It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 8:36 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:17 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Chicago Bears


Odds to win the NFC North: +836
The Bears rode an awesome, unsustainable, life-affirming year of luck to the NFC Championship Game last season. Nobody can take that away from them. But let's pick away at that record to reveal why they will be terrible in 2011.

Let's start with the numbers. The Bears were 7-3 in games decided by a touchdown or less, and that includes a mostly meaningless loss to the Packers in Week 17. Winning close games at that rate is not a product of talent. In 2009, with virtually the same roster, the Bears were 3-5 in games decided by a touchdown or less. Since the strike season of 1982, there have been five other teams that were 7-3 in touchdown-or-less decisions in a given season. Those teams were 13-20 in those games the following year. That's not a small-sample fluke, either. If you take the 135 teams since 1982 that won at least four games by a touchdown-or-less and put up a winning percentage in those games of .700 or better, those teams were 496-478 in close games the following year, a winning percentage of .509. In 2009, the four teams who fit that criteria were the Colts, Vikings, Raiders, and Chargers. They were a combined 22-4 in close games. They went 12-16 in 2010. There's no real reason to think that the Bears will be bad in close games in 2011 (that's the Gambler's Fallacy1), but there's also no reason to think they will be particularly good in them, either.

The advanced numbers aren't kind to the Bears, either. The Pythagorean method of using points scored and allowed to predict team performance pegged the Bears to be a 9.5-win team. Football Outsiders estimated that the Bears would have won just 8.2 games against an average schedule with average luck. Brian Burke's Generic Win Probability stat said that the Bears would win an average of just 51 percent of their games against league-average teams at a neutral site.

Now, let's throw in the common sense. Those wins included three victories over teams that were forced to play their third-string quarterback for part or all of the contest. Their Week 1 victory over the Lions needed the referees to wipe a perfectly good Calvin Johnson touchdown catch off the slate. Their 11 defensive starters missed a total of only eight games all season — three from Zack Bowman (who was promptly benched), one from Lance Briggs, and four from Pisa Tinoisamoa. Brian Urlacher missed more time in 2009 than the entire defense combined in 2010. That's not going to happen again, especially with a team on which at least six of the defensive starters will be 30 or older in 2011.

Finally, there's the harsh reality of the league's taking away the one thing the Bears did best. The one consistent significant advantage Chicago has had over its competition over the past few seasons has been on special teams. The Bears averaged 25.4 yards per kick return last season, the second-highest rate in football. They were third in 2009 and fifth in 2008. That advantage is gone, and while there's no doubt that Devin Hester will make a few scurries out of the end zone, chances are that he won't contribute three touchdowns on kickoffs again. On the other hand, chances are that it won't really matter. With an average amount of injuries and luck, the Bears would have been a mediocre football team in 2010. With a tougher schedule and the league's new special teams rules coming their way in 2011, mediocre might be a stretch this season.

Best-case scenario: They stay relatively healthy on defense, the offensive line percolates and produces a league-average attack, and they sneak into the playoffs as a 10-6 wild card.

Worst-case scenario: Oh, boy. Remember the 2010 Cowboys? Follow that blueprint to a T.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:27 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 65767
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
FavreFan wrote:
.Brian Burke's Generic Win Probability stat said that the Bears would win an average of just 51 percent of their games against league-average teams at a neutral site.

:lol: Ballsey prediction. :lol:

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:32 pm
Posts: 11750
pizza_Place: ***
I agree with most of this, except
Quote:
Their Week 1 victory over the Lions needed the referees to wipe a perfectly good Calvin Johnson touchdown catch off the slate.

Ignoring all the stuff that GD has said about that game, anyone who writes about football for a living shouldn't be so stupid. The rule applied there is the rule applied in every single damn football game on every part of the field. If you don't control the ball to the ground on the 40 yard line, it is incomplete. If you don't do it in the end zone, it is incomplete. In the act of falling, Calvin Johnson let go of the ball. You can't call it complete just because you believe he could have held onto it.

