Jump to content
Indianapolis Colts
Indianapolis Colts Fan Forum

2nd and 40


cdgacoltsfan

Recommended Posts

20 hours ago, braveheartcolt said:

And the Bolts defense knew that as well.....

 

And they weren't expecting the draw play that is run almost every time that situation comes up?

 

They knew that Luck to Hilton was going to be a thing at the end, too. But it still worked. Why? Because it's our strength. No matter how much we want to be and how much we try, we aren't a running team. When was the last time we had a run go for 40 yards? 30 yards? When you look at our big chunk plays, they are passes. We have guys with wheels fast enough to get YAC, as we saw on the final TD Sunday. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 83
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic


23 hours ago, Mitch Connors said:



 



Try to come up with the first and here are the things that could go right:



  - completions and no 1st down (field position)



  - completions and a 1st down



  - completions and a TD



  - defensive holding/P.I.  1st down



 





dont forget...illegal contact-first down


Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dustin said:

They threw the ball on the very next play. Trying not to cause a turnover is not an argument. 

 

Of course it is.     Worse,  you know it is.

 

You've reduced to caveman thinking.       Throw or not throw.

 

You eliminate the types of throws....   3 steps, 5 steps,  7 steps,  roll out.   etc.

 

But you're smart enough to know this.       You're just not honest enough to argue the point.     You try to make it black or white,  when there are all sorts of shades of gray involved.      You just pretend they don't exist.

 

Nice try.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/26/2016 at 2:34 PM, Mitch Connors said:

 

Try to come up with the first and here are the things that could go right:

  - completions and no 1st down (field position)

  - completions and a 1st down

  - completions and a TD

  - defensive holding/P.I.  1st down

 

 

There are 32 Head Coaches in the NFL.     

 

Why do basically all 32 go conservative on 2nd and 40?      What do these guys know that apparently you don't?

 

Trying to make this a Pagano-thing is weak.     It's not an issue for him,  it's an issue for all HC's.   They're reluctant to risk a turnover or another negative play in that circumstance. 

 

Punt and live to fight another day.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, braveheartcolt said:

Short pass, with no real conviction in getting a first down. But a good point nonetheless.

 

Getting a 1st down isn't even the first priority. Its getting an extra 6-7 yards on the previous play to flip the field on a punt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Of course it is.     Worse,  you know it is.

 

You've reduced to caveman thinking.       Throw or not throw.

 

You eliminate the types of throws....   3 steps, 5 steps,  7 steps,  roll out.   etc.

 

But you're smart enough to know this.       You're just not honest enough to argue the point.     You try to make it black or white,  when there are all sorts of shades of gray involved.      You just pretend they don't exist.

 

Nice try.

 

 

Not an argument. 

 

If you want to have a discussion about this, please form an argument. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

There are 32 Head Coaches in the NFL.     

 

Why do basically all 32 go conservative on 2nd and 40?      What do these guys know that apparently you don't?

 

Trying to make this a Pagano-thing is weak.     It's not an issue for him,  it's an issue for all HC's.   They're reluctant to risk a turnover or another negative play in that circumstance. 

 

Punt and live to fight another day.....

 

Trends are changing and the notion of giving up on any possession is too. 10 years ago it was a terrible idea to go for it on 4th and 1 on the 50. Today? 20+ teams do it no questions. Why? Because the odds are more likely you get a positive outcome when factoring the passing penalties than a turnover. 

You know who rarely gives up on possessions? Belicheck. I would be shocked to see the Pats not call a slant or screen in that scenario on 2nd down. Belicheck should call You and ask what everyone else always does and he'd be a better coach.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎26‎/‎2016 at 2:54 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

There are zero plays for 2nd and 40,  no matter what our resident genius thinks....

 

But if you try to come up with the first,  here's a sample of what could go wrong....

 

-- Interception.

-- Catch and fumble and the D recovers.

-- Sack and a possible fumble....    

-- Or, just a sack and no fumble and worse field position.

 

There's lots that could go wrong,  and the odds are tiny of anything going right.     You're just trying to get back some of the yardage to help your punt team and the field position battle.

 

I don't agree with this.  You risk an interception, catch, fumble, sack, etc., on any passing play (or run play fumble or loss of yardage for that matter), whether it's 2nd and 3 on the 35 or 2nd and 40 on the 35.  You can accept the drive is dead and still cough the ball up no matter what play you're running.  They're going to be in prevent defense, and if there's one thing Colts fans know, it's how fast teams eat up yardage in 2 minute drill when we're in prevent.  The odds are small of having something go right, sure,  but it's about the same as the odds of really improving field position to a point that it makes a difference.  And even if your goal was to improve field position, that's still not a reason to exclude the passing game.  It's going to be, in all likelihood, your best chance of really actually getting your punter in range for downing the ball inside the 10 given your opponents coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gacoop1 said:

Could have used that 140 Million dollar arm. Skittish OC and HC...Need to man up and take some risk....

Being safe and smart is not being skittish. Luck used that 140 million arm when needed didn't he?

I am still waiting for you to accept the bet I proposed to you. What's the matter? You don't even believe in your own nonsense either?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

I don't agree with this.  You risk an interception, catch, fumble, sack, etc., on any passing play (or run play fumble or loss of yardage for that matter), whether it's 2nd and 3 on the 35 or 2nd and 40 on the 35.  You can accept the drive is dead and still cough the ball up no matter what play you're running.  They're going to be in prevent defense, and if there's one thing Colts fans know, it's how fast teams eat up yardage in 2 minute drill when we're in prevent.  The odds are small of having something go right, sure,  but it's about the same as the odds of really improving field position to a point that it makes a difference.  And even if your goal was to improve field position, that's still not a reason to exclude the passing game.  It's going to be, in all likelihood, your best chance of really actually getting your punter in range for downing the ball inside the 10 given your opponents coverage.

Sorry, I cant agree. We have maybe the best punter in the league so let him earn his money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There seems to be a few who are just arguing for arguments sake. It don't take a rocket scientist to know that field position is crucial.

Just because Pagano played it safe some want to make an issue over it. That is just looking for something to be negative even when there is nothing.

One poster even brought up Belichick and how he would have gone for it. Seems like I remember one time Belichick did go for it and it cost him a trip to the super bowl when it didn't work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mitch Connors said:

 

Trends are changing and the notion of giving up on any possession is too. 10 years ago it was a terrible idea to go for it on 4th and 1 on the 50. Today? 20+ teams do it no questions. Why? Because the odds are more likely you get a positive outcome when factoring the passing penalties than a turnover. 

You know who rarely gives up on possessions? Belicheck. I would be shocked to see the Pats not call a slant or screen in that scenario on 2nd down. Belicheck should call You and ask what everyone else always does and he'd be a better coach.

 

 

Yeah.....  Belichick also won with his 2nd string back-up who has almost no experience and he won with his 3rd string QB who was a rookie.

 

Belichick is in a league of his own.     So, comparing anyone to BB and saying he's not as good is just stating the incredibly obvious.      No one is as good as BB.

 

Oh,  and since I'm 59 and have followed the NFL for 50 years I can share with you that your comment that 10 years ago it was a terrible idea to go for it on 4th and 1 from the 50 is not only false,  it's not even a little bit true.

 

There are a large number of factors that go into making that decision,  but, in general that was true back in the 70's --- maybe.     I'm not sure where you got that idea,  but I'd seriously question it.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/26/2016 at 10:00 PM, NorthernBlue said:

Man people are really searching hard to say something negative about the coaching staff right now

Yup. I can't believe theres an argument about a 2nd and 40. 

 

Whats funny is if they called 2 pass plays and Luck gets picked, these same people would be whining that the Colts should have played it conservative and ran the ball. A lot of stupid posts in this thread quite frankly. And the Colts won the game the last I checked, the 2nd and 40 is meaningless. I guess people have to find something to cry about since we won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

You do realize pretty much every NFL coach would have done the same thing right?

He knows. He just want's to throw every negative thing out there even when there is nothing.

I think he really don't believe anything he says. He is just letting his inner Skip Bayless come out. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/26/2016 at 11:59 AM, lollygagger8 said:

I don't like how we just gave up. I realize it was a long yardage to achieve, but not even trying to advance the ball with throws was lame. 

 

If you are just going to give up like that, just punt it on 2nd down. 

 

???

 

You could punt on 2nd and 40 from your own 21 yard line, or you could punt on 4th and 24 from your own 37 yard line. How is one not better than the other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/26/2016 at 2:27 PM, MR. Blueblood said:

Correct me if I'm wrong, but can't all those things happen every time you decide to throw the ball?  Regardless if it's first and 10, third and 3, or second and 40.

 

I get the point you're making, just the bullet points you are trying to use can happen on ANY GIVEN PLAY in a game.

 

The post was in response to the OP, who basically asked 'what's the worst that could happen?' Yeah, there's lots that can happen, which is the answer whenever someone questions a conservative decision. 

 

The real question is about risk/reward, which is how basically any binary decision should be graded. The risk is something catastrophic happening, and the chances of that were considerable, given the fact that the protection was leaky all day, Luck had given up a sack/fumble/TD at the end of the first half, and he'd thrown a pick earlier in the second quarter. Lots could go wrong.

 

The reward would be a first down, or even a TD. But on that drive, the offense was a mess, the calls were going against the Colts, and you could assume that any well coached team would be very passive in coverage to avoid a cheap defensive holding penalty for a five yard automatic first down. You never know, but you're playing the odds, and the odds weren't in the Colts favor on that drive.

 

Besides all that, it's early in the 4th quarter, you have a tight game, you're at home, the defense is actually playing pretty well, especially in the red zone, and your offense has been moving the ball effectively when they avoid big mistakes. The smart play is to flip the field, rely on your defense, and let the offense get the ball back with a chance to deliver the lead. And that was the eventual outcome.

 

The sequence almost worked out for the Colts, by the way. The Chargers muffed the punt and the Colts almost recovered. 

 

I know fans always want to see the team go 'pedal to the metal,' but the Colts did the smart thing there. (Fans in LOS were even booing when the Colts kneeled it out at the end of the first half, which is a ridiculous response, IMO.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Superman said:

 

???

 

You could punt on 2nd and 40 from your own 21 yard line, or you could punt on 4th and 24 from your own 37 yard line. How is one not better than the other?

 

I'm saying we didn't even try to get a first down. We conceded defeat. If you continue to play like that, you aren't going to win many games. 

 

I would've rather seen them actually try to get a first down instead of just running into a stacked box with a right side O-line that is playing out of position. TY was eating them up all game, at least run a 20 yard route and TRY. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the Colts completed a pass for a first down and there was a holding call on Doyle

 

2nd and 20

 

Then they go deep and complete a 53 yard pass to Rogers - Offensive Pass Interference

 

2nd and 30

 

Then they complete another pass for 12 yards + or - another holding call

 

2nd and 40.

 

The D is dropping back into a prevent D, running the ball in that situation is not bad.  One it's clear the refs are not going to let you have anything big, two the O is facing a loose front 7, so there is a chance the RB can get to the 2nd level and make a move or break a tackle and get a big gain, three you start playing for field position.

 

What I don't get is going empty backfield on 3rd and 5 to 3rd and 3.  Not just the Colts but a lot of teams do this... I would keep a running back in so you have the threat of a run.  Help freeze those LBers for a fraction of a second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Coffeedrinker said:

So the Colts completed a pass for a first down and there was a holding call on Doyle

 

2nd and 20

 

Then they go deep and complete a 53 yard pass to Rogers - Offensive Pass Interference

 

2nd and 30

 

Then they complete another pass for 12 yards + or - another holding call

 

2nd and 40.

 

The D is dropping back into a prevent D, running the ball in that situation is not bad.  One it's clear the refs are not going to let you have anything big, two the O is facing a loose front 7, so there is a chance the RB can get to the 2nd level and make a move or break a tackle and get a big gain, three you start playing for field position.

 

What I don't get is going empty backfield on 3rd and 5 to 3rd and 3.  Not just the Colts but a lot of teams do this... I would keep a running back in so you have the threat of a run.  Help freeze those LBers for a fraction of a second.

 

 I hate empty backfield, especially on third down. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

I'm saying we didn't even try to get a first down. We conceded defeat. If you continue to play like that, you aren't going to win many games. 

 

I would've rather seen them actually try to get a first down instead of just running into a stacked box with a right side O-line that is playing out of position. TY was eating them up all game, at least run a 20 yard route and TRY. 

 

 

 

 It wasn't a stacked box. They were basically in prevent. 

 

I don't know why you are acting like they gave up on the game. It was a bad situation. They decided to live to fight another day. Similar to being backed up against your own end zone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, lollygagger8 said:

 

I'm saying we didn't even try to get a first down. We conceded defeat. If you continue to play like that, you aren't going to win many games. 

 

I would've rather seen them actually try to get a first down instead of just running into a stacked box with a right side O-line that is playing out of position. TY was eating them up all game, at least run a 20 yard route and TRY. 

 

 

 

Don't forget that Pagano also gave up when we had the ball with a minute left and 2 timeouts at the end of the half. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

 It wasn't a stacked box. They were basically in prevent. 

 

I don't know why you are acting like they gave up on the game. It was a bad situation. They decided to live to fight another day. Similar to being backed up against your own end zone. 

 

You're probably right about the stacked box.... I was going off memory.

 

Lol, I'm not acting like they gave up the game, just that series. I'm simply not a fan of giving up as much as you seem to be. With TY in beast mode, why not go for some sideline throws only he can get? He was beating his man all day. If they are incomplete, big deal. You lost what.....10 or so yards? Boomstick would've done his thing either way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

I'm simply not a fan of giving up as much as you seem to be.

 

Yeah, no one is a fan of giving up. They weighed the risk/reward and made a rational decision, one that they believed gave them a better chance of winning the game. 

 

Quote

If they are incomplete, big deal. You lost what.....10 or so yards? Boomstick would've done his thing either way. 

 

This is also strange to me. McAfee doesn't have an unlimited leg, and punt coverage is dependent on hang time, not just distance. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Superman said:

I know fans always want to see the team go 'pedal to the metal,' but the Colts did the smart thing there. (Fans in LOS were even booing when the Colts kneeled it out at the end of the first half, which is a ridiculous response, IMO.) 

Especially after the previous drive ended in a fumble recovery for a touchdown and then we put the ball on the turf the first play of that last drive in the first half.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Especially after the previous drive ended in a fumble recovery for a touchdown and then we put the ball on the turf the first play of that last drive in the first half.

Using the fumble recovery to justify not trying to advance the ball for a shot at a field goal before the half is justified, however, using the fumble by Gore in your argument is not justified.

 

The run by Gore is part of the 'playing it safe' mentality. Most fans would want to see Luck throw the ball, save the clock, and move the ball forward for a shot at a field goal. Instead, Pagano played it safe, and it nearly resulted in a turnover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Superman said:

 

Yeah, no one is a fan of giving up. They weighed the risk/reward and made a rational decision, one that they believed gave them a better chance of winning the game. 

 

 

This is also strange to me. McAfee doesn't have an unlimited leg, and punt coverage is dependent on hang time, not just distance. 

 

We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Just like going for 2 last week, some people thought it was a good idea, some didn't. If we would've lost this game, more people would be questioning this. 

 

 

 

Oh, and McAfee has unlimited everything. Lol 

Image result for pat mcafee meme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Flash said:

Using the fumble recovery to justify not trying to advance the ball for a shot at a field goal before the half is justified, however, using the fumble by Gore in your argument is not justified.

 

The run by Gore is part of the 'playing it safe' mentality. Most fans would want to see Luck throw the ball, save the clock, and move the ball forward for a shot at a field goal. Instead, Pagano played it safe, and it nearly resulted in a turnover.

I'm saying using the fumble TD justified the call to run the ball on 1st and 10 with 55 seconds.  The fumble by Gore was even more justification to just take it in before the half with a tie score.  Hence why I agree with Superman that the boos were unwarranted.  I get what the fans wanted to see, but given the previous two fumbles on 2 plays, there wasn't much reason to throw the ball down field.  Especially when each incomplete stops the clock and should we give the ball back to SD, they have 2 timeouts (at least 1 if we decide to run on 3rd and 10 after an incomplete pass).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I'm good with picking up the option. I kind of agree a little with Ballard that there is more upside to Paye on passing downs. He is a good athlete and he has improved each season. Important that he says healthy, he was quite a raw prospect coming out of college and was then injured alot in his first 2 seasons in the NFL. So I can see why Ballard would like him around for another 2 years to see how much they can improve him. He's also an excellent run defender, which is important to note, especially in that LDE role.
    • Doug….   I’ve just read your latest two posts.   And as has been the recent trend, I don’t understand your logic.   So I’ve got a long post to respond to your long post.    So let me ask you an important question:     Have you noticed in the last month or so that I am responding to your posts very slowly?   I’m taking 8, 10, even 12 hours to respond.    I’m doing it deliberately.  I don’t want us to be going back and forth and back and forth while we’re both awake.  I’m trying to slow the pace of communication so things don’t get heated.  So I’m not trying to pick a fight,  I’m trying to AVOID a fight.   As to your two posts….   I think your memory is playing tricks with you.  Ballard said “let’s take the wide receiver” this draft for Mitchell.  His quote in 2022 after the Colts had no pick in the first round was this…. “Tomorrow,  wide receiver, tight end, tackle, and safety or corner.”   What did Ballard do?   He took those 4 positions in that order.  But not until he had traded DOWN from 35 to 53 for Pierce.   That was Reich’s personal pick.  Ballard was confident the players would be there and they were.   Not possible if everyone has same info as you assert.    Do you remember the 2019 draft when Ballard took Rock, Benagu, Campbell, and Okereke on Day 2,  that was the first year of the popular video series and the most memorable sound was Frank going around the war room high fiving everyone yelling “Four for Four!  Four for Four!”   Those were the guys Frank wanted, those were the guys Ballard got him.   Not possible if every team sees things the same.    The story of the 21 draft was the Colts picking 21.  And Ballard telling the scouts he had a good feeling that Paye, who the Colts ranked 10th on their board, would fall to the Colts.   And he did.   Ballard thought Dayo would fall to pick 54, and he said he likely would’ve taken Dayo at 21 if Paye had been taken.  Ballard was right again.   And again, not possible if everyone sees things the same.    Historically speaking…. In 2012, Seattle had Russell Wilson ranked THIRD on their board.  But they waited to draft him at pick 75 because they thought at 5’10” and 5/8ths,  RW would still be there.  And he was.   That wouldn’t be possible if everyone had mostly similar rankings as you believe.  As for Reimann:  picked 77.  You talk about his value as a left tackle.  Yet he lasted to pick 77.   Any other team could’ve taken him before the Colts did.   They didn’t.  Yet you think it has nothing to do with his age.  I don’t understand the logic you use to reject the age argument.   I don’t see an alternative view that makes sense.    All of these are examples of teams seeing the same thing differently.  They value things differently.  When asked recently, Steichen said he valued quickness in a wide receiver.  For other teams they might value speed, or precision route running.   Every team has its own identity based on what they value.    GMs are different.  Head coaches are different.  Scouts are different.   They are NOT working with the same information.  Every team has their own Big Board and the differences are big, not small.  32 teams, 32 very very different looking boards.     I’m 67.  I have literally studied the draft for more than 50 years.   The draft has always been a passion of mine, even before I became a TV sports producer at age 23.   I’m not making this up.     This post could be longer, but I think it’s gone long enough.  There was much to talk about.   Thanks for reading.               
    • Next year imagine the Colts will be looking at 2 QBs.  My top dual threat/mobile pocket passers are Jalen Milroe, Grayson McCall, and KJ Jefferson.   For offensive lineman got to love LT Kelvin Banks Jr who managed to hold his own versus Will Anderson a few years ago and LG Donovan Jackson.  Jackson has generated all-conference honors the past two seasons; Nelson's contract expires at the end of 2026 where he will be 30 years old.   So far for running backs I like Treveyon Henderson, DJ Giddens, and Kyle Monangai.  Each back knows how to secure the rock.  Last I checked both Dalvin Cook and Damien Harris are still free agents that would improve our roster.   Not sure if we need a top talented wide receiver early but am interested in Tre Harris and Ricky White.  While De'Corian Clark been compared to Alec Pierce and made Bruce Feldman's Freak list.  Still need to see where his high school numbers would have ranked compared to this year's draft class.     Plenty of defensive lineman to like in the next draft and probably one of the best groups coming out.   Edge Princely Umanmielen - one I feel is a fit for the Colts Edge Jack Sawyer is another stud that I want to pair with Latu and Paye Edge James Pearce Jr. DT 3-tech Tyleik Williams Edge/DL Mykel Willaims - as a freshman led all FBS true freshman edge defenders LDT Kenneth Grant NT/DT Walter Nolan Edge Dani Dennis-Sutton Edge Landon Jackson Edge Patrick Payton Edge Tyler Baron DL Shermar Turner - been one of the more disruptive DTs in the SEC.  Has a quick first step and body control to shoot the gaps. NT/DT Tonka Hemingway Edge Jasheen Davis NT/DT Alfred Collins. Linebackers got an interesting group of prospects to keep an eye on from the following: WLB Jack Kiser WLB Danny Stutsman LB Dasan McCullough MLB/OLB Jay Higgins LB/Edge Collin Oliver LB Eugene Asante SLB/Edge Khordae Sydnor LB Keaten Wade LB/Edge Steve Linton WLB Eric Gentry Read where some say this is a very weak safety class but got a few that seem to have potential.  This draft class I noticed more excel in press/man more than zone but still very capable of playing both.  Some of the defensive backs I like so far are: LCB Will Johnson CB Benjamin Morrison CB Ricardo Hallman SS Kevin Winston Jr - Blackmon signed a 1-year deal but only a 2% missed tackle rate and ranked 2nd among all safeties in 2023. SS Xavier Nwankpa - 4.39s-forty speed reminds me of Nick Cross FS Rod Moore - excellent 4.40s-forty speed FS Hunter Wohler - slower 4.52s-forty speed, if can improve his speed might be better than Rod Moore CB Tacario Davis CB Maxwell Hairston FS Jahdae Barron CB Jacobee Bryant CB Jordan Hancock CB Denver Harris SS Keon Sabb CB Malik Spencer CB Aydan White CB Tommi Hill - In 2023 had an outstanding QB rating when targeted of 38.6.  With another solid year Hill could move up the draft boards. Still on the lookout of those players not listed on the primary draft boards that the Colts always seem to find hidden gems to draft.
    • This is the list of Retired Colts Numbers. Peyton Manning — No. 18 Johnny Unitas — No. 19 Buddy Young — No. 22 Lenny Moore — No. 24 Art Donovan — No. 70 Jim Parker — No. 77 Raymond Berry — No. 82 Gino Marchetti — No. 89
    • a lot of the recent super bowl winners had game changing tight ends bowers would have been a nice addition but i like who we got, imo an a plus draft  
  • Members

    • TheNewGuy

      TheNewGuy 16

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Virtuoso80

      Virtuoso80 435

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Behle

      Behle 102

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Nadine

      Nadine 8,136

      Administrators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • TheBlueAndWhite

      TheBlueAndWhite 154

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Yoshinator

      Yoshinator 9,389

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • SOMDColtsfan

      SOMDColtsfan 418

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CardiacColts

      CardiacColts 342

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Dunk

      Dunk 1,387

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...