Jump to content

LooseGoose

2014 Draft

Recommended Posts

The amount of Lions optimism and Mayhew love is strong with this post. What did you want Mayhew to come out and say...he DIDN'T like one of HIS draft picks? Come on. These type interviews and news articles around this year are much akin to Bonderman starting to throw a change-up articles.

I will never, ever, ever convince you that the Lions aren't the most talented, awesome team in the NFL and I will never convince you that Mayhew is a well below average general manager. So I won't try. You will be dedicated to Mayhew regardless of what he does, that is fine. I on the other hand value wins and production. Mayhew hasn't won.

and nobody will ever convince you that they aren't the shittiest. Shrug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What stats are we better than SF or Carolina so far you listed 3 down conversion and completion %, this all started because you said we have a better secondary than SF and Carolina had...I'm not seeing many stats where we are better. And I understand that pass rush is helpful, but I don't think that a better pass rush means that their secondary is less talented, I don't think the too correlate. For instance, the Rams had the best pass rush last season...their secondary didn't rank nearly as high as Carolina or SF (Rams ranked 19th in yards, 7th in TD, 20th in INT). So clearly pass rushing isn't a good indicator of overall success in the secondary. Quite a bit had to do with them having good secondaries.

And you list how Cook and Wright "were terrible" but they produced more than Slay/Bentley. Houston is an injury concern and may miss the entire year, Slay missed a quarter of the season due to injury, should I just not count of them because they have an injury history? You seem to be giving the Lions players all the benefit of the doubt and then only looking at the worst for the 49ers. Brock, if he played for the Lions would be our #1 CB, without question...his last 6 games were stellar, his game against Atlanta on MNF he practically won the 49ers the game. He broke up the pass that would directly lead to Navarro Bowman INT the ball and then INT the last hail mary in the end zone to win the game. I would take him over the 33 year old Mathis every day. Culliver, Cook, and Wright have some question marks (injury concerns) but they have a history of producing in the NFL, I take the history of production from players in their prime over guys who have no history of success. SF has their young rookie guys who may or may not produce and turn into good players (Morris, Johnson, Reaser, and Acker) but the difference is they aren't relying on those guys to produce like the Lions are. If Slay doesn't produce he will have to be replaced by whom...Vaughn who is beyond terrible or Greenwood who is just as uncertain as Slay. If Bentley doesn't produce (which he has never done so far) he will be replaced by Lawson who has no history of production. I'll take producers with the rookies as a fallback option over unproven rookies who COULD be good (but haven't yet) who would be replaced by other rookies who are unproven and have zero success thus far.

Lol, what did Cook and Wright produce? Fire while they were getting torched? Hospital bills? Criminal records?

I made a simple statement that I didn't think those team's secondaries were the reason for their pass d success and that those teams have sustained considerable losses in FA(you keep forgetting that I said have a better secondary and not had). You disagree. It is what it is. Its one thing to disagree, but another to act like this simple concept is so bizarre and foreign to you. Its very uncomplicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you disagree that the most common analysis of the Lions the last few years is "talented roster' date=' but undisciplined and underperformed"?[/quote']

Yes. They have a very small number of stars and a larger number of sub-average players. That is not a 'talented roster' - that is just a roster where media talking heads like to talk about the talent of the same few talented players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Always nice to defer all blame to a scapegoat. I just personally think the amount of evidence that suggests Mayhew is a sub-par GM is overwhelming.

It is overwhelming? How so?

Which of his FA acquisitions over the past few seasons do you consider poor? I honestly can't think of too many. I've been content with a bunch of his moves.

He has had hits and misses in the draft like most GMs have. More hits recently, more misses the previous few drafts.

I guess it all boils down to how highly you regard the talent of the roster and if the coaches have maximized the talent given to them and I would say that this is a roster that has underperformed considering the personnel. I see that as a coaching issue moreso than a GM issue but to each their own.

We'll certainly find out this upcoming season with a brand new coaching staff if the previous coaching regime was the biggest issue or if the talent of the roster is overrated.

Yes. They have a very small number of stars and a larger number of sub-average players. That is not a 'talented roster' - that is just a roster where media talking heads like to talk about the talent of the same few talented players.

