ADVERTISEMENT

The Badass Big 12

Buckaineer said:
Internally the fanbase of OU now hates the BIG 12 .....
Click to expand...

You're really going to have to elaborate on that comment and demonstrate that it is factual versus a fiction that exists in your mind. And if you do that you'll have to do more than reference a few discontented posters on a chat board.

Are there any articles by legitimate writers conveying the idea that OU fans en masse now hate the Big 12? If so, then link us up.

Are there OU community leaders voicing this opinion .... that the OU community is sick of the Big 12?
 
Buckaineer said:
Everything you've posted is either an outright lie, total misrepresentation of what has been going on or idiocy at its finest.

You seem to be detached from reality.

In reality the president of OKLAHOMA, seeing a need for the BIG 12 to address its disadvantages competitively ( less able to make playoff than others) and financially ( falling behind the Big Ten and SEC in per member revenues by an ever increasing amount) and from a psychological standpoint with not much positive exposure or influence compared to others- proposed that rather than doing things piece by piece - the league ( not buckaineer) should address all of these issues at the same time. Expansion which makes it possible to have a network and made a CCG make sense to add. These things would greatly increase revenues for everyone, give everyone more exposure, and eliminate any competitive disadvantages.

Some could only look at the issue emotionally ( should ring a bell with you) so the conference hired consultants to study the issue, report back to everyone in the spring and summer meeting and then decisions could be made.

In the meantime, not wanting the Big 12 to do anything proactive, many launched a groundswell campaign on social media to paint a very negative picture of everything the conference was trying to do. Actual fans of the conference were quickly duped into the full buy in of " no one available", "no money", " can't do this or that in only the BIg 12", "just wait" etc.

With UT and OU social media targeted along with other schools in the conference, the fans as expected raised hell and soon that went up the food chain. Some misguided and mislead fans joined in to harm their own programs down the road --all the while claiming social media has no influence, but viciously attacking anyone that agreed with positive improvements for the conference and trying to silence any such voices. Ask yourself why it's so important to you to silence anyone with a positive view of comprehensive improvements on a message board if social media has no impact?

With all the noise coming from the fanbases, getting anything done became extremely difficult at the leadership level.

When the meetings came about UT went into action with board members communicating with OU board members to stop any expansion and UTs social media outlets declaring everything dead before the meetings even began. Then prior to the full distribution and examination of the data at the meetings, UT virtually declared they liked things as they are, thought expansion should just be an ongoing conversation, and didn't intend to do anything with the LHN. They informed everyone that having a 10 team CCG would be "intriguing" but nothing else should happen to keep them happy.

Thus, the very next day, suddenly no network, more "study" on expansion indefinitely, and magically a ten team CCG happened. OUs president smiled, did the politically correct thing of declaring the conference strong, adding a CCG good, and expansion an ongoing study.

Internally the fanbase of OU now hates the BIG 12 and you can be sure their wishes have made it up the foodchain. UT obviously only has the intention of keeping their options open, which is bad for everyone else. They have duped others into taking no action for themselves until UT walks away, knowing they won't have to worry about the sheepish fanbases of the other schools pushing their schools to do anything but bow to UT.

Seeing your reactions- you are already trying to deflect any blame -while you did everything you could do to wreck WVUs conference future. It may not have been much, a negative post here, a bash of that school there on social media, but it was enough. Every bit adds up.

So stop attacking me, I have no influence according to you, I'm just talking about all this on a message board.
Click to expand...

[roll]

Jesus man, you need to relax. There is more to life than conference realignment. WVU will just fine even if the Big 12 blows up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BobbyBoucheer
WV football will survive................no matter what the Big 12(?) does. I would be OK with WV going back to the Southern Conference. WV could dominate there and I would be at every game!
 
Buckaineer said:
Boren's position was that not only was it a good idea, consultants had told him that a conference network would add $4 to $6 million per school.
Click to expand...

The problem is, we need to know if that $4-6 million number was consistent under ALL circumstances. Is that with 14 schools, or 12 (or 10)? Is that with adding any schools, or just certain ones? Is that from partnering with Fox or ESPN (or neither)?

You said many times that there was going to be a "data dump" at the Spring meetings. Boren made the "$4-6 million" comment back in January. If they already knew the numbers back then, why would there even be a data dump in the first place?
 
topdecktiger said:
The problem is, we need to know if that $4-6 million number was consistent under ALL circumstances. Is that with 14 schools, or 12 (or 10)? Is that with adding any schools, or just certain ones? Is that from partnering with Fox or ESPN (or neither)?

You said many times that there was going to be a "data dump" at the Spring meetings. Boren made the "$4-6 million" comment back in January. If they already knew the numbers back then, why would there even be a data dump in the first place?
Click to expand...

Boren was on the composition committee which investigated all these things for over a year before making recommendations. Thats why he knew they had found additive schools, and a network would be beneficial. He basically laid everything out there - you can still find all of his interviews. His discussion of revenues were based on at least a 12 team conference.

The rest of the membership wasnt privy to what the composition comittee had learned initially
 
HurdyGurdyEer said:
Thank you. We'll see if this turns out to be a bellwether moment indicative of a long term trend or not.

But honestly .... at this time this only tells us about a surge in opinion and not whether it is a majority consensus.
Click to expand...

I can assure you this has been building over several years, helped all the while by a few "plants" from elsewhere in social media daily bashing the BIG 12 to the OU fanbase and gradually involving actual OU fans. Have witnessed for years now.
 
Buckaineer said:
Boren was on the composition committee which investigated all these things for over a year before making recommendations. Thats why he knew they had found additive schools, and a network would be beneficial. He basically laid everything out there - you can still find all of his interviews. His discussion of revenues were based on at least a 12 team conference.

The rest of the membership wasnt privy to what the composition comittee had learned initially
Click to expand...

I've read the interviews. He still didn't give the specifics I was mentioning. Which schools were actually additive? Were UConn an Cincinnati actually additive, or was that only other schools? Boren never mentioned specific schools. Also, who was going to be the partner with the network? Did the consultants actually know if ESPN or Fox were actually willing to start a network? Was that $4-6 million figure accurate if the Big 12 had no partner?

See, you're leaving lot of things out here. A big one is the point I just mentioned, whether ESPN or Fox will actually agree a network. You're putting it all off on Texas, but the willingness of ESPN or Fox to actually start a network is critical. Then, you have another problem. If Fox was the partner, it's ESPN that owns the LHN. You can't just roll the ESPN owned LHN into a Fox owned Big 12 network just like that. There are a lot of complications there. Plus, IMG also has to agree to roll over/disband the LHN, even if the network is with ESPN. Three different entities have to agree on what to do with the LHN.

The point is, there are a lot of factors outside of the Big 12's control here.
 
Buckaineer said:
Everything you've posted is either an outright lie, total misrepresentation of what has been going on or idiocy at its finest.

You seem to be detached from reality.

In reality the president of OKLAHOMA, seeing a need for the BIG 12 to address its disadvantages competitively ( less able to make playoff than others) and financially ( falling behind the Big Ten and SEC in per member revenues by an ever increasing amount) and from a psychological standpoint with not much positive exposure or influence compared to others- proposed that rather than doing things piece by piece - the league ( not buckaineer) should address all of these issues at the same time. Expansion which makes it possible to have a network and made a CCG make sense to add. These things would greatly increase revenues for everyone, give everyone more exposure, and eliminate any competitive disadvantages.

Some could only look at the issue emotionally ( should ring a bell with you) so the conference hired consultants to study the issue, report back to everyone in the spring and summer meeting and then decisions could be made.

In the meantime, not wanting the Big 12 to do anything proactive, many launched a groundswell campaign on social media to paint a very negative picture of everything the conference was trying to do. Actual fans of the conference were quickly duped into the full buy in of " no one available", "no money", " can't do this or that in only the BIg 12", "just wait" etc.

With UT and OU social media targeted along with other schools in the conference, the fans as expected raised hell and soon that went up the food chain. Some misguided and mislead fans joined in to harm their own programs down the road --all the while claiming social media has no influence, but viciously attacking anyone that agreed with positive improvements for the conference and trying to silence any such voices. Ask yourself why it's so important to you to silence anyone with a positive view of comprehensive improvements on a message board if social media has no impact?

With all the noise coming from the fanbases, getting anything done became extremely difficult at the leadership level.

When the meetings came about UT went into action with board members communicating with OU board members to stop any expansion and UTs social media outlets declaring everything dead before the meetings even began. Then prior to the full distribution and examination of the data at the meetings, UT virtually declared they liked things as they are, thought expansion should just be an ongoing conversation, and didn't intend to do anything with the LHN. They informed everyone that having a 10 team CCG would be "intriguing" but nothing else should happen to keep them happy.

Thus, the very next day, suddenly no network, more "study" on expansion indefinitely, and magically a ten team CCG happened. OUs president smiled, did the politically correct thing of declaring the conference strong, adding a CCG good, and expansion an ongoing study.

Internally the fanbase of OU now hates the BIG 12 and you can be sure their wishes have made it up the foodchain. UT obviously only has the intention of keeping their options open, which is bad for everyone else. They have duped others into taking no action for themselves until UT walks away, knowing they won't have to worry about the sheepish fanbases of the other schools pushing their schools to do anything but bow to UT.

Seeing your reactions- you are already trying to deflect any blame -while you did everything you could do to wreck WVUs conference future. It may not have been much, a negative post here, a bash of that school there on social media, but it was enough. Every bit adds up.

So stop attacking me, I have no influence according to you, I'm just talking about all this on a message board.
Click to expand...

Buck,

Nothing EVER said on a message board impacted either way the decision of any schools administration in the entire history of the internet. When any of those people here the words "...but on the message boards..." they look at you like you just said, "...but in the national Enquirer..." Nothing said on a single one of these boards, in public or private matters to anyone that makes the real decisions in college athletics.

It makes some people feel important and crucial but the only value in what is said here is to those that come here and school administrations have better things to do then to hang the words of any of us.

We occasionally hear X recruit went another way because of something they read on a message board, pure BS by the site admin to use the moment as a means of enforcing their will. Now reporters do read this board and some of the biggest posters here are reporters. They read this drivel on a daily basis and piece together stories out of it AFTER they have done some vetting of the points. One would hope they vet all points but, hey, journalism as a profession died decades ago. and there are few professional journalist left.

Nothing you say matters. Nothing I say matters. Nothing anyone says here matters.
 
topdecktiger said:
I've read the interviews. He still didn't give the specifics I was mentioning. Which schools were actually additive? Were UConn an Cincinnati actually additive, or was that only other schools? Boren never mentioned specific schools. Also, who was going to be the partner with the network? Did the consultants actually know if ESPN or Fox were actually willing to start a network? Was that $4-6 million figure accurate if the Big 12 had no partner?

See, you're leaving lot of things out here. A big one is the point I just mentioned, whether ESPN or Fox will actually agree a network. You're putting it all off on Texas, but the willingness of ESPN or Fox to actually start a network is critical. Then, you have another problem. If Fox was the partner, it's ESPN that owns the LHN. You can't just roll the ESPN owned LHN into a Fox owned Big 12 network just like that. There are a lot of complications there. Plus, IMG also has to agree to roll over/disband the LHN, even if the network is with ESPN. Three different entities have to agree on what to do with the LHN.

The point is, there are a lot of factors outside of the Big 12's control here.
Click to expand...

Boren gave some details but not all. If you think because tou personally werent briefed on the specifics, then its not real then Id say you may have an ego issue.

They will never reveal that level of detail.
 
Buckaineer said:
Boren gave some details but not all. If you think because tou personally werent briefed on the specifics, then its not real then Id say you may have an ego issue.

They will never reveal that level of detail.
Click to expand...

No, that's not what I think. You are claiming that you know why the network was scuttled. Truth is, you don't know anymore than we do. You just assume that Texas blocked the network. There are plenty of other reasons why the network could have been dropped. I just gave you one very legitimate reason. If ESPN or Fox didn't agree to it, then it doesn't matter what Texas, Boren, Bowlsby or anyone in the Big 12 wanted to do.

The other poster had it right. Whenever Boren says something you like, you take his statements at face value. When he says something you don't like, you make up your own interpretation of what he said. Here's the reality. The Big 12 wasn't going to make a bunch of money adding a bunch of mediocre schools. Anybody with common sense could figure that out.
 
Charleston Mountie said:
Buck,

Nothing EVER said on a message board impacted either way the decision of any schools administration in the entire history of the internet. When any of those people here the words "...but on the message boards..." they look at you like you just said, "...but in the national Enquirer..." Nothing said on a single one of these boards, in public or private matters to anyone that makes the real decisions in college athletics.

It makes some people feel important and crucial but the only value in what is said here is to those that come here and school administrations have better things to do then to hang the words of any of us.

We occasionally hear X recruit went another way because of something they read on a message board, pure BS by the site admin to use the moment as a means of enforcing their will. Now reporters do read this board and some of the biggest posters here are reporters. They read this drivel on a daily basis and piece together stories out of it AFTER they have done some vetting of the points. One would hope they vet all points but, hey, journalism as a profession died decades ago. and there are few professional journalist left.

Nothing you say matters. Nothing I say matters. Nothing anyone says here matters.
Click to expand...

Social media does impact decisions. Fans are important to presidents and ADs. Fans ingluence decisions because without them there is no support. No one said leaders are reading the boards-- but fans do.

Fans get bs on a message board and complain directly via email to a president or AD, or maybe to influential boosters who pass on the anger.

Maybe fans read things on a message board and then get on radio and influence even more people.

Maybe sime influential supporters are on message boards and are influenced and take things up the food chain.

But it starts at the bottom and goes up from there and its naive to pretend that doesnt happen.

What is said on these and other boards does matter and its why Mayland hired a pr firm to quell fan discontent of the big ten move on message boards.

You need to wake up, its not just fun and games. Texas just caught an A n M poster using twitter posing as a UT fan using racist comments to steer away recruits. These things are real and happen- and happened with the BIG 12.
 
topdecktiger said:
No, that's not what I think. You are claiming that you know why the network was scuttled. Truth is, you don't know anymore than we do. You just assume that Texas blocked the network. There are plenty of other reasons why the network could have been dropped. I just gave you one very legitimate reason. If ESPN or Fox didn't agree to it, then it doesn't matter what Texas, Boren, Bowlsby or anyone in the Big 12 wanted to do.

The other poster had it right. Whenever Boren says something you like, you take his statements at face value. When he says something you don't like, you make up your own interpretation of what he said. Here's the reality. The Big 12 wasn't going to make a bunch of money adding a bunch of mediocre schools. Anybody with common sense could figure that out.
Click to expand...

We all know. Texas wouldnt give up the LHN. Thus no network was possible.
 
Buckaineer said:
We all know. Texas wouldnt give up the LHN. Thus no network was possible.
Click to expand...

Texas said it just the day before. Had it been a problem of the network not being viable, the day before they nixed it, UT would not have talked about a network as though it was a possibility if they could be " made whole".
 
HurdyGurdyEer said:
There's always the junior college route too.
Click to expand...

Yes...........the junior college route works for me and others. Your reference is to WV playing Delaware State in 2017. Right? Or are you talking about William and Mary or maybe even Georgia State?
 
Buckaineer said:
Social media does impact decisions. Fans are important to presidents and ADs. Fans ingluence decisions because without them there is no support. No one said leaders are reading the boards-- but fans do.

Fans get bs on a message board and complain directly via email to a president or AD, or maybe to influential boosters who pass on the anger.

Maybe fans read things on a message board and then get on radio and influence even more people.

Maybe sime influential supporters are on message boards and are influenced and take things up the food chain.

But it starts at the bottom and goes up from there and its naive to pretend that doesnt happen.

What is said on these and other boards does matter and its why Mayland hired a pr firm to quell fan discontent of the big ten move on message boards.

You need to wake up, its not just fun and games. Texas just caught an A n M poster using twitter posing as a UT fan using racist comments to steer away recruits. These things are real and happen- and happened with the BIG 12.
Click to expand...

You are equating fans in general to the miniscule percentage of them that spout off on a message board. I am sorry but nothing said here or on any board has any impact on college presidents or their administration. Message boards are NOT social media. Social media is twitter, instagram, snapchat and the like. A message board is the stone age in social media.
 
