Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Football
Topic:  Playoff system reform

Topic:  Playoff system reform
Author
Message
bobcat2nc
General User

Member Since: 12/28/2004
Post Count: 584

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 6:53:12 AM 
Because I had nothing else to do and my mind was reeling from the incessant TV chatter about who is in and who is out I tried to come up with something that made more sense to me.

This is based on these assumptions:
1. traditional" values and once sacred stances have been abandoned for the sake of operetta and money for the power schools and the other entities that will profit from a football playoff.
2. Because of 1 the next level of schools (MAC-like) will be forced to create their own system of playoffs and alliances to maintain its fan base and create relevance. ( I do not like this assumption but I believe this is going to happen)

It is only because of these assumptions that this plan makes sense to me.

Playoff scheme.
1. Create 6 leagues of 11 teams. Leagues subject to periodic review for modification such as team transfers between leagues or for teams being dropped completely and replaced by teams from lower level. (Underperformance penalized and quality performance rewarded)
2. Each year teams in league play everyone in league 1X.--10 games
3. Each year there are 2 games with crossover leagues. The opponent is based on where each team finished in their own league in a previous year(2 years prior for instance). First place vs first place, 10nth vs 10nth. This creates a rotating league challenge to create some more common opponents to better select those in the playoff. This adds 2 more games for total of 12 now.
3. All six league champs are in playoff plus 6 more teams as selected by the "committee". The committee ranks them 1-12. No league playoffs.
4. Teams 5-12 begin playoff in seeded bracket: 5/12, 6/11 etc. with teams 1-4 getting bye week. 13 games for these teams now. (Same as league championships)
5. Like the old MAC bb tourney the next step is the remaining 8 teams in seeded bracket. 14 games for winners of first round and 13 for 1-4 teams
6. Winners play- 14 games for 1-4 and 15 for those that had to play in first round. (15 games is the number of games the current system will mean for the 2 finalists teams)
7. Championship game. If teams ranked 1-4 in finals it will be 15 games. If teams that had to play in first round are in it will be 16 games.--since my assumptions are that it is about power and money anyhow then this doesn't seem like too much of a stretch.

Just a crazy plan by someone with too little things of importance to think about.
Back to Top
  
Y-CityCatFan
General User

Member Since: 7/28/2005
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 136

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 9:07:07 AM 
I still want to hold out hope that we still have a shot. How about this...
A 12 team playoff, each FBS conference champ gets in. In order for a G5 champ to get in though, they can't have lost more than 2 games (or even 1). If a G5 champ can't meet this requirement, a committee can choose an additional at large. I would be fine with something like this. It would still acknowledge that the G5 is "lesser", which the P5 would want.
Back to Top
  
Mike Johnson
General User



Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,707

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 9:10:53 AM 
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

http://www.facebook.com/mikejohnson.author

Back to Top
  
Pataskala
General User

Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,152

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 11:31:08 AM 
Numerous coaches and ADs from "P"5 schools are already clamoring for an 8-team playoff. I think in the next ten years they'll either bump it to 16 and include a token G5 school or ditch the playoff system for something else (maybe a modified BCS). They have to draw the line somewhere, so unless they include all the "P"5 schools, somebody's going to bitch about being excluded (just like with the b-ball tourney).

We will get by.
We will get by.
We will get by.
We will survive.
Back to Top
  
D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 11:50:54 AM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)

Last Edited: 12/7/2014 11:51:15 AM by D.A.

The Few, The Proud, The Bobcats!

And for the record, I hate tOSU, and Ricordati and Torgerson are DB's.

"This isn't just another walkover from the MAC." Kirk Herbstreit, another DB, on College Football Gameday
Back to Top
  
Mike Johnson
General User



Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,707

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 12:04:40 PM 
D.A. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)


Same here - which is what I've told Rod McDavis.

http://www.facebook.com/mikejohnson.author

Back to Top
  
Campus Flow
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 4,952

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 12:26:56 PM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
D.A. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)


Same here - which is what I've told Rod McDavis.


I'm sure that is exactly what Rod wanted to hear.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,023

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 1:02:11 PM 
Uncle Wes wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
D.A. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)


Same here - which is what I've told Rod McDavis.


I'm sure that is exactly what Rod wanted to hear.