Talentwise, Stafford, Mega, Suh, Bush and Fairley are as physically talented as any group in the NFL. That's 5 prominent talents at 4 very different positions. Levy is very talented, Tulloch is solid as is Quin at safety.

There is absolutely no reason why that roster shouldn't have finished at the very least 9-7 last season and probably better. I don't think there's any doubt that the roster underachieved and was poorly coached.

Edited by NYLion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The amount of Lions optimism and Mayhew love is strong with this post.

Not to be confused with the amount of Lions vitriol and Mayhew hate that comes from all your posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you disagree that the most common analysis of the Lions the last few years is "talented roster' date=' but undisciplined and underperformed"?[/quote']

Not entirely, I think that the team was undisciplined and underperformed, but I also don't think they are nearly as talented as you give them credit for. Also, I think it is largely Mayhew and companies fault for 1) Hiring Schwartz and 2) Extending Schwartz to such a contract after only very moderate success. If you are going to blame the coaching staff...should you hold the front office that hired and extended the coaching staff at fault also?

The front office is in charge of everything football related. They do all the hiring, they do all the drafting. Their fingerprint is on every single solitary aspect of their team. Successful teams have successful front offices, unsuccessful teams have unsuccessful front offices, it is that simple. Mayhew has had five years (not counting all the years he was Millen's right hand man) to do SOMETHING with this team, he hasn't. He hired Jim Schwartz, he then extended Jim Schwartz after a blowout loss in the wildcard game when Schwartz was being applauded for turning the team around, and now a year or two later Jim Schwartz went from being one of the saviors of the franchise to a scapegoat. Jim Schwartz, to the very best of my knowledge, has been volatile and aggressive his entire career, Mayhew should have taken that into consideration and either not hired him or taken character into consideration when drafting players in the 1st-4th rounds and found guys who could succeed in such a passionate environment and not get carried away by it. He was largely unsuccessful.

Mayhew knew what he was getting when he hired and extended Schwartz, he knew what he was getting when he drafted guys like Titus Young (off the field issues) and Jahvid Best (injury issues). There were no big surprises, these guys all did the exact same things they had done prior and somehow it is a surprise when it doesn't work out? They were all poor decisions, that is on Mayhew. If Mayhew wanted to try and be the smartest guy in the room and take the high risk/high reward guys (like Billichick does) he should have instilled a culture or winning and professionalism first and foremost. Instead, he hired and extended a volatile coach to mentor young, volatile players and people are shocked when it blew up in his face...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
..

Talentwise, Stafford, Mega, Suh, Bush and Fairley are as physically talented as any group in the NFL. That's 5 prominent talents at 4 very different positions. Levy is very talented, Tulloch is solid as is Quin at safety.

...

I'll give you 6 of those as above average but you have to play 24 guys minimum guys and more like 30 pretty regularly (without even counting special teams). I just don't see 25% of the guys on the field having talent as a recipe for a playoff football team, you are losing too many other battles all over the field. In FB I'll take breadth and depth over stars any Sunday and I just think that has been the Lions most continuous roster management problem for years at this point. Too much resource spent on too little of the roster, and with the Suh debacle and now the idee fixe at TE it is just more of the same. Drafting the occasional star/= building a winning team. We'll see how the new crew does but I was not that encouraged by the use of the top pick. It might have made more sense IF they had let Pettigrew walk, but not after the money they spent on him.

Edited by Gehringer_2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not entirely, I think that the team was undisciplined and underperformed, but I also don't think they are nearly as talented as you give them credit for. Also, I think it is largely Mayhew and companies fault for 1) Hiring Schwartz and 2) Extending Schwartz to such a contract after only very moderate success. If you are going to blame the coaching staff...should you hold the front office that hired and extended the coaching staff at fault also?

