Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

Brian Gaine is leaving Houston Texans front office

TheKDog said:
It's even worse because the Texans have massively mortgaged the future by trading their first and second rounders next year.

Heck it was a big punishment to the Pats to lose first rounders for deflategate and spygate. And these were very low first rounders. And they survived because they were already stacked.

Here we are just giving away a first rounder that can be pretty high if Vegas is right and we only win 8-9 wins. We still have major holes to fill.
Click to expand...
Jesus it's just a single year, just the 2018 Draft and it may be worth what we paid but we won't know that yet one way or the other and won't for awhile.
 
IDEXAN said:
Jesus it's just a single year, just the 2018 Draft and it may be worth what we paid but we won't know that yet one way or the other and won't for awhile.
Click to expand...

This is what people said about the Brock signing.

"It's only a couple of years, then we can cut him if it doesn't work out."

Meanwhile, we've wasted another year of Hopkins, Watt, Brown and Clowney.
 
TheKDog said:
This is what people said about the Brock signing.

"It's only a couple of years, then we can cut him if it doesn't work out."

Meanwhile, we've wasted another year of Hopkins, Watt, Brown and Clowney.
Click to expand...
Often more than just a year. Usually takes a rookie 2 -3 years before they can contribute on a high level. A miss on a 1st RD draft pick will normally set you back 5 years at the position drafted.
 
TheKDog said:
This is what people said about the Brock signing.

"It's only a couple of years, then we can cut him if it doesn't work out."

Meanwhile, we've wasted another year of Hopkins, Watt, Brown and Clowney.
Click to expand...

Let me guess, you wanted to pin their hopes on a 4th rounder with 92 career attempts?
 
infantrycak said:
Let me guess, you wanted to pin their hopes on a 4th rounder with 92 career attempts?
Click to expand...

No, but I wanted them to address the QB position intelligently, not by spending tons of money on a crappy free agent or doing a high risk trade up.
 
Texian said:
Often more than just a year. Usually takes a rookie 2 -3 years before they can contribute on a high level. A miss on a 1st RD draft pick will normally set you back 5 years at the position drafted.
Click to expand...

And since it took TWO first rounders to get Watson, I guess that's 10 years. Fun times coming.
 
thunderkyss said:
I didn't think Brooks & Ben Jones was let go to sign Brock & Lamar. I think (could be wrong) we signed Jeff Allen to a similar cap for 2016 that Brooks got to go to Philly. We didn't pay Ben Jones, but I think that was more a player "valuation" thing (even though I liked Ben) than a have to sign Brock & Miller thing. Then we drafted a guy in the 2nd to start at center... so.
Click to expand...
No doubt Brooks was a highly sought after Lineman. Pro Football Focus had Brooks rated as one of their top guards in 2013 and 2014 before ranking him much lower in 2015. The reason for his sudden drop off was unexplained. But Brooks was dealing with uncontrolled severe anxiety disorder and chronic progressive and recurrent gastric ulcers most of his last year here. Not widely publicized, but he was admitted several times for the aforementioned conditions. The Texans foresaw the potential progressive long-term problems involved and, although otherwise reported, were not willing to re-sign him to a lengthy contract. Last year with the Eagles, things even worsened for Brooks again leading to hospitalization and missing of 2 games, and with distinct ill effects of his conditions on his performance throughout the season.
 
Last edited:
Yet Brooks still had an excellent year despite issues

"New import Brandon Brooks was excellent in his first season with the Eagles, allowing just one sack all season at guard and narrowly missing out on a spot on the PFF All-Pro team."
 
TheKDog said:
No, but I wanted them to address the QB position intelligently, not by spending tons of money on a crappy free agent or doing a high risk trade up.
Click to expand...
What do you consider "address the QB position intelligently"? If Watson turns out to be the franchise QB we all are hoping for, then this move is damn genius!
 
Texian said:
Often more than just a year. Usually takes a rookie 2 -3 years before they can contribute on a high level. A miss on a 1st RD draft pick will normally set you back 5 years at the position drafted.
Click to expand...

This is what worries me.

Of course the Watson pick assures that NRG will be full for another 5 yr.

I hope Watson turns out to be better than I think he will be. (A 15ish type QB) because we will be having the Schaub discussion for the next 10 yrs, only with racial overtones.
 
Texian said:
Your road map is all over the place but I'm happy to oblige your confusions. Holmgren was never successful as the sole decision maker. In Green Bay Ron Wolf was calling the shots and in Seattle Holmgren was fired as GM in 2002 and it wasn't until Holmgren was replaced by Ted Thompson as Seattle's GM did the Seahawks achieve success. That pretty much explains why Holmgren failed in Cleveland as the single decision maker.

Matt Millen was hired out the broadcasting booth and no experience as a Head Coach or a GM. While Holmgren and Millen were never high achievers as football operations decision makers, Ted Thompson and Ron Wolfe were. Let me think a minute....Ted Thompson and Ron Wolf....both mentors and teachers to Eliot Wolf....hhmmmm.

Gary Kubiak was just a so so coach as the final decision maker of football operations. Once he was relieved of those responsibilities and answered to a real GM as in John Elway he became a Super Bowl winning coach, much like Mike Holmgrem. The guy that built the team and put the Broncos together was Elway, Kubiak just coached them.
Click to expand...

So you agree with me. It can't be just any guy. It has to be the right guy.

So let's assume you buy a brand new football team, of course you're going to want to hire the right guy.

But let's say the right guy doesn't want to lead an expansion team, so you reach out to your second choice. Again, he doesn't want to lead an expansion team.

What do you do?
 
gs27 said:
Not when there is a difference in professional ability and or a conflict of interest. A high level hospital executive who is not a surgeon should not tell a surgeon how to do his job or what tools he needs to use to do his job. An owner of a company who is not an engineer should not tell an engineer how to do his job or what tools he needs to use to do his job. The difference is that individuals who get to that level are generally knowledgeable in the businesses they run and are successful because they listen to people who are experts in their fields..
Click to expand...

Well, not exactly. Bean counters tell surgeons how to do their jobs & what tools they can & can't use all the time. Bean counters tell engineers how to do their jobs & what tools they can & can't use all the time.

Or actually owners & board of directors use information gathered by "business" folks all the time to set parameters the "skilled" folks can operate within.

In the Texans situation Bob McNair hired Bill O'Brien to do a job. He let O'b build a team with Rick Smith's help. After the second year & getting embarrassed in the playoffs McNair said enough with the bargain bin, get our franchise a franchise QB.

For all we know Bob was hoping O'b would be that guy but quickly found out he wasn't. Now he's hoping he can make him that guy.
 
thunderkyss said:
So you agree with me. It can't be just any guy. It has to be the right guy.

So let's assume you buy a brand new football team, of course you're going to want to hire the right guy.

But let's say the right guy doesn't want to lead an expansion team, so you reach out to your second choice. Again, he doesn't want to lead an expansion team.

What do you do?
Click to expand...

I don't see how you would think that I agreed with you. I explained why your Holmgren and Millen examples were off base and just plain wrong.

You sell the team, nobody wants to work for you.
 
TheKDog said:
Yet Brooks still had an excellent year despite issues

"New import Brandon Brooks was excellent in his first season with the Eagles, allowing just one sack all season at guard and narrowly missing out on a spot on the PFF All-Pro team."
Click to expand...

Ok.

I'm not saying he couldn't play. I'm saying the Texans decision wasn't based on a need to save money for Brock & Lamar.

The entire contract value was higher in Brooks' favor. But the difference in 2016 cap dollars was negligible.
 
zshawn10 said:
He was going to be the GM in the post-Grigson/pre-Ballard era.

Also:

patrick

✔@PatDStat
Jimmy Raye III is the VP of Football Ops for the Colts since 2013. Also, spent time with the Chargers (1996-2012)

5:55 PM - 17 May 2017
Click to expand...

He was made the interim GM following the firing of Grigson. He was never going to be seriously considered for the permanent Colts GM position. He was given the courtesy of being interviewed. There was talk for the past few years that Grigson and he had to go. He was originally brought in Jan of 2013 specifically to help bolster the support cast for Luck. None of the 2013 Colts draftees are still with the team. It is obvious that these two to date have failed miserably ito find the pieces to protect/support their golden child.
 
TheKDog said:
This is what people said about the Brock signing.

"It's only a couple of years, then we can cut him if it doesn't work out."

Meanwhile, we've wasted another year of Hopkins, Watt, Brown and Clowney.
Click to expand...

Texian said:
Often more than just a year. Usually takes a rookie 2 -3 years before they can contribute on a high level. A miss on a 1st RD draft pick will normally set you back 5 years at the position drafted.
Click to expand...

Sooooo.... we shouldn't go after the best FA QB. We shouldn't trade up to get the best QB prospect in the draft.

It sounds like you're saying we should continue to do what we had done previously (draft a bargain QB like Savage or sign the FA QB no one else wants like Fitz, or trade practically nothing for another team's project QB like Mallet) & expect different results.
 
TheKDog said:
This is what people said about the Brock signing.

"It's only a couple of years, then we can cut him if it doesn't work out."

Meanwhile, we've wasted another year of Hopkins, Watt, Brown and Clowney.
Click to expand...
We didn't waste anything unless you consider the season a waste if we don't advance to the AFC championship game ?
Even with all of the ups and downs I enjoyed the 2017 season but yes it would have great to win the SB.
 
IDEXAN said:
We didn't waste anything unless you consider the season a waste if we don't advance to the AFC championship game ?
Even with all of the ups and downs I enjoyed the 2016 season but yes it would have great to win the SB.
Click to expand...


Agreed
 
thunderkyss said:
Ok.

I'm not saying he couldn't play. I'm saying the Texans decision wasn't based on a need to save money for Brock & Lamar.

The entire contract value was higher in Brooks' favor. But the difference in 2016 cap dollars was negligible.
Click to expand...

Right but I think cap implications are looked at over several years. They still need to extend Hopkins and Clowney
 
IDEXAN said:
We didn't waste anything unless you consider the season a waste if we don't advance to the AFC championship game ?
Even with all of the ups and downs I enjoyed the 2017 season but yes it would have great to win the SB.
Click to expand...

We had a historically bad offense. Defenses like that don't come around too often and we let them down with predictably idiotic offensive signings
 
thunderkyss said:
Sooooo.... we shouldn't go after the best FA QB. We shouldn't trade up to get the best QB prospect in the draft.

It sounds like you're saying we should continue to do what we had done previously (draft a bargain QB like Savage or sign the FA QB no one else wants like Fitz, or trade practically nothing for another team's project QB like Mallet) & expect different results.
Click to expand...

Osweiler is and was mediocre at best. There was no justification for that contract even if no one else better was available in free agency.

Watson was the third QB picked and we apparently didn't even have him as the first QB on our own draft board. Maybe not even second.

The QB position has now cost two firsts and a second plus one year of very high salary for bottom 5 production. That is ridiculously expensive. Watson has to be extremely good to justify that.

And no, there were other options, such as drafting Garropolo or Carr, just to name two examples. Other good QBs have been available in recent years.
 
TheKDog said:
Osweiler is and was mediocre at best. There was no justification for that contract even if no one else better was available in free agency.

Watson was the third QB picked and we apparently didn't even have him as the first QB on our own draft board. Maybe not even second.

The QB position has now cost two firsts and a second plus one year of very high salary for bottom 5 production. That is ridiculously expensive. Watson has to be extremely good to justify that.

And no, there were other options, such as drafting Garropolo or Carr, just to name two examples. Other good QBs have been available in recent years.
Click to expand...

Eh, no. We paid about average QB salary for bottom 3 production for one year. We gave up a 2nd round pick stupidly, but that wasn't necessary to be rid of him. So, the cost was a 2nd round pick and average QB money for 1 year of bottom 3 play.

The two firsts that we used to draft Watson haven't resulted in anything as of yet, obviously, as the team hasn't been on the field yet.
 
TheKDog said:
Right but I think cap implications are looked at over several years. They still need to extend Hopkins and Clowney
Click to expand...

I'm sure cap implications are looked at over several years. But there's nothing in the Texans cap forecast that would have prohibited signing Brooks to a longer. Deal. Even with Brock's $19M we still had $30M free.

Not signing Brooks had nothing to do with signing Brock & Miller.

According to CnnnD, this is the one time the Texans contract negotiations were in line with medical data.
 
TexansSeminole said:
Eh, no. We paid about average QB salary for bottom 3 production for one year. We gave up a 2nd round pick stupidly, but that wasn't necessary to be rid of him. So, the cost was a 2nd round pick and average QB money for 1 year of bottom 3 play.

The two firsts that we used to draft Watson haven't resulted in anything as of yet, obviously, as the team hasn't been on the field yet.
Click to expand...

Osweiler had a top 10 contract. By guaranteed per year and total guaranteed he was paid like a top 10 qb.

But even if it was average, it was still a steep price.
 
TexansSeminole said:
Eh, no. We paid about average QB salary for bottom 3 production for one year. We gave up a 2nd round pick stupidly, but that wasn't necessary to be rid of him. So, the cost was a 2nd round pick and average QB money for 1 year of bottom 3 play.

The two firsts that we used to draft Watson haven't resulted in anything as of yet, obviously, as the team hasn't been on the field yet.
Click to expand...

Osweiler had a top 10 contract. By guaranteed per year and total guaranteed he was paid like a top 10 qb.

But even if it was average, it was still a steep price.
thunderkyss said:
I'm sure cap implications are looked at over several years. But there's nothing in the Texans cap forecast that would have prohibited signing Brooks to a longer. Deal. Even with Brock's $19M we still had $30M free.

Not signing Brooks had nothing to do with signing Brock & Miller.

According to CnnnD, this is the one time the Texans contract negotiations were in line with medical data.
Click to expand...

Then why get rid of him and Ben Jones? Our ol was massively worse and a major reason we had a historically bad offense
 
TheKDog said:
Osweiler is and was mediocre at best. There was no justification for that contract even if no one else better was available in free agency.
Click to expand...

Clearly there was since Elway and Kubiak were close to matching it. What should be called into question is OB's coaching.

Watson was the third QB picked and we apparently didn't even have him as the first QB on our own draft board. Maybe not even second.
Click to expand...

How do you know this? And so the f'k what, you have to consider where you are picking.

The QB position has now cost two firsts and a second plus one year of very high salary for bottom 5 production. That is ridiculously expensive. Watson has to be extremely good to justify that.
Click to expand...

Watson has to do zilch to justify costs associated with Oz.

And no, there were other options, such as drafting Garropolo or Carr, just to name two examples. Other good QBs have been available in recent years.
Click to expand...

And that's a knock on Watson?
 
TheKDog said:
We had a historically bad offense. Defenses like that don't come around too often and we let them down with predictably idiotic offensive signings
Click to expand...

Osweiler threw three TD passes that were dropped in the divisional round. If those balls were caught that's a totally different game.

I didn't care much for Osweiler before we signed him. The only reason I could think of as a reason we did was that he played well in big moments.

Something none of our QBs did before. They were great to serviceable in meaningless games, but disappeared when things started tp matter.

Brock had all kinds of problems... I'm not saying different. But those three dropped TDs support what I believe the thinking was behind signing Brock. Fiedo on the right sideline, Fiedo in the back of the end zone, the perfect bomb to the wide open Fuller.

If he wasn't a snotty nosed punk or if O'b wasn't always on edge, I think Osweiler would still be here, regardless his historically poor stats.


TheKDog said:
Osweiler is and was mediocre at best. There was no justification for that contract even if no one else better was available in free agency.
Click to expand...

Preaching to the choir. I didn't say he was worth $37M guaranteed. I said the best available.

TheKDog said:
Watson was the third QB picked and we apparently didn't even have him as the first QB on our own draft board. Maybe not even second.
Click to expand...

Some people felt he was the best. Across the board everyone agrees of the three he is closest to pro ready.

TheKDog said:
The QB position has now cost two firsts and a second plus one year of very high salary for bottom 5 production. That is ridiculously expensive. Watson has to be extremely good to justify that.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the 1st round pick we used on Carr. The 4th on Ragone, what was it a 6th on Henson, two 2nds on Schaub, a fifth on Yates & the late 4th for Savage.

TheKDog said:
And no, there were other options, such as drafting Garropolo or Carr, just to name two examples. Other good QBs have been available in recent years.
Click to expand...

No. I don't think so. Carr is looking better than I thought, but I didn't think he could win a Super Bowl then, don't think he can win a Super Bowl now. I think he's closer to Culppepper than Aaron Rodgers.

More or less the same about Garoppolo.

I haven't formed an opinion on Watson yet. On one hand I think Ricky McNair is setting O'b up for failure. On the other, I think Bill O'Brien is a dumbast
 
TheKDog said:
Then why get rid of him and Ben Jones? Our ol was massively worse and a major reason we had a historically bad offense
Click to expand...

I don't know that we got rid of them. They were FAs & we didn't value them as highly as other teams. Just like we didn't value Bouye as much as Jacksonville did. We wanted to keep him, but not as badly as Jacksonville wanted him.
 
thunderkyss said:
Osweiler threw three TD passes that were dropped in the divisional round. If those balls were caught that's a totally different game.

I didn't care much for Osweiler before we signed him. The only reason I could think of as a reason we did was that he played well in big moments.

Something none of our QBs did before. They were great to serviceable in meaningless games, but disappeared when things started tp matter.

Brock had all kinds of problems... I'm not saying different. But those three dropped TDs support what I believe the thinking was behind signing Brock. Fiedo on the right sideline, Fiedo in the back of the end zone, the perfect bomb to the wide open Fuller.

If he wasn't a snotty nosed punk or if O'b wasn't always on edge, I think Osweiler would still be here, regardless his historically poor stats.




Preaching to the choir. I didn't say he was worth $37M guaranteed. I said the best available.



Some people felt he was the best. Across the board everyone agrees of the three he is closest to pro ready.



Don't forget the 1st round pick we used on Carr. The 4th on Ragone, what was it a 6th on Henson, two 2nds on Schaub, a fifth on Yates & the late 4th for Savage.



No. I don't think so. Carr is looking better than I thought, but I didn't think he could win a Super Bowl then, don't think he can win a Super Bowl now. I think he's closer to Culppepper than Aaron Rodgers.

More or less the same about Garoppolo.

I haven't formed an opinion on Watson yet. On one hand I think Ricky McNair is setting O'b up for failure. On the other, I think Bill O'Brien is a dumbast
Click to expand...

For sure Ricky is setting up BOB for failure.

I like Garoppolo as much as you like McCarron. So we will have to disagree on this one.
 
steelbtexan said:
I like Garoppolo as much as you like McCarron. So we will have to disagree on this one.
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with that. I don't think any less of you for it, just like I don't think any less of O'b/Rick for picking Savage over McCarron. They should get the guy they believe in.
 
steelbtexan said:
Yep,

The Colts have been known for their great drafts/FA acquisitions over the last 5 yrs.

This is a certain downgrade.
Click to expand...

I heard a rumor that an unsubstantiated source almost believed O'b might have thought about bringing this guy in to help get the kind of players he needs to put butts in the seats.
 
steelbtexan said:
Did he?
Click to expand...

Of the two I mentioned, sure. Did he rather have Garoppolo? Maybe.

I know Wade Phillips would have rather had Patrick Peterson than Jj Watt. But the draft is what it is. Most teams don't always get all the guys they wanted.

They do the best they can & deal with it.

If they drafted Garoppolo with 33 I'd be as upset as you are that they didn't. I'd just express it different.
 
TheKDog said:
Well the Patriots made the Super Bowl in 1985 then didn't go back until 1995. But that's because they finally built a good front office. When are we gonna do that? Are you saying we should give O'Brien and Rick 10 years?

Also, we are an 8-9 win team (in the worst division), have no first or second round pick next year, our best OL is aging, and Hopkins and Clowney are not extended.

How exactly are we supposed to get better? Just play harder?
Click to expand...

New England came into the league in 1960. Their first 15 years they made the playoffs ONCE... with a 7-6-1 record

It took them 25 years to make a super bowl, but their great and the Texans suck

How exactly is your crying going to make them improve? Just cry louder?
 
Texian said:
So then Ricky McNair is not really a General Manager. He's only an assistant to the General Manager. So in this we agree.
Click to expand...
EVERY employee is, in one way or another, an assistant to the owner of the business.

The only GMs who operate as you seem to think they should have owned the team; Al Davis and Jerrah Jones.
 
I'll pile on...

TheKDog said:
Osweiler is and was mediocre at best.
Click to expand...
Mediocre? Keenum was mediocre. Osweiler blew to high heaven!

TheKDog said:
Watson was the third QB picked and we apparently didn't even have him as the first QB on our own draft board. Maybe not even second.
Click to expand...
You were sitting next to Rick?

TheKDog said:
drafting Garropolo or Carr, just to name two examples. Other good
Click to expand...
Why does everyone (not really everyone) think Garropolo is a "good" QB? Dude has like a four or five game sample size? Osweiler had a 7 or 8 game sample size. Played well enough in those games to line the bank account. But he's horrible. Ol Jimmy could be the same....
 
steelbtexan said:
So Ted Thompson is an assistant?

Schnieder/Carroll ?

Ozzie?

Elway?

Belichick?

Etc....
Click to expand...
yep.
gs27 said:
Not when there is a difference in professional ability and or a conflict of interest. A high level hospital executive who is not a surgeon should not tell a surgeon how to do his job or what tools he needs to use to do his job. An owner of a company who is not an engineer should not tell an engineer how to do his job or what tools he needs to use to do his job. The difference is that individuals who get to that level are generally knowledgeable in the businesses they run and are successful because they listen to people who are experts in their fields. That is not the case with football as there is a major conflict of interest between making decisions that will keep the fans in the seats and purchasing jerseys versus making decisions that in the long term gives the team the greatest likelihood of winning championships. No, football isn't surgery or rocket design but that is where the problem lies, those who know little about the game, like McNair, influence those who know a great deal about the game because they think they are more knowledgeable than they are, and that is wrong.
Click to expand...
The original post I responded to was this....
Texian said: ↑
Ricky does what he asked and told to do, just like Cal.
Click to expand...
I would submit that even in your examples the surgeon or the engineer is doing what he's been asked to do by their respective employers; do the best job they can in surgery or in the engineering problems she/he are asked to solve.

Nothing in Texian's post said Rick Smith is being told HOW to do his job.
So I responded to only what was said.
 
thunderkyss said:
I'm sure cap implications are looked at over several years. But there's nothing in the Texans cap forecast that would have prohibited signing Brooks to a longer. Deal. Even with Brock's $19M we still had $30M free.

Not signing Brooks had nothing to do with signing Brock & Miller.

According to CnnnD, this is the one time the Texans contract negotiations were in line with medical data.
Click to expand...

To put the record entirely straight, the Texans after multiple hospitalizations diagnosed recurrent gastric ulcers in Brooks. However, they most importantly failed to diagnose the cause..........i.e., the severe pathological anxiety/panic attack condition he was suffering every time he had to step onto the field (anadditional issue that had him miss numerous practices throughout the year). It wasn't until the Eagles medical staff again hospitalized Brooks in Pihiladelphia for recurrent ulcer disease that his underlying causative anxiety condition was diagnosed and treatment subsequently quickly instituted.
 
Last edited:
His replacement is Jimmy Raye III? The guy who was VP of football operations for the slowly disintegrating (despite having Andrew Luck) Colts team?

That's a clear downgrade. Looks like somebody hired someone who wasn't going to be much of a threat. That's always a good idea.
 
Hervoyel said:
His replacement is Jimmy Raye III? The guy who was VP of football operations for the slowly disintegrating (despite having Andrew Luck) Colts team?

That's a clear downgrade. Looks like somebody hired someone who wasn't going to be much of a threat. That's always a good idea.
Click to expand...

Sad the team is being run/run into the ground this way.

Rotting from within
 
Raye, 48, has spent the last four years working with the Indianapolis Colts as vice president of football operations. His primary role was in assisting now-fired general manager Ryan Grigson on personnel decisions and NFL Draft preparation and research. Raye also did some contractual negotiations.

Prior to his Colts tenure, Raye spent 17 years in the scouting department with the San Diego Chargers. He started as an area scout before being promoted to director of collegiate scouting. His crowning achievement with the Chargers was zeroing in on running back Ladanian Tomlinson.
Click to expand...

http://texanswire.usatoday.com/2017/05/18/texans-hiring-jimmy-raye-iii-to-replace-brian-gaine/
 
ObsiWan said:
EVERY employee is, in one way or another, an assistant to the owner of the business.

The only GMs who operate as you seem to think they should have owned the team; Al Davis and Jerrah Jones.
Click to expand...

Your basic cop out. Can we all just agree that the owner can fire anyone in organization? YES! That doesn't necessarily make them all assistants (The Cop Out). Now that we can all agree the owner can fire anyone in the organization may be we can get back to some adult conversation and discussion and stop with the Middle School argumentative BS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top