Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Eminence

Le'Veon Bell

Recommended Posts

Bell made a huge blunder.  He is never getting that $15M back.  And, he is another year older with 30 years old quickly approaching.  Time to cash in is running out. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No skin in this game (not a Steelers fan, barely own Bell/Conner anywhere)....

I have no problem whatsoever with what he did.  I'm glad he did it.  He didn't "holdout".  He wasn't under contract.  He was presented an offer and he believes his worth is higher than the single year offer.  He made the decision that, for him, it would be better/smarter to wait until next year and sign a long-term offer rather than risk injury, especially given that Pitt has had no issue giving him a very heavy workload for a few years now.  He is under no obligation to accept that offer.  It's very different than a player under contract that decides to hold out because they feel they are worth more than their current contract.  Keep in mind, in general, I don't mind that either as teams typically have the advantage in most of those situations, especially with the ability to unilaterally cut a player and end contracts if they want.  But still, they are still not holding up their end of a deal.  In this case, Bell isn't under any contract.

They made a business decision to not want to give him a long term contract but instead offer him a one year franchise tag.  He made a business decision to not accept it.  Both parties are able to do what they did.  Neither is right nor wrong with their decision overall. 

Hopefully this will pave the way for some changes:

1)  RBs, especially at the elite level, are underpaid.  Yes, it's more of a plug and play position than others, but it's a punishing position with a lower shelf life and he deserves more.  Sammy Watkins got a 3 year/$48M with $30M guaranteed with the Chiefs.  He means much less to them than Bell does to Pitt.  Tyrod Taylor is making more than Bell would have made.  He's not even starting.

2)  The franchise tag is turning into nonsense.  And, in particular, it's ruining RBs.  When they get signed to lesser rookie contracts that extend 4-5 years, then get tagged 1-2 years because the team isn't willing to commit, now you have a 27-28 yo RB that can't get his pay day anymore as a result.  The tag has to either be limited to 1 year, rookie contracts need to be shortened, or an exception has to be made for a low shelf-life position like RB.  Hopefully his decision can help bring up a way to change the current system.

3)  Losing the ability to negotiate a contract after an early deadline -- This was a big part of why we ended up here, IMO.

Edited by gianmarco
  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess since I requested this, I'll be the one to post that BELL IS OFFICIALLY NOT REPORTING in big red type

(for those who don't want to read a 143 page thread)

:)

Edited by joey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DocHolliday said:

Bell made a huge blunder.  He is never getting that $15M back.  And, he is another year older with 30 years old quickly approaching.  Time to cash in is running out. 

It is literally impossible to know if he made the right decision. If he played this year and suffered a serious injury, it's conceivable he could have made $14.5 million this year and nothing beyond that (although pretty unlikely). If he did get severely hurt, he could have seen his value plummet and been forced to take a one year, low ball prove it deal next season. If that were the case, he certainly would not see much in guaranteed money.

I have seen talk (albeit misguided IMO) that he could still see offers even greater than the Gurley deal with even more guaranteed money. I'm sure this heated debate will continue until Bell signs in March. Until we know the deal he gets, it's tough to do a more thorough analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gianmarco said:

No skin in this game (not a Steelers fan, barely own Bell/Conner anywhere)....

I have no problem whatsoever with what he did.  I'm glad he did it.  He didn't "holdout".  He wasn't under contract.  He was presented an offer and he believes his worth is higher than the single year offer.  He made the decision that, for him, it would be better/smarter to wait until next year and sign a long-term offer rather than risk injury, especially given that Pitt has had no issue giving him a very heavy workload for a few years now.  He is under no obligation to accept that offer.  It's very different than a player under contract that decides to hold out because they feel they are worth more than their current contract.  Keep in mind, in general, I don't mind that either as teams typically have the advantage in most of those situations, especially with the ability to unilaterally cut a player and end contracts if they want. 

They made a business decision to not want to give him a long term contract but instead offer him a one year franchise tag.  He made a business decision to not accept it.  Both parties are able to do what they did.  Neither is right nor wrong with their decision overall. 

Hopefully this will pave the way for some changes:

1)  RBs, especially at the elite level, are underpaid.  Yes, it's more of a plug and play position than others, but it's a punishing position with a lower shelf life and he deserves more.  Sammy Watkins got a 3 year/$48M with $30M guaranteed with the Chiefs.  He means much less to them than Bell does to Pitt.  Tyrod Taylor is making more than Bell would have made.  He's not even starting.

2)  The franchise tag is turning into nonsense.  And, in particular, it's ruining RBs.  When they get signed to lesser rookie contracts that extend 4-5 years, then get tagged 1-2 years because the team isn't willing to commit, now you have a 27-28 yo RB that can't get his pay day anymore as a result.  The tag has to either be limited to 1 year, rookie contracts need to be shortened, or an exception has to be made for a low shelf-life position like RB.  Hopefully his decision can help bring up a way to change the current system.

3)  Losing the ability to negotiate a contract after an early deadline -- This was a big part of why we ended up here, IMO.

Agree with most of what you’re saying. Most people seem to be overlooking the fact that Pitt was going to have him play one year with zero incentive to keep him healthy and no guaranteed money beyond this year.

I’m not sure that RBs are underpaid though. I think they’re dependent on the system to some degrees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, gianmarco said:

No skin in this game (not a Steelers fan, barely own Bell/Conner anywhere)....

I have no problem whatsoever with what he did.  I'm glad he did it.  He didn't "holdout".  He wasn't under contract.  He was presented an offer and he believes his worth is higher than the single year offer.  He made the decision that, for him, it would be better/smarter to wait until next year and sign a long-term offer rather than risk injury, especially given that Pitt has had no issue giving him a very heavy workload for a few years now.  He is under no obligation to accept that offer.  It's very different than a player under contract that decides to hold out because they feel they are worth more than their current contract.  Keep in mind, in general, I don't mind that either as teams typically have the advantage in most of those situations, especially with the ability to unilaterally cut a player and end contracts if they want. 

They made a business decision to not want to give him a long term contract but instead offer him a one year franchise tag.  He made a business decision to not accept it.  Both parties are able to do what they did.  Neither is right nor wrong with their decision overall. 

Hopefully this will pave the way for some changes:

1)  RBs, especially at the elite level, are underpaid.  Yes, it's more of a plug and play position than others, but it's a punishing position with a lower shelf life and he deserves more.  Sammy Watkins got a 3 year/$48M with $30M guaranteed with the Chiefs.  He means much less to them than Bell does to Pitt.  Tyrod Taylor is making more than Bell would have made.  He's not even starting.

2)  The franchise tag is turning into nonsense.  And, in particular, it's ruining RBs.  When they get signed to lesser rookie contracts that extend 4-5 years, then get tagged 1-2 years because the team isn't willing to commit, now you have a 27-28 yo RB that can't get his pay day anymore as a result.  The tag has to either be limited to 1 year, rookie contracts need to be shortened, or an exception has to be made for a low shelf-life position like RB.  Hopefully his decision can help bring up a way to change the current system.

3)  Losing the ability to negotiate a contract after an early deadline -- This was a big part of why we ended up here, IMO.

not that I disagree but it did offer him a long-term offer that he felt was not good enough.

 

So their plan wasn't solely a one-year run them into the ground

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

It is literally impossible to know if he made the right decision.

We he literally just lost $14.5M,.

Only thing it's literally impossible to answer is if it was worth the less then 1% chance of a career ending type injury and if the decreased wear and tear vs questions such as if he's a team player and how much he loves football made him more or less appealing when he hits the open market next spring then had he just suited up this year. So we don't yet know what his lost $14.5M did for him, we just know he lost it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bryhamm said:

Would be funny as hell if the Steelers came out and said ... after further consideration, we feel confident that we can tag him again next year at the 2nd year rate and we'll settle it in arbitration.

Maybe. Some are saying "read the CBA", but the CBA is not 100% crystal-clear and explicit on this matter, is it? Isn't it kind of open to interpretation? The kind of thing league lawyers would hash out with an arbitrator or in front of a judge if the league felt like fighting it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Doug B said:

Maybe. Some are saying "read the CBA", but the CBA is not 100% crystal-clear and explicit on this matter, is it? Isn't it kind of open to interpretation? The kind of thing league lawyers would hash out with an arbitrator or in front of a judge if the league felt like fighting it?

Yep, which makes it all the stranger that the NFL and Steelers were saying they wouldn't fight it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, belljr said:

not that I disagree but it did offer him a long-term offer that he felt was not good enough.

 

So their plan wasn't solely a one-year run them into the ground

Yes, that's true and I failed to mention that. 

As we'll never know the true details of it, no way to blame either Pittsburgh or Bell for not getting that long-term deal done.  Either way, both parties within their rights to not accept what was proposed or asked for.  In the end, they didn't agree and here we are.  Bell will be somewhere else next year and hopefully, for his sake, he gets what he's looking for.  Time will tell.

But I don't get the ill-will toward him or calling it dumb or saying he made a mistake.  He's not under contract, isn't holding out, and is simply making a decision that he thinks will ultimately get him more money in the end which he feels he's deserved.  It's not easy to have the stones to turn away $14+M and sit for an entire year but I give him credit for believing in himself enough to do that and not give in if he felt it wasn't good enough.  Even if it doesn't work out, he's done nothing wrong otherwise.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

New York Jets 3/1
Oakland Raiders 5/1
Philadelphia Eagles 7/1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 7/1
Green Bay Packers 7/1
San Francisco 49ers 9/1
Baltimore Ravens 9/1
Indianapolis Colts 9/1
Houston Texans 12/1

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, menobrown said:

We he literally just lost $14.5M,.

Only thing it's literally impossible to answer is if it was worth the less then 1% chance of a career ending type injury and if the decreased wear and tear vs questions such as if he's a team player and how much he loves football made him more or less appealing when he hits the open market next spring then had he just suited up this year. So we don't yet know what his lost $14.5M did for him, we just know he lost it.

What if he signed his tag, got 400 touches, and teams didn't give him a ton of guaranteed money because of his workload, then he broke down from all the work and eventually got cut like Jamaal Charles 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DocHolliday said:

Bell made a huge blunder.  He is never getting that $15M back.  And, he is another year older with 30 years old quickly approaching.  Time to cash in is running out. 

He’s 26.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lod001 said:

New York Jets 3/1
Oakland Raiders 5/1
Philadelphia Eagles 7/1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 7/1
Green Bay Packers 7/1
San Francisco 49ers 9/1
Baltimore Ravens 9/1
Indianapolis Colts 9/1
Houston Texans 12/1

Baltimore is the favorite, imo, since I can totally see Bell wanting to stick it to the Steelers twice a year. Texans would make my fantasy shares happiest, though. Yes, please! See you next year Le'Veon. Don't get fat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bryhamm said:

Yep, which makes it all the stranger that the NFL and Steelers were saying they wouldn't fight it.

Why would the Steelers fight it? Even if they could tag him at the second year level again, would they? They could use that $15MM elsewhere and Conner has shown he’s more than good enough to replace Bell.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dr. Octopus said:

Why would the Steelers fight it? Even if they could tag him at the second year level again, would they? They could use that $15MM elsewhere and Conner has shown he’s more than good enough to replace Bell.

Exactly. This looks like a rare occasional where an absolute can be assumed. There's zero chance the Steelers would even consider giving him big money in any fashion. Let him walk, collect a 3rd, both sides look a little silly (less so for PIT but only b/c Conner beasted out and they saved 14M+ in personnel costs) but at least it's over. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, bostonfred said:

What if he signed his tag, got 400 touches, and teams didn't give him a ton of guaranteed money because of his workload, then he broke down from all the work and eventually got cut like Jamaal Charles 

 

We can play what if games all day, like will his contract he gets put him in same position next year. All we know with certainty is he lost $14.5M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, menobrown said:

 

We can play what if games all day, like will his contract he gets put him in same position next year. All we know with certainty is he lost $14.5M.

We also know for certain that he didn’t get hurt playing football this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr. Octopus said:

He’s 26.

Exactly.   He turns 27 in 3 months and is that much closer to 30.  RBs typically have a short career and Bell wasted a prime year.  

Edited by DocHolliday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kutta said:

We also know for certain that he didn’t get hurt playing football this season.

And made as much as we did. Surefire way to not get hurt playing football is to not get paid to play football. Brilliant.

Edited by menobrown
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, menobrown said:

And made us much as we did.

With the potential for much more than us next year

Edited by kutta
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, menobrown said:

 

We can play what if games all day, like will his contract he gets put him in same position next year. All we know with certainty is he lost $14.5M.

He didn't lose $14.5M. 

He lost the chance to earn $14.5M but that money would have come with a price. That price was a full season of playing and a risk of injury. It wasn't free money. He decided a year of not playing was worth more than a year of playing at that amount.  There is a value to a year of sitting out if it potentially earns him more long-term. We will likely never know if that value is more or less than 14.5M, but it's definitely not anything close to 0, especially when you factor in the injury risk.

Much like negotiating a salary or the sale of a home, you don't have to take anything offered to you. If my house is for sale and I'm offered $500K for it, turning it down doesn't mean I lost $500K.  I still own the house and I can still sell it. And even if it's only worth $500K now, I may have reason to believe I can get more next year for it if I just wait. I might sell it for more. I might sell it for less. But I haven't lost money that isn't mine because I still own the home and I decided to see if I can do better.