He may not have wanted to hear it but the closer the big schools get to being pros, the closer we get to becoming an Ivy.
Back to Top
  
Mike Johnson
General User



Member Since: 11/11/2004
Location: North Canton, OH
Post Count: 1,707

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 1:50:52 PM 
Alan Swank wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
D.A. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)


Same here - which is what I've told Rod McDavis.


I'm sure that is exactly what Rod wanted to hear.


He may not have wanted to hear it but the closer the big schools get to being pros, the closer we get to becoming an Ivy.


His membership on the NCAA board notwithstanding, he acknowledges the inevitability of the P5 continuing to push for more of - everything.

http://www.facebook.com/mikejohnson.author

Back to Top
  
bobcat2nc
General User

Member Since: 12/28/2004
Post Count: 584

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 1:55:03 PM 
I agree with the sentiment that this P5 thing will relegate the rest of football to something totally different than we know now. Also think that BB not far behind.

After further review I do not care what really happens because the decision to leapfrog tOSU over TCU cannot be motivated by anything other than self promotion of the system and money. Two impressive wins by the 3 and 5 rated teams and one team moves up while the other moves down. The body of work through the season is hard to compare but why change that comparison at this juncture?

My bias shows through so now I have to take a chill pill and just move on. Already cancelled Dispatch for weekdays and Saturdays. May need to X out Sunday paper as well and put a block on Columbus tv stations.



Last Edited: 12/7/2014 2:26:52 PM by bobcat2nc
Back to Top
  
Alan Swank
General User

Member Since: 12/11/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,023

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 2:38:41 PM 
bobcat2nc wrote:
I agree with the sentiment that this P5 thing will relegate the rest of football to something totally different than we know now. Also think that BB not far behind.

After further review I do not care what really happens because the decision to leapfrog tOSU over TCU cannot be motivated by anything other than self promotion of the system and money. Two impressive wins by the 3 and 5 rated teams and one team moves up while the other moves down. The body of work through the season is hard to compare but why change that comparison at this juncture?

My bias shows through so now I have to take a chill pill and just move on. Already cancelled Dispatch for weekdays and Saturdays. May need to X out Sunday paper as well and put a block on Columbus tv stations.





Columbus tv stations - who gets those with cable in Athens? Anyone else tired of bad WV commercials?
Back to Top
  
Mark Lembright '85
General User

Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Highland Heights, OH
Post Count: 2,447

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 2:46:06 PM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
D.A. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)


Same here - which is what I've told Rod McDavis.


Were it me, as soon as the P5 announces they are increasing scholarships and doling out stipends to the players, I would immediately begin disbanding the football program and transferring those resources to the basketball program, or as much as possible given Title IX ramifications of disbanding a men's sports team.

Ohio can compete in hoops no matter what the major conferences do, I'm convinced of that. Football's not even worth trying.
Back to Top
  
D.A.
General User

Member Since: 8/6/2010
Location: Georgetown, ME
Post Count: 1,174

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 4:16:15 PM 
Uncle Wes wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
D.A. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)


Same here - which is what I've told Rod McDavis.


I'm sure that is exactly what Rod wanted to hear.


I can state with 99.44/100's% confidence that President McDavis would not share my view, and that his view is likely the more level headed response. I just simply have zero percent interest in donating any money to ICA if we do not have football at all, or if we are playing in a lower class (either literal or figurative) in both sports.

And please save me the opinions of us already being in a second class, as I am referring to different rules packages as stated above, such as increasing scholarship levels, or stipends at the P5 level that would far exceed the G5 capabilities.

I won't take my OHIO ICA donations elsewhere, I'll simply divert my ICA funds to the academic pursuits at OHIO that I already have designated in planned gifts.

The Few, The Proud, The Bobcats!

And for the record, I hate tOSU, and Ricordati and Torgerson are DB's.

"This isn't just another walkover from the MAC." Kirk Herbstreit, another DB, on College Football Gameday
Back to Top
  
Campus Flow
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 4,952

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 4:49:57 PM 
Mike Johnson wrote:
Alan Swank wrote:
Uncle Wes wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
D.A. wrote:
Mike Johnson wrote:
Discussion of G5s will become academic when - not if - the P5, now enabled to set their own rules, decide to increase scholarships. At that juncture, say farewell to the increased competitiveness that followed the reduction of scholarships from 105 to 85.

And which will also certainly lead to an expansion of basketball scholarships, leading to a watering down of that product as well. If both of these scenarios play out, then I'm out. That would be my personal tipping point of wanting to see OHIO transitioning the institution to a singular focus of academic pursuits. (ducks)


Same here - which is what I've told Rod McDavis.


