Club Mgmt. Board of Directors as led by President Dave Barham

Remove this Banner Ad

 
Last edited:
Lore said:
Turns out the most interesting thing is that they barely said anything.
Click to expand...
The sunday show they only really focus on a snap review of the round. Wednesday morning show is when the delve into the news a bit before doing a preview of upcoming games.
 
joey_jo_jo said:
The sunday show they only really focus on a snap review of the round. Wednesday morning show is when the delve into the news a bit before doing a preview of upcoming games.
Click to expand...
We’ve been getting a solid roast in both shows for a couple of weeks but ye
 

Log in to remove this ad.

This really was amateur hour by Essendon. Is that what we do now? We sack coaches who have had one bad year? One. On what basis? Team performance they say? Uncompetitive in 5 or 6 games they say?

That may be true, but so what? How uncompetitive was Richmond in 2016 (13th with a percentage of 78%) Or Melbourne in 2019 (5 wins with a percentage of 78%). Richmond, remember lost by 120 points in the last round of 2016

BOTH those clubs could have used the old "we were uncompetitive in several games" excuse but they didn't. They realized that there is more to a football club than just the coach and they backed the coach.

Rutten had only been coach for 45 games and the first season we made the finals. And it's not like he had a 5 year contract. It was a three year contract. He only had one year left, and we had only struggled for one season. You always learn more from a bad season than you do from a good one. So give him the chance to learn from his mistakes. If the performances are still poor after two consecutive bad years then fine, move the coach on. But ONE bad year without giving him the opportunity to make amends and learn from it? Give me a break.

And not only that, the excuses from the club reek of the same illogical crap you hear from idiot supporters. "We were uncompetitive in several games, so we've taken this path". What do dumb supporters do? They say the same thing. They want to sack the coach. We all see them, we all hear them. They're idiots and we we tolerate them at work, and on bigfooty, but it is just ramblings from dumb supporters whenever any club has a bad loss. Yes, there are times to sack a coach, but not after one bad season

You'd expect the higher-ups at a football club would be a bit smarter, a bit more analytical, a bit more nuanced and thoughtful. Such as analyzing recent football history at other clubs and seeing what has worked. For example, they said we are on the lookout for a coach with senior coaching experience. Do these numbskulls realize that the the last 12 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in their first senior job? Do these numbskulls realize that 17 of the last 18 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in their first appointment? Do they realize that Essendon has ALREADY gone down that path with premiership coaches Thompson and Worsfold, and it didn't work out. Have they not analyzed the failures of Thompson and Worsfold at Essendon, Malthouse at Carlton, Pagan at Carlton, Blight and St.Kilda, Roos at Melbourne etc.

And then there's the much needed external review. Why would you sack the coach before this? What if the review recommends keeping the coach? Isn't the whole point of the review to analyze all aspects of the club, including analyzing the people responsible for making the decisions about the coach?

What the hell have we just done? The people making these decisions have no idea. So insular, so stupid, so panicked, so impatient, so ignorant of what has been successful outside our club and what we can learn from those outside successes.
 
Last edited:
Dan26 said:
This really was amateur hour by Essendon. Is that what we do now? We sack coaches who have had one bad year? One. On what basis? Team performance they say? Uncompetitive in 5 or 6 games they say?

That may be true, but so what? How uncompetitive was Richmond in 2016 (13th with a percentage of 78%) Or Melbourne in 2019 (5 wins with a percentage of 78%). Richmond, remember lost by 120 points in the last round of 2016

BOTH those clubs could have used the old "we were uncompetitive in several games" excuse but they didn't. They realized that there is more to a football club than just the coach and they backed the coach.

Rutten had only been coach for 45 games and the first season we made the finals. And it's not like he had a 5 year contract. It was a three year contract. He only had one year left, and we had only struggled for one season. You always learn more from a bad season than you do from a good one. So give him the chance to learn from his mistakes. If the performances are still poor after two consecutive bad years then fine, move the coach on. But ONE bad year without giving him the opportunity to make amends and learn from it? Give me a break.

And not only that, the excuses from the club reek of the same illogical crap you hear from idiot supporters. "We were uncompetitive in several games, so we've taken this path". What do dumb supporters do? They say the same thing. They want to sack the coach. We all see them, we all hear them. They're idiots and we we tolerate them at work, and on bigfooty, but it is just ramblings from dumb supporters whenever any club has a bad loss. Yes, there are times to sack a coach, but not after one bad season

You'd expect the higher-ups at a football club would be a bit smarter, a bit more analytical, a bit more nuanced and thoughtful. Such as analyzing recent football history at other clubs and seeing what has worked. For example, they said we are on the lookout for a coach with senior coaching experience. Do these numbskulls realize that the the last 12 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in the first senior job? Do these numbskulls realize that 17 of the last 18 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in their first appointment? Do they realize that Essendon has ALREADY gone down that path with premiership coaches Thompson and Worsfold, and it didn't work out. Have they not analyzed the failures of Thompson and Worsfold at Essendon, Malthouse at Carlton, Pagan at Carlton, Blight and St.Kilda, Roos at Melbourne etc.

And then there the much needed external review. Why would you sack the coach before this? What if the review recommends keeping the coach? Isn't the whole point of the review to analyze all aspects of the club, including analyzing the people responsible for making the decisions about the coach?

What the hell have we just done? The people making these decisions have no idea. So insular, so stupid, so panicked, so impatient, so ignorant of what has been successful outside our club and what we can learn from those outside successes.
Click to expand...
The inmates are running the asylum, have been for 20 years. And you’re absolutely spot on in everything you’ve said.
 
Dan26 said:
This really was amateur hour by Essendon. Is that what we do now? We sack coaches who have had one bad year? One. On what basis? Team performance they say? Uncompetitive in 5 or 6 games they say?

That may be true, but so what? How uncompetitive was Richmond in 2016 (13th with a percentage of 78%) Or Melbourne in 2019 (5 wins with a percentage of 78%). Richmond, remember lost by 120 points in the last round of 2016

BOTH those clubs could have used the old "we were uncompetitive in several games" excuse but they didn't. They realized that there is more to a football club than just the coach and they backed the coach.

Rutten had only been coach for 45 games and the first season we made the finals. And it's not like he had a 5 year contract. It was a three year contract. He only had one year left, and we had only struggled for one season. You always learn more from a bad season than you do from a good one. So give him the chance to learn from his mistakes. If the performances are still poor after two consecutive bad years then fine, move the coach on. But ONE bad year without giving him the opportunity to make amends and learn from it? Give me a break.

And not only that, the excuses from the club reek of the same illogical crap you hear from idiot supporters. "We were uncompetitive in several games, so we've taken this path". What do dumb supporters do? They say the same thing. They want to sack the coach. We all see them, we all hear them. They're idiots and we we tolerate them at work, and on bigfooty, but it is just ramblings from dumb supporters whenever any club has a bad loss. Yes, there are times to sack a coach, but not after one bad season

You'd expect the higher-ups at a football club would be a bit smarter, a bit more analytical, a bit more nuanced and thoughtful. Such as analyzing recent football history at other clubs and seeing what has worked. For example, they said we are on the lookout for a coach with senior coaching experience. Do these numbskulls realize that the the last 12 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in the first senior job? Do these numbskulls realize that 17 of the last 18 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in their first appointment? Do they realize that Essendon has ALREADY gone down that path with premiership coaches Thompson and Worsfold, and it didn't work out. Have they not analyzed the failures of Thompson and Worsfold at Essendon, Malthouse at Carlton, Pagan at Carlton, Blight and St.Kilda, Roos at Melbourne etc.

And then there the much needed external review. Why would you sack the coach before this? What if the review recommends keeping the coach? Isn't the whole point of the review to analyze all aspects of the club, including analyzing the people responsible for making the decisions about the coach?

What the hell have we just done? The people making these decisions have no idea. So insular, so ignorant of what has been successful outside our club and what we can learn from those outside successes.
Click to expand...

There is sense of surrealism surrounding how the EFC has handled this, this year was poor but what this club needed was a full assessment of why that was the case to determine if the club was on the right path, this club should have expected a poor season when they are developing a side that with good drafting and proper development could become a handy team in a few years. This year set the low bar for this group to build on.
 
Last edited:
Bombermania said:
There is sense of surrealism surrounding how the EFC has handled this, this year was poor but what this club needed was a full assessment of why that was the case to determine if the club was on the right path. However, this club should have expected a poor season when they are developing a side that with good drafting and proper development could become a handy team in a few years. This year set the low bar for this group to build on.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It's not unusual for clubs to have a poor year when building a team. You don't necessarily want TWO bad years. But even two isn't a deal breaker. Melbourne had two bad years in 2019 and 2020, for example. We could have turned it around next year and surprised a few people. I always think you learn a lot from a bad year. In fact I've mentioned on here in recent weeks, that I sort of WANTED us to have a bad year, because we havn't really had a bad once since 2006 (taking out the drug thing), and it would give Rutten an opportunity to fix some issues instead of having everyone talking us up. Now we are back to ground zero. Again.
 
Last edited:
Dan26 said:
This really was amateur hour by Essendon. Is that what we do now? We sack coaches who have had one bad year? One. On what basis? Team performance they say? Uncompetitive in 5 or 6 games they say?

That may be true, but so what? How uncompetitive was Richmond in 2016 (13th with a percentage of 78%) Or Melbourne in 2019 (5 wins with a percentage of 78%). Richmond, remember lost by 120 points in the last round of 2016

BOTH those clubs could have used the old "we were uncompetitive in several games" excuse but they didn't. They realized that there is more to a football club than just the coach and they backed the coach.

Rutten had only been coach for 45 games and the first season we made the finals. And it's not like he had a 5 year contract. It was a three year contract. He only had one year left, and we had only struggled for one season. You always learn more from a bad season than you do from a good one. So give him the chance to learn from his mistakes. If the performances are still poor after two consecutive bad years then fine, move the coach on. But ONE bad year without giving him the opportunity to make amends and learn from it? Give me a break.

And not only that, the excuses from the club reek of the same illogical crap you hear from idiot supporters. "We were uncompetitive in several games, so we've taken this path". What do dumb supporters do? They say the same thing. They want to sack the coach. We all see them, we all hear them. They're idiots and we we tolerate them at work, and on bigfooty, but it is just ramblings from dumb supporters whenever any club has a bad loss. Yes, there are times to sack a coach, but not after one bad season

You'd expect the higher-ups at a football club would be a bit smarter, a bit more analytical, a bit more nuanced and thoughtful. Such as analyzing recent football history at other clubs and seeing what has worked. For example, they said we are on the lookout for a coach with senior coaching experience. Do these numbskulls realize that the the last 12 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in the first senior job? Do these numbskulls realize that 17 of the last 18 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in their first appointment? Do they realize that Essendon has ALREADY gone down that path with premiership coaches Thompson and Worsfold, and it didn't work out. Have they not analyzed the failures of Thompson and Worsfold at Essendon, Malthouse at Carlton, Pagan at Carlton, Blight and St.Kilda, Roos at Melbourne etc.

And then there the much needed external review. Why would you sack the coach before this? What if the review recommends keeping the coach? Isn't the whole point of the review to analyze all aspects of the club, including analyzing the people responsible for making the decisions about the coach?

What the hell have we just done? The people making these decisions have no idea. So insular, so stupid, so panicked, so impatient, so ignorant of what has been successful outside our club and what we can learn from those outside successes.
Click to expand...


This is a great post and as a Richmond fan I wholeheartedly agree re: our 2016-17 off season.

Look at the Pies in 17-18 with Buckley too. Within one kick of the cup.

Truth here is essendon board decided to go for Clarkson and made the Rutten situation completely untenable.

I've seen a few posts about Truck being too soft compared to Hardwick but the truth is Dimma is a soft man at heart with his players. That's where the great sportsmanship that you saw for Hurley and Gary after the 2020 GF comes from.

Won't get anywhere if you don't back your own people through adversity.
 
Dan26 said:
This really was amateur hour by Essendon. Is that what we do now? We sack coaches who have had one bad year? One. On what basis? Team performance they say? Uncompetitive in 5 or 6 games they say?

That may be true, but so what? How uncompetitive was Richmond in 2016 (13th with a percentage of 78%) Or Melbourne in 2019 (5 wins with a percentage of 78%). Richmond, remember lost by 120 points in the last round of 2016

BOTH those clubs could have used the old "we were uncompetitive in several games" excuse but they didn't. They realized that there is more to a football club than just the coach and they backed the coach.

Rutten had only been coach for 45 games and the first season we made the finals. And it's not like he had a 5 year contract. It was a three year contract. He only had one year left, and we had only struggled for one season. You always learn more from a bad season than you do from a good one. So give him the chance to learn from his mistakes. If the performances are still poor after two consecutive bad years then fine, move the coach on. But ONE bad year without giving him the opportunity to make amends and learn from it? Give me a break.

And not only that, the excuses from the club reek of the same illogical crap you hear from idiot supporters. "We were uncompetitive in several games, so we've taken this path". What do dumb supporters do? They say the same thing. They want to sack the coach. We all see them, we all hear them. They're idiots and we we tolerate them at work, and on bigfooty, but it is just ramblings from dumb supporters whenever any club has a bad loss. Yes, there are times to sack a coach, but not after one bad season

You'd expect the higher-ups at a football club would be a bit smarter, a bit more analytical, a bit more nuanced and thoughtful. Such as analyzing recent football history at other clubs and seeing what has worked. For example, they said we are on the lookout for a coach with senior coaching experience. Do these numbskulls realize that the the last 12 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in the first senior job? Do these numbskulls realize that 17 of the last 18 premierships have been won by clubs whose coach was in their first appointment? Do they realize that Essendon has ALREADY gone down that path with premiership coaches Thompson and Worsfold, and it didn't work out. Have they not analyzed the failures of Thompson and Worsfold at Essendon, Malthouse at Carlton, Pagan at Carlton, Blight and St.Kilda, Roos at Melbourne etc.

And then there the much needed external review. Why would you sack the coach before this? What if the review recommends keeping the coach? Isn't the whole point of the review to analyze all aspects of the club, including analyzing the people responsible for making the decisions about the coach?

What the hell have we just done? The people making these decisions have no idea. So insular, so stupid, so panicked, so impatient, so ignorant of what has been successful outside our club and what we can learn from those outside successes.
Click to expand...
The question we'll probably never know is what Truck was selling them behind closed doors. Publicly he came across as a guy who didn't have the answers.

If he was asked to present to the board in the last couple of weeks then I don't think it was covered by the media. Thinking about it inf probably expect there should've been crisis meetings where Ben got to present what he thought was going wrong, how he was going to fix it and how things were fitting with his vision for the club.
 
Plenty on here knew from the start the club wouldn't have the stomach to push through any form of failure from Rutten perceived or otherwise.

This was a hail mary from the beginning Hatched by the same feeble minds that rushed the Worsfold extension. The same amateurs that premetiuely slipped from under rocks into high stations either through nepotism or good timing. It's been a 10 year slow motion car wreck that the same people rub our faces in to this day.

This shit show goes on and on and on until these people get shown the door. And if anyone thinks these types leave because they shame or disgrace themselves or realise they aren't up.to it - they never leave voluntarily - It's the same in organisations all.over.
 
yodellinhank said:
The question we'll probably never know is what Truck was selling them behind closed doors. Publicly he came across as a guy who didn't have the answers.

If he was asked to present to the board in the last couple of weeks then I don't think it was covered by the media. Thinking about it inf probably expect there should've been crisis meetings where Ben got to present what he thought was going wrong, how he was going to fix it and how things were fitting with his vision for the club.
Click to expand...
Whatever he was selling privately was good enough for Brasher, Allen, Wellman, Madden, Campbell, Mahoney and even Sheedy up until a week ago, as evidenced by the internal review they were happy with until Sheedy and then Campbell saw the writing on the wall and turned their coats.
 
yodellinhank said:
The question we'll probably never know is what Truck was selling them behind closed doors. Publicly he came across as a guy who didn't have the answers.

If he was asked to present to the board in the last couple of weeks then I don't think it was covered by the media. Thinking about it inf probably expect there should've been crisis meetings where Ben got to present what he thought was going wrong, how he was going to fix it and how things were fitting with his vision for the club.
Click to expand...
where was it said that he presented to the board? Barham didn't seem to know anything about Rutten until after he had spoken to Clarkson.
 
CBombers17 said:
Plenty on here knew from the start the club wouldn't have the stomach to push through any form of failure from Rutten perceived or otherwise.

This was a hail mary from the start. Hatched by the same feeble minds that rushed the Worsfold extension. The same amateurs that premetiuely slipped from under rocks into high stations either through nepotism or good timing. It's been a 10 year slow motion car wreck that the same people rub our faces in to this day.

This s**t show goes on and on and on until these people get shown the door. And if anyone thinks these types leave because they shame or disgrace themselves or realise they aren't up.to it - they never leave voluntarily - It's the same in organisations all.over.
Click to expand...
These same amateurs are the ones now looking to hire an experienced coach who will bring immediate success without waiting for the external review to make any such recommendation about the likelihood of that.


If they want to know what all those other clubs have that we don’t, the simple answer is they have patience in the place of arrogance, empathy and professionalism in place of “bold and courageous”.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Bunk Moreland said:
Review-wise, none of it makes any sense.

You can’t sack your coach before the review.

You can’t try to hire another coach before the review.

You can’t guarantee things before the review.

You can’t know what sort of coach you want before a review.

It’s clear that any “review” is going to be complete bullshit.
Click to expand...

These are some clear and logical facts.
 
Lore said:
These same amateurs are the ones now looking to hire an experienced coach who will bring immediate success without waiting for the external review to make any such recommendation about the likelihood of that.


If they want to know what all those other clubs have that we don’t, the simple answer is they have patience in the place of arrogance, empathy and professionalism in place of “bold and courageous”.
Click to expand...
It's simply not true. Have a look how many coaches in the league have had less than 3 years in the role. Those above 5 have flags or recent top 4 finishes. Head coaches will be chewed up and spat out and if you don't win you aren't going to last.
 
yodellinhank said:
It's simply not true. Have a look how many coaches in the league have had less than 3 years in the role. Those above 5 have flags or recent top 4 finishes. Head coaches will be chewed up and spat out and if you don't win you aren't going to last.
Click to expand...
How many of those who have been at clubs more than five years have won flags in the first three years?
 
Lore said:
How many of those who have been at clubs more than five years have won flags in the first three years?
Click to expand...
The average time into tenure for a premiership for a VFL/AFL coach historically is 3 seasons.

Before 1990 it was 2 seasons, and post-1990 it's up to 4 (the average for the past decade is the same, 4 seasons on average).

Bomber, Hardwick, and particularly Malthouse are huge outliers to the norm which is probably worth bearing in mind, but the fact that the trend is changing however slightly tells us a story.

Perhaps it wasn't the best thing for our club to have a regime that continued from 1981 and took us fairly deep into the modern era because that seems to be all they understand now.
 
www.codesports.com.au

Optics over substance catches up with Bombers

In the days leading up to Essendon’s elimination final against West Coast in 2019, staffers from the club’s administration decided to put up red and black balloons in the foyer of The Hangar to celebrate the Bombers’ return to September action.
www.codesports.com.au www.codesports.com.au

Interesting one.

Rutten played politics too (is this a good thing or a bad thing?)
Rutten has been known to play footy politics himself, particularly during his early years at the Bombers, but he was made to appear a highly sympathetic figure by the way the Dons handled his final week in the job.
Click to expand...

The staff tore shreds off Barham too:
Barham copped it both from Essendon players over the way the week panned out, but so too when he addressed staff.
Click to expand...

The knives come out — gossip about Truck including someone from Richmond talking to the journo:
The truth is not everyone at the Tigers was a fan. At a farewell event for the retiring Brendon Goddard held at the end of 2018, it’s understood a Richmond employee raised concerns with a senior Essendon figure about some of Rutten’s personality traits. This was just as Rutten’s arrival at the Bombers was being confirmed. The club was probably too far down the track and hired him anyway.

Some of the concerns about Rutten materialised once he arrived at Tullamarine. While his relationships with players were generally strong, he alienated a host of football department staffers, particularly early. A schism emerged between those who were aligned more to Rutten and Richardson, and those who were closer to Worsfold. It all came to a head at the end of 2019. Those there at the time are still of the view that senior Essendon figures were disappointed the club qualified for the 2019 finals series, because it meant that Worsfold could not be sacked; Rutten not parachuted in per the plan.

