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

Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

    Originally posted by Jonathan View Post
    The draft is still a way away but I found in interesting Carroll of Missouri and Toney Dougles were first rounders. If I am the Pacers I am looking to acquire another early second round pick. Maybe we can work something out with Portland since they have four second round picks and a lot of youth.
    I've been thinking the same thing lately. It's commonly thought that we want another first round pick, but an early 2nd would be really nice. There are a number of interesting players there and if we screw it up, they don't have a guaranteed contract anyway.
    "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

    - Salman Rushdie

    Comment


    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

      I think Carroll is a solid pick no matter when he is selected. The guy understands the flow of the game. He works his arse off and is tough as nails. I would love to have a young player like him on the Pacers.
      "Your course, your path, is not going to be like mine," West says. "Everybody is not called to be a multimillionaire. Everybody's not called to be the president. Whatever your best work is, you do it. Do it well. … You cease your own greatness when you aspire to be someone else."

      Comment


      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

        Originally posted by mellifluous View Post
        I've been thinking the same thing lately. It's commonly thought that we want another first round pick, but an early 2nd would be really nice. There are a number of interesting players there and if we screw it up, they don't have a guaranteed contract anyway.
        I agree. An earlier second round pick seems to be more logical than a first rounder because there is no guaranteed contract, and if we decide to sign the pick, it will be cheaper than if it were a first rounder. On top of that, the tier of players going in the mid to late first round seems to stretch into the early part of the second round, and there's always the likelihood that a player or two will slip into the second round.

        Comment


        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

          Originally posted by sloopjohnb View Post
          I agree. An earlier second round pick seems to be more logical than a first rounder because there is no guaranteed contract, and if we decide to sign the pick, it will be cheaper than if it were a first rounder. On top of that, the tier of players going in the mid to late first round seems to stretch into the early part of the second round, and there's always the likelihood that a player or two will slip into the second round.
          I think that it will be as equally difficult ( if not nearly as costly ) to acquire a last 1st round pick as it will be to acquire an early 2nd round pick ( probably between the 30th to 35th spots ). Not only because there will be some prospects that will likely drop out of the 1st round, I can see Teams putting a premium on those top 2nd round picks since they aren't "guaranteed" contracts.
          Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

          Comment


          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

            Originally posted by CableKC View Post
            I think that it will be as equally difficult ( if not nearly as costly ) to acquire a last 1st round pick as it will be to acquire an early 2nd round pick ( probably between the 30th to 35th spots ). Not only because there will be some prospects that will likely drop out of the 1st round, I can see Teams putting a premium on those top 2nd round picks since they aren't "guaranteed" contracts.
            I'm sure you're right about this, even though it's fairly disheartening. Jonathan does have an interesting suggestion with Portland. There's no way their going to use all 4 2nd round picks (even though I'm fairly sure they'll use one on Nick Calathes if they get the chance). At this point, however, I'm not sure what we could give them for one, other than the scenario where we give them a future 2nd a la the Stanko trade.
            "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

            - Salman Rushdie

            Comment


            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

              Yeah I think they will go for Euro players and maybe trade one or two for one or two next year.

              Comment


              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                I just looked at Chad Ford's mock draft and I hope he is wrong about Austin Daye going to the Pacers.

                Daye hardly weighs more than Johnny Flynn. Is probably a few years away from competing.

                I can guarantee there will be better players available when the Pacers pick. Better players and more NBA ready players.

                Comment


                • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                  Originally posted by rommie View Post
                  I just looked at Chad Ford's mock draft and I hope he is wrong about Austin Daye going to the Pacers.
                  Again, Ford is in reality about as much of an Insider as anyone on this board, so his mock drafts pretty much carry the same weight as a mock draft from any poster on this board.

                  The only difference between someone on this board and Chad Ford:

                  1) Ford gets a travel budget from ESPN
                  2) GMs love using Ford as a ways of handing out misdirection and misinformation.

                  Remember last year when Chad Ford said it was all but a conclusion that Miami was trading the #2 pick (he wrote about this every day leading up to the draft) and then of course nothing happened.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                    Ford's draft opinion might be one of the least informed out there, other than perhaps Peter Vescey. I typically enjoy Ford's NBA coverage, but his draft and draft prospect work leaves a lot to be desired.

                    Daye makes zero sense to go to Indy or to go anywhere that high in the draft.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                      Originally posted by Naptown_Seth View Post
                      Ford's draft opinion might be one of the least informed out there, other than perhaps Peter Vescey. I typically enjoy Ford's NBA coverage, but his draft and draft prospect work leaves a lot to be desired.

