Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

2006 off-season evaluation part 7

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 3
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 3 template Next
  • #1

    2006 off-season evaluation part 7

    The management:

    Right now we have two people in charge of running the basketball operations of the Indiana Pacers. Donnie Walsh & Larry Bird. Although Bird has the title of being in charge of basketball operations he made it very clear in the post season interview, which many of us have known all along anyway, that Donnie Walsh was his boss & he had to report to him.

    Take that however you want but for some of us it still means the product on the floor is at the very least something the Walsh approves of.

    Let's look at each of them starting with Bird.

    The Good: He say's the right things & as we all know he has a kick butt take no crap attitude. At least he makes it appear that way (we'll talk more about this below). He seems to have an idea of what he wants on the floor & does not seem to be afraid to criticize his coach for not playing the players or the style he wants. He still has some pull with the players because of who he was on the floor & he seems to have the respect of the league office.

    The bad: The kick butt take no crap attitude may all be a facade. There is just no way to know this yet so that is why I listed it in both sections. He may very well have been willing to jettison the jackass off of our team last season but was stopped from above. Then again maybe he wasn't ready. All we are getting now is the afterthoughts of these guys so who knows. He has already proven to be to slow to take some definitive action with the team. I say that because it was apperant to almost anybody that by the end of February that Carlisle had lost the team & it was apperant that maybe some of the team were trying to get Rick fired. Bird should have either fired Carlisle (which he wasn't going to do) or he should have given the "your not going to get the coach fired" speech right there & then instead of waiting till there was just a couple of weeks left in the regular season.

    He has stated that he will take more of a hands on role next season. I ask why? Why does he think he needs to? Conversely why did he wait till next season to do it? This ship was falling apart early last season & Larry decided to tour Europe. We have scouts for that job so when the ship was rocking back & forth why was he not right back over here to try & stabilize it?

    The outlook: Who knows. I don't think we will ever truely know what Larry Bird will be like or want until Donnie Walsh is gone. It may be great or it may suck but there is just no way to know.

    Donnie Walsh:

    The Good: Stepped up (finally) & took care of Ron. I know he had no problem in doing it but in reality it should have been Bird over here taking the heat for Ron? Beyond that the list of good for Walsh is long so I will name a few & I'm sure others will add to this. Good manager of business, loyal to his players, liked by agents, respected by league office, decent eye for talent, etc., etc.

    The Bad: I will do my best here to be fair & non-biased. He is conservative to a fault (I don't even think his largest supporters can deny this), he sometimes over pays our players to much. The big one though is he stood by (well he actually participated in) while our franchise was being taken over by very talented yet very mentally unstable players. He rarel makes player moves unless it is forced upon him.

    I'll stop because I think that is enough coming from me, if anybody else wants to add feel free.

    The outlook: This supposedly his last season, I don't know if it is or if it is not. His legacy in Indiana is intact & in fact has been since about the 1989 season. There are still so many people around that remember not making the playoffs that making the playoffs has become the end all be all of the team. So therefor the WalshWarriors will always hold him in high regard. I think he will help guide Bird through this season & then maybe he will slip off into retirement. But as long as he is around he will still hold the trump cards.

    Overall:

    It's time for one or the other. We have to many people with to many ideas on how this team should be run. The owners may not want to pay Rick & another coach & it is obvious that Rick & Larry do not agree on how the team should play or who should be playing in what position.

    This creats conflict & it sets up for another unstable season to come, IMO. I think the Simons need to just bite the bullit (as they have so many other times during the Walsh years) & let them fire the coach. Having a coach who has a guranteed job yet no extension just makes it so that the players are in limbo again. This is the last thing we need.

    I know that Larry & Donnie supposedly have this symbiotic relationship & that is all well & good. But as Bob Marley used to say "one voice".

    I think it's finally time to make the full fledged change over to Bird. I may or may not like what he is going to do but I think one voice is what is going to be required to right this ship.


    Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

    Originally posted by Peck
    I think it's finally time to make the full fledged change over to Bird.


    That is all.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

      I have to agree that it either has to be Larry or Donnie running the ship, not a combination of both of them.

      I think we are seeing that the combination isn't working. It really isn't all there fault that this team has played the way it has the past 2 years, but I think if both of these guys are making basketball decisions this thing won't get any better. I say this because everyone has their own vision of how a team should play, I think we need to let one or the other make this team into their own vision.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

        Change is going to hurt I fear.

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

          Originally posted by Gamble
          Change is going to hurt I fear.

          Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
          Turn and face the strange ch-ch-changes...

          When you are through changing, you are through.
          ~Bruce Barton

          It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. ~Author unknown

          There's as much risk in doing nothing as in doing something.
          - Trammell Crow

          We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
          - Albert Einstein


          The point regarding one or the other is a valid one, though. I can only imagine the times certain decisions could not be made or were postponed one way or another due to opposing views.



          GM by committee is never a good long term solution.

          Why Not Us ?

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

            I fear commenting here because I know who is lurking.

            But alas - here I am - making this mistake.

            Maybe we could change from One Goal to One Voice. And I do think that as much as I despise Bird - I think the fact that DW is a short timer means it is time to bow out. BUT I can also see the argument in that he deserves one more year to right the ship before he sails off.

            I am not a DW fan - never have been. But I will take it to my grave that he was on the right side of the Artest trade situation and he would have chosen Maggette. Too many things point to this - the most being that he is younger and locked up. DW does not like to take chances - the rent-a-player route is not his thing.

            I also agree with Peck - it sure seemed like Bird ran away from the Artest issue and perhaps could have even made it more tolerable (could he have smoothed it over enough so he could have played while we shopped him - we will never know). Basically - I lost a lot of respect for him in the weeks he was backpacking through Europe.

            The Carlisle situation is at best messy, at worst a mess. I think you need to turn the page and get a fresh voice in there. Until you do - you are just extending the failed run of the current group. What baffles my mind is - a) who wants to keep him between Bird and DW and b) are the Simons so cheap that they can't pay the guy for a year to go away? The seats they sell would more than make up for it. No one comes top watch a coach coach - but I do believe people are staying away because they do not like Rick's system.

            I am left not knowing where the franchise is or where it is going. I sure hope that feeling isn't the same one in the Conseco offices... but I wonder.
            Heywoode says... work hard man.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

              It is imperative that this franchise gets back to "One voice" - I like that...

              And right now I think that voice should be Kiki Vandeweghe's.

              I'll be the first to stand up and salute DW for saving us from perennial lottery appearances. I also think he's underestimated Pacers' fans patience - there were only 4,000 fans per game in the 1980s because the team had no direction at all, and his cautious nature has resulted in a team that is consistently good, and occasionally great, but never really all that close to being a champion.

              A trip to the lottery and then back up (with a plan, of course) might've been painful short term but would have reaped more dividends long term than the current "fall in love with mismatched talent" strategy.

              Like Doug, my dislike of Mr. Bird is no secret. If he actually takes over the leadership of this team I'll probably be on suicide watch. (I'll still believe it when I see it - how much longer does everyone think Ainge will last in Boston? You know they're eventually going to make Bird an offer he can't refuse and then we'll read heartfelt, touching stories of that reunion and how much he's missed being a part of the Celtics... and remember I don't like the Green Guys.)
              Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
              Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
              Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
              Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
              And life itself, rushing over me
              Life itself, the wind in black elms,
              Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                Originally posted by grace


                That is all.


                Before anybody actually thinks I want Bird to be the man in charge I wanted to clerify this.

                I have no particular interest in him being here. Like many of you I was at those 80's Pacers/Celtics games in the 80's so I know how you feel.

                However, just like I had to do when he was the coach, I have learned to live with it.

                I make no seceret about the fact that I have never been a big Walsh fan so I'm willing to go a differant direction, if for no other reason than to prove me wrong.

                But I think Bird on his own will be vastly differant than Bird under Walsh. My only real concern is what will Birds relationship be with the Simons?


                Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                  Originally posted by Peck

                  I know that Larry & Donnie supposedly have this symbiotic relationship & that is all well & good. But as Bob Marley used to say "one voice".