Charleston Mountie said:
You are equating fans in general to the miniscule percentage of them that spout off on a message board. I am sorry but nothing said here or on any board has any impact on college presidents or their administration. Message boards are NOT social media. Social media is twitter, instagram, snapchat and the like. A message board is the stone age in social media.
Click to expand...
Now you have gone in done it. Buck truely thinks everything he posts has an impact on the outcome of the BIG12 and expansion and you just spoiled his entire existence over the past 2 years
 
  • Like
Reactions: michaelwalkerbr and Charleston Mountie
Maybe with the downward trend of cable TV as well as ESPN and Fox1 broadcasts, we should be thankful "The marketplace" shot down the idea of a Big 12 network. WVU total third tier rights were worth over $9 million in 2013. I quote A D Oliver Luck right after the final IMG deal was signed:

“Beyond the guaranteed money, we kept a couple of things that I would call lucrative items,” Luck revealed. “We keep the (advertising sponsorship) deal with United Bank and with WVU Health Care. That money comes straight to us.”

Luck estimates that while $86 million over 12 years averages out to just over $7 million a year — WVU was grossing about $6 million a year in Tier 3 revenues before this contract, the additional rights they kept this time that were included in the first deal give the Mountaineers about a $9 to $9.5 million gross per year.

And this article came from WVU longtime 'fan' Bob Hertzel of the Fairmont Times
 
  • Like
Reactions: Monroeer and Charleston Mountie
michaelwalkerbr said:
Maybe with the downward trend of cable TV as well as ESPN and Fox1 broadcasts, we should be thankful "The marketplace" shot down the idea of a Big 12 network. WVU total third tier rights were worth over $9 million in 2013. I quote A D Oliver Luck right after the final IMG deal was signed:

“Beyond the guaranteed money, we kept a couple of things that I would call lucrative items,” Luck revealed. “We keep the (advertising sponsorship) deal with United Bank and with WVU Health Care. That money comes straight to us.”

Luck estimates that while $86 million over 12 years averages out to just over $7 million a year — WVU was grossing about $6 million a year in Tier 3 revenues before this contract, the additional rights they kept this time that were included in the first deal give the Mountaineers about a $9 to $9.5 million gross per year.

And this article came from WVU longtime 'fan' Bob Hertzel of the Fairmont Times
Click to expand...
What rights are those that WVU kept, and what are they doing to make 3m a year on it?
 
“Beyond the guaranteed money, we kept a couple of things that I would call lucrative items,” Luck revealed. “We keep the (advertising sponsorship) deal with United Bank and with WVU Health Care. That money comes straight to us.”
 
michaelwalkerbr said:
“Beyond the guaranteed money, we kept a couple of things that I would call lucrative items,” Luck revealed. “We keep the (advertising sponsorship) deal with United Bank and with WVU Health Care. That money comes straight to us.”
Click to expand...

Would that be affected by a conference network? Those seem to be West Virginia-specific items. I would think they could advertise with WVU Health Care either way. I'm not familiar with any of the other conferences taking local advertisements away from the schools and transferring them to the network.
 
topdecktiger said:
Would that be affected by a conference network? Those seem to be West Virginia-specific items. I would think they could advertise with WVU Health Care either way. I'm not familiar with any of the other conferences taking local advertisements away from the schools and transferring them to the network.
Click to expand...

I used Luck's words and Hertzel's article to illustrate what WVU is receiving now, which with the conference payout reaches $40 million. That is approaching half of the athletic department's income of $90 million. My point being, it would be very difficult for the Mountaineers to be able to match that with a conference network in today's market. Quality streaming broadcast is one of the coming things, along with pay per view. I can't get some of the WVU games in South Carolina, but I can get every UFC or WWE event I want. That is money left on the table, for every power 5 school at least.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Charleston Mountie
michaelwalkerbr said:
I used Luck's words and Hertzel's article to illustrate what WVU is receiving now, which with the conference payout reaches $40 million. That is approaching half of the athletic department's income of $90 million. My point being, it would be very difficult for the Mountaineers to be able to match that with a conference network in today's market. Quality streaming broadcast is one of the coming things, along with pay per view. I can't get some of the WVU games in South Carolina, but I can get every UFC or WWE event I want. That is money left on the table, for every power 5 school at least.
Click to expand...

What you are illustrating is not what I'm talking about. I'm asking why West Virginia would lose the advertising contract with WVU Health if the Big 12 had a conference network.
 
topdecktiger said:
What you are illustrating is not what I'm talking about. I'm asking why West Virginia would lose the advertising contract with WVU Health if the Big 12 had a conference network.
Click to expand...

You're not going to find some specious argument here over something that no one cares about. The first contract with IMG did not retain those rights for the school. The second one did. Mr. Luck spoke to the advantage of retaining those advertising rights.