                      Daye makes zero sense to go to Indy or to go anywhere that high in the draft.
                      And just remember that his mocks are all based on his opinions of what he thinks is best for Team X and not based on any actual information of what Team X is actually thinking.

                      He has about as much of a clue was to what teams are thinking as anyone on this board.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                        Originally posted by d_c View Post
                        And just remember that his mocks are all based on his opinions of what he thinks is best for Team X and not based on any actual information of what Team X is actually thinking.

                        He has about as much of a clue was to what teams are thinking as anyone on this board.
                        I disagree. I think 90% of the people on this board have a better handle than Ford, when it comes to the draft.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center



                          PICKTEAMPLAYERVITALS
                          Sacramento
                          Jrue Holiday
                          Position: PG
                          Height: 6-4
                          Weight: 199
                          Age: 18
                          School: UCLA



                          Analysis: Holiday's performance at the NBA pre-draft combine suddenly doesn't make this pick such a stretch. Yes, this is very high for Holiday, but at the end of the day, there just isn't a big difference between the fourth pick and the 10th pick in this draft.
                          The Kings need a point guard, and if they can't get their hands on Rubio, Holiday's combination of size and defensive ability should get him the nod in Sacramento. The other possibilities here -- including Brandon Jennings, Jonny Flynn and Curry -- don't really fit the team's need. But it looks as if another player, Memphis guard Tyreke Evans, will get a look, too.
                          Wow. Jrue moving up to 4? I expected him to climb, but not that much.

                          PICKTEAMPLAYERVITALS
                          Milwaukee
                          Jordan Hill
                          Position: PF
                          Height: 6-10
                          Weight: 232
                          Age: 21
                          School: Arizona


                          Analysis: The Bucks will jump for joy if this scenario happens. Hill is a top-five talent, but if the Wizards pass, he may slip here. None of the other teams are really after a power forward. Hill would be a godsend for the Bucks.

                          They face losing both of their free agents -- Charlie Villanueva and Ramon Sessions -- this summer due to financial constraints. That loss could leave them wide open at both the point and the 4. If Hill is gone, they'll try to find the best player among DeJuan Blair, Flynn and Earl Clark.
                          PICKTEAMPLAYERVITALS
                          Indiana
                          Austin Daye
                          Position: SF
                          Height: 6-11
                          Weight: 192
                          Age: 20
                          School: Gonzaga



                          Analysis: The Pacers' biggest need is an athletic big man who can score and block shots. Unfortunately, there aren't any of those guys in the draft this year. They are also looking for a starting point guard. But if the draft plays out like this, the Pacers would have to reach.
                          The good news is that Daye could be a great fit, especially if they start playing Danny Granger more at the 4. Daye's shooting ability and upside remind some of, dare we say, Jonathan Bender.
                          Ack. I don't know much about Daye, but I dislike everything else about this analysis.

                          And like others have said, picking Daye right in front of Jennings and Clarke? Ouch. If we're going to roll the dice, I'd rather roll them on a PG than a tweener F.

                          PICKTEAMPLAYERVITALS
                          Dallas
                          Terrence Williams
                          Position: SG
                          Height: 6-6
                          Weight: 213
                          Age: 21
                          School: Louisville



                          Analysis: The Mavs have been willing to take a chance on big-time athletes with a questionable background. It worked for them with Josh Howard and it might work again with Williams. He has lottery talent, and if he can focus and improve that jump shot, he could be a long-term replacement for Jerry Stackhouse.
                          Again with the "questionable background." What is this red flag he's obsessed with, and why does nobody else in the world know about it?
                          This space for rent.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                            Combine athlete tests are in.

                            Name Height w/o Shoes Height w/shoes Weight Wingspan Reach Body Fat No Step Vert No Step Vert Reach Max Vert Max Vert Reach Bench Agility Sprint Rank Projected
                            Patrick Mills 5' 11.25"6' 0.5"1756' 2"7' 11"6.927.510' 2.5"33.010' 8"810.873.10NA30
                            Wayne Ellington 6' 4.25"6' 5.25"2026' 6.5"8' 4"5.531.510' 11.5"38.011' 6"1311.143.20NA29
                            Darren Collison 6' 0.25"6' 1.5"1666' 3"8' 0.5"5.730.510' 7"33.510' 10"910.453.10NA27
                            Marcus Thornton 6' 2.75"6' 3.75"1946' 5"8' 3"4.831.010' 10"33.011' 0"1410.733.28NA26
                            Sam Young 6' 5.25"6' 6.75"2236' 10.75"8' 9.5"4.927.511' 1"33.011' 6.5"NA11.473.45NA25
                            Chase Budinger 6' 6.25"6' 7"2066' 7"8' 5"10.029.510' 10.5"38.511' 7.5"1011.083.24NA24
                            Gani Lawal 6' 7.75"6' 9"2297' 0"8' 10"7.230.011' 4"34.511' 8.5"1711.933.34NA23
                            Tyler Hansbrough 6' 8.25"6' 9.5"2346' 11.5"8' 10"8.527.511' 1.5"34.011' 8"1811.123.27NA22
                            B.J. Mullens 6' 11.75"7' 1.25"2587' 1.5"9' 3"8.528.511' 7.5"32.511' 11.5"1011.103.45NA21
                            Jeff Teague 6' 0.25"6' 1.5"1756' 7.5"8' 2.5"4.530.510' 9"36.511' 3"1311.053.18NA20
                            Eric Maynor 6' 2.25"6' 3.25"1646' 2.5"8' 1"5.428.510' 5.5"31.510' 8.5"810.783.19NA19
                            James Johnson 6' 7"6' 7.75"2577' 0.75"8' 9.5"12.030.511' 4"35.011' 8.5"1811.213.23NA18
                            Ty Lawson 5' 11.25"6' 0.5"1976' 0.75"7' 10.5"6.629.010' 3.5"36.510' 11"1410.983.12NA17
                            Terrence Williams 6' 5"6' 6.25"2136' 9"8' 7.5"5.130.511' 2"37.011' 8.5"911.153.18NA16
                            Austin Daye 6' 9.75"6' 10.75"1927' 2.75"9' 2"5.525.011' 3"28.011' 6" 12.113.55NA15
                            Earl Clark 6' 8.5"6' 10.25"2287' 2.5"9' 1.5"5.228.511' 6"33.011' 10.5"511.173.35NA14
                            Jrue Holiday 6' 3.25"6' 4.25"1996' 7"8' 4.5"6.328.510' 9"34.011' 2.5"610.643.21NA13
                            Gerald Henderson 6' 4"6' 5"2156' 10.25"8' 6.5"4.431.511' 2"35.011' 5.5"811.173.14NA12
                            Dejuan Blair 6' 5.25"6' 6.5"2777' 2"8' 10.5"12.026.011' 0.5"33.011' 7.5"1811.503.45NA11
                            Jonny Flynn 5' 11.25"6' 0.75"1966' 4"7' 11.5"6.333.010' 8.5"40.011' 3.5"1010.863.23NA10
                            Demar Derozan 6' 5.5"6' 6.5"2116' 9"8' 6.5"4.929.010' 11.5"38.511' 9"511.883.31NA9
                            Stephen Curry 6' 2"6' 3.25"1816' 3.5"8' 1"5.729.510' 6.5"35.511' 0.5"1011.073.28NA8
                            Tyreke Evans 6' 4"6' 5.25"2216' 11.25"8' 8"7.128.511' 0.5"34.011' 6"711.813.17NA6
                            Jordan Hill 6' 9.25"6' 10.25"2327' 1.5"9' 0"6.031.011' 7"35.011' 11"1112.233.30NA5
                            James Harden 6' 4"6' 5.25"2226' 10.75"8' 7.5"10.131.511' 3"37.011' 8.5"1711.103.13NA3
                            Hasheem Thabeet 7' 1.25"7' 2.5"2677' 6.25"9' 5"6.7NANANANANANANANA2
                            Blake Griffin 6' 8.5"6' 10"2486' 11.25"8' 9"8.232.011' 5"35.511' 8.5"2210.953.28NA1
                            http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-...&pos=0&sort=16

                            PS if we draft Daye, I may, just may, pull a Shade this year.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                              I'm sure it's been mentioned so excuse the redundancy, but forget about the grains of salt, you'd better have a stockpile of leftover road salt when you listen to anything coming out of any GM or team mouthpiece's pieholes for the next 3 weeks!

                              Comment


                              • Re: Official 2009 NBA Draft Recruiting Center

                                TWill's number look better and better. I wish I watch more UL games. But I can take Seth's word, I like Rush and Love last year too.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X