guys to say could've been 5-8 year starters for us. As for the state of the Bills, I love Trent Edwards and think he is the next guy to really do great things in this league. I trust Bill Walsh and what I've seen. He has the "It" factor...sh-- I'm going to call him "It" from now on...granted T.O., Reed and Evans being makes him have to put up numbers, if he doesn't maybe he isn't right for our system... But I do love Trent and if he starts for us until he's 37 I'd like to see us prepare for him departure...point blank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 "spellscheck"? Busted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybob Posted April 16, 2009 Share Posted April 16, 2009 Hi Romeo- a couple things- If you title something " Peyton Manning, his career inching toward the end " then shouldn't the article be about how his career is inching towards the end?? but your article is only a little bit about Peyton Manning and you have his career going any where from 4-10 years longer- I'm going to give you two better titles for your article. 1. "Peyton Manning and other QBs, their careers inching towards the end or maybe not, who the F knows certainly not me" 2. " I like turtles " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Thanks for calling it an interesting read, as for saying it's nothing new? Honestly have you seen this on any other forum, site or page? So the concept isn't anything new but this post is so...ugh! As for Blanda, Moon and the elder signal callers of franchises past, present and future...teams are always looking to get younger. Joe Montana was ushered out of San Fransisco due to injury concern and a YOUNGER Steve Young poised and ready to "attempt" to take over the position. As for Jim Kelly, he could have played a few more years, but he saw the direction the franchise was going in and being the class act he was(and is) stepped away without letting a conflict begin. We replaced Jim with Rob Johnson based on one game, but NFL front offices are always looking for the next Jack Hobbs I suppose. Rob had great talent but didn't read safties well and found himself being replaced by BCU's and NCAA former leading passer, Doug Flutie. Flutie was a great competitor but the team just didn't have the forward direction to be effective in the post season. Had they just stuck with Flutie and groomed a replacement, we'd be fine but the fact is we didn't do that and it's 2009. also I just want to say that call was bull sh--, Frank Wychek didn't throw a legal pass so !@#$ you Titans we would have gone to the super bowl if it wasn't for that bull sh-- call! Um...sorry but yeah...thanks All due respect, but where did you get this notion from? I love Kelly too, but he knew his skills were dimishing by the week. I have heard him say as much, numerous times. In my opinion, there is nothing that ever happend, or that was said, to indicate that Kelly retired for nay other reason than that his skills were eroding. True, he put a good stretch together the last 4 or 5 games of his final season, to secure a playoff spot, but his arm strength, and accuaracy were noticeably diminished. His last game, against the Jags was a real bad note to leave on...I hate that his last act as a Buffalo Bills player, came riding off on a cart with a concussion, rather than riding off in the sunset with a Super Bowl ring. Kelly was too competitve a guy to hang it up, if he truly thought he could still play. Kelly was a team guy, but he wasn't bowing to any "change of direction" that the franchise was heading in. He fielded some interest from the Vikings and the Ravens, the following season, but he never considered them seriously. Honestly, I think he only went along, because he missed the game, and missed being "the man" for an NFL team. These guys like hearing that they are good. But, Jim knew he was done... I also recall, on the pregame show before the last playoff game that his Bills faced Marino(1995), they did one of those puff pieces about what great buddies the two QB's were. In it, when asked "who will play longer?" Jim didn't hesitate to say "Dan, definitely. I don't see myself playing too much longer. This game hurts a lot, and when it starts to take a whole week to get over last Sunday's game, it is start to at least think about retiring." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lucks Posted April 17, 2009 Share Posted April 17, 2009 Rome, great post bro!!! U r one of the reasons i enjoy this site. Keep it up bro!! C u in the M-I-A IN OCT TO SQUISH THE FISH LUCKS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts