After Further Review: Packers vs. Giants
By Ross Uglem
Ross will provide a few observations every Monday afternoon following a Packers game based on a few viewings of the condensed version of the game on NFL GamePass. While this might not be the All-22 camera deep dive that might be more "educational", it should provide a conversation point for the rest of the week.
The run defense is special. This isn't a fluke, and it's certainly not some run of "luck" based on what running backs were and were not available to their teams. The Packers defensive front is beating opposing offensive lines. There is no room to run, I don't really care who the running back is.
One specific quirk that I enjoyed was a run blitz that Capers used on more than one occasion. Capers pushed in his edge defender on a few plays and brought HaHa Clinton-Dix on a run blitz. The tackle was forced to block "in" and engage the bigger defender. Clinton-Dix was allowed to run free at the running back and the slide in from the edge defender created a clogged middle of the play. It was a really cool design.
Rodgers was just a few ticks from a much better game. The deep ball to Nelson was probable defensive pass interference. The officials clearly missed defensive pass interference on an end zone attempt to Nelson as well. Nelson also dropped a few very good throws, including one drop that immediately led to an interception. Richard Rodgers absolutely dropped a touchdown.
Don't get me wrong. I didn't see the same quarterback that I saw in the Detroit game. There were not enough times in which Rodgers hit his drop and released the football. Too many times Rodgers waited and waited for a second and even third and fourth actions from his wide receivers. The fix for his struggles should be so simple. Hit your drop and fire the ball. With that said, Nelson has to play better.
Aaron Ripkowski played very well. Not just when he had the ball in his hands, either, though that was pretty freakin' cool.
Morgan Burnett you gotta catch that.
Not enough can be said about the quality of play of the offensive line. Continuity is so, so important. Through four games the Packers have had that.
This was Davante Adams best game since the playoff game against Dallas. Adams was open quite a bit on Sunday night, and did very well when he was called upon, beyond just his touchdown reception. He caught 5 of his 8 targets on a night in which Aaron Rodgers didn't complete a very high percentage of his passes. His 17 yard per catch average provided the offense with a big play explosiveness it lacked a season ago.
He also probably stopped a third Rodgers interception with an offensive pass interference in the second quarter.
James Starks needs to play better or be replaced.
Randall Cobb looked as good as he has since 2014. There's really no question about it.
Kyler Fackrell appears to be a hell of a player. In fact, early returns on this year's draft class are remarkable. It's clear that Kenny Clark is a player, and defensive linemen like Clark don't really come into their own until their second or third seasons. Clark's future is very bright. Fackrell's Pro Football Focus grade, if he qualified on a snap-count basis, would have him amongst the 20 or 22 best edge defenders in football. Not 3-4 OLB, edge defenders. Blake Martinez is a serviceable starter and early returns on Trevor Davis and Dean Lowry are fine.
Nick Perry is really, really, really playing well.
Pour one out for Hyde, Rollins, Gunter, Burnett and Clinton-Dix. These guys played every snap on Sunday night, and they held the Giants passing game largely in check. It's long been a tenet of Capers' defense to allow the opposing team's #1 threat to "get his" and shut down the rest of the offense, and that's what the Packers did. Sterling Shephard and Victor Cruz combined for 2 catches and just 14 yards. Eli Manning finished with a QBR of 21.7 (scale of 1 to 100).
What a weird penalty to call on Jeff Janis.
Jake Ryan is much better than he was a season ago. If you get a chance, just watch even the condensed version of the game and watch Ryan on every play. You can tell he's another year removed from the ACL injury he suffered at Michigan.
-------------------
Ross Uglem is a staff writer for Cheesehead TV. He can be found on Twitter @RossUglem
Comments (54)
chugwater
October 10, 2016 at 04:47 pm
Really think this team can be special if the offense and secondary become more consistent. Also can't wait to see the defense play Dallas and their O line.
rdent
October 10, 2016 at 05:34 pm
Probably the biggest test against the run the Defense will see this year
EdsLaces
October 11, 2016 at 07:02 am
Perhaps ...but playing Demarco and Henry might be even harder...
Colin_C
October 10, 2016 at 04:47 pm
I was at the game, and thought Adams really did have his best game in quite some time. He showed strength, speed, and easily could have passed 100 yards with one or two better throws from 12.
Like I said after the Lions game, our RB situation is desperately thin. I'm itching to see what Jackson is capable of, since he never got a shot in the preseason. Age has caught up to Starks.
After last weeks swiss cheese secondary, I was pretty nervous about this game. But boy, our guys played light out. Got lucky a few times with some overthrown or dropped passes, but against this WR group, I'd give them an A.
I think Dallas will be a good test to see where we're at as a defense.
Lphill
October 10, 2016 at 04:48 pm
Let's see a complete game from the offense and defense against the Cowboys a hot team, we will see how good the Packers run D is against a hot running back , Jordy is entitled to have an off game because he doesn't have many he will bounce back this week, I am confident about the offense and defense but the punting situation has to be resolved fast.
Ibleedgreenmore
October 10, 2016 at 06:10 pm
I had to scratch my head on the Janis call out of bounds play. I agree with what was written, the refs had some pretty bad calls out there last night.
Bearmeat
October 10, 2016 at 06:43 pm
Hochuli looks old now - and he's always been senile. He just likes to hear himself talk.
The refs were awful last night and I wasn't surprised one bit.
rdent
October 10, 2016 at 08:28 pm
It always seems that Hochuli and his crew make some B.S. calIs,I couldn't believe that holding call on Bakhtiari
Thegreatreynoldo
October 10, 2016 at 09:55 pm
I thought the officiating was bad. The call against Janis was obvious and correct.
NickPerry
October 11, 2016 at 07:11 am
That call on Bakhtiari wasn't even borderline holding, it was just a Horse S*** call. The TD by Beckham stood because it was called that way on the field, but I thought it was clear enough (Trying to be Biased) his foot was out. Then again if Burnett would just catch ONE ball that hit him in the hands, I wouldn't even bring up the TD.
RCPackerFan
October 11, 2016 at 07:22 am
Its penalty's like that, that I wish they could review. That was a huge penalty. It cost them a 1st down.
Packer_Pete
October 11, 2016 at 05:21 am
the refs had some very strange calls, I agree. phantom holding calls, obvious PIs weren't called. but on both teams. But that Janis call was absolutely correct. The rule is that he has to come back in immediately, or at least try, if he was forced out. Dude ran down the sideline in the white and parts even on the other side of the white for 20 yards... nothing wrong with that call...
RCPackerFan
October 11, 2016 at 07:16 am
I thought the Janis call was right.
But there were a quite a few that were wrong. That holding penalty on Bakhtiari was absolutely a joke and cost us a first down.
If they aren't going to call PI that is fine. But how can they call Offensive PI on Adams, and not call it on Cruz (or whoever the WR was), who was pulling Rollins down? If Rollins doesn't get pulled down I believe he intercepts the pass.
Also there was a couple of other PI penalty's that should have been called. And how many times were the Giants OL holding our OLB's coming around the corner?
The refs definitely missed a lot.
rdent
October 11, 2016 at 08:21 am
I'm glad it wasnt my imagination,I thought I saw a significant amount of holding by NY offensive line that wasn't called
marpag1
October 11, 2016 at 08:04 am
Agree. I don't understand why people are so worked up about the call. When I was watching the game, I never even questioned it at all. It was a bad play by Janis. He's gotta know that the rules require him to stay (or get) in the field of play. But this seems to be the big bugaboo with Janis... loads of physical talent but doesn't always seem to "get it" in between the ears.
RCPackerFan
October 11, 2016 at 06:32 am
Let me ask you. If Rodgers catches the TD pass that went through his hands, Starks catches the screen pass that hit his hands and would have likely went for a TD, and Nelson doesn't drop that 3rd down pass which would have given them first and goal inside the 10 on their 2nd drive, would you say Rodgers got his groove back?
I know he missed some throws, but the WR's didn't do him any favors either.
I think McCarthy needs to change the game plan. But change it to what he did on the first 2 drives. They did everything, and marched down the field. Then he went back to the same old stuff and it didn't work.
I agree with you on Abbrederis. My question with him though is, will he get that chance? With Pennel and Goodson set to return from suspension, do they cut Abbrederis? I hope not, but is it a real possibility?
cpheph1
October 11, 2016 at 11:38 pm
Moo...
stockholder
October 10, 2016 at 07:52 pm
I'm Glad you guys like Perry now. How many of you wanted him gone after TT would not pick up his option. Remember me writing he was going to be a good player. Nooo. You said dump him. And I wrote I hope he plays his heart out. Hear the money! You guys eat to many beans. Quit passing gas. So -- can you hear what I'm telling you about Adams, and how he should be used? NOOO I'm just to negative. Turn arounds come by performance. Adams performance still leaves much to be desired. We've got so use to him being a disappointment! You can't contain yourself s when he actually makes a play or two.
Rossonero
October 10, 2016 at 08:17 pm
Injuries and poor play hurt Perry, but the Packers were very patient with him. After waiting 4 years and having no return on your investment, wouldn't you want to walk away too?
Thegreatreynoldo
October 10, 2016 at 10:09 pm
This is wrong on so many levels it is hard to know where to start. Not picking up Perry's option was the correct decision and saved us millions. I think most of us were fine with re-signing him at a modest salary. Concern has not been talent but health. I for one am not in a hurry to extend Perry. I don't think it would save all that much to do it now, and I still have injury concerns about Perry.
cpheph1
October 11, 2016 at 11:42 pm
Why do you have injury concerns about Perry and not specify any other players?..you only have injury concerns about Perry?
Thegreatreynoldo
October 12, 2016 at 01:56 am
Perry's snap counts:
2012: 200
2013: 368
2014: 360
2015: 351
2016: 194
Stockholder's comment was specifically about Perry, so my reply was limited to Perry. The guy lives on the injury report and has so far played at most about 35% of the available snaps. I saw no reason to mention other players, but since you ask, I have injury concerns about Bulaga (knees), Shields (concussions), CM3 (hammies mostly), Lacy (concussions), and Burnett (back). Guys like Lang, who play at a very high level even with their nagging injuries, don't overly concern me though I maintain awareness of his situation. Stockholder mentions Adams, but since I don't know what he thinks about Adams or how he should be used, I can't respond to that portion of his comment.
I also thought Stockholder's comment could be read as suggesting that we should extend Perry. It is one thing to take a $4.875M one year flyer on a guy, and quite another to pay such a player big money. DPF suggested 4 yrs., $32M. IDK what his market is; I guess I think it probably turns out to be more if he reaches UFA and continues to play at this level. I can see Perry getting more than say Houston, Orakpo, Hali get, maybe jerry Hughes, or maybe as much as Kerrigan.
Objectively speaking, Perry's had 4 sacks and 24 tackles in his best year prior to 2016, so he is a one-year wonder. He could not beat out Mike Neal for snaps last year. He should not be dropped into coverage, but his run D and pass rush will excite attention. It is easier for teams like Tampa Bay, which has almost $60M in projected cap space for 2017 (plus any increase in the $155M current limit) to take a big money, multi-year flyer on Perry than it is for GB with a projected $14.6M in cap space (+ any increase in the cap) to devote guaranteed money to Perry. We still have decisions to make on Tretter, Lang, Lacy, Cook, Datone, and Hyde. Despite some misgivings, I think TT should cough up the money necessary to retain a potential red+ chipper like Perry.
cpheph1
October 12, 2016 at 10:47 am
A very well thought response, something I've come to appreciate from you! I concur on hoping Ted shows Perry the love with $. No doubt he's got some hard cap decisions to make going into 2017.
As you know, it's all about how the contracts are structured...but Ted has two (IMO) either or situations with Perry/Datone & Tretter/Lang. As well as a big decision on Lacy. They won't pay Hyde starter $ because he's not one. Cook would be nice but he's hard to judge ATT because of the injury.
Peppers' rather large cap number will be off the 2017 cap...so they'll have some room to sign some of their own.
Anyway, thanks for the candid and thoughtful response.
Thegreatreynoldo
October 13, 2016 at 02:49 am
thanks, cpheph1 (sorry, but you need a nickname!). I agree with your post in general. TT probably has to pick btw Lang/Tretter. Lang was truly tremendous against NY - we'd surely miss him. However, Tretter did well against huge DTs in Hankins and Harrison as well, and he is younger and more versatile. [I really want to find out THIS season whether Tretter (and Linsley) can play guard - I am not convinced that either can, at least at Lang's level. But I agree with DPF: Tretter may want to play OC, if he believes it is his best position, and if TT can't promise that because Linsley can't play OG, it might not be TT's choice.]
TT might have to pick btw Perry/Datone, but so far Datone's market price might be reasonable enough to keep both. However, I think you were driving at something else: I think we both believe that Datone will play well enough over the course of the season to drive up his price. I agree on Hyde - his future probably depends on Brice, maybe Evans, and whether TT believes he has talent in the pipeline to replace Hyde if his market is more than back -up money (Guion money?). Agree also that we have to wait on Cook.
We agree that the structure of a contract is the most important thing. How much is guaranteed, when does it come off the cap, and how much dead money is there in the outer years are the important questions. Any time TT agrees to a big, multi-year contract, we need to be dispassionate about it. To wit the Daniels Contract: Talent, Production, Youth, Injury history, Work ethic, general character were all checked. The structure is fair: it is not team friendly like Sitton's was. Ditto for Bakh's contract.
Turophile
October 11, 2016 at 02:26 am
Stockholder needs to understand that the concern (regarding Perry) from most people that know anything about the Packers, was that injuries were preventing him from any lengthy run of standout games.
He showed talent pretty early, when he was fit. So make sure you don't sprain your elbow, when you pat yourself on the back. This could have gone another way (remember DL Justin Harrell, drafted 2007).
stockholder
October 11, 2016 at 07:49 am
The concern (regarding Perry) was injuries. But many did not like his play at OLB. He liked Mathews side vs. the other. He was playing like a lineman. Instead of a LB. He did play Mathews side better. He got to use his shoulder and reach with his Right Hand. Everyone thought he was a bust. But he's learned how to move now. More than likely thanks to Peppers. And getting better knowledge of what Capers wanted. If they really wanted him , Peppers would not have been signed. So maybe you should pay closer attention to details. You want to go down a road that is a dead end.
rdent
October 11, 2016 at 08:30 am
Justin Harrell, drafted hurt and was a total injury bust,one of TT's worst draft picks if not the worst
rdent
October 11, 2016 at 08:37 am
Although Jerel Worthy comes to mind, 2nd round,couldn't get healthy with GB but I believe he is still with Buffalo
Rossonero
October 10, 2016 at 08:17 pm
I think the bigger problem is McCarthy trotting out the same personnel groupings over and over and over again.
The "zebra" package (3 WRs, 1 RB, 1 TE) is being used far too much. Remember the opening drive? We saw new formations, misdirection and play action fakes.....then McCarthy went back to his vanilla, predictable, zebra package for the next 3 quarters. That makes NO sense!
What happened to using a 5 WR set? We certainly have the talent, but we're not using it. Until McCarthy realizes this strategy is a formula for mediocrity, nothing is going to change. Rodgers could've set up a table and eaten dinner with Olivia back there and it wouldn't have mattered, nobody was getting open because there's so much damn film on this personnel grouping that it makes it easy for our opponents to scheme against us.
RCPackerFan
October 11, 2016 at 06:45 am
I completely agree.
Look at what they did on the first 2 drives, and then what they did after that. The first 2 drives they mixed and matched personnel, and after that they went more into the hurry up using 11 personnel.
The strength of the offense is the versatility that it brings. The amount of weapons they have and the different things they can do. So why stick to using 3 WR's all the time?
McCarthy needs to realize that until Nelson is fully back, defenses know how to beat our 3 WR set especially with Richard Rodgers as our TE and without a true receiving threat out of the backfield.
What I don't like about them sticking with the 3 WR sets most of the time is its, not forcing defenses to change their personnel. Later in the game the Packers came out with a 4 WR set and what it did was it ended up putting Cobb against a Safety and Rodgers took advantage of the mismatch.
I'm not saying they have to run 4-5 WR sets all the time, but if they did it more it would force defenses to change, which would create more mismatches.
PETER MAIZ
October 10, 2016 at 10:19 pm
Well, I'm glad Cobb is back and the defense is playing lights out. It certainly looks like Shum will be a dud.
templerun2
October 11, 2016 at 04:19 am
Really impressive post. I read it whole and going to share it with my social circules. I enjoyed your article and planning to rewrite it on my own blog.
http://fnafsisterlocation.com => fnaf sister location
PatrickHelms
October 11, 2016 at 06:57 am
I kind of liked the vanilla play calls in the second half once we were winning. No reason to show the rest of the league more plays. I saw a lot of plays that some of our WR's got to a point in the field and just kind of danced around a bit without shaking the defender. With as much time they were given, even the vanilla plays should have yielded better production but they just kind of gave up. When they were open, Arod didn't even look their way. I also don't agree that our secondary was much better than they have been. We were beat on more than half the plays. Had it not been for the pressure, the drops and the bad throws, this game would have been much different. Rollins was beat most of the time. We need Sam back and we need a punter. That play by Rip had their whole team going backwards....that was incredible. Run D was awesome and the O line was really awesome..
Tundraboy
October 11, 2016 at 05:37 pm
Is showing the rest of the league how scary we are a bad thing? Maybe a bit more emotion and bravado is in order. Its football not espionage.
marpag1
October 11, 2016 at 08:39 am
Gotta make a few confessions: Like most everyone else, I thought the Packers defensive front (and linemen in particular) were suspect. I thought Daniels was a player and virtually everyone else was a JAG. Five weeks in and it seems clear that I was wrong. But I'm baffled... got no explanation for it. What changed?
If this is the REAL Nick Perry, and if Kenny Clark continues on the same path, and if Datone is at least serviceable and not injured (again), TT's first round selections on D are going to start looking a LOT better in a big hurry.
Confession #2. A few weeks ago I was critical of people who were knocking James Starks. Well, apparently they saw something back then that I didn't, cuz they were right and I was wrong. WTH, James?
Agree with those who say that ARod still doesn't look like ARod, but he got very, very little help from his receivers. Nelson catches that ball as opposed to an INT, or RRod doesn't drop the TD and the whole thing looks a lot better. But yeah, ARod still isn't sharp.
dobber
October 11, 2016 at 08:39 am
"Five weeks in and it seems clear that I was wrong. But I'm baffled... got no explanation for it. What changed?"
I would argue that the coaching staff decided to change roles to suit players rather than trying to change players to suit roles.
marpag1
October 11, 2016 at 08:42 am
Just curious if you want to be more specific.... which players and which roles?
If you're talking about Datone at elephant end, I agree with that.
dobber
October 11, 2016 at 09:06 am
I think Datone is the prime example. I also think that limiting Peppers is having a positive impact on this defense. Those two would be my first responses. In general, the Packers really seem to be better suited with their personnel to play an even front and this shift seems to put them in that position.
Thegreatreynoldo
October 12, 2016 at 04:20 am
Marpag - I think your first confession is premature. Daniels is good and provides disruption. Guion played better than expected, a notch above NFL average. Clark is okay. Really, Guion and Clark have been clogging the middle, but not too much more. Even when they used Lowry, Ringo, and Price, we got some contributions from them and didn't get hurt by their play. Note that guys listed as DL on the roster have played 429 snaps: that equals 1.69 DL on the field on average. [Peppers and Jones have played on the DL too, but I don't have a breakdown of their snaps on the DL.] DBs have played 1304 snaps, which translates to 5.13 DBs on the field on average. [Burnett has played some hybrid LB.]
The biggest thing I see is the total tackles ratios of the ILBs (1 tackle every 6.86 snaps). Even their solo tackle to snap ratio of 1 tackle every 9.54 snaps is very healthy. For the first time in forever, ILBs are 1st and 2nd in tackles, rather than safeties. Here is a breakdown of # of snaps to make one tackle:
6.33: Martinez (1 solo tackle every 8.86 snaps)
6.40: Ryan (1 solo tackle every 9.7 snaps)
8.64: Thomas (1 solo every 10.1 snaps)
7.20: Fackrell (9.28 solo) !!!
11.4: Perry (17.64 solo)
11.7: Elliot (17.50 solo)
14.9: CM3 (14.90 solo)
22.2: Peppers (55.5 solo)
49.0: Datone (98.0 solo)
Stats are great but they need context. I am on board with Dobber in that the defense is not trying to fit round pegs in square holes. That is, players are not being expected to do things that don't fit their skillset. More importantly, the defense is working cohesively. The OLBs, Perry in particular, are setting a good edge, funneling runs inside or stringing them out. The DL are clogging the middle, and Daniels provides some penetration and disruption. The ILBs are running free and have shorter distances to cover, so they can make those tackles closer to the LOS, or are being granted more time to get outside because the outside runs have been strung out. Safeties aren't having to come up to make the tackle as much. Pressure has been uneven but adequate. Perry has 4.5 sacks, but as important IMO are the 5 or 6 pressures in addition to his sack against NY. CM3 has 3 sacks, but I am not seeing consistent pressure from him. Daniels generally has been disruptive. We do have some other players that have contributed and few (maybe none) that have really disappointed in the front 7, and a lot of guys who have toiled in the trenches w/o getting gaudy stats, but who do the dirty work and have done it pretty well. Tackling has been better, too. Individually, Perry, Daniels and CM3 have been plus players, maybe Ryan and Guion. The others have been solid, but their individual grades wouldn't necessarily be that high. [Our ILBs have been functioning well within the structure of the defense: seems I wrote the same thing about AR regarding the first half of the Detroit game.] Fackrell has contributed, but the sample size is only 65 snaps. Dallas will provide a good test. Guion and Clark have clogged the middle nicely, but will they get moved off the LOS by Dallas' OL, leaving our ILBs having to stack and shed more? I like Martinez, Ryan and Thomas, but don't think that scenario is a good one for those players.
cpheph1
October 12, 2016 at 11:17 am
Nice response! My main comment is the fact the Pack typically plays with 5 DBs so in actuality we're talking about a front six, not seven. Regardless, the guys up front are definitely doing their jobs! Mike Daniels doesn't have gaudy stats but he's definitely been a beast! He's an ascending player and irreplaceable ATT.
I definitely concur that nobody up front has been a disappointment (main players).
RCPackerFan
October 11, 2016 at 09:18 am
While Rodgers isn't out of this world good. He has been better then some are saying too...
Would people be critcial of him if Rodgers catches the TD pass. If Nelson catches the pass and doesn't tip the pass to the defense (would have gave them a first and goal). If Starks doesn't drop the screen pass that hits his hands, and had nothing but room and 2 blockers in front of him.
Also there were other drops that didn't help. But those 3 plays if they score 3 TD's vs what 2 FG's? Thats a 15 point difference. Add 15 and the score ends up something like 38-16 if everything else holds true. All of a sudden the score looks a lot better, and people are happier.
marpag1
October 11, 2016 at 09:54 am
Agreed. On the screen pass I would say that ARod should have thrown a better ball - it's just a little screen pass for crying out loud- but Starks definitely should still have caught it. Starks was the main offender, but ARod wasn't great on that play either.
Thegreatreynoldo
October 11, 2016 at 08:30 pm
RC, I hope I have enough objectivity to think that AR is a bit off even if Starks, Nelson and RR had indeed caught those passes. I am no fan of RR, but I don't count his potential TD pass as a drop.
To use a basketball analogy, AR reminds me of a career 90% free throw shooter who has a year where he shoots 84% from the line (i.e. simply talking accuracy). AR also reminds me of a guy whose shot selection suddenly becomes suspect (i.e. talking vision, taking what is given, playing favorites).
cpheph1
October 11, 2016 at 11:54 pm
I'm probably the only one that'll disagree with WRT RRogers' failed catch...that.was.a.drop! Bottom Line: eyes of the beholder.
Finwiz
October 12, 2016 at 12:38 pm
I agree, the throw to Rogers in the end zone was in the only place it could have been for him to catch it, because he was blanketed - AS USUAL! The ball went right through his hands. The pass to Starks should have been caught too - it was right there. Ask Starks if he thought it should have been caught, his reaction after the play said it all.
cpheph1
October 11, 2016 at 11:50 pm
The screen that's being referenced was a near perfect throw but was also a classic drop by Starks...should've been a TD...
cpheph1
October 11, 2016 at 11:27 pm
Excellent commentary Ross!!!
Lan Mai
May 08, 2017 at 09:11 pm
Interesting article! Thank you for sharing them! I hope you will continue to have similar posts to share with everyone! I believe a lot of people will be surprised to read this article!
http://window-movie-maker.com
Nguyễn Tuấn Khánh
May 20, 2017 at 03:34 am
Interesting article! Thank you for sharing them! I hope you will continue to have similar posts to share with everyone! I believe a lot of people will be surprised to read this article!
http://sli-therio.com
Anna Shetty
November 30, 2017 at 03:05 am
Many thanks for sharing this very diverse opinion post where each expert has no doubt shared his best knowledge on the topic. Have more success in your journey.
rolandswan
February 28, 2018 at 03:51 am
An over a great greatly common level beautiful blog page a good customer loyalty of passion is virtually all about to exhibit such good great amazing details with us. I expectation each and every one of you an unfathomable
htmlcolor
June 18, 2018 at 02:39 am
Your post contains a lot of useful information for me. Thank you very much for that.
dajijin
January 24, 2020 at 02:56 am
I agree with what was written, the refs had some pretty bad calls out there last night.
dajijin
January 24, 2020 at 02:56 am
I think Dallas will be a good test to see where we're at as a defense. http://www.templerun3.biz