Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Djgb13

Alfred Morris Agrees to 2 Year deal with Dallas

Recommended Posts

Morris has a career avg of 4.5 yards per carry , and if the Cowboys Oline is as good as advertised he will upgrade their running game a lot . I still don't see a Super Bowl team but now they can take a good long look at the Qb postion .

I think they need to find someone to replace Romo , Romo has the look of a player that's breaking down .

He's not the 4.5 YPC back anymore. He's in the 3s now. Which is all that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's not the 4.5 YPC back anymore. He's in the 3s now. Which is all that matters.

Could have Copy & Pasted this straight from the tag lines on McFadden when he was just signed here.

 

In his last 3 years with Oakland, DMC went for 3.3, 3.3 and 3.4 ypc.... Lands in Dallas and all of the sudden is back up to 4.6.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could have Copy & Pasted this straight from the tag lines on McFadden when he was just signed here.

 

In his last 3 years with Oakland, DMC went for 3.3, 3.3 and 3.4 ypc.... Lands in Dallas and all of the sudden is back up to 4.6.

You could argue that the team in Oakland was a dogs breakfast as well.

 

or you could argue he was hurt those years.

 

what happened in Oakland is something to pay attention to, but that's not the situation he is in today.

 

You could argue that a walking turnip could get 4 YPC behind that line in dallas, and you may be right. but the benefit goes to the walking turnip that happens to be the starter.

 

until further notice, that walking turnip is DMC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could argue that the team in Oakland was a dogs breakfast as well.

 

or you could argue he was hurt those years.

 

what happened in Oakland is something to pay attention to, but that's not the situation he is in today.

 

You could argue that a walking turnip could get 4 YPC behind that line in dallas, and you may be right. but the benefit goes to the walking turnip that happens to be the starter.

 

until further notice, that walking turnip is DMC.

If you remember, the verdict was in - NO WAY McFadden was going to flourish in Dallas, He was old, always injured and done.... Then they passed the crow out for all to eat.. Same thing "could" be shaping up for Morris.. Not saying he's not done and finished (he might be) - just saying we've seen it happen, this line just might be enough to revitalize his career... As far as carries, he will see his share of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you remember, the verdict was in - NO WAY McFadden was going to flourish in Dallas, He was old, always injured and done.... Then they passed the crow out for all to eat.. Same thing "could" be shaping up for Morris.. Not saying he's not done and finished - just saying we've seen it happen, this line just might be enough to revitalize his career... As far as carries, he will see his share of work.

I dont disagree.

 

but

 

until the coach declares him to be the starter, I dont see him getting a ton of value.

 

Hes a big guy, so he may poach a lot of goal line carries. so if you are in a TD only league, he may have some value there.

 

More likely he is a player who will backup DMC until he gets hurt or until he proves to be ineffective. Then he will get the start.

 

so he may be a priority waiver wire pickup (or a nice handcuff to DMC)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

yeah, some people (i'm looking at you R8Rmick) forecast doom and gloom, calling the guy junk. that wasn't an altogether unreasonable projection, and at least R8R owned his miss (though he's talking the same way this offseason, evidently hoping to get it right sooner or later :P ). but he performed quite well, and there's no reason to expect a decline this season. the addition of morris bodes very well for him, keeping his carry count down and providing a change of pace.

Just when I thought I was out of this conversation, they've sucked me back in again.

 

Look, if you feel comfortable with McFadden as your guy by all means bust a move. But I feel both you and the Cruzer are savvy enough not to expect a similar year from the guy again. So he ran for 1,000 yards behind your world class line. So what? The way Dallas fans talk Walt Garrison could limp back into the huddle and run wild. Is he even still alive?

 

I'm beyond telling knowledgeable Cowboys fans like yourselves what's up with your team. In fact, I kind of like the 4-12 version better than the 2014 one anyway.

 

I have a position that differs from yours. I like how your team built to its strength in 2014 and drafted Zach Martin. I contend that if you put a young dynamic runner behind that line this year you're going to get much much more than 'another 200 yards' than McFadden gave you last year.

 

What's more, if you're expecting future returns from McFadden based on past performance I feel you'll end up less than satisfied. As for Alf, he's a one dimensional plodder who will be even less explosive, though he did have a 48 yard TD run last year. I really wish Romo would've played through last season, so the entire question could be addressed in context. Though that is another can of worms isn't it?

 

I'm anxious to re-visit this come midseason, and will readily admit my mistake if this team duplicates its 2014 performance with its current stable of plodders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

until the coach declares him to be the starter, I dont see him getting a ton of value.

We're on different pages.. I could care less about fantasy value, I'm only concerned with football value... From that sense, given his contract - it could prove to be a wonderful value, much like DMC was last year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You could argue that the team in Oakland was a dogs breakfast as well.

 

or you could argue he was hurt those years.

 

what happened in Oakland is something to pay attention to, but that's not the situation he is in today.

 

You could argue that a walking turnip could get 4 YPC behind that line in dallas, and you may be right. but the benefit goes to the walking turnip that happens to be the starter.

 

until further notice, that walking turnip is DMC.

Back in the 1950's there was an old TV program called The Groucho Marx Show. If a guest on his show said a magic word, a duck would come floating down from the studio rafters. Well, my friend, you just said the Magic Word.

 

Was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We're on different pages.. I could care less about fantasy value, I'm only concerned with football value... From that sense, given his contract - it could prove to be a wonderful value, much like DMC was last year.

Football value is different.

 

I like the signing. and the price was right for the cowboys.

 

if DMC gets hurt, this guy will be fantasy gold.

 

as for football value, everyone here realizes that football value often differs from fantasy value. This is a fantasy board. so yeah, It looks like to some extent we are not talking the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YPC on its own is a useless stat. If his YPC is so good, why not give it to him more? It's a first down every 3 carries according to YPC. Context is necessary.

 

but that has nothing to do with his injury history, which is what you bounced to after it was shown that DMC performed exceptionally well. remember the 'run success rate' thingy i mentioned? that statistic is specifically based on down/distance, and measures a RB's ability to contribute to drives instead of just gaining meaningless yards. a run 'success' means gaining at least 45% of the to-go yards on 1st down (so at least 4.5 on first and 10), 60% on 2nd down, and 100% on 3rd and 4th downs.

 

DMC ranked 8th in the league at run success. that's better than big money guys like forte, gurley, martin, murray, and peterson. so to substantially upgrade the running game by upgrading the RB, you're going to have to draft a guy who is way better than gurley. otherwise you're only going to see a small improvement in exchange for a very large investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

but that has nothing to do with his injury history, which is what you bounced to after it was shown that DMC performed exceptionally well. remember the 'run success rate' thingy i mentioned? that statistic is specifically based on down/distance, and measures a RB's ability to contribute to drives instead of just gaining meaningless yards. a run 'success' means gaining at least 45% of the to-go yards on 1st down (so at least 4.5 on first and 10), 60% on 2nd down, and 100% on 3rd and 4th downs.

 

DMC ranked 8th in the league at run success. that's better than big money guys like forte, gurley, martin, murray, and peterson. so to substantially upgrade the running game by upgrading the RB, you're going to have to draft a guy who is way better than gurley. otherwise you're only going to see a small improvement in exchange for a very large investment.

I think all those guys you named would have rushed for more than 3 tds and had more than 4 100 yard games behind that line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the pick up both fantasy football wise in non ppr league , and in football value .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all those guys you named would have rushed for more than 3 tds and had more than 4 100 yard games behind that line.

But with 12 of the 16 games w/out Romo and with 14 of 16 w/out Dez - the difference (as song is pointing out) would not have been so significant to justify the monumental cap investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But with 12 of the 16 games w/out Romo and with 14 of 16 w/out Dez - the difference (as song is pointing out) would not have been so significant to justify the monumental cap investment.

But it would justify Elliot at 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it would justify Elliot at 4

As long as this defense is the way it is - nothing justifies taking Elliot at 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm anxious to re-visit this come midseason, and will readily admit my mistake if this team duplicates its 2014 performance with its current stable of plodders.

 

 

hey man--you were a 100% stand up guy about owning last season's prediction, and i respect that.

 

on this issue, i'm just entertaining ideas. over on bloggingtheboys, i make the same argument that you're making: building on strength to maximize ROI. i also give a second line of argument about the physical identity that garrett has always wanted, which emphasizes DL, OL and a power run game. from that perspective, elliott or bosa probably contribute more to physical playstyle than ramsey would , so it wouldn't be unreasonably to pick elliott over ramsay.

 

my honest opinion is that if ramsey is on the board, you have to take him. he's one of the only transcendent talents in this draft class (jack being the other, but we don't need another gimpy WLB). if he's not, and you believe that goff or wentz is likely to develop into a franchise QB, that's your pick. otherwise attempt to trade down, and if that's not possible, select the best guy for the physical game (bosa or elliott).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think all those guys you named would have rushed for more than 3 tds and had more than 4 100 yard games behind that line.

you're changing gears yet again. earlier, you were saying that a generalized stat (YPC, number of TDs, or number of 100 yard games) is useless on its own. you were shrieking about context, worthless yards, and number of carries. then when i showed you that DMC was a top performer in the best contextual stat available, you drop it.

 

suddenly, you're using generalized stats on their own, without mentioning how many goal-to-go carries DMC had compared to the other guys.

 

there are good arguments to be made, but you ain't making 'em.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as this defense is the way it is - nothing justifies taking Elliot at 4.

The real problem with the cowboys is that they have multiple holes to fill.

 

sure, they could use elliot at 4.

 

but I think they have greater needs.

 

 

I think they need someone who will be able to take over starting duties as early as next year (earlier if Romo gets hurt again)

 

They also could stand to have another difference maker on D.

 

Both of these spots are a higher priority (in my opinion)

 

while Elliott would be a nice add to this team, DMC put up 1000 yards in 2/3 of a season. Regardless of what you think of the guy, the numbers are decent.

 

I think this is more likely a spot they will look to fill in next years draft.

 

Just my opinion.

 

I think the only way that Dallas takes Elliott is if they think he's a generational talent.

 

I'm not betting on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as this defense is the way it is - nothing justifies taking Elliot at 4.

 

 

disagree. look no further than 2014, and how a dominant run game almost carried a legitimately bad defense to the NFCC. the key word is 'dominant', rather than merely good. IMO, the run game with DMC and morris will be good, but not dominant. i don't see them taking over games and carrying the team. a guy like elliott has the potential to take the run game back to a dominant level, and allow DAL to go back to physically demolishing teams like they did to SEA in 2014. the addition of one guy has the potential to do this.

 

so if you aren't going to draft that one guy, you need to find the one guy who can elevate the defense from bad to good. which one defensive rookie do you think can transform the entire defense? to my mind, the only guy who might fit that description is ramsey, and that's a longshot. rookie DLmen almost never make an immediate impact. a rookie LB with a destroyed knee who plays the same position as our other great LB with a destroyed knee? dubious choice. who else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct, they aren't good enough, which is why they should take a QB to solidify their future.

 

and trade their OL for future pics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as this defense is the way it is - nothing justifies taking Elliot at 4.

The defense is getting fixed with one rookie this year? Sorry, I think the Boys are in win now mode. Romo is at the end, so maximize strengths. But it's too late anyway, the Morris signing takes Elliot out of the picture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

disagree. look no further than 2014, and how a dominant run game almost carried a legitimately bad defense to the NFCC. the key word is 'dominant', rather than merely good. IMO, the run game with DMC and morris will be good, but not dominant. i don't see them taking over games and carrying the team. a guy like elliott has the potential to take the run game back to a dominant level, and allow DAL to go back to physically demolishing teams like they did to SEA in 2014. the addition of one guy has the potential to do this.

 

so if you aren't going to draft that one guy, you need to find the one guy who can elevate the defense from bad to good. which one defensive rookie do you think can transform the entire defense? to my mind, the only guy who might fit that description is ramsey, and that's a longshot. rookie DLmen almost never make an immediate impact. a rookie LB with a destroyed knee who plays the same position as our other great LB with a destroyed knee? dubious choice. who else?

Great call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

and trade their OL for future pics.

 

silliness.

 

i don't understand people who think this way. they assume that one guy from the 2016 draft class will automatically become the most important player on the team, without whom the team can't possibly win anything else in the future. the 2nd-7th rounds don't matter, the players currently on the team don't matter, and future FA acquisitions don't matter. the entire future of the team depends solely upon one rookie, and if that one guy isn't drafted, everyone else might as well hand up their cleats. that's ridiculous.

 

DAL drafting a QB at 4 amounts to trading their 2016 first round pick for an extra 1st round pick in the future. they don't get a 1st rounder this year (in the sense of immediate play), but when romo finally goes down for good, they get two 1st rounders: their normal pick that year, plus the top QB prospect that they already drafted. except the QB they 'pick' will not be a rookie--he will have spent years working with the team, and will already understand the offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

hey man--you were a 100% stand up guy about owning last season's prediction, and i respect that.

 

on this issue, i'm just entertaining ideas. over on bloggingtheboys, i make the same argument that you're making: building on strength to maximize ROI. i also give a second line of argument about the physical identity that garrett has always wanted, which emphasizes DL, OL and a power run game. from that perspective, elliott or bosa probably contribute more to physical playstyle than ramsey would , so it wouldn't be unreasonably to pick elliott over ramsay.

 

my honest opinion is that if ramsey is on the board, you have to take him. he's one of the only transcendent talents in this draft class (jack being the other, but we don't need another gimpy WLB). if he's not, and you believe that goff or wentz is likely to develop into a franchise QB, that's your pick. otherwise attempt to trade down, and if that's not possible, select the best guy for the physical game (bosa or elliott).

Oh yeah, if Ramsey is there you have to take him. Do you pair him and Jones together on the back end? Best safety tandem since Waters-Harris.

 

What's to remember is that you're going to have the #4 pick in EVERY round. So long as you keep snatching that card out of Jerry's hand the Cowboys are going to end up with some fine players. I'm looking at who the Raiders are getting with the 14th in every round (thinking Walter Jackson-Karl Joseph-Joshua Perry 1-2-3), but damn... that 4th pick would be sweet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh yeah, if Ramsey is there you have to take him. Do you pair him and Jones together on the back end? Best safety tandem since Waters-Harris.

 

What's to remember is that you're going to have the #4 pick in EVERY round. So long as you keep snatching that card out of Jerry's hand the Cowboys are going to end up with some fine players. I'm looking at who the Raiders are getting with the 14th in every round (thinking Walter Jackson-Karl Joseph-Joshua Perry 1-2-3), but damn... that 4th pick would be sweet.

 

hard to say on ramsey's position, but i don't think you pair them unless the corners can start making plays. scandrick is one of the better corners in the league at coverage, but he doesn't get picks (and is coming off major injury). claiborne has improved substantially, but he doesn't get takeaways either. word is that the staff wants jones to settle at FS, so that would put ramsey in the box an awful lot. i'm not sure if he's built for that, and LCB is a much higher-impact position than SS. also, ramsey has been very clear that he wants to play corner (~50% higher earning potential), so there's that as well.

 

the 4th pick in each round puts a big smile on my face. guys are going to fall, so there's a very good chance of netting 4 top-100 prospects. in a very deep draft at DAL's primary position group need (DL), things look good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real problem with the cowboys is that they have multiple holes to fill.

 

sure, they could use elliot at 4.

 

but I think they have greater needs.

Exactly....... The other part to this - it's proven, drafting 1st round RBs (high) is a bad, terrible biz plan... Unless of course you're convinced Elliot is AP or T. Gurley - anyone buying that? Not me.

 

Since '06, RBs taken in the first 10 picks of a 1st Round:

 

2006: R. Bush (2nd)

2007: A. Peterson (7th)

2008: D. McFadden (4th)

2010: CJ Spiller (9th)

 

Recent history suggests by taking one that early - all you've done is pick up 3rd round talent with your top 10, 1st Round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly....... The other part to this - it's proven, drafting 1st round RBs (high) is a bad, terrible biz plan... Unless of course you're convinced Elliot is AP or T. Gurley - anyone buying that? Not me.

 

Since '06, RBs taken in the first 10 picks of a 1st Round:

 

2006: R. Bush (2nd)

2007: A. Peterson (7th)

2008: D. McFadden (4th)

2010: CJ Spiller (9th)

 

Recent history suggests by taking one that early - all you've done is pick up 3rd round talent with your top 10, 1st Round pick.

 

This post exemplifies my confusion with Cowboy fans. You can't use parallels with your offensive line, because it is so much more talented. The norm, or "what happened with this certain RB drafted by this team," just doesn't apply.

 

When you have a force multiplier, hedge to your advantage. But Dallas fans, and I've talked and heard from countless of them, feel because their offensive line is so bad-ass that they can skimp and go cheap at running back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly....... The other part to this - it's proven, drafting 1st round RBs (high) is a bad, terrible biz plan... Unless of course you're convinced Elliot is AP or T. Gurley - anyone buying that? Not me.

 

Since '06, RBs taken in the first 10 picks of a 1st Round:

 

2006: R. Bush (2nd)

2007: A. Peterson (7th)

2008: D. McFadden (4th)

2010: CJ Spiller (9th)

 

Recent history suggests by taking one that early - all you've done is pick up 3rd round talent with your top 10, 1st Round pick.

 

in research terms, you have created a selection problem. anyone chosen with the first 10 picks is most likely getting drafted by a very poor team, and is therefore automatically less likely to be successful than a player chosen later (even if the later guy has less talent). DMC had talent, but he got drafted by a dumpster fire of an organization--this might have had something to do with his lack of success. spiller didn't join a strong organization either-- two 1st round RB picks in three years says something about buffalo. bush got drafted by a pass-first offense. so really, the only comp in that list is peterson.

 

you've also conflated market value with use value--they're two different things. you're saying that top RBs are 3rd round talents simply because teams usually don't draft those RBs earlier. but that only relates to the draft market, not to the player's actual usefulness to the team. in other words, teams might be consistently making market errors by mistakenly passing up on very useful players.

 

does that make sense? think about emmitt. in terms of use value, he should have been the first pick in that draft, but 16 teams passed on all that use value (trying to maximize their market value). his market value was 17th, but that doesn't mean that he was a 17th-pick talent. he was a 1st-pick talent who got mistakenly passed over in the market. jimmy certainly wasn't a genius for picking him--jimmy was just lucky. and that luck (combined with building a good organization) turned out to make him look extremely good.

 

 

to get back to today, the question revolves around which one player would have more impact on the team ecosystem. it's possible that elliott has the ability to elevate the entire offense from pretty good to dominant while he is still a rookie. so as we look at the defensive prospects, which one player has the potential to elevate the entire defense while he is still a rookie? do you think ramsey by himself can elevate the entire defense to a playoff level? bosa? jack?

 

who?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cowboys won the Super Bowl in Tony Dorsetts rookie year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cowboys won the Super Bowl in Tony Dorsetts rookie year.

 

aside from a guy named staubach, the doomsday defense helped a bit. dorsett rushed for fewer yards that year than DMC did in 2015.

 

if we're going to make comparison-based projections, we need to look for successful teams that had mediocre defenses offset by highly productive running games. other than the 2014 cowboys, i can't think of any off the top of my head. OTOH, an elite running game mated with an elite defense (and merely a competent passing game) has won a lot of rings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Cowboys won the Super Bowl in Tony Dorsetts rookie year.

That was a different era, and he was a hall of fame RB.

 

unless you are making the argument this kid is HOF material, you are not even remotely comparing apples to apples.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He wasn't a HOF rb in his rookie season .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a different era, and he was a hall of fame RB.

 

unless you are making the argument this kid is HOF material, you are not even remotely comparing apples to apples.

Of all the posistions on the field, RB is the best one for a rookie to contribute. Drafting a RB will probably have a greater chance of a meaningful contribution than a defensive player. Sorry if I don't have faith in DMC or Alf. I watched them play last year, which overrides stats to me. I see what D Johnson did last year for Arizona, and that line isn't close to the one in Dallas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of all the posistions on the field, RB is the best one for a rookie to contribute. Drafting a RB will probably have a greater chance of a meaningful contribution than a defensive player. Sorry if I don't have faith in DMC or Alf. I watched them play last year, which overrides stats to me. I see what D Johnson did last year for Arizona, and that line isn't close to the one in Dallas

That used to be the case.

 

it used to be that all you expected from a RB is to carry the ball through the hole as defined by blocking.

 

Now the RB is expected to go out and run pass routes and with ZBS schemes, they are now expected to do a better job of reading the play.

 

I think its harder for a RB to contribute immediately than it used to be.

 

That being said, a DB is definitely needed, and if they can grab one early in the draft that they can plug and play I think it will make a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I expected Dallas to take a RB in the 3rd/4rth last year. D Johnson would have been amazing for us & IMO his success is an even stronger reason why we should not draft a RB in the top 10. Sure, we're not guaranteed to get someone as good as D Johnson in the 3rd this year, but with our O Line I'll take our chances of immediate ROI for a RB in that round. Also .. that RB some people thought we should pay tons of $ to keep last year? 3rd round draft pick :music_guitarred:

 

On the other hand, I do think an amazing defensive talent ( which is what we should get at #4 overall ) at CB or DE can have an immediate impact on the team & should also be a cornerstone for years to come .. when a RB might not justify a second contract. Sure, a top tier RB would have immediate impact as well ( arguably more when considered without context ) .. but I'm actually pretty excited about our RB squad right now. While not top tier, I think it is a strength for us currently - it's definitely not a huge source of weakness like aspects of the defense. So in terms of incremental value, I think it'd be a lot easier to improve the team by taking a defensive player.

 

Overall I'd be thrilled if we got a disruptive defensive player in round 1 and a RB in the 3rd/4rth to pair with our O Line. I'd also be fine with a QB at #4, if the FO is convinced whoever is left is a viable franchise QB. If they fall in love with Elliot, they at least need to trade down some to take him & get more picks for defensive players ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On the other hand, I do think an amazing defensive talent ( which is what we should get at #4 overall ) at CB or DE can have an immediate impact on the team & should also be a cornerstone for years to come

 

rookie pass rushers almost never have an immediate impact. demarcus ware had a great rookie season...with 8 sacks. JJ watt had 5.5. khalil mack had 4.5. and no one in this draft class even approaches the talent and athleticism that those guys displayed as prospects. drafting a DE would be an excellent teambuilding move, but probably won't really pay off until romo is 39.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing people say "Alf will be a beast, they made DMC look good last year." Last I checked, DMC is still there and has taken advantage of his fresh start. Alf is an interesting reserve right now, nothing more. Upside for sure but not a starter by any means. Better than Randle who last year I had ranked as a 10th round flier at best (no I'm not lying, he was one of my patented "too low" guys).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better than Randle who last year I had ranked as a 10th round flier at best

That's where I had McFadden ranked last yr.

I drafted him around there in a league and had I not had some very bad luck in that league I would've won it.

 

Imo that could very well happen with Morris this yr too, the problem is he'll never last that long in drafts this yr unless he's hurt at draft time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not to sure about Morris posted a monster season .

 

But it's a good move for the Cowboys one .

 

Not much help in ppr leagues

 

But I can see him being a low rb two in non ppr leagues just based on what could a high td production

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

×