What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

RB Ezekiel Elliott, NE (2 Viewers)

ILUVBEER99 said:
He should try to maximize his worth.  it's not bad behavior at all. Fans think these players owe them something.  The NFL is a business just like any other.  Would you take less money than you think you're worth to make your company happy?  If so you're a sucker.
Click to expand...
The problem is that isn't really not a business just like any other, at least not like any other that I've ever been with (insurance and financial services arena).  I can leave my company and go to another company if that other company is willing to give me more money.  Zeke doesn't have that ability.  He's under contract that he can't get out of, unless he signs a new deal from one single company.  They OWN him, and his services, currently for the next two years.  In what other business would that apply?

Sure he should try to maximize his worth, but he's not dealing with a true capitalistic system here.  He can only try to maximize his worth to one company.  It doesn't matter if Houston is willing to pay him $30m a year, they aren't able to. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
btemp said:
You literally know none of this. How do you know its a phenomenal offer? You at a whiskey bar with Jerry Jones? 

Fan irrationality can be comical. 
Click to expand...
Fair enough.  Just going off of what was reported - that it was the second richest RB contract in NFL history, but you are correct.  I cannot confirm that to be accurate.

 
I always think it's a bit comical when fans get behind the stars in these situations as if it is Zeke versus the Cowboys.  But in reality, all Zeke is doing is taking some money from the second string offensive tackle, CB-2 and WR-3.  He's taking it from other guys on the team.  Jerry Jones will be fine regardless, trust me.

The Cowboys will spend to the cap, they will spend no more or no less money regardless of what the Zeke contract ends up being.  At some point, it's not worth paying someone(regardless of how talented he is) beyond what they believe is reasonable for that position.

As was pointed out recently, we don't know for sure what the offer is, but if we believe the reports, he is a jerk for holding out just to be the highest paid RB.  If you are under contract for the next two years, you should be extremely happy that you're getting an offer anywhere near the highest paid at your position.

 
Even though I am all about players trying to get paid, in this instance I am happy to see the Jones' standing firm and not giving in to Zeke's ridiculous demands.  And hey, if he does miss some games, it is a chance to see how good Prescott really is and if he deserves the money he is going to want.  Granted, we saw Dak kind of fall on his face in 2017 during Zeke's 6-game suspension, but they had no receivers then.  With Amari Cooper and an improving Michael Gallup, Prescott has no excuses to not play well this time without Zeke. 

 
matttyl said:
The problem is that isn't really not a business just like any other, at least not like any other that I've ever been with (insurance and financial services arena).  I can leave my company and go to another company if that other company is willing to give me more money.  Zeke doesn't have that ability.  He's under contract that he can't get out of, unless he signs a new deal from one single company.  They OWN him, and his services, currently for the next two years.  In what other business would that apply?

Sure he should try to maximize his worth, but he's not deal with a true capitalistic system here.  He can only try to maximize his worth to one company.  It doesn't matter if Houston is willing to pay him $30m a year, they aren't able to. 
Click to expand...
A lot of businesses sign employees to contracts.   Once he signed the contract he is bound to the terms of the agreement just like any other profession that has contracts.  

He is free to hold out for more money but if the Cowboys don't budge his only recourse is to sign the new deal offered by the Cowboys,  play out the current contract, or find another profession.   If he plays out his current contract then he will be free to go wherever he wants.   

I don't think Zeke is the bad guy in this nor do I think the Cowboys are, it is just the way it is.   

 
Godsbrother said:
A lot of businesses sign employees to contracts.   Once he signed the contract he is bound to the terms of the agreement just like any other profession that has contracts.  

He is free to hold out for more money but if the Cowboys don't budge his only recourse is to sign the new deal offered by the Cowboys,  play out the current contract, or find another profession.   If he plays out his current contract then he will be free to go wherever he wants.   

I don't think Zeke is the bad guy in this nor do I think the Cowboys are, it is just the way it is.  
Click to expand...
Again, I've not had any type of contract like that in my profession.  I can go elsewhere if I wanted to, just can't take any clients with me (non compete).  Do other contracts stipulate you can't go and work anywhere else?  I thought they were just "if you work here, this is what and how you will be compensated for that."  Might have non compete language, but you can go work elsewhere (which I guess Zeke could do in a non football type situation). 

Also, bolded likely isn't true.  He'll be franchised (at least that's what the team will try to do if he doesn't sign with them).  He'd likely be franchised twice if he's still producing.

Agree that I don't think Zeke is a bad guy either, or the Cowboys - but it's just the way it is. 

 
matttyl said:
Again, I've not had any type of contract like that in my profession.  I can go elsewhere if I wanted to, just can't take any clients with me (non compete).  Do other contracts stipulate you can't go and work anywhere else?  I thought they were just "if you work here, this is what and how you will be compensated for that."  Might have non compete language, but you can go work elsewhere (which I guess Zeke could do in a non football type situation). 

Also, bolded likely isn't true.  He'll be franchised (at least that's what the team will try to do if he doesn't sign with them).  He'd likely be franchised twice if he's still producing.

Agree that I don't think Zeke is a bad guy either, or the Cowboys - but it's just the way it is. 
Click to expand...
I don't think a person in the entertainment industry, say a person on the local news or a sports announcer for CBS, can decide to go to a different station or network if they are under contract.   And there are non-compete contracts that prohibit you going to a competitor for a certain period of time.

You do have a point about the franchise tag which is probably the dumbest thing the players agreed to in the last CBA.   

 
Godsbrother said:
I don't think a person in the entertainment industry, say a person on the local news or a sports announcer for CBS, can decide to go to a different station or network if they are under contract.   And there are non-compete contracts that prohibit you going to a competitor for a certain period of time.

You do have a point about the franchise tag which is probably the dumbest thing the players agreed to in the last CBA.   
Click to expand...
Applies to maximum of 32 guys out of ~1,700.  But I see your point. 

We had a female sportscaster in DC area switch stations a while back, but I'm not sure about her contract stipulations (likley a buyout of prior contract, which players don't have the ability to do).  Non-compete in my business says you can go anywhere (though not within 1 mile or something of current office location), you just can't take any current clients with you (agency owns clients, not agent).  Other than that, if someone wants to pay me more, I can go.  Most people some sort of ability to make that happen.  Players have none.  No chance the Cowboys release him from his contract. 

 
matttyl said:
Applies to maximum of 32 guys out of ~1,700.  But I see your point. 

We had a female sportscaster in DC area switch stations a while back, but I'm not sure about her contract stipulations (likley a buyout of prior contract, which players don't have the ability to do).  Non-compete in my business says you can go anywhere (though not within 1 mile or something of current office location), you just can't take any current clients with you (agency owns clients, not agent).  Other than that, if someone wants to pay me more, I can go.  Most people some sort of ability to make that happen.  Players have none.  No chance the Cowboys release him from his contract. 
Click to expand...
But they do.  There's the CFL, Arena league, etc.  If you want to make the NFL money though, you have to deal with the NFL rules.

 
matttyl said:
Dumb, but honest question - if Zeke wanted to play in one of those leagues right now, could he?
Click to expand...
I have no idea what the language is in the NFL contract he signed, but I would guess not at the moment without being in breach of that contract.  However, he is already in breach of the contract by holding out.

 
Sitting at 1.05 in a PPR draft that starts at 2:00 today.  Don't think I'm willing to risk missed games even though I badly want to draft/own Zeke as he is my favorite player to watch in the league.

 
BradtheAg said:
Sitting at 1.05 in a PPR draft that starts at 2:00 today.  Don't think I'm willing to risk missed games even though I badly want to draft/own Zeke as he is my favorite player to watch in the league.
Click to expand...
A guy in my league felt the same way with LeVeon Bell last year and took him at 1.03 (at the time he was saying he would be back for week 1).  Someone else picked up Conner in the 10th round and made a killing and this poor fellow missed the playoffs.

 
Godsbrother said:
A lot of businesses sign employees to contracts.   Once he signed the contract he is bound to the terms of the agreement just like any other profession that has contracts.  

He is free to hold out for more money but if the Cowboys don't budge his only recourse is to sign the new deal offered by the Cowboys,  play out the current contract, or find another profession.   If he plays out his current contract then he will be free to go wherever he wants.   

I don't think Zeke is the bad guy in this nor do I think the Cowboys are, it is just the way it is.   
Click to expand...
Not sure how it makes sense that Elliott has to honor his end of a signed contract despite overperforming his salary, but the Cowboys are free to walk away whenever they please if/when he underperforms his salary.

These holdout situations are purely a byproduct of the owners refusing to offer fully guaranteed deals (understandably).

They have the power to end holdouts altogether by moving to a fully guaranteed structure like in the NBA and MLB.  Holdouts don't happen in those leagues.

 
davearm said:
Not sure how it makes sense that Elliott has to honor his end of a signed contract despite overperforming his salary, but the Cowboys are free to walk away whenever they please if/when he underperforms his salary.

These holdout situations are purely a byproduct of the owners refusing to offer fully guaranteed deals (understandably).

They have the power to end holdouts altogether by moving to a fully guaranteed structure like in the NBA and MLB.  Holdouts don't happen in those leagues.
Click to expand...
Lost in this is the news (if you believe it) that he was offered the 2nd richest RB contract in NFL history,.  They are giving him an opportunity to not have to honor the last 2 years of his contract and to be paid a ton of money (if you believe the news).  What you are saying in your first paragraph is not really relevant here.  He doesnt have to honor what he signed if he signs the new offer.  

 
davearm said:
Not sure how it makes sense that Elliott has to honor his end of a signed contract despite overperforming his salary, but the Cowboys are free to walk away whenever they please if/when he underperforms his salary.
Click to expand...
It may not be fair but that is the way it works in the NFL.  

 
BradtheAg said:
Sitting at 1.05 in a PPR draft that starts at 2:00 today.  Don't think I'm willing to risk missed games
Click to expand...
Same for me this evening

It's my highest stakes league and the one I most want to win

Dont think I can do it unless I get enough alcohol in me before it starts :lol:

 
Cowboysfan8 said:
Same for me this evening

It's my highest stakes league and the one I most want to win

Dont think I can do it unless I get enough alcohol in me before it starts :lol:
Click to expand...
Good luck, man. That is going to be what makes or breaks your season. I personally love Zeke as a runner, I'd hate to be a fan of the team and be playing fantasy. All those moving parts.

No pressure.

I've gone down with the Josh Gordon ship three times. You're not alone if you sink. 

 
Godsbrother said:
It may not be fair but that is the way it works in the NFL.  
Click to expand...
Right -- the way it works in the NFL is that owners won't/don't honor contracts, so neither do the players. 

Which is why your "once he signed the contract he is bound to the terms of the agreement just like any other profession" take was odd, since it clearly doesn't apply to this particular profession.

 
davearm said:
Right -- the way it works in the NFL is that owners won't/don't honor contracts, so neither do the players. 

Which is why your "once he signed the contract he is bound to the terms of the agreement just like any other profession" take was odd, since it clearly doesn't apply to this particular profession.
Click to expand...
How don't they?  I assume you're talking about cutting a player with a year or two left on his deal, right?  If the deal has guaranteed money remaining on it, it's paid.  If it's not guaranteed, it's not paid.  It's all right there in the contract.  The owners aren't breaking the deal, the contact is written to allow that to happen.  If the players don't want that....then only sign fully guaranteed deals (which is what the rookie contracts are going to, and what Cousins signed).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
davearm said:
Not sure how it makes sense that Elliott has to honor his end of a signed contract despite overperforming his salary, but the Cowboys are free to walk away whenever they please if/when he underperforms his salary.

These holdout situations are purely a byproduct of the owners refusing to offer fully guaranteed deals (understandably).

They have the power to end holdouts altogether by moving to a fully guaranteed structure like in the NBA and MLB.  Holdouts don't happen in those leagues.
Click to expand...
Not true in this case. Zeke’s rookie contract was fully guaranteed. I assume the 5th year option is as well. Cowboys walk away they still have to pay him.

 
Salaries are either guaranteed or they aren't depending on the language. That's not the issue.

This goes both ways. Nobody feels sorry for the owners when players are underperforming in relation to their salary. Salaries are simply the result of negotiations & the money often doesn't line up with performance (on both ends of the spectrum).

The bottom line is the salary cap is the elephant in the room. The ultimate goal is to win the Super Bowl & tough decisions need to be made. It's not as black & white as people make it out to be.

 
Cobbler1 said:
Not true in this case. Zeke’s rookie contract was fully guaranteed. I assume the 5th year option is as well. Cowboys walk away they still have to pay him.
Click to expand...
The CBA is set up to cap the first contract for rookies.  These rookies had no say in the CBA.  It's within their right to not want to play under an agreement they had zero say in.  

 
ILUVBEER99 said:
The CBA is set up to cap the first contract for rookies.  These rookies had no say in the CBA.  It's within their right to not want to play under an agreement they had zero say in.  
Click to expand...
Their moral right, not their legal one. It's long been held as a pro-union position that labor gets to negotiate for those not already in the workforce. 

 
ILUVBEER99 said:
The CBA is set up to cap the first contract for rookies.  These rookies had no say in the CBA.  It's within their right to not want to play under an agreement they had zero say in.  
Click to expand...
Then they can go play in any other league, or literally do anything else they want.  If they want to play in the NFL for their choice of careers, it comes with some rules.

 
ChuckLiddell said:
Lost in this is the news (if you believe it) that he was offered the 2nd richest RB contract in NFL history,.  They are giving him an opportunity to not have to honor the last 2 years of his contract and to be paid a ton of money (if you believe the news).  What you are saying in your first paragraph is not really relevant here.  He doesnt have to honor what he signed if he signs the new offer.  
Click to expand...
Local Dallas media reported at the time that the problem was the amount of guaranteed money not the total value of the contract.  

from spotrac.com 

"Todd Gurley signed a 4 year, $57,500,000 contract with the Los Angeles Rams, including a $21,000,000 signing bonus, $45,000,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $14,375,000. In 2019, Gurley will earn a base salary of $5,000,000, while carrying a cap hit of $9,200,000 and a dead cap value of $34,850,000."

 
moondog said:
Local Dallas media reported at the time that the problem was the amount of guaranteed money not the total value of the contract.  

from spotrac.com 

"Todd Gurley signed a 4 year, $57,500,000 contract with the Los Angeles Rams, including a $21,000,000 signing bonus, $45,000,000 guaranteed, and an average annual salary of $14,375,000. In 2019, Gurley will earn a base salary of $5,000,000, while carrying a cap hit of $9,200,000 and a dead cap value of $34,850,000."
Click to expand...
That's kinda an insane contract.

 
Cobbler1 said:
Not true in this case. Zeke’s rookie contract was fully guaranteed. I assume the 5th year option is as well. Cowboys walk away they still have to pay him.
Click to expand...
Yes and NFL Rookie contracts dramatically suppress salaries.  Sam Bradford signed for $78M in 2010.  The next year under the new CBA and rookie wage scale, Cam Newton got $22M.

How noble of the owners to guarantee those ~75% off deals.

Holding out is the leverage the players have under the system both sides have agreed to.  Everyone has their eyes open here.  This "Zeke has to honor his contract" stuff is naive, at best.

 
davearm said:
Yes and NFL Rookie contracts dramatically suppress salaries.  Sam Bradford signed for $78M in 2010.  The next year under the new CBA and rookie wage scale, Cam Newton got $22M.

How noble of the owners to guarantee those ~75% off deals.

Holding out is the leverage the players have under the system both sides have agreed to.  Everyone has their eyes open here.  This "Zeke has to honor his contract" stuff is naive, at best.
Click to expand...
It's a salary cap league.  If player A gets cut, player B gets his money.  Owners are trying to maximize the good players that they can fit under the cap.  With very few exceptions, all teams are spending to the cap.  It's not like they are trying to be mean, the money is just going to another guy.

 
brewer said:
It's a salary cap league.  If player A gets cut, player B gets his money.  Owners are trying to maximize the good players that they can fit under the cap.  With very few exceptions, all teams are spending to the cap.  It's not like they are trying to be mean, the money is just going to another guy.
Click to expand...
One could reasonably argue that the cap itself is an artificial wage ceiling and that the amount of money allotted by the cap itself is indeed for the benefit of the owners. 

 
brewer said:
It's a salary cap league.  If player A gets cut, player B gets his money.  Owners are trying to maximize the good players that they can fit under the cap.  With very few exceptions, all teams are spending to the cap.  It's not like they are trying to be mean, the money is just going to another guy.
Click to expand...
Owners are trying to maximize the money they put into their bank accounts. The salary cap and the CBA are designed to transfer money away from the players and to the owners. The NFL has the weakest labor union in pro sports, for various reasons, and the most recent CBA screwed both rookies and vets.

 
rockaction said:
One could reasonably argue that the cap itself is an artificial wage ceiling and that the amount of money allotted by the cap itself is indeed for the benefit of the owners. 
Click to expand...
Absolutely.  And the union should likely address that at the CBA.  For now, this is what they are dealing with.

My point is that everyone seems to feel bad for the guy who gets cut and doesn't see the $ from the end of his contract.  When that happens, someone else gets that money instead.  Why are they not as deserving?

 
brewer said:
Absolutely.  And the union should likely address that at the CBA.  For now, this is what they are dealing with.

My point is that everyone seems to feel bad for the guy who gets cut and doesn't see the $ from the end of his contract.  When that happens, someone else gets that money instead.  Why are they not as deserving?
Click to expand...
That's a good point. If you're hitting the cap ceiling, a player is getting paid with that money. True.

 
davearm said:
Yes and NFL Rookie contracts dramatically suppress salaries.  Sam Bradford signed for $78M in 2010.  The next year under the new CBA and rookie wage scale, Cam Newton got $22M.

How noble of the owners to guarantee those ~75% off deals.

Holding out is the leverage the players have under the system both sides have agreed to.  Everyone has their eyes open here.  This "Zeke has to honor his contract" stuff is naive, at best.
Click to expand...
It was the veteran players at the time that wanted a rookie wage scale to prevent players like Sam Bradford coming in without ever playing a down making more than the veterans.

 
davearm said:
Yes and NFL Rookie contracts dramatically suppress salaries.  Sam Bradford signed for $78M in 2010.  The next year under the new CBA and rookie wage scale, Cam Newton got $22M.

How noble of the owners to guarantee those ~75% off deals.

Holding out is the leverage the players have under the system both sides have agreed to.  Everyone has their eyes open here.  This "Zeke has to honor his contract" stuff is naive, at best.
Click to expand...
Not arguing that. Just where you said owners didn’t have to honor their end of the Zeke contract when in fact, they do because it’s fully guaranteed. If you want to argue that owners don’t have to honor their side of other not fully guaranteed contracts that’s fine. But you have to acknowledge that everyone has their eyes open to that as well. Players know going in that they are only certain of getting the guaranteed portion of the contract. If they want more guaranteed money they have to give something like less overall money. Or if they really want to let their level of play reflect their salary they can go less guaranteed money and add more incentives. Or just sign one year deals after their rookie contract is up.

 
ILUVBEER99 said:
The CBA is set up to cap the first contract for rookies.  These rookies had no say in the CBA.  It's within their right to not want to play under an agreement they had zero say in.  
Click to expand...
See above. Not arguing one way or the other on that. The post you quoted was my response to someone saying that the owners didn’t have to honor their end of the Zeke deal. Which isn’t the case.

 
CalBear said:
Owners are trying to maximize the money they put into their bank accounts. The salary cap and the CBA are designed to transfer money away from the players and to the owners. The NFL has the weakest labor union in pro sports, for various reasons, and the most recent CBA screwed both rookies and vets.
Click to expand...
I love it when people try to characterize business owners as some kind of villains when they act in the interest of their business.

Paying guys millions and millions to play a game in order to profit millions or billions more - seems to be how it is supposed to work right?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cobbler1 said:
Not arguing that. Just where you said owners didn’t have to honor their end of the Zeke contract when in fact, they do because it’s fully guaranteed. If you want to argue that owners don’t have to honor their side of other not fully guaranteed contracts that’s fine. But you have to acknowledge that everyone has their eyes open to that as well. Players know going in that they are only certain of getting the guaranteed portion of the contract. If they want more guaranteed money they have to give something like less overall money. Or if they really want to let their level of play reflect their salary they can go less guaranteed money and add more incentives. Or just sign one year deals after their rookie contract is up.
Click to expand...
Seems like a distinction without a difference.  They're both deals that heavily favor the team, where the players' only leverage is to hold out for a better deal.

 
davearm said:
Not sure how it makes sense that Elliott has to honor his end of a signed contract despite overperforming his salary, but the Cowboys are free to walk away whenever they please if/when he underperforms his salary.

These holdout situations are purely a byproduct of the owners refusing to offer fully guaranteed deals (understandably).