We have gone over this so many times. It was absolutely necessary and reasonable to extend Schwartz. That's the price of doing business. Getting an 0-16 to the playoffs in 2 years is a contract extension everyday of the week for every NFL team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll give you 6 of those as above average but you have to play 24 guys minimum guys and more like 30 pretty regularly (without even counting special teams). I just don't see 25% of the guys on the field having talent as a recipe for a playoff football team, you are losing too many other battles all over the field. In FB I'll take breadth and depth over stars any Sunday and I just think that has been the Lions most continuous roster management problem for years at this point. Too much resource spent on too little of the roster, and with the Suh debacle and now the idee fixe at TE it is just more of the same. Drafting the occasional star/= building a winning team.

I disagree with your assessment pretty much point by point. I feel you very much undervalue the talent that exists on the roster. The Lions got beat by schemes all over the field, rarely was the physical matchup completely one-sided. I also don't think there is a Suh debacle. So he doesn't show up for voluntary work outs he maybe he is a jerk? Why does that have anything to do with him being a top 3 player at his position in the league?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree with your assessment pretty much point by point. I feel you very much undervalue the talent that exists on the roster. The Lions got beat by schemes all over the field, rarely was the physical matchup completely one-sided. I also don't think there is a Suh debacle. So he doesn't show up for voluntary work outs he maybe he is a jerk? Why does that have anything to do with him being a top 3 player at his position in the league?

I don't care if he shows up for mini-camp either. The debacle is the resource they are committing to one position on the field that doesn't merit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is overwhelming? How so?

Which of his FA acquisitions over the past few seasons do you consider poor? I honestly can't think of too many. I've been content with a bunch of his moves.

He has had hits and misses in the draft like most GMs have. More hits recently, more misses the previous few drafts.

I guess it all boils down to how highly you regard the talent of the roster and if the coaches have maximized the talent given to them and I would say that this is a roster that has underperformed considering the personnel. I see that as a coaching issue moreso than a GM issue but to each their own.

We'll certainly find out this upcoming season with a brand new coaching staff if the previous coaching regime was the biggest issue or if the talent of the roster is overrated.

Talentwise, Stafford, Mega, Suh, Bush and Fairley are as physically talented as any group in the NFL. That's 5 prominent talents at 4 very different positions. Levy is very talented, Tulloch is solid as is Quin at safety.

There is absolutely no reason why that roster shouldn't have finished at the very least 9-7 last season and probably better. I don't think there's any doubt that the roster underachieved and was poorly coached.

I don't think Championships are won through free agency. They are won through the draft, when comparing Mayhew's drafts to those franchises that are Super Bowl contenders year-in-and-year-out, Mayhew drafts largely pale in comparison. Yes, we have some decent front end talent (which we dedicate more of our salary cap to than any other franchise) but what about 6-53? This isn't the NBA where a few superstars can shoulder the burden and lead a team to the championship. Look at the last few Super Bowl winners, look at their roster and statistics, did they rely on 1-5 superstars or were they simply solid teams top to bottom getting contributions from everywhere? I imagine you will find the latter to be true.

I also think it is a misnomer to isolate "General Manager" and "Coach." The general manager hires the coach, it is one of his primary and most important decisions. If a general manager can't find the right coaching staff to mentor and develop the players that he drafts...how is that useful? The best general managers are able to find great coaches, work with them in building a system and culture, and then working with the coaches to find the best players to fit that system.

I don't think the Lions have a system, I don't think they have a positive "winning" culture, I don't think they have a great coaching staff...to be honest. Prior to the actual hiring, I don't think anyone had Caldwell high on their list of coaches. Even the other front offices looking for a new coach didn't consider Caldwell as a legitimate option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We have gone over this so many times. It was absolutely necessary and reasonable to extend Schwartz. That's the price of doing business. Getting an 0-16 to the playoffs in 2 years is a contract extension everyday of the week for every NFL team.

It was not absolutely necessary, it was the general managers decision. The problem here is there has only been one 0-16 team, there is no other baseline to go off of. Most franchises don't celebrate blow-out loses in a wildcards game, to be honest...for some franchises getting blow out in the wildcard game and not making deep playoff runs is a fire-able offense. So no, extending him was NOT a neccessity, and even if we did have to extend him, did it have to be for 3 years/18M? Why not for one additional year. Maybe a better question, did we have to hire Schwartz in the first place? Or better yet, if your plan is to hire an aggressive, passionate, volatile coach...shouldn't you consider character when drafting players so as to not overload the locker room with aggressiveness and volatility knowing that your coach that you hired (and extended) is not a disciplinarian type?