Bell can still play. Whether he gets more or less overall remains to be seen. But he didn't lose anything since that money still had to be earned by him being on the football field. It wasn't free money. Semantics, perhaps, but it's a difference, IMO.

Edited by gianmarco
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So was Lynch the first big name to "sit and save" (his body) for a year?  I think we will see more of this.  Especially at RB, it makes sense to take a breather for a position like that, with such a short shelf-life.  They could very well end up making more money and/or extending their career in the end.  There's no way of knowing that for certain, but there's certainly an argument for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Rodrigo Duterte said:

So was Lynch the first big name to "sit and save" (his body) for a year?  I think we will see more of this.  Especially at RB, it makes sense to take a breather for a position like that, with such a short shelf-life.  They could very well end up making more money and/or extending their career in the end.  There's no way of knowing that for certain, but there's certainly an argument for it.

Ricky Williams. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Rodrigo Duterte said:

So was Lynch the first big name to "sit and save" (his body) for a year?  I think we will see more of this.  Especially at RB, it makes sense to take a breather for a position like that, with such a short shelf-life.  They could very well end up making more money and/or extending their career in the end.  There's no way of knowing that for certain, but there's certainly an argument for it.

Article about holdouts from the past

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah that's right, Ricky Williams, good one.  But was his all about saving his body and making it a business decision, solely?  Didn't his reasoning also have to do with his heart being in it?  

Also, weed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, DocHolliday said:

Exactly.   He turns 27 in 3 months and is that much closer to 30.  RBs typically have a short career and Bell wasted a prime year.  

That’s three full seasons before he even turns 30 - so you’d get 4 seasons out of him until he’s over 30. He also just missed a full season of wear and tear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr. Octopus said:

Why would the Steelers fight it? Even if they could tag him at the second year level again, would they? They could use that $15MM elsewhere and Conner has shown he’s more than good enough to replace Bell.

cant they carry over the 14.5 mil of unpaid money from this year to next year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dr. Octopus said:

That’s three full seasons before he even turns 30 - so you’d get 4 seasons out of him until he’s over 30. He also just missed a full season of wear and tear.

So you think he made the right move by sitting out a year and not making $15M?  No matter what he earns next year, he is always out the 2018 paycheck.   I guess he saved his body to prolong his career but does Bell really want a prolonged career?   Seems like walking away from the game came awfully easy.  

Obviously, Bell doesn't care about winning but I wonder if he would be a little disappointed should the Steelers win or even play in the SB?   Bell must already have a team tell him that they are going to pay him a huge contract.   That makes his move this season make sense.  Somewhat.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dr. Dan said:

cant they carry over the 14.5 mil of unpaid money from this year to next year?

I believe a large part will carry over but I don’t see why that matters - either way they are using up $15MM of cap space that they can use elsewhere. If they get an extra $15 MM carrying over should they “waste” it on Bell.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, DocHolliday said:

So you think he made the right move by sitting out a year and not making $15M?  

No, I’ve said that from the beginning. I never thought he’d make that choice.

you just said he’s close to 30 - so I pointed out he’s only 26. He has three/four years before that’s really an issue which is a full contact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I know is that if he simply chooses the team that offers the most guaranteed money, that team had better hope they have a lethal run-blocking line with interior linemen that can kick out, pull, and get to the second level. That patient start-stop style of his is mesmerizing if he has linemen that can get up field and finish blocks. I don't know how well it will play behind, say, the Lions O-line. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, menobrown said:

 

We can play what if games all day, like will his contract he gets put him in same position next year. All we know with certainty is he lost $14.5M.

The only way he lost $14.5M is if he gets the Kaepernick treatment.

If he signs for, say, $25M, did he really lose $14.5M?  You'll probably say yes but the correct answer is, not really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bell is just looking for his last big payday. The Jets might give him what he wants and he will be fine with that even if he does not have the success he had in Pitt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very curious to see how much Bell ends up signing for in the off-season. Has a ton working aganst him now. 

1. Injury prone  2. Drug problems  3. Selfish attitude/no regard for teammates  4. Been easily replaced twice now (Williams n Conner)

Red flag after red flag.  Yet some team will be looking to make a splash and sell season tickets. It's going to be interesting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, davearm said:

The only way he lost $14.5M is if he gets the Kaepernick treatment.

If he signs for, say, $25M, did he really lose $14.5M?  You'll probably say yes but the correct answer is, not really.