I did not write the article, nor did I claim they would lose those specific rights. I merely opined that it would be very difficult for a Big 12 network to get WVU to the $40 million mark in conference income. If you have a problem with that as a Clemson fan, take it up with Hertzel.

I cannot imagine why it would mean anything to you one way or another.
 
Last edited:
Let me try this again.......

Adult+Wallpaper+%25283%2529.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fingon, ColoradoMountaineer and michaelwalkerbr
michaelwalkerbr said:
I used Luck's words and Hertzel's article to illustrate what WVU is receiving now, which with the conference payout reaches $40 million. That is approaching half of the athletic department's income of $90 million. My point being, it would be very difficult for the Mountaineers to be able to match that with a conference network in today's market. Quality streaming broadcast is one of the coming things, along with pay per view. I can't get some of the WVU games in South Carolina, but I can get every UFC or WWE event I want. That is money left on the table, for every power 5 school at least.
Click to expand...
You need dish sports package, I can't remember last time I missed a FB or BB game.
 
michaelwalkerbr said:
You're not going to find some specious argument here over something that no one cares about. The first contract with IMG did not retain those rights for the school. The second one did. Mr. Luck spoke to the advantage of retaining those advertising rights.

I did not write the article, nor did I claim they would lose those specific rights. I merely opined that it would be very difficult for a Big 12 network to get WVU to the $40 million mark in conference income. If you have a problem with that as a Clemson fan, take it up with Hertzel.

I cannot imagine why it would mean anything to you one way or another.
Click to expand...

You're the one trying to turn things into an argument. Bringing up Clemson has nothing to do with this. That's just you being argumentative with me, instead of addressing the point.

I don't have a problem with the article. I'm not arguing about the IMG contract. I'm asking why having a conference network would affect those rights. When IMG failed to retain those right for the school in the previous contract, it wasn't because of a conference network. So, I don't see why a conference network would interfere with those rights now.
 
What ever ends up happening with the big 12 I doubt Texas is going anywhere. They have come accustom to being the major power player in the conference and I doubt they are willing to give that up. No other conference out there would allow them the perks they currently have. It doesn't stop others from leaving but anyone associated with Texas will always have power 5 status.
 
OlegeezEER said:
What ever ends up happening with the big 12 I doubt Texas is going anywhere. They have come accustom to being the major power player in the conference and I doubt they are willing to give that up. No other conference out there would allow them the perks they currently have. It doesn't stop others from leaving but anyone associated with Texas will always have power 5 status.
Click to expand...

I also have my doubts that Texas would ever leave, but if they did it would be to go independent. The conference money we need is chump change to them and they can offset it in several ways. Texas is not worried about money as much as it is about branding, which is centered on their ego.

The trend is now away from the conference network model and that is an advent of technology that no one can stop. Once Texas believes it can do better solo than in a group it will leave, regardless of the presence of a GoR. Few schools could make it independent, but Texas is one of them.
 
michaelwalkerbr said:
The SEC reported earnings of $527.4 million including the CFP and SEC Network for the past season on Jan 19, 2016. That's $32.7 million per school, including the SEC network. Compare that to WVU's combined income from the Big 12 and IMG. The SEC's total income may hit $40 million for some schools including ads and radio broadcasts. But WVU's $38 million total is not exactly the former Big East now is it?

The SEC hasn't exactly left the neighborhood yet, has it?
Click to expand...



Comparing the SEC and the Big12 is downright silly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SeronimusPratt

OT: American Primeval

Replies
22
Views
726
The Blue Lot
SeronimusPratt
SeronimusPratt
Vernon

WVSPORTS.COM Examining the NET Rankings across the Big 12 Conference

Replies
0
Views
111
Mountaineer Message Board
Vernon
Vernon
Vernon

WVSPORTS.COM Examining the NET Rankings across the Big 12 Conference

Replies
0
Views
112
Mountaineer Message Board
Vernon
Vernon
Vernon

RIVALS Big 12 Spotlight: Quarterback storylines to follow this spring

Replies
0
Views
156
Mountaineer Message Board
Vernon
Vernon
Vernon

WVSPORTS.COM Examining the NET Rankings across the Big 12 Conference

Replies
0
Views
148
Mountaineer Message Board
Vernon
Vernon
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back