Edited by EchO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think Championships are won through free agency. They are won through the draft, when comparing Mayhew's drafts to those franchises that are Super Bowl contenders year-in-and-year-out, Mayhew drafts largely pale in comparison. Yes, we have some decent front end talent (which we dedicate more of our salary cap to than any other franchise) but what about 6-53? This isn't the NBA where a few superstars can shoulder the burden and lead a team to the championship. Look at the last few Super Bowl winners, look at their roster and statistics, did they rely on 1-5 superstars or were they simply solid teams top to bottom getting contributions from everywhere? I imagine you will find the latter to be true.

I also think it is a misnomer to isolate "General Manager" and "Coach." The general manager hires the coach, it is one of his primary and most important decisions. If a general manager can't find the right coaching staff to mentor and develop the players that he drafts...how is that useful? The best general managers are able to find great coaches, work with them in building a system and culture, and then working with the coaches to find the best players to fit that system.

I don't think the Lions have a system, I don't think they have a positive "winning" culture, I don't think they have a great coaching staff...to be honest. Prior to the actual hiring, I don't think anyone had Caldwell high on their list of coaches. Even the other front offices looking for a new coach didn't consider Caldwell as a legitimate option.

Free agency is important for a team like the Lions that is already top heavy.

Free agency is where you fill out the rest of the roster to compliment the elite talent already in place and I personally think that Mayhew has done well in this regard. KVB, Burleson were the early additions which helped change the culture and more recently, he has filled positions of need with Tulloch, Houston, Quin, Bush, Bell and now Tate and built up the offensive line with smart drafting and cutting deadweight like Peterson and Cherilus.

There were some definite drafting foul ups like in particular, his trading up for running backs with big question marks, drafting players with questionable character and trying to go for raw, high upside players but he seems to have turned that around recently.

His biggest downfall was sticking with the coaching staff too long. I think the Schwartz hiring was good for a team that needed to be brought out of the gutter because he's a highly emotional coach who coaches with an edge and his players follow suit but that sort of coaching has a shelf life and when it comes to taking the next step to contender status, you need a smart coach who will install a smart gameplan that caters to the strength of the personnel. I think it was obvious after the 4-12 season that Schwartz maxxed out here and Mayhew waited one year too long to make the change.

I have liked most of his player personnel moves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was not absolutely necessary, it was the general managers decision. The problem here is there has only been one 0-16 team, there is no other baseline to go off of. Most franchises don't celebrate blow-out loses in a wildcards game, to be honest...for some franchises getting blow out in the wildcard game and not making deep playoff runs is a fire-able offense. So no, extending him was NOT a neccessity, and even if we did have to extend him, did it have to be for 3 years/18M? Why not for one additional year. Maybe a better question, did we have to hire Schwartz in the first place? Or better yet, if your plan is to hire an aggressive, passionate, volatile coach...shouldn't you consider character when drafting players so as to not overload the locker room with aggressiveness and volatility knowing that your coach that you hired (and extended) is not a disciplinarian type?

Why do you get so hung up on the amount of time a coach is extended and for how much? He got fired and the Lions have to pay him, so what? It has nothing to do with anything, doesn't effect the team one iota.

Find me a team that hadn't made the playoffs in 5 years, then they make the playoffs, lose a wild card game and then fire their coach. Marvin lewis has been losing first round games like it is his job, still coaching the bengals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Free agency is important for a team like the Lions that is already top heavy.

Free agency is where you fill out the rest of the roster to compliment the elite talent already in place and I personally think that Mayhew has done well in this regard. KVB, Burleson were the early additions which helped change the culture and more recently, he has filled positions of need with Tulloch, Houston, Quin, Bush, Bell and now Tate and built up the offensive line with smart drafting and cutting deadweight like Peterson and Cherilus.

There were some definite drafting foul ups like in particular, his trading up for running backs with big question marks, drafting players with questionable character and trying to go for raw, high upside players but he seems to have turned that around recently.

