View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sat Oct 25, 2014 3:52 am



Reply to topic  [ 31 posts ] 
 Tannehill's pocket 
Author Message
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Tannehill's pocket
Quote:
The defenders are often found to be closing in on Tannehill within 2.5 seconds of the snap. That is not nearly enough time to go through progressions.

"2.5 (seconds) is about the right time a quarterback wants to scan three to four reads and get (a) pass off and not get sacked. Any less is tough," a former AFC scout told Bleacher Report. "If there's great pass protection and no one's open, the quarterback has to scramble after three (seconds) or so as it breaks down."

Tannehill has regularly had far less time in the pocket than he needs to reasonably go through his progressions.

According to ProFootballFocus.com (subscription required), Tannehill has often been under pressure very quickly after the snap. He's spent 2.5 seconds or less in the pocket on 64.9 percent of his dropbacks, which is the second-highest percentage of such passes in the league.




http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1806 ... -struggles

_________________
Image


Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:26 pm
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6562
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Shame, can you imagine RT with protection?


Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:41 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3096
Location: MA.
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Who was worse?


Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:51 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3096
Location: MA.
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Playaction! tied for the sixth-lowest percentage in the NFL


Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:57 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Kev1321 wrote:
Who was worse?


Matthew Stafford is the only QB who has less time to throw than Tannehill.

Tannehill has less time to throw than 30 or so other QBs in the NFL. Across the board, the metrics indicate that for him to be successful, he would have to make decisions much faster than the overwhelming majority of NFL QBs.

_________________
Image


Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:09 pm
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Kev1321 wrote:
Playaction! tied for the sixth-lowest percentage in the NFL


That goes to coaches abandoning the running game, even in a close game, and to the offensive line doing a poor job of run blocking.

_________________
Image


Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:10 pm
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin
Phinfever Global Moderator, Design Admin

Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2010 8:24 am
Posts: 3875
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Rich wrote:
Kev1321 wrote:
Playaction! tied for the sixth-lowest percentage in the NFL


That goes to coaches abandoning the running game, even in a close game, and to the offensive line doing a poor job of run blocking.


Would like to see some more screen plays... they know our offensive line is weak... let em run through and dump it off to Miller / Thigpen... leave Thomas off the field plz.


Tue Oct 15, 2013 1:11 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3096
Location: MA.
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Rich wrote:
Kev1321 wrote:
Playaction! tied for the sixth-lowest percentage in the NFL


That goes to coaches abandoning the running game, even in a close game, and to the offensive line doing a poor job of run blocking.


Crazy........And even more so when you consider all the close game we have played


Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:07 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3096
Location: MA.
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
We all talked about getting to this point with a winning record would be big...Mostly because the schedule got a little easier but also because we could regroup a young team team and come out in the second half of the season with an identity....This is the part of the season that good coaching should mold the team....It will start with running the ball more.


Tue Oct 15, 2013 2:11 pm
Profile
Phinfever All Pro
Phinfever All Pro
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 321
Location: Scarborough, Maine
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Imagine if he ever gets 3.0 seconds or more. He will be back there yawning and looking at his watch before he throws.


Tue Oct 15, 2013 3:56 pm
Profile
Phinfever All Pro
Phinfever All Pro

Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 6:12 pm
Posts: 278
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
..It will start with running the ball more.[/quote]


:yay:


Tue Oct 15, 2013 4:09 pm
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5641
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Wait ..... the article says 2.5 seconds is what he averages and it's not enough to go thru his read. Yet, the scout quoted said he could get through 3-4 reads in 2.5 seconds and anything less would be tough?

Again, I'm not here saying the O-line should be absolved of a lot of the blame because they deserve it. Part of the reason Tanny gets rid of the ball quickly is because he's being coached that way. Often he does it very well and that is why teams primarily are afraid to blitz him. I also believe in part that's because they want to eventually become a quick paced offense, getting more plays in the game. However, he struggles at time feeling pressure and moving around the pocket accordingly when the ball does not come out fast. When I posted those videos from Landshark (which YouTube took down), it clearly showed multiple instances of Tanny moving himself right into a pass rusher where he should've literally seen him beat his blocker and had enough time to react.

Beyond the coaching, the pocket is NOT ever going to change until we become less one-dimensional or we magically replace most of our current O-line pieces. It's even worse that we do not regularly take advantage of his athleticism (albeit the guy needs to learn how to friggin' slide) and we do not utilize screen passes. I already posted the stats on the worst 5 rushing teams in the league with the combined win percentage (.277) and sacks given up (78). It's not shocking that Tannehill is subjected to more pressure moments or sacks given up. He averages 34.6 attempts a game in an offense that as a 2:1 pass/run ratio.

We've previously discussed whether this regime is coaching him to stand in the pocket. I understand why it's being done, however I think it's running into direct conflict with who he is as a passer. People make claims of "well what if he gets hurt breaking the pocket!!!!" ...... ummm what do those same people think is gonna happen if he continues to get sacked 5-6 times a game?

_________________
Image


Tue Oct 15, 2013 5:35 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5842
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
A 2nd year QB with an already limited college resume should not be expected to have great pocket awareness. Add that to a disastrous offensive line, TE's and RB's who can't block, and a one dimensional offense. They're asking for bad results.

I know its beating a dead horse but its time to change up the play calling, moving the pocket and even forcing the run. 2 carries for 6 yards to create 3rd and 4 is a heck of a lot better than 3rd and 10.


Wed Oct 16, 2013 7:20 am
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6562
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
I love how we keep talking about an easy schedule, nothing is easy. We play the Bills, Pats, and Bengals. Easy? no.


Wed Oct 16, 2013 8:17 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5842
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Makchell wrote:
I love how we keep talking about an easy schedule, nothing is easy. We play the Bills, Pats, and Bengals. Easy? no.


The Fins are playing the Bills without a legit starting QB. They are playing the Pats who just lost Mayo and maybe Talib.

These aren't easy games but the Fins should have a good opportunity to win them.


Wed Oct 16, 2013 8:54 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Rock Sexton wrote:
Wait ..... the article says 2.5 seconds is what he averages and it's not enough to go thru his read. Yet, the scout quoted said he could get through 3-4 reads in 2.5 seconds and anything less would be tough?


Read it again.

Quote:
The defenders are often found to be closing in on Tannehill within 2.5 seconds of the snap. That is not nearly enough time to go through progressions.


That means often LESS THAN. In fact, 69.4% of the time, he has less than or equal to 2.5 seconds to throw.

Quote:
"2.5 (seconds) is about the right time a quarterback wants to scan three to four reads and get (a) pass off and not get sacked. Any less is tough


So he is saying that if you have less than 2.5 seconds, which often times is the case, it is going to be tough to go past your 2nd read.

Quote:
According to ProFootballFocus.com (subscription required), Tannehill has often been under pressure very quickly after the snap. He's spent 2.5 seconds or less in the pocket on 64.9 percent of his dropbacks, which is the second-highest percentage of such passes in the league.


He has the 2nd least time in the league. I mean... you can't get much worse than that from a pass protection standpoint.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:03 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5842
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Very frustrating to see the explosive potential of this offense and how it hasn't become a consistent reality yet. We've seen glimpses.


Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:12 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5641
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
jammer wrote:
A 2nd year QB with an already limited college resume should not be expected to have great pocket awareness. Add that to a disastrous offensive line, TE's and RB's who can't block, and a one dimensional offense. They're asking for bad results.


I guess my question is, how much time does he need before we start judging his pocket awareness? Sure he spent two years playing WR at Texas A&M, but he also played QB (as he did in high school before that). We ported over Sherman from A&M and most of the offense Tanny ran. I mean he knows the plays so he shouldn't be out there having that as a mental strain. All that's left for him is feeling the pocket and making his reads.

Quote:
I know its beating a dead horse but its time to change up the play calling, moving the pocket and even forcing the run. 2 carries for 6 yards to create 3rd and 4 is a heck of a lot better than 3rd and 10.


That's what I've been saying.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:24 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5641
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Rich,

I get all those stats. My point is better pocket awareness can help to alleviate these numbers .... as would be better play-calling. We're not giving opposing teams anything to think about. We're saying "Hey let's drop back to pass at twice the rate of the run" and letting them tee off on our struggling pass protection.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:31 am
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 5:10 pm
Posts: 5842
Location: Topsfield, MA
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
I'm not arguing you should go easy on Tannehill for lack of awareness. I'm arguing his coaches should not be putting him in situations that require some more veteran seasoning.

The videos I've seen of his sacks show him stepping up in the pocket but the defender has either pushed the linemen into him or juked outside and cut inside to block the escape lane. He should now recognize that simply stepping up isn't going to cut it when his linemen are manhandled.

His coaches should be thinking he has not developed enough yet to be a pocket QB with a shakey o-line.

But keep everything in perspective. You're talking about a guy who has spent a lot of his time at QB using his mobility. He's now being asked to hang tight in a pocket that all but evaporates at an unacceptable rate.


Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:32 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5641
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
I saw this posted on another site by a poster named Shouright and thought I'd share it ..... it's some more statistics gathered from PFF on the O-line and Tanny.

Quote:
The data below, taken from Pro Football Focus’s “Premium Stats,” are for the QBs in the NFL who have taken at least 75% of the offensive snaps for their teams this year. The data pertain to team and QB variables related to sacks, which we know have been a problem for the Dolphins through the first five games in 2013. The Dolphins currently lead the league in sacks with 24.

The column headers in the table of data below refer to: 1) the QBs named in the table, 2) the total number of dropbacks they’ve had in 2013, 3) their average time to actually throw the ball (in seconds), 4) their average time they had to attempt to throw the ball (in seconds), 5) their average time to be sacked (in seconds), 6) their average time to scramble (in seconds), 7) the percentage of total dropbacks resulting in pressures, and finally, 8) the percentage of pressured dropbacks resulting in sacks.

Image

In the third row from the bottom, entitled “Tannehill Z-score,” what we have is a standardized measure of how far above or below the league average Ryan Tannehill’s statistics are in these areas.

There are only two significant statistics to be found for Ryan Tannehill in that regard in my opinion:

1) The amount of time he’s had to attempt to throw the ball, which is 1.3 standard deviations below the league average, and which means he’s had significantly less time than the average QB to attempt to throw the ball (although that amount of time is just less than a quarter of a second [0.23 seconds], which is about as fast as the blink of an eye), and;

2) The percentage of pressured dropbacks resulting in sacks, which is 2.85 standard deviations above the league average, and which means he’s been sacked significantly more on pressured dropbacks than the average QB, and very much so. That difference is much more than just “the blink of an eye.”

However, contrary to what we might have previously believed, Ryan Tannehill is not being pressured on a greater percentage of his dropbacks than the average QB. He is also not being sacked more quickly than the average QB, and he is not taking any longer than the average QB to throw the ball or to scramble downfield (when he does).

It might seem sensible to close the book on the issue at this point and conclude that Tannehill’s greater percentage of sacks on pressured dropbacks is due to the smaller amount of time he’s had to attempt to throw the ball. It certainly isn’t due to the fact that he’s being pressured more often on dropbacks than the average QB, because he is not.

However, when we correlate 1) the time QBs have had to attempt to throw, with 2) the percentage of pressured dropbacks resulting in sacks (see the bottom row of the table), we find the correlation is -0.13, which means there is little or no relationship between the two variables.

In other words, QBs in the NFL are not being sacked more often because they have less time to attempt to throw the ball. Those two variables are unrelated, and therefore one cannot possibly cause the other. There’s a time-honored statistical maxim most people know that says correlation doesn’t equal causation, but it’s also the case that causation can’t happen without correlation. One variable cannot cause another if it isn’t correlated with it.

Additionally, when we correlate 1) the time QBs have had to attempt to throw, with 2) the percentage of total dropbacks resulting in pressures (see the row of the table above the bottom one), we find the correlation is 0.67, meaning that, contrary to what we might have expected, the more time a QB has to attempt to throw the ball, the greater percentage of the time he’s pressured on his dropbacks. So it can’t be said that Ryan Tannehill is being pressured because he has less time to attempt to throw the ball, when that isn’t the case for quarterbacks across the league.

What we also find by correlating some of the data is that, although the number of total dropbacks has a moderately strong correlation (0.40) with percentage of dropbacks in which QBs are pressured, total dropbacks is negatively correlated (-0.31) with the percentage of sacks in which the QB is pressured. This is an important distinction, because although it suggests that teams that run the ball less (i.e., those with more dropbacks) may be pressured somewhat more, it also suggests they are not sacked more. In fact they are sacked less.

(For any extreme stat geeks out there, please note that I also generated scatterplots for the above variables and investigated the possibility of quadratic relationships, of which there were none. The scatter appeared to be random in all cases.)

The take-home messages are the following three points in my opinion:

1) It’s inconsistent with the above data to believe that Ryan Tannehill’s greater percentage of sacks on pressured dropbacks is due to his having less time than the average QB to attempt to throw the ball.

2) It’s inconsistent with the above data to believe that Ryan Tannehill is being sacked more on pressured dropbacks because the team isn’t running the ball enough.

3) There must be another explanation for Ryan Tannehill’s much higher percentage than the league average of pressured dropbacks that result in sacks.

One possible explanation that’s consistent with the above data is that the amount and/or quickness with which Tannehill moves in response to pressure has been insufficient. This would explain why he’s pressured no more than, and no more quickly than, the average QB, but is sacked far more often than the average QB.

In other words, he may be doing a fine job of getting rid of the ball quickly when he does throw the ball, but a poor job of moving out of harm’s way when he doesn’t throw the ball.

This explanation fits very well with the above data in my opinion, in that Ryan Tannehill has had less time than the average QB to attempt to throw the ball, but more time than the average QB to actually throw the ball. In other words, when he senses pressure, he often gets rid of the ball quickly when he does throw the ball.

However, when Ryan Tannehill is pressured and he does not throw the ball, he’s much more likely than other pressured QBs to be sacked, thus illustrating the “lack of movement” hypothesis alluded to above. Obviously if he’s chosen (for whatever reason) not to throw the ball under pressure, the only other option available to him to avoid a sack is to move. What fits best with the above data is the idea that such movement under pressure on his part isn’t happening anywhere near sufficiently.

And of course this may be something he’s being coached to do, as well: to hang in the pocket and continue to visually scan downfield, despite whatever may be happening with regard to the pass rush.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:43 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5641
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
jammer wrote:
But keep everything in perspective. You're talking about a guy who has spent a lot of his time at QB using his mobility. He's now being asked to hang tight in a pocket that all but evaporates at an unacceptable rate.


I'd say inconsistent rate and again, that's because of the one-dimensional nature of this offense. It's still ridiculous IMO in how they're coaching him to stand in that pocket the way he is 95% of the time.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 10:45 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Rock, I saw that analysis but don't agree with his conclusion. When across the board you're below the mean and below the overwhelming majority of QBs, protection is still the primary problem.

Fix the protection and you fix the offense.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 11:30 am
Profile
Phinfever Legend
Phinfever Legend
User avatar

Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:48 pm
Posts: 5641
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Rich wrote:
Rock, I saw that analysis but don't agree with his conclusion. When across the board you're below the mean and below the overwhelming majority of QBs, protection is still the primary problem.

Fix the protection and you fix the offense.


How can they fix the protection this year when the lack the personnel to do so? That's why this coaching staff needs to learn to adjust to who they have. It's like they're just trotting guys out there saying "We're going to be a high octane passing attack to hell or high water!"

I just don't get it. We don't see ....

- Screen passes
- WR's lining up in multiple positions
- Bootlegs
- Roll-outs
- Play-action
- Consistently attempting to run the ball
- Any attempt to give Tanny max protect using a guy like Yeatman as the TE

If high octane means 2-3 step drops and a littany of comeback/curl routes all darn game, then it doesn't leave me with a rosy feeling in my stomach. Those kinds of tendencies will get eaten alive in the NFL as the season progresses.

This O-line could possibly be a little bit better if they weren't tipping our cap so darn much to the defense.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 11:41 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Rock Sexton wrote:
How can they fix the protection this year when the lack the personnel to do so? That's why this coaching staff needs to learn to adjust to who they have.


Like any truly good coach would do, you make the system fit the players, not force the players into a system.

_________________
Image


Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:09 pm
Profile
2014 Phinfever VIP!
2014 Phinfever VIP!

Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2010 8:57 am
Posts: 4767
Location: Houston, Texas
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
I love how we keep talking about an easy schedule, nothing is easy. We play the Bills, Pats, and Bengals. Easy? no.

Mak, we are 3-2 and I am grateful for that, but I agree with you, NOTHING is so called "easy" on Miami's schedule. The mere fact we are talking about Tannehill having 2.5 seconds to throw the ball against a tough Bills pass rush, a Belicheck coached team and Cincinnati that gives up meager yardage to their opponents and also have a tough pass rush. Heck, even the Jets with Rex Ryan coaching will have them competing hard.

Nothing on this schedule has me saying we will win convincingly.


Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:02 pm
Profile
Phinfever Lead Moderator
Phinfever Lead Moderator

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:04 pm
Posts: 6562
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Mak, we are 3-2 and I am grateful for that, but I agree with you, NOTHING is so called "easy" on Miami's schedule. The mere fact we are talking about Tannehill having 2.5 seconds to throw the ball against a tough Bills pass rush, a Belicheck coached team and Cincinnati that gives up meager yardage to their opponents and also have a tough pass rush. Heck, even the Jets with Rex Ryan coaching will have them competing hard.

Nothing on this schedule has me saying we will win convincingly.


I'm scared we are coming out of this stretch 1-2.


Wed Oct 16, 2013 1:19 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3096
Location: MA.
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Nothing is easy.....Can't wait for an easy game and the 4the quarter is back ups making plays


Wed Oct 16, 2013 2:04 pm
Profile
Phinfever Global Moderator
Phinfever Global Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 6:53 pm
Posts: 3823
Location: Palm Beach County, Florida
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Kev1321 wrote:
Nothing is easy.....Can't wait for an easy game and the 4the quarter is back ups making plays


This Sunday!!

_________________
Extend Philbin!
Enough already , this is the best regime in the NFL ...by far!!
2014 Lazor Powered... THE MAKING OF A DYNASTY!!


Wed Oct 16, 2013 6:38 pm
Profile
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
2013 Phinfever VIP Donor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:56 pm
Posts: 3096
Location: MA.
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
JJ says Tanny needs to get rid of the ball..




http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/video ... D=25262653


Thu Oct 17, 2013 3:37 am
Profile
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
Phinfever Live!, Blog Writer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 9:59 am
Posts: 21598
Location: Miami, FL
Post Re: Tannehill's pocket
Kev1321 wrote:
JJ says Tanny needs to get rid of the ball..




http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/video ... D=25262653


A proven master at getting a QB what he needs to be successful....

_________________
Image


Thu Oct 17, 2013 6:59 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 31 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2010 phpBB Group.
Designed by Coots & IamPZ - Phinfever.com.