??s for Recruiting Aficionados

nsmike

One thing I like about the recruiting is that it's easy to see the coaches direction. The defenive backfield has been a problem, they are addressing it, by not only getting JUCO recruits to address the need now, they're getting HS recruits to develop and keep it going. RB lots of small developmental backs on team but no experience and no big back. The recruiting results one JUCO signed for experience and a commit from a big back. In every area of need, you can see it being addressed, in recruiting. No one knows if the recruits we have, are the answer, but no one can fault the vision.

As wren and Coach Kill have pointed out, we won't know how well our 2012 recruiting class probably for at least a couple years. So is there any place we can begin to hang our hat on Jerry Kill's 2012 recruiting class? I believe nsmike is looking in the right direction by looking at the vision and how well it is being implemented. In addition, it is also useful to examine Kill's and his staff's recruiting history as to how success they have been in the past. I personally like what I am seeing when it comes to the vision and their history of recruiting. These guys know what they are doing. I have mentioned in the past that they also work harder. Since then I have received feedback that everybody at this level works hard. I am sure this is generally true. Therefore I will restate it by saying that Kill and his staff work smarter than most others. This is certainly open to debate and I am curious what others take on this would be.
 

Its fun to speculate about recruits, but predicting their on-field productivity is risky at beat. Think of the NFL. They spend tons of $ on scouting, meet with and get to see the possible draftees work out, have the guys take intelligence and psych tests and they still whiff on a number of their picks. So its that much harder to predict what HS kids will do in college, with much less data to base decisions on. But its still fun to discuss recruiting. Go Gophers!
 

Just wondering - now that the juco's have signed LOI's, can't Kill and co. comment on them? Of course he won't say anything negative, but even in positive comments we may be able to discern a little of his philosophy and direction. Or do they have to wait until the recruits are on-campus or practicing?
 

I have mentioned in the past that they also work harder. Since then I have received feedback that everybody at this level works hard. I am sure this is generally true. Therefore I will restate it by saying that Kill and his staff work smarter than most others. This is certainly open to debate and I am curious what others take on this would be.

As I have said before I don't think they work harder then other staffs because to survive in this day and age you have to try and outwork everyone. The main advantage I see them having over other staffs is that they have been together a long time so they are all on the same page and they really know what they like and don't like in a potential player. Makes the evaluation process a little easier when there are fewer disagreements on the staff as to whether or not a guy fits the mold they are looking for.
 

Just wondering - now that the juco's have signed LOI's, can't Kill and co. comment on them? Of course he won't say anything negative, but even in positive comments we may be able to discern a little of his philosophy and direction. Or do they have to wait until the recruits are on-campus or practicing?
Given that he says he doesn't actually judge recruits until they get on campus and start working, I doubt you get a lot of comments about the JUCO recruits until they work out in spring practice.
 


Just wondering - now that the juco's have signed LOI's, can't Kill and co. comment on them? Of course he won't say anything negative, but even in positive comments we may be able to discern a little of his philosophy and direction. Or do they have to wait until the recruits are on-campus or practicing?

I don't know the answer to your question but I wouldn't be surprised that they may have to, or prefer to wait until National Signing Day before they make any comments.
 

MNVCGUY

As I have said before I don't think they work harder then other staffs because to survive in this day and age you have to try and outwork everyone. The main advantage I see them having over other staffs is that they have been together a long time so they are all on the same page and they really know what they like and don't like in a potential player. Makes the evaluation process a little easier when there are fewer disagreements on the staff as to whether or not a guy fits the mold they are looking for.

Thanks - That what I was trying to point to but you stated it much clearer. Also given the number of years that they have been together, I am sure that they have established a large and very useful network that they are able to use often.
 

nsmike said:
One thing I like about the recruiting is that it's easy to see the coaches direction. The defenive backfield has been a problem, they are addressing it, by not only getting JUCO recruits to address the need now, they're getting HS recruits to develop and keep it going. RB lots of small developmental backs on team but no experience and no big back. The recruiting results one JUCO signed for experience and a commit from a big back. In every area of need, you can see it being addressed, in recruiting. No one knows if the recruits we have, are the answer, but no one can fault the vision.

By their public comments and actions to date I think these guys value consistency and dependability above all else. I get the sense that they'd rather have 2* junior / senior 'system' talent at every position than 3* guys who either don't play hurt, are inconsistent, or have shaky grades. This seems to be what they are after. They may need to compromise on this in the short term to fill some gaps. In general I'm quite pleased. In all I think they had a pretty good year in state too.
 

My biggest fear with hiring Jerry Kill as coach was that we would fall back to being non-competitive in recruiting. So far, that fear has been realized though Coach Kill has done slightly better than I expected instate (though losing top instate kids to schools like Vanderbilt and West Virginia is a little more disappointing than losing them to Notre Dame, Miami, etc). My biggest concern with this class is that a lot of these kids are not "hidden gems" in that a lot of them have been to camps or combines where they performed in front of other D-1 staffs. At least one players went to camps at MAC schools and was not offered, but came to Minnesota and was offered here. I keep hearing about schools like Florida International and Western Michigan as our competition for recruits and that is not where we want to be. In more than a few cases, you have to truly believe that Jerry Kill can identify BCS talent better than our B1G competition.

If the Gophers come in 10,11, or 12 in the final Rivals B1G recruiting rankings, history will show that it's very unlikely that the class will ever lead us to where we want to be. That doesn't mean it can't happen and it's entirely possible that Coach Kill and staff is identifying a number of players who are underrated for one reason or another. There is even some evidence that points to that with the Gophers being one of the first to look at the Whitlow kid from Alabama and the DL last year who ended up going to Va Tech.
 



EG#9 said:
If the Gophers come in 10,11, or 12 in the final Rivals B1G recruiting rankings, history will show that it's very unlikely that the class will ever lead us to where we want to be.

How do you define "where we want to be"?
 

My biggest fear with hiring Jerry Kill as coach was that we would fall back to being non-competitive in recruiting. So far, that fear has been realized though Coach Kill has done slightly better than I expected instate (though losing top instate kids to schools like Vanderbilt and West Virginia is a little more disappointing than losing them to Notre Dame, Miami, etc). My biggest concern with this class is that a lot of these kids are not "hidden gems" in that a lot of them have been to camps or combines where they performed in front of other D-1 staffs. At least one players went to camps at MAC schools and was not offered, but came to Minnesota and was offered here. I keep hearing about schools like Florida International and Western Michigan as our competition for recruits and that is not where we want to be. In more than a few cases, you have to truly believe that Jerry Kill can identify BCS talent better than our B1G competition.

If the Gophers come in 10,11, or 12 in the final Rivals B1G recruiting rankings, history will show that it's very unlikely that the class will ever lead us to where we want to be. That doesn't mean it can't happen and it's entirely possible that Coach Kill and staff is identifying a number of players who are underrated for one reason or another. There is even some evidence that points to that with the Gophers being one of the first to look at the Whitlow kid from Alabama and the DL last year who ended up going to Va Tech.

Your post basically hits on the debate that we will be having on this board for the next couple of years. As we have seen in these recruiting threads this class can be viewed from a ton of angles. The optimists look at the class and believe that Kill is finding those guys that no one else wanted but are going to be good players for us. The pessimists are saying that we are getting guys that are lower ranked for a reason and that while some of them are likely to pan out the vast majority will disappoint.

The problem of course is we won't know who was right for a few years. For my part I fall more on the concerned side right now only because while the rankings are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination I did a look back on the past 7 years in another thread and the teams that finished near the bottom of the conference in recruiting rankings typically finished near the bottom in the standings as well.

The fan in us all has to believe that the lower level success that Kill and his staff has had is going to translate to the Big Ten level. So all we can really do is sit back and hope that they are smarter then the people who evaluate the recruits for a living, and also that they are able as coaches to bring out the best in these guys when they get here.
 

My biggest fear with hiring Jerry Kill as coach was that we would fall back to being non-competitive in recruiting. So far, that fear has been realized though Coach Kill has done slightly better than I expected instate (though losing top instate kids to schools like Vanderbilt and West Virginia is a little more disappointing than losing them to Notre Dame, Miami, etc). My biggest concern with this class is that a lot of these kids are not "hidden gems" in that a lot of them have been to camps or combines where they performed in front of other D-1 staffs. At least one players went to camps at MAC schools and was not offered, but came to Minnesota and was offered here. I keep hearing about schools like Florida International and Western Michigan as our competition for recruits and that is not where we want to be. In more than a few cases, you have to truly believe that Jerry Kill can identify BCS talent better than our B1G competition.

If the Gophers come in 10,11, or 12 in the final Rivals B1G recruiting rankings, history will show that it's very unlikely that the class will ever lead us to where we want to be. That doesn't mean it can't happen and it's entirely possible that Coach Kill and staff is identifying a number of players who are underrated for one reason or another. There is even some evidence that points to that with the Gophers being one of the first to look at the Whitlow kid from Alabama and the DL last year who ended up going to Va Tech.

EG- I find this quote to be fascinating. I have heard the arguments that Kill can't recruit, but I have gone to practices and watched the freshmen he brought in versus the guys Brewster had recruited the last two years, and Kill's are better. From Brew's recruiting, we have one or two potential starters at dback, a bunch of wasted scholarships at WR. (On a team with good depth, Jones and DCT redshirt last season). Two freshmen starting over supposed three star recruits at DE, and the topper, no backup to a junior QB who has not played the position. (The issue with Brew's backup QBs is not fit in the system, they just are not B1G QBs.) No backup MLB, and apparently two kids at most ready to play DT next year. The only place Brewster became competent was o-line recruiting, and that was after he forgot to do that for two years. Our recruiting has been much worse than under Mason, because the three star kids we got at skill and DL positions were apparently three star kids other schools were too smart to take. (In Jacques case they may have been wrong).
If your fear is that we would not be competitive versus other teams in the B1G, I don't think so, but you could be right, but if your fear was our recruiting would go backwards, there is just about zero chance of that happening.
 





Well put corcoran. I don't think anyone is stating yet that Jerry Kill has proven he's a master at uncovering hidden talent. But the fact was that even in year 1with less than 2 months to finish off a recruiting class, many of the freshmen he brought in were flat out better than some of the upperclassmen. In addition, if you take him at face value two of the red-shirts (T Cockran and Foster Bush) have a chance to start next year and are as good as any of the other freshmen. I'm excited to see how it plays out.

As I stated earlier, even for the people that are star-gazers it's hard not to be impressed with the offensive recruits compared to any historical class with the exception of 2008.
 

Here's a thought to ponder:

Does winning bring better recruits? OR

Do better recruits bring winning?

If you have to win games before you can attract a better class of recruits, then how do you win games without upgrading your talent base?

If you have to upgrade your talent base before you can win games, then how do you convince quality kids to play for a 'losing' team?

I don't have any answers. Just mulling over those questions - and wanted to throw it out to add to the discussion.
 

Both are true. Winning brings better recruits and better recruits bring winning - but you have to start having success (winning) to start the climb upward in recruiting.
 

Here's a thought to ponder:

Does winning bring better recruits? OR

Do better recruits bring winning?

If you have to win games before you can attract a better class of recruits, then how do you win games without upgrading your talent base?

If you have to upgrade your talent base before you can win games, then how do you convince quality kids to play for a 'losing' team?

I don't have any answers. Just mulling over those questions - and wanted to throw it out to add to the discussion.

It is all about getting better one step at a time (baby steps) and sticking to your vision. It is about knowing how to implement that vision. It is about changing the culture etc. etc. That is how Barry Alvarez and Kirk Ferentz did it.
 

Here's a thought to ponder:

Does winning bring better recruits? OR

Do better recruits bring winning?

If you have to win games before you can attract a better class of recruits, then how do you win games without upgrading your talent base?

If you have to upgrade your talent base before you can win games, then how do you convince quality kids to play for a 'losing' team?

I don't have any answers. Just mulling over those questions - and wanted to throw it out to add to the discussion.

Good questions S.O.N. (I would have written SON, but I didn't want to go all Foghorn Leghorn on you). Anyway, I think winning is going to bring the high profile guys, but there isn't a team in the country composed entirely of high profile guys. To me, that means good programs are going to have to mine deep and find solid kids who fit their style of play and (using that dreaded phrase that I even hesitate to use) "coach them up."

To do that, the staff needs to, like scouting in all sports, project what an 18-year-old kid is going to look like as a player when he's 21. On my pessimistic days, I can understand and appreciate EG#9's concerns, but I think Kill is going to do a better job of developing his players across the board than what we've seen around here in awhile. At least that is my hope.

I'm a big believer that, regardless of what any high school coach might say in the locker room, the "size of the dog in the fight usually (let me stress the usually) matters more than the size of the fight in the dog." The problem is that any dog in a fight has to know how to fight and size and speed aren't that valuable if (let me stress the if) they are not applied correctly.

I've digressed, but I think winning breeds interest and interest breeds better recruiting.
 

My biggest fear with hiring Jerry Kill as coach was that we would fall back to being non-competitive in recruiting. So far, that fear has been realized though Coach Kill has done slightly better than I expected instate (though losing top instate kids to schools like Vanderbilt and West Virginia is a little more disappointing than losing them to Notre Dame, Miami, etc). My biggest concern with this class is that a lot of these kids are not "hidden gems" in that a lot of them have been to camps or combines where they performed in front of other D-1 staffs. At least one players went to camps at MAC schools and was not offered, but came to Minnesota and was offered here. I keep hearing about schools like Florida International and Western Michigan as our competition for recruits and that is not where we want to be. In more than a few cases, you have to truly believe that Jerry Kill can identify BCS talent better than our B1G competition.

If the Gophers come in 10,11, or 12 in the final Rivals B1G recruiting rankings, history will show that it's very unlikely that the class will ever lead us to where we want to be. That doesn't mean it can't happen and it's entirely possible that Coach Kill and staff is identifying a number of players who are underrated for one reason or another. There is even some evidence that points to that with the Gophers being one of the first to look at the Whitlow kid from Alabama and the DL last year who ended up going to Va Tech.

Who pissed in your eggnog? Minnesota has never been known for bringing in great recruiting classes. It's what you do with those recruiting classes that is important (think Brewster's nationally ranked recruiting class from a few years back). Why don't you at least give this class a chance to perform on the field before you declare that there are no "hidden gems". Some of Minnesota's best players historically were not highly regarded or recruited by others. Just think, you would have been furious that the Gophers out recruited St. Johns for the services of some unknown in-state receiver with no other offers named Eric Decker.
 

Here's a thought to ponder:

Does winning bring better recruits? OR

Do better recruits bring winning?

If you have to win games before you can attract a better class of recruits, then how do you win games without upgrading your talent base?

If you have to upgrade your talent base before you can win games, then how do you convince quality kids to play for a 'losing' team?

I don't have any answers. Just mulling over those questions - and wanted to throw it out to add to the discussion.

MV did a stats breakdown if this chicken or egg type question. What he concludes is that the best programs get the best recruits because they win, not the other way around.
 


Just think, you would have been furious that the Gophers out recruited St. Johns for the services of some unknown in-state receiver with no other offers named Eric Decker.

And for every Eric Decker I can give you a list 10 times as long of low ranked guys that didn't pan out. I agree with you that most of it is going to hinge on what is done with the recruits once they get here, but EG's point is valid because there is just as good a chance that these guys really are not hidden gems as there is that they are.

All we can do now is wait and see how it all shakes out in a few years.
 

It is really quite simple: as the Loon always maintained, the ONLY way to improve...

the University of Minnesota Football program is by finding a way to beg, borrow or steal Football wins. EVERY win helps. EVERY loss hurts. Therefore, coaching, game planning, instilling discipline, weight and strength training, building team unity, having good, solid position coaching, having players stay academically elegible and progressing towards graduation and gaining the rewards that being a successful student-athlete can provide, having a season or two in which injuries do not decimate your depth, having the ball bounce the right way sometimes, having good, solid game plans, recruiting student athletes who know your situation, buy into your plan and have the chance to succeed as college students at the University of Minnesota all help to eventually recruit the type of student athlete who fits the system that is "begging, borrowing and stealing any kind of win it can get on the football field on Game Day Saturdays.

Therefore, maintaining an ooc schedule that ALLOWS a chance of 3 or, hopefully 4 ooc wins to start the season is ESSENTIAL. Remember, wins help...losses HURT. IF you win 4 ooc games and a couple of Big Ten games, suddenly, you will find that a bowl game will reward your players, staff, administration, students and fans and will show signs of improvement. Any program that does NOT routinely get a bowl invitation is a program that will have a VERY hard time improving. There is NO SUCH THING as a "bad" bowl game. Qualifying for a bowl game is crucial to recruiting your in-state athletes. Some people "bad-mouth" lower level bowl games...but...since there are so many, it is REALLY bad if you don't get an invitation.

You do NOT want a new coach who talks of "recruiting" his/her way to success. That brewster clown was doomed to fail here at Minnesota from day one. It is MUCH more about coaching and what you do with the players and the team once you have them on campus than about the "stars" that some fantasy recruiting ranker gives them.

Coach Kill completely fits the mold of a coach who can "beg, borrow and steal..." wins as he builds his football program.. He is a "ball coach" and he will find a way to put his players...his team...his program in a position to become a more competetive program. He will have his program...our program back on the path that the program was on prior to that failed brewball era. There will be NO such thing as a "BAD" bowl game.

The wins over iowa the past two seasons were EXACTLY the kind of wins that will begin to HELP this football program. Coach Kill will need to maintain a managable ooc schedule and will need to consistantly win 2 to 3 Big Ten games or more each season. Then some year...he will win four to five Big Ten games. Make no mistake, this program will be judged by two things by fans and recruits in the end: 1.) Did the team receive an invitation to a bowl game? And 2.) How did the team compare in Conference play with it's chief rivals?

Building the program at Minnesota back to respectability has much less to do with recruiting, alone than eg#9 would try to have people believe. I think that the LOON was correct all along from a dozen years ago, or longer. The ONLY way for University of Minnesota Football to improve is by getting ANY kind of win. Ugly, lucky, narrow or even flukey (The "catch" at PSU back in 1999...).

I really think that Coach Kill and his staff DO fit the mold of "BALL COACHES" who through effort, hard work and by being consistant will help the U of M Football Players, Team and Program to find a way to win a few more ball games. THAT will give this program a chance.

Having a b.s.-er of a coach who fancies himself as a "recruiter" will only land you at the bottom of the conference. It's NOT just about recruiting eg#9...not at all...

Yes, iowa is going to a bowl game...and NO, the Gophers are not...BUT, our coaches, players, team BEAT iowa for the second season in a row. THAT is progress. THAT is real. THAT is something to believe in...THAT will help this program to begin to improve!

; 0 )
 


All that matters is BIG TEN wins vs. BIG TEN LOSSES, right wren? I mean...that's the drum you've been banging since you created this new login.

You're sounding so dopo-like, as usual, killer... ; 0 )

Of COURSE, the Big Ten record is the ONLY record that you can use to compare one Big Ten Coach to another Big Ten Coach. IF you are trying to pad the loser brewster's record...you can't even do that by counting all of his cupcake games...That brewster got his can kicked all over the place. By the way: he won 6 stinking Big Ten games in the time he was here. That really sucked wild animal with the keyboard... ; 0 )

The ONLY way you can compare one football coach at Minnesota to another football coach at Minnesota is to compare the BIG TEN wins and BIG TEN losses. THAT way, there is some basis for comparison.

Comparing records against Western Michigan, Montana, South Dakota and NDSU against some other ooc games that get played against other schools from other conferences tells us nothing. Records against THOSE kinds of teams certainly don't compare to records against the Ohio State, PSU, wisky and iowa do they little "petty" wild animal?????? At LEAST if we compare Big Ten records from one season to another, there is a basis for comparison.
 

the University of Minnesota Football program is by finding a way to beg, borrow or steal Football wins. EVERY win helps. EVERY loss hurts. Therefore, coaching, game planning, instilling discipline, weight and strength training, building team unity, having good, solid position coaching, having players stay academically elegible and progressing towards graduation and gaining the rewards that being a successful student-athlete can provide, having a season or two in which injuries do not decimate your depth, having the ball bounce the right way sometimes, having good, solid game plans, recruiting student athletes who know your situation, buy into your plan and have the chance to succeed as college students at the University of Minnesota all help to eventually recruit the type of student athlete who fits the system that is "begging, borrowing and stealing any kind of win it can get on the football field on Game Day Saturdays.

Therefore, maintaining an ooc schedule that ALLOWS a chance of 3 or, hopefully 4 ooc wins to start the season is ESSENTIAL. Remember, wins help...losses HURT. IF you win 4 ooc games and a couple of Big Ten games, suddenly, you will find that a bowl game will reward your players, staff, administration, students and fans and will show signs of improvement. Any program that does NOT routinely get a bowl invitation is a program that will have a VERY hard time improving. There is NO SUCH THING as a "bad" bowl game. Qualifying for a bowl game is crucial to recruiting your in-state athletes. Some people "bad-mouth" lower level bowl games...but...since there are so many, it is REALLY bad if you don't get an invitation.

You do NOT want a new coach who talks of "recruiting" his/her way to success. That brewster clown was doomed to fail here at Minnesota from day one. It is MUCH more about coaching and what you do with the players and the team once you have them on campus than about the "stars" that some fantasy recruiting ranker gives them.

Coach Kill completely fits the mold of a coach who can "beg, borrow and steal..." wins as he builds his football program.. He is a "ball coach" and he will find a way to put his players...his team...his program in a position to become a more competetive program. He will have his program...our program back on the path that the program was on prior to that failed brewball era. There will be NO such thing as a "BAD" bowl game.

The wins over iowa the past two seasons were EXACTLY the kind of wins that will begin to HELP this football program. Coach Kill will need to maintain a managable ooc schedule and will need to consistantly win 2 to 3 Big Ten games or more each season. Then some year...he will win four to five Big Ten games. Make no mistake, this program will be judged by two things by fans and recruits in the end: 1.) Did the team receive an invitation to a bowl game? And 2.) How did the team compare in Conference play with it's chief rivals?

Building the program at Minnesota back to respectability has much less to do with recruiting, alone than eg#9 would try to have people believe. I think that the LOON was correct all along from a dozen years ago, or longer. The ONLY way for University of Minnesota Football to improve is by getting ANY kind of win. Ugly, lucky, narrow or even flukey (The "catch" at PSU back in 1999...).

I really think that Coach Kill and his staff DO fit the mold of "BALL COACHES" who through effort, hard work and by being consistant will help the U of M Football Players, Team and Program to find a way to win a few more ball games. THAT will give this program a chance.

Having a b.s.-er of a coach who fancies himself as a "recruiter" will only land you at the bottom of the conference. It's NOT just about recruiting eg#9...not at all...

Yes, iowa is going to a bowl game...and NO, the Gophers are not...BUT, our coaches, players, team BEAT iowa for the second season in a row. THAT is progress. THAT is real. THAT is something to believe in...THAT will help this program to begin to improve!

; 0 )

I am glad your posts are dissertation long, that way I am not tempted to waste my time reading them.

The argument can rage on. I will be content in patiently waiting to see what Kill's recruiting can bring to the UMN as I am confident that his formula will translate to wins, both in how he recruits for his system and how he develops the talent once they get here.
 

I am glad your posts are dissertation long, that way I am not tempted to waste my time reading them.

The argument can rage on. I will be content in patiently waiting to see what Kill's recruiting can bring to the UMN as I am confident that his formula will translate to wins, both in how he recruits for his system and how he develops the talent once they get here.

You are right, reading wren's "dissertations", a.k.a. babble, is a waste of time as most people have found out. Instead you could use that time to write the GopherHole staff each time wren high jacks a string. Maybe then we can get him banned for the same reason Lakebison was banned.
 

I am glad your posts are dissertation long, that way I am not tempted to waste my time reading them.

The argument can rage on. I will be content in patiently waiting to see what Kill's recruiting can bring to the UMN as I am confident that his formula will translate to wins, both in how he recruits for his system and how he develops the talent once they get here.


I'm so glad to hear that sumtimegoph! You know, everytime I see your moniker it reminds me of that old Don Henley classic: "Boys of sum(time)mer..." You do have your "...hair slicked back and those wayferers on..." don't you? ; 0 )

You sound like you are just too much sumtimes...

Fortunately, your post was very short. It kind of fits what you have to say!

; 0 )
 

You are right, reading wren's "dissertations", a.k.a. babble, is a waste of time as most people have found out. Instead you could use that time to write the GopherHole staff each time wren high jacks a string. Maybe then we can get him banned for the same reason Lakebison was banned.

What the hey dopo....errrrrr....killjoy? You know, my post dealt with the subject matter of recruiting vs. coaching and other factors. Why, you, yourself killjoy posed the question: "...which came first, the chicken or the egg..." regarding recruiting vs. other factors. Perhaps you should ban yourself for your role.

Are you people really so insecure?

Well. that's enough for now killer. Have a great time trying to focus on getting someone banned. Say hello to dopo...and tell him that I think he would feel really good if he would make a contribution to GOPHERHOLE in your honor!

See you kids around...

' 0 )
 




Top Bottom