His biggest downfall was sticking with the coaching staff too long. I think the Schwartz hiring was good for a team that needed to be brought out of the gutter because he's a highly emotional coach who coaches with an edge and his players follow suit but that sort of coaching has a shelf life and when it comes to taking the next step to contender status, you need a smart coach who will install a smart gameplan that caters to the strength of the personnel. I think it was obvious after the 4-12 season that Schwartz maxxed out here and Mayhew waited one year too long to make the change.

I have liked most of his player personnel moves.

Cherilus actually turned into, and is continuing to be a good player...we simply couldn't afford him. But I understand your point and agree. For the most part Mayhew has found quite a few additions via free agency. My point is that I wish he drafted better so we didn't have to fill so many starting spots with free agents. I would much rather build like GB than Oakland who, IMO, are the extremes of how a franchise is built (GB with draft picks and Oakland with FA).

I don't think Schwartz was a good head coach, but like I said I think that his role in the Lions ineptitude was far less than some make out. However, that is a very difficult thing to prove until they go out and play a few games under a new head coach. So as you said earlier, we will see and this season should definitely be interesting. I just want to see results, if the Lions under Caldwell don't perform well next season, I hope there is a very short leash and Bill Ford Jr. cleans house...I don't want to waste 2-5 more years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why do you get so hung up on the amount of time a coach is extended and for how much? He got fired and the Lions have to pay him, so what? It has nothing to do with anything, doesn't effect the team one iota.

Find me a team that hadn't made the playoffs in 5 years, then they make the playoffs, lose a wild card game and then fire their coach. Marvin lewis has been losing first round games like it is his job, still coaching the bengals.

All of this is 100% correct.

Schwartz's contract doesn't effect the team one iota...but IMO it implies poor judgment. The poor judgment does effect the team, unfortunately.

I probably can't find you a team based on that criteria you listed that fired their coach. But I don't judge the team on that criteria either. I don't compare the current Lions team to past teams, I don't give Mayhew a pass because he inherited/helped in the making of an 0-16 team. I look at the situation in a vacuum. I ask myself, what do I expect out of a general manager who is hired in with a #1 draft pick (nice asset to have when building a team) and is given 5 years to transform a franchise or even build one from scratch (expansion team style). Mayhew doesn't meet those expectations. Five years is more than enough time to build a team, even from scratch...the fact that only what 1-3 players even remain from the 0-16 team should prove that this is Mayhew's team, he built this...he interviewed, hired, and consulted the coach, he drafted the players, this is his team. The team he built went 7-9 this season to cap off a 29-67 run as Mayhew as GM, simply not good enough. If Schwartz was this bad of a coach, a coach so bad that he was able to single-handedly take a "talented" team and turn them into an undisciplined below average team...Mayhew should have been the first to recognize that years ago, that is on Mayhew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cherilus actually turned into, and is continuing to be a good player...we simply couldn't afford him. But I understand your point and agree. For the most part Mayhew has found quite a few additions via free agency. My point is that I wish he drafted better so we didn't have to fill so many starting spots with free agents. I would much rather build like GB than Oakland who, IMO, are the extremes of how a franchise is built (GB with draft picks and Oakland with FA).

I don't think Schwartz was a good head coach, but like I said I think that his role in the Lions ineptitude was far less than some make out. However, that is a very difficult thing to prove until they go out and play a few games under a new head coach. So as you said earlier, we will see and this season should definitely be interesting. I just want to see results, if the Lions under Caldwell don't perform well next season, I hope there is a very short leash and Bill Ford Jr. cleans house...I don't want to waste 2-5 more years.

Deadweight was probably too strong a word for Gosder. I think his temper tantrums and overall undisciplined play wasn't a good fit here anymore, he needed a coach who could preach structure to him and it seems that it's working out for him in Indy.

Next season is "show me" time for sure. I think a lot of pundits will predict the Lions to be between 7-9 and 9-7 based on last years' results but i think the roster is capable of much more than that so if the new coaching staff can't coax the positive results out of this roster, then it might be time to re-evaluate the talent of the roster.

It all boils down to Stafford anyway. You can add to the roster all you want, but if the QB is underperforming, the team won't fare well. It's as simple as that.