But yeah, I agree, this might be a 6 or 7 win team.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:34 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Darkside wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
.Brian Burke's Generic Win Probability stat said that the Bears would win an average of just 51 percent of their games against league-average teams at a neutral site.

:lol: Ballsey prediction. :lol:

Quite generic indeed, huh?

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 4:26 pm
Posts: 1568
It always irks me when people keep referring to the 3 games the Bears won against third string QB's, as if the Bears were the only team in the league to face a third stringer, or how those are just guaranteed wins.

The Packers LOST to the same Detroit team playing their third string QB (yes I know Rodgers missed the second half but the Packers 2nd string QB should be better than the Lions third string QB right?). The Eagles LOST to the Vikings and Joe Webb at home a week after the Bears beat the Vikings badly. And really was Tyler Thigpen or whoever played QB for the Dolphins against the Beloved that much worse than 1st string Chad Henne?

And if we are to play the what if game, that Calvin johnson should have been reward a TD, then give the Bears a win against the Redskins when the officials did not give Cutler a TD on the QB sneak.

And while the Bears may certainly drop back to a 7 win team, I find it hard to believe that the team that was in the NFC Championship game could be on the same level as the Bills. The Bears have no chance to win?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 43570
Irish Boy wrote:
Ignoring all the stuff that GD has said about that game, anyone who writes about football for a living shouldn't be so stupid. The rule applied there is the rule applied in every single damn football game on every part of the field. If you don't control the ball to the ground on the 40 yard line, it is incomplete. If you don't do it in the end zone, it is incomplete. In the act of falling, Calvin Johnson let go of the ball. You can't call it complete just because you believe he could have held onto it.

Agreed.

He only kept one hand on the ball, and paid for it. If he would've kept both hands on it, he probably would have gotten the TD.

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 4:55 pm
Posts: 3287
pizza_Place: Olde Silver Tavern, Manalapan, NJ [R.I.P.?]
Barnwell lost me the second he called Brandon Marshall a top-5 wideout. FO's own stats have Marshall as a below-average player in every year of his career but one.

_________________
The Bulls haven't done anything wrong, and they're not going to do anything wrong.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun Sep 04, 2011 10:03 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:19 pm
Posts: 980
I wouldn't even try and quantify what the Bears are. It is pretty clear that under Lovie, that is pointless.

_________________
"Mattress technology has come a long way"

- Dan Bernstein, 2016


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:17 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
FavreFan wrote:
why they will be terrible in 2011.....

Best-case scenario: They stay relatively healthy on defense, the offensive line percolates and produces a league-average attack, and they sneak into the playoffs as a 10-6 wild card.

These 2 don't add up. Worst case scenario for ANY NFL team is to be just awful. Because of injuries or bad play, bad luck, or whatever. So he says they will be terrible, then he rattles off a bunch of stats that to me pins them as mediocre to slightly above average.

I think a lot of people (myself included) see the Bears as being a 9 or a 10 win team, possibly making the playoffs, possibly winning one of those playoff games but not advancing past the Divisional Round. I think the only way they end up with 12 wins again if is Cutler has an MVP type season, which means the Oline has to be very very good. And staying as healthy as possible, but thats a given.

Missing the playoffs at 9-7 or 8-8 would be diasppointing, but not terribly surprising and certainly not "terrible in 2011"

8-8 is not terrible. Its not good but its not terrible. 4-12 or 3-13 is terrible, and the Bears will not be terrible.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:24 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
There's a flip side to that coin. Any team can go 10-6 with the right amount of luck. Usually if the best case scenario is 10-6 and a wildcard the team in question is considered bad. I'd agree with you though that their best-case might be slightly better than that. I see them as an 8-8ish team with too much competition to get a WC berth this year.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:31 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Either way, we'll see what sort of team they are after their first 3 games. 2 of the 3 at home, but against very tough teams. If they are 3-1 after week 4, look out. Though that stretch of 4 games in a row against the AFC West worries me too.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:32 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Though that stretch of 4 games in a row against the AFC West worries me too.

Not sure if serious....

