Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It would have worked if Arch had had a just OK game.

But we didnt force Ohio state to do anything differently defensively and the motions help identify coverages pre snap more easily. It allowed them to just sit back like they did and give up runs

  • Rage+1 1
Posted
19 minutes ago, satyanash said:

And I strongly suspect Day has figured out that A) Sark will go through stretches where he abandons the run for the pass even when the former is working, and B) Texas can be counted on to leave points off the board in the redzone.

Ryan Day did not plan for 8 months to have 200 yards of total offense and count on Texas bailing him out in the red zone in order to win a 14-7 game.

Let's be serious. 

  • Hook 'Em 7
Posted
5 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

But we didnt force Ohio state to do anything differently defensively and the motions help identify coverages pre snap more easily. It allowed them to just sit back like they did and give up runs

And it would have worked if Arch plays just OK.

Posted
11 minutes ago, Hookem2147 said:

Ryan Day did not plan for 8 months to have 200 yards of total offense and count on Texas bailing him out in the red zone in order to win a 14-7 game.

Let's be serious. 

The negative posters on here over the last couple years are functional fucking retards. 
we have a whole bunch of smart people that were pissed at late stage Mack, Charlie - and Herman because that should be the proper default for those morons. This is not that situation. 

  • Hook 'Em 4
Posted

Can’t help but chuckle at the regardedness regarding our use of motion yesterday… not really much used but bygod on 3rd and 4 in the redzone, under center single back set, and we motion the back out 5 yards behind the line a few beats before snap completely negating any run threat. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Wulaw Horn said:

The negative posters on here over the last couple years are functional fucking retards. 
we have a whole bunch of smart people that were pissed at late stage Mack, Charlie - and Herman because that should be the proper default for those morons. This is not that situation. 

To further add, I’m not saying everything is perfect or that dark doesn’t have things he could do a little better here and there, but to lose the forest for the trees is something simple minded dolts do and to write shit with a straight face like ryan Day planned a game with an 18% win expectancy is just Helo level moronic. 
 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
1 hour ago, lilMAC25 said:

I simply pointed out the absolute fallacies in your statement.

 

if you don’t think atm was a “big game” or that our defense didn’t have some HUGE goal line stops in that game that helped us win games and make it to the playoffs where we had more HUGE stops to help us advance, then maybe you should stop smoking crack.

 

Sark is a LLLOOOONNNNGGG away from perfect, but he’s all a LLLOOOOONNNNGGG WAY from what we had before him. More than likely the guy we have after him is gonna be worse than Sark.
 

(BTW, you might wanna check who started this shitshow of a thread)

wtf are you even talking about? I never questioned our defense making goal line stands. I said other coaches didn’t have an issue with our great defense scoring points that helped them win a game. That doesn’t mean our defense sucked, our defense does their fucking job literally almost every game.
 

It’s sark not doing his and scoring when it matters most. His record in the biggest games we play shows that. Aggy isn’t Georgia or Ohio st and a stupid comparison. Matter of fact it backs up my statement of our limp dick offensive struggles. Our offense scored aggy only points. 

Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

This is where I’m kind of at. arch is starting his 3rd year in the system. What we saw called yesterday was vanilla bullshit that shouldn’t have been called from the get go. We should have been running our normal amount of pre snap movement and such. Arch being bad didn’t help at all but going vanilla as fuck and not giving him simple options really sucked in that environment. It made playing defense and covering so much easier. 

Im fine limiting the playbook and I expect inexperienced mistakes like an INT or missing the check down throwing it deep into coverage and a sack bc he held it too long. I didn’t expect dog shit performance across the board from said highly ranked 3rd year in the system QB, especially when sark says the kid is ready and can handle the pressure. What in the actual fuck is that disconnect? 

Edited by troph
Posted
1 minute ago, troph said:

Im fine limiting the playbook and I expect inexperienced mistakes I didn’t expect dog shit performance across the board especially when sark says the kid is ready and can handle the pressure. What in the actual fuck is that disconnect? 

Yeah, but he's a coach and that was coachspeak. What do you expect him to say?

Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

Yeah, but he's a coach and that was coachspeak. What do you expect him to say?

Arch is a tough kid, he’s growing and learning and I have all the confidence in the world, it’ll be a big test for us, but it’s just game 1 and we have a long season ahead of us to define who we are. We are going out there to compete and get better every day. 

that’s much better coach speak than arch is ready for this he’s had the manning name on his back his whole life. 

slider / bullshit meme

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
3 hours ago, StrippersAndNobelPrizes said:

Red zone scoring offense 2025, 2024, 2023 🤔IMG_0312.thumb.jpeg.1d119d815f9da3504224cba92d4c794e.jpeg

IMG_0310.thumb.jpeg.041768c13c5c0ec08371040a32e8b471.jpeg

IMG_0311.thumb.jpeg.a0d927242bb542c2e7647ce160202a2e.jpeg

But who would possibly want to come here to call plays

Posted
1 minute ago, troph said:

Arch is a tough kid, he’s growing and learning and I have all the confidence in the world, it’ll be a big test for us, but it’s just game 1 and we have a long season ahead of us to define who we are. We are going out there to compete and get better every day. 

that’s much better coach speak than arch is ready for this he’s had the manning name on his back his whole life. 

slider / bullshit meme

I hear ya. It's all coachspeak, which is why I try to take everything a head coach says about his team with a grain of salt.

Posted

I guess coach-hating is addictive. It's absurd to think Manning looked in practice the way he did in the shoe, and Sark decided he was ready. This was not a failure of coach preparation unless you think a coach can prescribe and administer xanax.

It wasn't footwork or mechanics that thwarted Manning. He choked horrifically. All the evidence you need for that is to review his performance in other games where the pressure was low. He was more than competent in those games. Had he played that well in this game, we likely win.

The only difference was pressure. Similarly to his panicky showing against Georgia last year, the moment was too large for him.  He faces pressure from the importance of a game and the expections almost cruelly laid upon him. 

I'll write this game off. He has a couple of cupcakes coming up, then he must face the next test. 

It's profoundly stupid to blame Manning's performance on Sarkisian. Fourth downs are another matter altogether.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I hear ya. It's all coachspeak, which is why I try to take everything a head coach says about his team with a grain of salt.

I rarely listen but it’s pretty terrible when the coach speak isn’t even on the same planet as reality, it calls into question the coach’s perception, judgment, player development and preparation. 

Posted
52 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It would have worked if Arch had had a just OK game.

See I’m not sure of this. Inside the 20 he needs to.be better than ok. Because of his OC

Posted
1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

Mack won his championship in year 8.

Sark is doing just fine. He's a good head coach and great for Texas. 

Exactly. Day won his in year 6. It's not the end of the world. People (not all, obviously) expect Saban, Bobby Bpwden, DKR, etc and are disappointed when in reality guys like that are fewer than guys like Julio Jones, Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Vince Young.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
Just now, RomaVicta said:

I guess coach-hating is addictive. It's absurd to think Manning looked in practice the way he did in the shoe, and Sark decided he was ready. This was not a failure of coach preparation unless you think a coach can prescribe and administer xanax.

It wasn't footwork or mechanics that thwarted Manning. He choked horrifically. All the evidence you need for that is to review his performance in other games where the pressure was low. He was more than competent in those games. Had he played that well in this game, we likely win.

The only difference was pressure. Similarly to his panicky showing against Georgia last year, the moment was too large for him.  He faces pressure from the importance of a game and the expections almost cruelly laid upon him. 

I'll write this game off. He has a couple of cupcakes coming up, then he must face the next test. 

It's profoundly stupid to blame Manning's performance on Sarkisian. Fourth downs are another matter altogether.

This is fair but sark didn’t do much in game to adjust. 4.5 yards per carry, run the fucking ball. Throw hitches and curls and other easy throws where touch isn’t needed and neither is precision hitting a guy on the run. There’s a lot he could have done in game especially when he’s the so called QB whisperer. It might be the QBs fault for his play but that bad? That’s gotta fall on the coach too. Fuck it was the worst QB game in 10 fucking years out of the position. Sark doesn’t walk Scott free no way. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted

The sky is falling takes by too many on this board are as expected.  Texas fans are largely morons.     I told all the idiots predicting a 20+ point win they were smoking crack and this was a coin flip game.   No doubt these are the same idiots ready to give up on Arch and claiming Sark can't win a big game.  Clowns.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, satyanash said:

We absolutely did not have the better gameplan.

Ohio State was inviting us to run the ball between the 20s all game. They kept a relatively light box and went exotic in the backend to confuse Arch, then tightened up in the redzone to shut down our run game and put the pressure on Sark and Arch to execute. Baxter and Wisner ran hard but we did not have the better gameplan just because we had more total yards. And I strongly suspect Day has figured out that A) Sark will go through stretches where he abandons the run for the pass even when the former is working, and B) Texas can be counted on to leave points off the board in the redzone.

On offense Ohio State purposely played conservatively with runs and quick passes. Our defense did well but they produced zero turnovers, zero sacks and just 1 TFL all game which was exactly what Ohio State needed to win with our offensive struggles on the other end. They didn't let our defense generate any big momentum-turning plays and they didn't risk Sayin making a big mistake.

Perfect summation.

Posted
7 minutes ago, William Bludworth said:

Exactly. Day won his in year 6. It's not the end of the world. People (not all, obviously) expect Saban, Bobby Bpwden, DKR, etc and are disappointed when in reality guys like that are fewer than guys like Julio Jones, Calvin Johnson, Adrian Peterson, and Vince Young.  

People tend to forget that It took a while for Saban, Bobby Bowden, and DKR to become successful head coaches.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, bschoolprof said:

Who are we gonna get better than Sark?  Who's even out there that's clearly better than Sark, regardless of availability?  

Barring some scandal or Jimbo-like flameout, he will coach here for a long time.  

 

Yeah. As long as he keeps putting us in position to fuck up in the redzone in high stakes games, we'll just have to keep rolling the dice and just hope one day we luck out and two or three different plays go our way to get us the rest of the way. Better than being TCU's bitch. 

It is baffling to me however, that with the gigantic support staffs they have available these days this particular problem persists year after year. You'd think someone that gets paid millions to coach could fix it in a single offseason. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, troph said:

Fuck it was the worst QB game in 10 fucking years out of the position. Sark doesn’t walk Scott free no way. 

Actually, I think your characterization vindicates Sark more than condemns him. The performance was so spectacularly bad (I agree with your description), that it's difficult to imagine what  a coach could have done about it. 

Manning did not belong on the field in the role of QB. I'm not hating. I want him to work out. 

Leaving Manning in the game was the only decisive choice, IMHO, that falls on Sark. I can't even name our second team QB, but he would have been better. If there were no other factors such as Manning's psychological strength and merciless public opinion, Manning should have been pulled.

The only reason you don't bench him is because you feel he is your best chance for a great season and that benching him would damage him and the hopes of a great season.

If we get into conference play and Manning plays nearly as poorly as yesterday, I say pull him. 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Haha 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, LateAughtsHorn said:

You'd think someone that gets paid millions to coach could fix it in a single offseason. 

Self reflection is difficult. And the higher up you get the more difficult it gets. And I guarantee you no one in his inner circle has told him he has a blind spot to red zone/goal line play calling, or even an issue juggling play calling and HC duties in general

Posted
1 minute ago, RomaVicta said:

Actually, I think your characterization vindicates Sark more than condemns him. The performance was so spectacularly bad (I agree with your description), that it's difficult to imagine what  a coach could have done about it. 

Manning did not belong on the field in the role of QB. I'm not hating. I want him to work out. 

Leaving Manning in the game was the only decisive choice, IMHO, that falls on Sark. I can't even name our second team QB, but he would have been better. If there were no other factors such as Manning's psychological strength and merciless public opinion, Manning should have been pulled.

The only reason you don't bench him is because you feel he is your best chance for a great season and that benching him would damage him and the hopes of a great season.

If we get into conference play and Manning plays nearly as poorly as yesterday, I say pull him. 

I don’t think you pull him. Honestly I think you might run more and scheme easier routes but that’s about it. One of these threads has all of Manning’s passes back to back to back it’s a good quick review. I just watched it and have toned down my view of the game plan and what sark could have done. 

i actually think the game plan was fine. Sarks abysmal 4th and go for it and arch’s accuracy were the game. It’s hard to say fuck it we are going to run the ball because guys were open and sometimes arch made the throw and sometimes he didn’t. Again, maybe lean heavier on the run and curls and come backs for routes but In the end if arch can get accurate he had plenty of time and plenty of open receivers.

pressures off, get better and get to the swamp and show up as a different QB.

and kick the fucking field goal. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, 6th Street said:

 

so when they line up where exactly is sark? is he in a place he can easily see this? Field visibility is one thing when the opposing team is lining up in 50 yard line, another thing when it's in the far end zone.

does his minion in the booth (milwee?) have the authority to change plays at a moments notice when he notices something like this?

is this where maybe having a real OC that calls in the booth will truly benefit?   or maybe a minion with a spine to go against his boss? 

Edited by FORTY NINE TO ZERO
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 1
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Rockethorn1978 said:

wtf are you even talking about? I never questioned our defense making goal line stands. I said other coaches didn’t have an issue with our great defense scoring points that helped them win a game. That doesn’t mean our defense sucked, our defense does their fucking job literally almost every game.
 

It’s sark not doing his and scoring when it matters most. His record in the biggest games we play shows that. Aggy isn’t Georgia or Ohio st and a stupid comparison. Matter of fact it backs up my statement of our limp dick offensive struggles. Our offense scored aggy only points. 

You literally fucking said “other teams didn’t have an issue scoring/converting short yardage situations on our awesome defense”, TO WHICH I SHOWED EXAMPLES WHERE THEY DID, and you said “YEAH BUT THOSE DONT COUNT BECAUSE REASONS”.

 

Am I typing in fucking Latin or something?

Edited by lilMAC25
Posted
1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

 

If we get into conference play and Manning plays nearly as poorly as yesterday, I say pull him. 

First road start against a top 3 team and you are talking about pulling the QB LOL.   JFC the idiocy on this board

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Rage+1 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Skipper said:

First road start against a top 3 team and you are talking about pulling the QB LOL.   JFC the idiocy on this board

Return to reading class. Then try reasoning class.

It would be idiocy to continue with a QB who played as poorly as Manning did Saturday. I'm neither suggesting he be pulled or that I expect him to be pulled, Skipper.

3 minutes ago, Skipper said:

 JFC the idiocy on this board

 

  • Drool 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Return to reading class. Then try reasoning class.

It would be idiocy to continue with a QB who played as poorly as Manning did Saturday. I'm neither suggesting he be pulled or that I expect him to be pulled, Skipper.

 

No its idiocy to talk about pulling your starting QB that has a grand total of 3 starts under his belt and only one of one of which was on the road against a defense with a pulse.  He's going to have growing pains.  Most people that understand football expect that.  Guess what.  He's going to miss more throws and throw more picks.  And "fans" like you will be calling for the backup just like you have the last 3 years I'm sure.   He's only going to get better if he plays through it.   Nothing more idiotic than fans that think QB2 is the answer to every loss year in and year out.

Posted
12 minutes ago, Skipper said:

No its idiocy to talk about pulling your starting QB that has a grand total of 3 starts under his belt and only one of one of which was on the road against a defense with a pulse.  He's going to have growing pains.  Most people that understand football expect that.  Guess what.  He's going to miss more throws and throw more picks.  And "fans" like you will be calling for the backup just like you have the last 3 years I'm sure.   He's only going to get better if he plays through it.   Nothing more idiotic than fans that think QB2 is the answer to every loss year in and year out.

The INT he threw didn’t bother me that much. Ball should have been further outside, but INTs happen.

 

 

the awful throws with bad foot placement with no one in his face should never happen.

  • Hook 'Em 5
Posted
6 minutes ago, lilMAC25 said:

The INT he threw didn’t bother me that much. Ball should have been further outside, but INTs happen.

 

 

the awful throws with bad foot placement with no one in his face should never happen.

To your point - His mechanics on that throw were atrocious that’s why it ran out of gas and was an INT. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Hookem2147 said:

Ryan Day did not plan for 8 months to have 200 yards of total offense and count on Texas bailing him out in the red zone in order to win a 14-7 game.

Let's be serious. 

Obviously not, but it's equally unserious to think Ohio State couldn't read the writing on the wall during the game. They turtled. It worked until Arch found a modicum of a pulse there in Q4 and it came back to bit them a bit. But they knew early on they were winning that game if they didn't hand it to Texas.

So in some sense I think the team stats and gap in total yardage are a bit of an illusion. That's not to say I don't think the Texas defense played a strong game because they obviously did.

Edited by gmr548
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, BevoAbyss said:

bevoabyss plaintext

 

Here are the offense and defense points per game since Sark arrived.

2021

offense = 423 points / 35 per game

defense = 373 points / 31 per game

 

2022

offense = 448 points / 35 per game

defense = 28 points  /22 per game

 

2023

offense = 501 points / 36 per game

defense = 265 points / 19 per game

 

2024

offense = 528 points / 33  per game

defense = 245 points / 15 per game

 

2021-2024 TOTAL

offense = 34 per game

defense = 21 per game

KEY POINTS

-- Sark's offense has averaged 33-36 points per game all 4 years

-- Sark's points per game has not improved -- regardless of QB (whether it is Casey, Card, QE, Arch). 

-- Defense is the MAJOR improvement.

 

2021-2025 VS Top 12 (record is 3-10 ... 1-7 v Top 5)

offense = 24 per game

defense = 31 per game

-- Sark's offense drops 10 points per game, so he is not the play calling wizard against top teams.

-- defense gives up 10 more points per game.

-- not a title winning formula.

 

Offense VS Non Top 12  (record is 35-7)

2021 399/12 = 33

2022 365/9 = 41

2023 406/9 = 45

2024 410/12 = 35

-- Sark racks up point on lesser teams. No surprise.

 

CONCLUSION:

Sark is the constant on offense across all 4 seasons of 33-35 point averages.

Sark has serious trouble beating top teams. Offense scores less, has trouble in red zones, defense gives up more points. This has serious implications in the playoffs, as we have seen past two years. 

Unless, these patterns are changed, he will not win a national  title. 

That's the bottom line.

Edited by Hagbard Celine
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
46 minutes ago, BevoAbyss said:

Here are the offense and defense points per game since Sark arrived.

2021

offense = 423 points / 35 per game

defense = 373 points / 31 per game

 

2022

offense = 448 points / 35 per game

defense = 28 points  /22 per game

 

2023

offense = 501 points / 36 per game

defense = 265 points / 19 per game

 

2024

offense = 528 points / 33  per game

defense = 245 points / 15 per game

 

2021-2024 TOTAL

offense = 34 per game

defense = 21 per game

KEY POINTS

-- Sark's offense has averaged 33-36 points per game all 4 years

-- Sark's points per game has not improved -- regardless of QB (whether it is Casey, Card, QE, Arch). 

-- Defense is the MAJOR improvement.

 

2021-2025 VS Top 12 (record is 3-10 ... 1-7 v Top 5)

offense = 24 per game

defense = 31 per game

-- Sark's offense drops 10 points per game, so he is not the play calling wizard against top teams.

-- defense gives up 10 more points per game.

-- not a title winning formula.

 

Offense VS Non Top 12  (record is 35-7)

2021 399/12 = 33

2022 365/9 = 41

2023 406/9 = 45

2024 410/12 = 35

-- Sark racks up point on lesser teams. No surprise.

 

CONCLUSION:

Sark is the constant on offense across all 4 seasons of 33-35 point averages.

Sark has serious trouble beating top teams. Offense scores less, has trouble in red zones, defense gives up more points. This has serious implications in the playoffs, as we have seen past two years. 

Unless, these patterns are changed, he will not win a national  title. 

That's the bottom line.

and there were a shitload of chucklefucks on this board that hated PK and wanted somebody else.  

Posted
1 hour ago, Skipper said:

"fans" like you will be calling for the backup just like you have the last 3 years I'm sure.

You're putting words in his mouth, but you do you boo

Posted

i plaintexted bevoabyss because his data paints and conclusion are compelling

unspoken is the measuring stick in this argument

in the world where stoops wins it all in year 2 is no more

smart made the title game in year 2 but took until year 6 to win a natty

dabo took 7.5 seasons to break through

saban won his 1st title in his 14th season as a head coach, year 3 at bama

tom landry had the albatross of "couldn't win the big one" for 5 years

it may take sark 10 years and i'm here for it

Posted
1 hour ago, BevoAbyss said:

Here are the offense and defense points per game since Sark arrived.

2021

offense = 423 points / 35 per game

defense = 373 points / 31 per game

 

2022

offense = 448 points / 35 per game

defense = 28 points  /22 per game

 

2023

offense = 501 points / 36 per game

defense = 265 points / 19 per game

 

2024

offense = 528 points / 33  per game

defense = 245 points / 15 per game

 

2021-2024 TOTAL

offense = 34 per game

defense = 21 per game

KEY POINTS

-- Sark's offense has averaged 33-36 points per game all 4 years

-- Sark's points per game has not improved -- regardless of QB (whether it is Casey, Card, QE, Arch). 

-- Defense is the MAJOR improvement.

 

2021-2025 VS Top 12 (record is 3-10 ... 1-7 v Top 5)

offense = 24 per game

defense = 31 per game

-- Sark's offense drops 10 points per game, so he is not the play calling wizard against top teams.

-- defense gives up 10 more points per game.

-- not a title winning formula.

 

Offense VS Non Top 12  (record is 35-7)

2021 399/12 = 33

2022 365/9 = 41

2023 406/9 = 45

2024 410/12 = 35

-- Sark racks up point on lesser teams. No surprise.

 

CONCLUSION:

Sark is the constant on offense across all 4 seasons of 33-35 point averages.

Sark has serious trouble beating top teams. Offense scores less, has trouble in red zones, defense gives up more points. This has serious implications in the playoffs, as we have seen past two years. 

Unless, these patterns are changed, he will not win a national  title. 

That's the bottom line.

I don't think it should be shocking that we score fewer points on elite teams.  Everyone scores fewer on elite teams.

There isn't a chasm between Texas and Ohio State.  It was a one score game and we didn't play well at the QB position.  Last year it was also close in so called "big" games, other than UGA1.  We're not losing due to systemic deficiencies, it's in the margins.  Flip 1-2 calls or plays and the result flips.  I believe Sark can get us there.

Posted (edited)
On 8/31/2025 at 4:55 PM, Hagbard Celine said:

if 4th quarter manning was there from the 1st series would you still say that?

The Manning who started and played most of the game is the only one I know how to judge. If he played great in the fourth quarter, obviously my condition would still apply: He wouldn't be playing badly, so there would be no need to bench him.

I'm surprised at the resistance to the notion that a QB who horribly misses easy passes should be replaced. That's my simple premise. Somehow that has been contorted into an advocacy that Manning should never play another down. I specify that if he continues to play as describe above, he should be benched as I think the guy under him can do better. Period.

Some moron took that to "I can't believe you're talking about benching after three bad quarters. Said moron doubles down. That suggests that the genius feels we should keep Manning on the field no matter what. 

I'm done with this topic. It's amusing that the moron referred to my post as "this board." I rarely post here. I'm hardly typical of it.

I want to see Manning succeed and believe that he will. Any player who doesn't should yield to one who can. Not exactly revolutionary.

Edited by RomaVicta
  • Hook 'Em 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...