I think that Lombardi might wind up being the best acquisition of the offseason. Listening to him, he seems like a guy who just "gets it". Very smart, articulate, detail oriented and appears to have a creative mind. I think he could be a god send for Stafford's career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Deadweight was probably too strong a word for Gosder. I think his temper tantrums and overall undisciplined play wasn't a good fit here anymore, he needed a coach who could preach structure to him and it seems that it's working out for him in Indy.

Next season is "show me" time for sure. I think a lot of pundits will predict the Lions to be between 7-9 and 9-7 based on last years' results but i think the roster is capable of much more than that so if the new coaching staff can't coax the positive results out of this roster, then it might be time to re-evaluate the talent of the roster.

It all boils down to Stafford anyway. You can add to the roster all you want, but if the QB is underperforming, the team won't fare well. It's as simple as that.

I think that Lombardi might wind up being the best acquisition of the offseason. Listening to him, he seems like a guy who just "gets it". Very smart, articulate, detail oriented and appears to have a creative mind. I think he could be a god send for Stafford's career.

He was very good his last year here too, to be fair. I wish we could have kept Cherilus even though our OL was a surprise strength last season.

Agree on everything else. Stafford needs to want to change too, which may be his biggest hurdle. I never doubted that Stafford has the physical tools, those are obvious...it has always been his attitude, decision making, and the overall mental side of the game that has held him back. Hopefully Lombardi can get through to him. I know this may shock people...but I honestly do want the Lions to do well, it's just that I don't trust this front office to get us where I want to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes. They have a very small number of stars and a larger number of sub-average players. That is not a 'talented roster' - that is just a roster where media talking heads like to talk about the talent of the same few talented players.

Elite talents:

Suh

Stafford

Fairley (inconsistent)

Warford (young)

Megatron

Ansah (young)

Great players:

Tulloch

Tate

Bush

Bell

Good players:

Quin

Waddle (young)

Raola

Levy

Mathis

Developmental talent:

Slay

Taylor

Greenwood

Green

Bentley

Fauria

2013 injuries:

Houston - strong performance in 2012

Jones

Consistent players:

Sims

Ihedigbo

Hillard (as backup)

Carey (as backup)

Palmer (as backup)

CJ Mosley (as backup)

Rookies:

Ebron

Van Noy

Swanson (as backup)

Lawson (as backup)

Reid (as backup)

Webster (developmental)

That's 45 players (on a 53 man roster) that I would consider above "sub average" or "developmental".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2014/02/13/projected-lineups-detroit-lions/

They are doing any updated ranking for every team post draft, Lions should be up in a few days. PFF definitely didn't have a negative view of the Lions, but then you look at the line-up for the 49ers or Seahawks, wowza. Your rankings were understandably slightly more generous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Notice 2 of the top 3 needs

To be fair, that was pre Golden Tate and Pettigrew signing. And...notice all those nasty orange ones where we should have cornerbacks. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To be fair, that was pre Golden Tate and Pettigrew signing. And...notice all those nasty orange ones where we should have cornerbacks. ;)

Tate took care of the WR need, but they rated Fauria yellow and they had Pettigrew ranked as around the 50th best TE in football 3 years running and lower than Fauria last year. It wouldn't have changed much. You still have terrible 3rd WRs and average at best TEs. Great starting WR duo though.

I've never argued their CBs had no issues though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tate took care of the WR need, but they rated Fauria yellow and they had Pettigrew ranked as around the 50th best TE in football 3 years running and lower than Fauria last year. It wouldn't have changed much. You still have terrible 3rd WRs and average at best TEs. Great starting WR duo though.

I've never argued their CBs had no issues though.

I'll be curious to see what PFF "labels" Ebrons in their upcoming depth chart...if I were doing it I would label the depth chart as such...

WR1: Johnson (Blue)

WR2: Tate (Light Green)

WR3: Ebron (Rookie)

WR4: Broyles/Jones (Rookie)

TE1: Pettigrew (Yellow)

TE2: Ebron (Rookie)

TE3: Fauria (Yellow)

I think labeling as simply a TE or simply a WR is erroneous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...