I'm sure that is exactly what Rod wanted to hear.


He may not have wanted to hear it but the closer the big schools get to being pros, the closer we get to becoming an Ivy.


His membership on the NCAA board notwithstanding, he acknowledges the inevitability of the P5 continuing to push for more of - everything.


The question is how should Ohio respond? Should Ohio respond with 2 money games against the SEC every year to give this program a chance at the playoff? Or should Ohio keep scheduling easy and acknowledge this program just plays for MAC championships? After 20 years of Ohio slowly inching up the football ladder its now at a plateau.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Jeff McKinney
Moderator

Member Since: 11/12/2004
Post Count: 6,045

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 5:01:46 PM 
bobcat2nc wrote:


After further review I do not care what really happens because the decision to leapfrog tOSU over TCU cannot be motivated by anything other than self promotion of the system and money. Two impressive wins by the 3 and 5 rated teams and one team moves up while the other moves down. The body of work through the season is hard to compare but why change that comparison at this juncture?



Agree.



Last Edited: 12/7/2014 5:04:07 PM by Jeff McKinney
Back to Top
  
C Money
General User



Member Since: 8/28/2010
Post Count: 3,420

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 5:35:59 PM 
No amount of reform is going to affect us. We'll keep getting the token handouts of money games and a "guaranteed" spot in an access bowl, but that's it. G5 ADs don't aspire to be G5 ADs--why would they ever reform a system to the detriment of those for whom they want to work?

Now there is something from this whole thing that could affect us, and that's the next round of conference realignment dominoes to fall. The Big 12 is going to have to add 2 teams to get to 12 to have a conference title game. Cincy has been begging for a spot, and several other AAC teams in good-sized markets would be in the conversation as well (Houston, UConn, Memphis).

The AAC also needs to add one more to get to 12 for a conference title game, and that's without any Big 12 raids. So, somewhere between 3 and 5 mid-major teams will be changing conferences within the next several years.

I don't know that I'm in favor of moving conferences, but for those of you who are, now's the time to start lobbying for it.
Back to Top
  
RSBobcat
General User



Member Since: 8/22/2010
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 4,401

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 5:40:04 PM 
Jeff McKinney wrote:
bobcat2nc wrote:


After further review I do not care what really happens because the decision to leapfrog tOSU over TCU cannot be motivated by anything other than self promotion of the system and money. Two impressive wins by the 3 and 5 rated teams and one team moves up while the other moves down. The body of work through the season is hard to compare but why change that comparison at this juncture?



Agree.





"The body of work through the season is hard to compare". I hate the thought that I am about to give some cred to to$u on here - but the body of work INCLUDED yesterdays games. to$u's performance vs Wisconsin was the most dominating performance of a top 20 team over another another top 20 team this year. TCU dominated 2-10 Iowa State (yawn)

RS Bobcat

Back to Top
  
Campus Flow
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 4,952

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 5:47:08 PM 
C Money wrote:
No amount of reform is going to affect us. We'll keep getting the token handouts of money games and a "guaranteed" spot in an access bowl, but that's it. G5 ADs don't aspire to be G5 ADs--why would they ever reform a system to the detriment of those for whom they want to work?

Now there is something from this whole thing that could affect us, and that's the next round of conference realignment dominoes to fall. The Big 12 is going to have to add 2 teams to get to 12 to have a conference title game. Cincy has been begging for a spot, and several other AAC teams in good-sized markets would be in the conversation as well (Houston, UConn, Memphis).

The AAC also needs to add one more to get to 12 for a conference title game, and that's without any Big 12 raids. So, somewhere between 3 and 5 mid-major teams will be changing conferences within the next several years.

I don't know that I'm in favor of moving conferences, but for those of you who are, now's the time to start lobbying for it.


The system is getting locked in and for the MAC this is as good as it is going to get. Five bowl games against MWC, CUSA and SBC schools. The AAC has some bowls against power conferences. Its a more exclusive group that are fans would have more pride to be a part of.

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
Campus Flow
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 4,952

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 5:58:13 PM 
Take a look at the bowl opponents the AAC is getting this year and compare to the MAC.