They have the power to end holdouts altogether by moving to a fully guaranteed structure like in the NBA and MLB.  Holdouts don't happen in those leagues.
Click to expand...
There's that over-performing talk again. Players don't get paid for what they've done, they get paid for what they can do.

Unless Zeke put a $15 million roof on Jerry's house, then YES... they should pay him for what he's done.

 
Milkman said:
Nah they should pay them more if they outperformed their contract. They won't but they should. 
Click to expand...
OK, so should players give money back if they under-perform on their contract?

What Zeke did is simply his resume/body of work for future negotiation... and that's what he's doing with it.

 
Dizzy said:
OK, so should players give money back if they under-perform on their contract?

What Zeke did is simply his resume/body of work for future negotiation... and that's what he's doing with it.
Click to expand...
They do all the time when they underperform. They are asked to take pay cuts. If they refuse they are cut. 

 
davearm said:
Yes and NFL Rookie contracts dramatically suppress salaries.  Sam Bradford signed for $78M in 2010.  The next year under the new CBA and rookie wage scale, Cam Newton got $22M.

How noble of the owners to guarantee those ~75% off deals.

Holding out is the leverage the players have under the system both sides have agreed to.  Everyone has their eyes open here.  This "Zeke has to honor his contract" stuff is naive, at best.
Click to expand...
I dont think anybody has really said that Zeke has to honor his contract, but had someone said that yes, it would be naive.  The issue some have is that he was offered what was reportedly a very lucrative deal and he turned it down, despite having little leverage due to the fact that he is under contract and basically under team control for the next 4 seasons.  If the Cowboys want to play hardball, they can dictate terms.  He has a lot more to lose than they do, and him acting like a petulant 2nd grader out in Cabo having his messenger boy spew vitriol about his teammate's contracts is not helping his cause.  Or at least I really hope it isnt.

 
Dizzy said:
OK, so should players give money back if they under-perform on their contract?

What Zeke did is simply his resume/body of work for future negotiation... and that's what he's doing with it.
Click to expand...
This.  I am an Orioles fan.  Chris Davis should owe the team $160M back from that $161M contract he signed based on this logic.

 
Milkman said:
They do all the time when they underperform. They are asked to take pay cuts. If they refuse they are cut. 
Click to expand...
But they dont give back the huge amount of money that they were already paid while underperforming.  This goes to Dizzy's point.  Those players you are referencing put out a few bad years on their resume, so their future negotiation position was a position of weakness.  Had they played real well, they would have been in a position of strength and instead of being cut maybe they are extended.  Zeke has played real well and was rewarded by reportedly being offered a huge pay increase going forward.  It wasnt as pretty as Todd's contract, so he turned his nose up at it.  Thats where we are.

 
ChuckLiddell said:
I dont think anybody has really said that Zeke has to honor his contract, but had someone said that yes, it would be naive.  The issue some have is that he was offered what was reportedly a very lucrative deal and he turned it down, despite having little leverage due to the fact that he is under contract and basically under team control for the next 4 seasons.  If the Cowboys want to play hardball, they can dictate terms.  He has a lot more to lose than they do, and him acting like a petulant 2nd grader out in Cabo having his messenger boy spew vitriol about his teammate's contracts is not helping his cause.  Or at least I really hope it isnt.
Click to expand...
Nobody has any idea what he was offered.  Zero idea.  All this “close to Gurley’s deal” matters not one bit unless the details have been disclosed.  Gurley’s contract was $58MM with $22MM guaranteed.  So the Cowboys can offer something “close” to Gurley’s deal with $54MM, but if they’re only guaranteeing $10MM then it’s really not close at all.  

To continue on about him turning down their “very lucrative deal” with comments like “he’s acting like a petulant 2nd grader” makes you seem irrationally full of hate for  what boils down to a contract negotiation.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
College RB Quinshon Judkins, Ohio St.
Replies
22
Views
862
Wigglytuff's Gruff
Wigglytuff's Gruff
greenmountaingoat
Ainias Smith-WR- Draft eligible Texas A&M
Replies
9
Views
277
Drunken Cowboy
D
BobbyLayne
Running Backs Don't Matter 101
4 5 6
Replies
284
Views
10K
humpback
H

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
Top