                  I think it's finally time to make the full fledged change over to Bird. I may or may not like what he is going to do but I think one voice is what is going to be required to right this ship.

                  The below is from the Star's Q & A with Donnie Walsh. http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl.../1088/SPORTS04

                  Q: Larry said he feels he needs to take a greater role in the organization. Will there be a change this summer in how you two handle personnel decisions?

                  A: Walsh} I'm looking to him to go out and identify what we need to do with the team. Identify the players he thinks would be good for our team. I'm here to help him in any way I can. That's how we've been doing things.

                  But I don't think he was talking about that. I think he was saying he needs to go down and be closer to the players and put his imprint on it. He's been there (as a player and coach). As a general manager or president, you're very hesitant to go down and start talking to the players too much, because then they stop listening to the coach. But he and Rick (Carlisle) have a history together, so it could work for those two.
                  -----

                  Who started this one voice stuff? I've read it before.

                  I can see where Bird and Carlisle are at odds, Bird has bluntly said so. Other than that I don't see a 'one voice' problem. As Walsh has said, Bird identifies the players he thinks would help the team, and he, Walsh, helps him any way he can. What's more Walsh says, "That's how we've been doing things."

                  This by the way is what I've been saying all along about their relationship.

                  As for who is quoted in the news, who cares? I've seen Walsh, Bird, Carlisle, and the Vice president speak for the Pacers.

                  EDIT; I do have some reservations about the type players Bird falls in love with, so I'm not sold on him, but that's a different topic.

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                    I think the fact that Bird was in Europe and took no leadership during the Artest situation gave the appearance of hiding
                    Heywoode says... work hard man.

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                      Originally posted by Frank Slade

                      Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes
                      Turn and face the strange ch-ch-changes...

                      When you are through changing, you are through.
                      ~Bruce Barton

                      It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change. ~Author unknown

                      There's as much risk in doing nothing as in doing something.
                      - Trammell Crow

                      We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
                      - Albert Einstein

                      "Bob Dylan once wrote, 'The times, they are a-changin.' Ron Burgundy had never heard that song."
                      Read my Pacers blog:
                      8points9seconds.com

                      Follow my twitter:
                      @8pts9secs

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                        Next up, 2006 off-season evaluation part 8: conseco concession workers and janitorial staff.

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                          Originally posted by Leisure Suit Larry
                          Next up, 2006 off-season evaluation part 8: conseco concession workers and janitorial staff.
                          If Peck writes it I'll read it.

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                            Originally posted by Peck
                            But as Bob Marley used to say "one voice".
                            Wasn't that "1 love"? lol

                            anyway... I am scared of what Larry Bird will do without his mentor there to guide him. I seriously doubt that Larry will be able to fill Donnie's shoes and do what he has done here. Almost 20 years of running a very good basketball team. That is hard to top. I am thinking more along the lines of how long it will take before Larry Bird quits/gets fired after Donnie leaves. I say 4 years.

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: 2006 off-season evaluation part 7

                              IMHO Donnie Walsh has been out of his comfort zone for a while now. We're ending up exactly where he tried to avoid by 'rebuilding on the fly'. Too many miscalculations.

                              I've wondered about a disconnect between coaches, Bird, and DW (and maybe the Simons) for some time. This team has a leadership void that runs straight thru the team and all the way to the top. There just doesn't seem to be a true 'The buck stops here' position.

                              The lunatics took over the asylum a long while ago. The comfort level that a player must feel as an Indiana Pacer must surely be amazing. The odds of a midseason trade are tiny unless a player WANTS traded and goes out of his way to demand it or show his displeasure. Even summer trades are rare without that set of circumstances.

                              One Goal... Hmmpf...

                              If Larry Bird wants to lay down the law and begin to demand certain things from these players, then GREAT. I say it's about time. But it can't be all talk.

                              Until DW moves on we're not going to know how Bird would run this organization. And teams aren't going to know who they should put on the speed dial to talk trades with the Pacers. One person needs the ultmate power and ultimate call. A vision must be dictated from the top... not spread out, watered down, and compromised.

                              -Bball
                              Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                              ------

                              "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                              -John Wooden

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 3 template Next
                              Working...
                              X