Instead Campbell authorised the coaching handover, which today can be deemed a categorical failure. Rutten was on the nose further during a toxic stay in the Queensland hub during the Covid-19-shaped 2020 season. To his immense credit, he improved relationships with some players, with the departures of a quartet of senior players at the end of that year allowing him to mould a younger group in his image.

But more than anything, Rutten could not stop the leaks. For once when it comes to Essendon, that has nothing to do with those of the journalistic variety. The Bombers simply could not defend. They were the only team to lose kicking a triple-digit score in 2021. They did it three times. This year, they have conceded the third-most points in the league. Rutten was supposed to instil a blue-collar approach, emphasising team defence. The irony was not lost on some of his former colleagues that in his final match at the helm, the Dons coughed up 21 goals against his old mob.
Click to expand...

Optics:
There are many lessons to be learnt for Essendon as they ponder how this debacle came to be. The biggest is that the club powerbrokers, particularly Campbell if he somehow survives the impending external review, favouring optics over substance will eventually catch up with you.
Click to expand...

Which along with self-preservation, led to:
  • the succession plan rather than sacking Worsfold
  • co-opting Kevin Sheedy to join the board in 2020 to stave off the threat of a spill
  • eschewing an external review mid-year
  • bury a workplace complaint about Campbell 8 years ago, which resurfaced recently when the Aus pursued it
  • Cherny also noted that bringing Hird back would serve the same purpose with trying to placate the members

Re: Sheedy
  • all but killed off any hope of Clarkson through his ridiculous and insulting comments about Clarkson, North and Tasmania in a radio spot on 5AA.
  • crossed the floor against Brasher
  • remains an unabashed supporter of list manager Adrian Dodoro

Dodoro’s relationship with Mahoney has become strained, “in part over comments Mahoney made to the board about the club’s list management, believed to have circled back to Dodoro”.
 
Lord Nicholson said:
The average time into tenure for a premiership for a VFL/AFL coach historically is 3 seasons.

Before 1990 it was 2 seasons, and post-1990 it's up to 4 (the average for the past decade is the same, 4 seasons on average).

Bomber, Hardwick, and particularly Malthouse are huge outliers to the norm which is probably worth bearing in mind, but the fact that the trend is changing however slightly tells us a story.

Perhaps it wasn't the best thing for our club to have a regime that continued from 1981 and took us fairly deep into the modern era because that seems to be all they understand now.
Click to expand...

The biggest change for me is back in the day, the coach WAS the club. He did everything. If you got a good one, he'd change the whole direction of your club. So could a bad one.

There's now dozens and dozens of people doing different things on the football side of the club. I think that was part of the reason Hardwick and Bomber survived, certainly - it was recognised that they needed more help in certain areas or things taken off their hands etc. Then the club flourished.

This is one of the big failings of the approach we've taken for mine... it's just so bloody old fashioned. "We're going shit, change the coach!". There's so much more to it than that. If we actually did a proper review it may not have much to do with the coach. Of course, we're not. We just sacked the coach.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Club Mgmt. Board of Directors as led by President Dave Barham

Similar threads

VelvetSledge
  • Locked
  • Sticky
MVP 2024 BigFooty Essendon Board POTY Award - ZACH MERRETT wins again!
Replies
24
Views
3K
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
Lore
Mod. Notice Welcome Nuggs Bunny, new Essendon board mod!
Replies
13
Views
1K
Vindicater
Vindicater
Beerfish
  • Poll
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Poster Of The Year - The Scales - Congratulations eDPS!
Replies
14
Views
1K
VelvetSledge
VelvetSledge
Nuggs Bunny
Competitions 2024 Essendon Board My Boy Draft - Round 2 now started
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
182
Views
6K
citizen-erased
citizen-erased
Sporno 4 Pyros
Sport The Essendon Board’s Paris 2024 Olympics Thread
2 3
Replies
63
Views
2K
Sporno 4 Pyros
Sporno 4 Pyros
RedmanWasHere
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Mock Draft
5 6 7 8 9
Replies
211
Views
10K
citizen-erased
citizen-erased
Beerfish
  • Locked
Competitions 2023 Essendon Board Poster Of The Year - The Scales - Nomination Thread - Win 1 year free platinum BF experience!
Replies
22
Views
1K
Lore
Lore

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top