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:36 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Kinda sorta. Just the travel aspect alone hurts a little bit. Some bad teams out there, but just from an irony standpoint I could see Orton lighting up the Bears :lol:

The Chargers are good and I could see the Bears having a little trouble with the Chiefs too.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:40 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Either way, we'll see what sort of team they are after their first 3 games. 2 of the 3 at home, but against very tough teams. If they are 3-1 after week 4, look out. Though that stretch of 4 games in a row against the AFC West worries me too.


The Bears will be Carolina even if Collins were their QB. They could easily go 0-3. Those first 3 games are easily their toughest stretch of the year. Finishing 2-1 or 3-0 would be a major victory in my eyes. We could be looking at a 14 or 13 win team if that were to happen.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 10:59 am 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17980
pizza_Place: 6 characters
HOVA wrote:
We could be looking at a 14 or 13 win team if that were to happen.


Whatchu know 'bout dem Pats?








:D


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33067
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
mrgoodkat wrote:
I wouldn't even try and quantify what the Bears are. It is pretty clear that under Lovie, that is pointless.


People continue to discount what Lovie and his staff do very well- defense (mainly turnovers), special teams, and having players working hard for him. That equates to a lot of wins. His staff has 4 guys who were once NFL head coaches, which is a big positive.

I know a lot of folks dislike Lovie because his public demeanor. The fact of the matter is that his teams are usually competitive over a course of a season. People count him out. I do not.

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
HOVA wrote:
We could be looking at a 14 or 13 win team if that were to happen.


Whatchu know 'bout dem Pats?








:D


They're going to be really good. Brady may put up video game numbers again this year. I think this is the season people rightfully give him his respect as the best QB of his era.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:06 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
denisdman wrote:
mrgoodkat wrote:
I wouldn't even try and quantify what the Bears are. It is pretty clear that under Lovie, that is pointless.


People continue to discount what Lovie and his staff do very well- defense (mainly turnovers), special teams, and having players working hard for him. That equates to a lot of wins. His staff has 4 guys who were once NFL head coaches, which is a big positive.

I know a lot of folks dislike Lovie because his public demeanor. The fact of the matter is that his teams are usually competitive over a course of a season. People count him out. I do not.

I don't really think he was dissing Lovie. He was just saying that under him, the Bears have been pretty unpredictable and I can't disagree with that.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:17 am 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17980
pizza_Place: 6 characters
HOVA wrote:
They're going to be really good. Brady may put up video game numbers again this year. I think this is the season people rightfully give him his respect as the best QB of his era.


Careful, HOVA. If you aren't careful you might take over my board crush from the absent OKC if you keep talking like that.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
HOVA wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
HOVA wrote:
We could be looking at a 14 or 13 win team if that were to happen.


Whatchu know 'bout dem Pats?








:D


They're going to be really good. Brady may put up video game numbers again this year. I think this is the season people rightfully give him his respect as the best QB of his era.

His era is over. Its Rodgers world now, Brady's just living in it.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Frank Coztansa wrote:
denisdman wrote:
mrgoodkat wrote:
I wouldn't even try and quantify what the Bears are. It is pretty clear that under Lovie, that is pointless.


People continue to discount what Lovie and his staff do very well- defense (mainly turnovers), special teams, and having players working hard for him. That equates to a lot of wins. His staff has 4 guys who were once NFL head coaches, which is a big positive.

I know a lot of folks dislike Lovie because his public demeanor. The fact of the matter is that his teams are usually competitive over a course of a season. People count him out. I do not.

I don't really think he was dissing Lovie. He was just saying that under him, the Bears have been pretty unpredictable and I can't disagree with that.


Under Lovie the Bears have been like the Sox have been for the last 20 years. Really good to mediocre. A 7-9 season is now considered terrible. The bar has been raised.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
HOVA wrote:
They're going to be really good. Brady may put up video game numbers again this year. I think this is the season people rightfully give him his respect as the best QB of his era.


Careful, HOVA. If you aren't careful you might take over my board crush from the absent OKC if you keep talking like that.


I've been saying the same thing for years now.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:50 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:56 am
Posts: 32234
Location: A sterile, homogeneous suburb
pizza_Place: Pizza Cucina
denisdman wrote:
mrgoodkat wrote:
I wouldn't even try and quantify what the Bears are. It is pretty clear that under Lovie, that is pointless.


People continue to discount what Lovie and his staff do very well- defense (mainly turnovers), special teams, and having players working hard for him. That equates to a lot of wins. His staff has 4 guys who were once NFL head coaches, which is a big positive.

I know a lot of folks dislike Lovie because his public demeanor. The fact of the matter is that his teams are usually competitive over a course of a season. People count him out. I do not.


+1

One could argue that Lovie-coached teams are incapable of winning the big one, but Lovie's teams are always competitive and are generally right there at the end of games, even against much more talented teams. The one exception I can think of is the year the Bears were clobbered by the Cardinals and Bengals midseason, but there were so many injuries that they were down to Nick Roach playing MLB.

It is a simple but relatively successful formula Lovie uses: dominate with special teams, don't give up big plays on defense (generally top 10 defense), and hope for some scoring from the offense. In the NFL, this is generally enough to compete for a playoff spot every year. Once in, anything can happen. Having Urlacher and Briggs on defense certainly doesn't hurt, either.

Bears 10-6

Ditka.

_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:55 am 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17980
pizza_Place: 6 characters
FavreFan wrote:
His era is over. Its Rodgers world now, Brady's just living in it.


Did that just happen right now, today? Because from what I remember, Rodgers has some catching up to do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
His era is over. Its Rodgers world now, Brady's just living in it.


Did that just happen right now, today? Because from what I remember, Rodgers has some catching up to do.

It happened last Thursday.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 11:59 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
leashyourkids wrote:
denisdman wrote:
mrgoodkat wrote:
I wouldn't even try and quantify what the Bears are. It is pretty clear that under Lovie, that is pointless.


People continue to discount what Lovie and his staff do very well- defense (mainly turnovers), special teams, and having players working hard for him. That equates to a lot of wins. His staff has 4 guys who were once NFL head coaches, which is a big positive.

I know a lot of folks dislike Lovie because his public demeanor. The fact of the matter is that his teams are usually competitive over a course of a season. People count him out. I do not.


+1

One could argue that Lovie-coached teams are incapable of winning the big one, but Lovie's teams are always competitive and are generally right there at the end of games, even against much more talented teams. The one exception I can think of is the year the Bears were clobbered by the Cardinals and Bengals midseason, but there were so many injuries that they were down to Nick Roach playing MLB.

It is a simple but relatively successful formula Lovie uses: dominate with special teams, don't give up big plays on defense (generally top 10 defense), and hope for some scoring from the offense. In the NFL, this is generally enough to compete for a playoff spot every year. Once in, anything can happen. Having Urlacher and Briggs on defense certainly doesn't hurt, either.

Bears 10-6

Ditka.

Someday he'll win the big one and people will end their posts with

Bears 10-6

Smith


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
FavreFan wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
His era is over. Its Rodgers world now, Brady's just living in it.


Did that just happen right now, today? Because from what I remember, Rodgers has some catching up to do.

It happened last Thursday.


I hope you're right. I have Rodgers in a couple keeper leagues and I could really enjoy a good 5 year run with him leading the way.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:05 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17980
pizza_Place: 6 characters
FavreFan wrote:
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
His era is over. Its Rodgers world now, Brady's just living in it.


Did that just happen right now, today? Because from what I remember, Rodgers has some catching up to do.

It happened last Thursday.


For the sake of my Packers friends, here's hoping that is a fact. My guy Brady is certainly on the back end of his career, but I think he's got one more ring left.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Ugueth Will Shiv You wrote:
HOVA wrote:
They're going to be really good. Brady may put up video game numbers again this year. I think this is the season people rightfully give him his respect as the best QB of his era.


Careful, HOVA. If you aren't careful you might take over my board crush from the absent OKC if you keep talking like that.


Brady wants Moss back.

http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/i ... d-patriots

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 06, 2011 12:08 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:12 pm
Posts: 17980
pizza_Place: 6 characters
HOVA wrote:


DON'T JINX IT.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: a retard and 36 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group