Yes.  Had he reported week 1 he could have had the $14.5 million this season and would still likely have gotten that $25 million contract with his next team.   Heck he would have been close to your hypothetical $25 million by signing the Steelers contract offer.

Now you can play the "what if he got a serious injury" game but he could have also lead the league in TDs, rushing yards, total yards, etc.   Either could have had a significant impact on a potential contract offer or perhaps not -- we'll never know.   

The one thing we DO know is that Bell walked away from $14.5 million to play football in 2018 and that money is gone.

 

 

 

Edited by Godsbrother
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, davearm said:

 

If he signs for, say, $25M, did he really lose $14.5M?  You'll probably say yes but the correct answer is, not really.

 

Kind of obvious that the answer is yes, he lost $14.5M.  No matter what any future compensation is, the fact remains that he had that money guaranteed for playing this year and did not earn it by his failure to show up.  I’m not sure how anyone can spin it any other way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Flying Elvis said:

Exactly. This looks like a rare occasional where an absolute can be assumed. There's zero chance the Steelers would even consider giving him big money in any fashion. Let him walk, collect a 3rd, both sides look a little silly (less so for PIT but only b/c Conner beasted out and they saved 14M+ in personnel costs) but at least it's over. 

Because they have extra money rolling into 2019 now and want better and more immediate compensation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

Because they have extra money rolling into 2019 now and want better and more immediate compensation. 

Except if they decide to tag him again, they'd lose all that extra money & would get no compensation.

Franchise tag (#3)= over $25M for 1 year.  If they tag him, he signs that & that can't trade him with that large a contract.  So, they are spending $25M of their 2019 cap on 1 RB, and won't get any compensation.

Transition tag=other teams can make offers, and Pitt has right to match.  Other offers would likely be structured in such a way to make Pitt unlikely to match (huge first year, etc).  If Pitt doesn't match, they lose Bell and get no compensation.

So, how does their extra money and desire for better/immediate compensation come into play? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not that I want to prolong the discussion any more but I find it funny that so many people continually support Bell by saying he didn’t get hurt as if it were a foregone conclusion. Yes there are a lot of injuries in the NFL. But there are exponentially more players that do not get hurt.

And secondly, how the idea that the Steelers were going to run him into the ground and he was smart to avoid that. I was under the impression the best players wanted the ball all the time. Where is the line drawn between not enough and too much? And there is still game script to take into account - they aren’t going to force feed him the ball 60 times a game and have Ben throw to AB and Juju once each per game. I just think the injury and overuse talk was Incredibly exaggerated. 

Edited by Elevencents

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

 

Transition tag=other teams can make offers, and Pitt has right to match.  Other offers would likely be structured in such a way to make Pitt unlikely to match (huge first year, etc).  If Pitt doesn't match, they lose Bell and get no compensation.

 

Wouldn’t they get a supplemental pick if they lose him?  If so, it would be a 3rd rounder.

Add that the market might not be as hot given how he placed himself as his only priority with no concern for the team whatsoever, and that he went back on his stated commitment to report for week 1.  If you are a GM on another team, what’s to keep Bell from collecting the massive signing bonus that it will likely take to sign him and then watch him put himself first and only again and dog it or fake an injury to protect himself while making sure he keeps the bonus?

 

.

Edited by Bronco Billy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bayhawks said:

Except if they decide to tag him again, they'd lose all that extra money & would get no compensation.

Franchise tag (#3)= over $25M for 1 year.  If they tag him, he signs that & that can't trade him with that large a contract.  So, they are spending $25M of their 2019 cap on 1 RB, and won't get any compensation.

Transition tag=other teams can make offers, and Pitt has right to match.  Other offers would likely be structured in such a way to make Pitt unlikely to match (huge first year, etc).  If Pitt doesn't match, they lose Bell and get no compensation.

So, how does their extra money and desire for better/immediate compensation come into play? 

why even bring in the franchise tag?  nobody believes that will happen.

you sure about the no compensation regarding the transition tag?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bronco Billy said:

 

Wouldn’t they get a supplemental pick if they lose him?  If so, it would be a 3rd rounder.

Add that the market might not be as hot given how he placed himself as his only priority with no concern for the team whatsoever, and that he went back on his stated commitment to report for week 1.  If you are a GM on another team, what’s to keep Bell from collecting the massive signing bonus that it will likely take to sign him and then watch him put himself first and only again and dog it or fake an injury to protect himself while making sure he keeps the bonus?

 

.

That's what I thought.  Might be another case of bayhawks just making crap up.

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.   Restore formatting

  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.


  • Recently Browsing   1 member