East Carolina vs. Florida
Houston vs. Pittsburgh
Virginia Tech vs. Cincinnati
North Carolina St. vs. UCF
Memphis vs. BYU

Toledo vs. Arkansas State
Western Kentucky vs. Central Michigan
Marshall vs. Northern Illinois
Bowling Green vs. South Alabama
Western Michigan vs. Air Force

Most Memorable Bobcat Events Attended
2010 97-83 win over Georgetown in NCAA 1st round
2012 45-13 victory over ULM in the Independence Bowl
2015 34-3 drubbing of Miami @ Peden front of 25,086

Back to Top
  
bobcat2nc
General User

Member Since: 12/28/2004
Post Count: 584

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 7:55:22 PM 
RSBobcat wrote:
Jeff McKinney wrote:
bobcat2nc wrote:


After further review I do not care what really happens because the decision to leapfrog tOSU over TCU cannot be motivated by anything other than self promotion of the system and money. Two impressive wins by the 3 and 5 rated teams and one team moves up while the other moves down. The body of work through the season is hard to compare but why change that comparison at this juncture?



Agree.





"The body of work through the season is hard to compare". I hate the thought that I am about to give some cred to to$u on here - but the body of work INCLUDED yesterdays games. to$u's performance vs Wisconsin was the most dominating performance of a top 20 team over another another top 20 team this year. TCU dominated 2-10 Iowa State (yawn)


I actually grudgingly see that point.
Back to Top
  
perimeterpost
General User



Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 3,165

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 8:07:35 PM 
there are 351 teams in Div1 men's bball and EVERY SINGLE TEAM has a direct path to a national championship.

there are 124 teams in Div1 FCS football and EVERY SINGLE TEAM has a direct path to a national championship.

there are 128 teams in Div1 FBS football and NOT ONE SINGLE TEAM has a direct path to a national championship.


This is the "what" that needs to be fixed, until it is the "how" doesn't matter.

MY STATE. MY TEAM.
Back to Top
  
OrlandoCat
General User

Member Since: 3/15/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 355

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 11:25:29 PM 
perimeterpost wrote:


there are 128 teams in Div1 FBS football and NOT ONE SINGLE TEAM has a direct path to a national championship.


I'd argue there are about 25 teams or so with a direct path to a national championship...and within that is where the problem lies.
Back to Top
  
OrlandoCat
General User

Member Since: 3/15/2005
Location: United States
Post Count: 355

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 11:28:58 PM 
RSBobcat wrote:
Jeff McKinney wrote:
bobcat2nc wrote:


After further review I do not care what really happens because the decision to leapfrog tOSU over TCU cannot be motivated by anything other than self promotion of the system and money. Two impressive wins by the 3 and 5 rated teams and one team moves up while the other moves down. The body of work through the season is hard to compare but why change that comparison at this juncture?



Agree.





"The body of work through the season is hard to compare". I hate the thought that I am about to give some cred to to$u on here - but the body of work INCLUDED yesterdays games. to$u's performance vs Wisconsin was the most dominating performance of a top 20 team over another another top 20 team this year. TCU dominated 2-10 Iowa State (yawn)


Coming from somebody who doesn't love nor hate OSU, it's a joke that they jumped TCU. If who TCU beat was a problem then they should never have been ranked 3rd in the first place, it's not like the committee didn't know who TCU was playing the following week when they ranked them.
Back to Top
  
Casper71
General User

Member Since: 12/1/2006
Post Count: 2,895

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/7/2014 11:38:38 PM 
I think the big 5 will go to a 5+3 at some point. The Champs of each BIG conference plus the next best 3. That's only one more weekend and it solves the problem they had this year...at least temporarily. Then numbers 9-10 will bitch and moan.

Personally, I think the little 5 might as well get together and have their own 60 (or so) team division.
Back to Top
  
Bcat2
General User

Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 4,295

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: Playoff system reform
   Posted: 12/8/2014 7:27:06 AM 
Casper71 wrote:
I think the big 5 will go to a 5+3 at some point. The Champs of each BIG conference plus the next best 3. That's only one more weekend and it solves the problem they had this year...at least temporarily. Then numbers 9-10 will bitch and moan.

Personally, I think the little 5 might as well get together and have their own 60 (or so) team division.


+1

"Do not pray for easy lives. Pray to be stronger men." JFK

Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  1 - 25  of 96 Posts
Jump to Page:  1 | 2 | 3 | 4    Next >
View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 327 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
324 Guests
3 Registered Users:
 Ted Thompson, OUs LONG Driver, Turney13
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties