Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Thursday, August 15, 2019

MLB Should Threaten Tanking Teams With Relegation

Jumping ahead to the key part of the argument:

How do you fix that, though? Simple: You make losing as painful as possible, and in that vein, there’s no better way to stop tanking in baseball than to borrow a page from the Premier League’s book and institute relegation. At the end of the season, the six worst teams in the majors—three from each league—are sent down to Triple A. If the Orioles aren’t capable of contending at the major league level, then they shouldn’t be here. Nor should the Tigers or the Marlins or the half-dozen other teams seemingly content to waste everyone’s time.

I think this would be entertaining- but, then again, my hometown probably would end up with an MLB team if this rule were applied this season, and we aren’t likely to ever get one any other way.

 

QLE Posted: August 15, 2019 at 05:04 AM | 42 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: mlb, relegation, tanking

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Rennie's Tenet Posted: August 15, 2019 at 08:43 AM (#5871575)
My guess is that the lawyers for the cities are canny enough that the leases specify that the clubs will play in MLB.


   2. JJ1986 Posted: August 15, 2019 at 08:48 AM (#5871577)
So after one year, we have 24 teams. Then 18, then 12, then 6. And then what?
   3. Rally Posted: August 15, 2019 at 08:58 AM (#5871580)
Not even going to click it, just assuming that the writer is being silly.

The only way it could conceivable work is if the AAA leagues were independent from the major leagues. OK - send the Orioles, Tigers, and Royals down for a year (they will certainly be back next year after winning a bunch of games against the AAA schedule).

They would be replaced by the Durham Bulls, Las Vegas Aviators, and Round Rock Express, the top AAA teams of AL franchises. They get to be AL teams now, but will lose their best players to the Rays, A's, and Astros as soon as they are ready.

OK, we say that those teams are not farms anymore, they get to be independent MLB teams until they are regulated. The Orioles, Tigers, and Royals are assigned farm status. So of course Houston calls Kyle Tucker up before the end of 2019, or sends him down to AA so they can keep his rights (and call him up to AAA Kansas City early next year). The new MLB teams will, one way or another, head into 2020 without any high probability MLB talent.

   4. Rally Posted: August 15, 2019 at 09:01 AM (#5871581)
Interesting for the NL, the Marlins obviously get relegated. Then there are the Pirates, who played .500 ball for a good chunk of the season before collapsing, and then the Rockies. Rockies made the playoffs last year, signed their big star to a huge extension, and certainly operated in the offseason like a team trying to contend. Hasn't worked out, they have had a bad year, but don't look like a team horrible enough to relegate.
   5. My name is RMc and I feel extremely affected Posted: August 15, 2019 at 09:07 AM (#5871582)
I ran an OOTP simulation in which the majors collapse after the 1981 strike and are replaced with a Premier League-like set-up, complete with pro/rel with the "freed" minors. It was...interesting.
   6. Zonk isn't Defacing the Nation Posted: August 15, 2019 at 09:10 AM (#5871584)
I thought we all just agreed that this was an easy thing to "fix" - and even if one doesn't think it's a problem in need of fixing (like me), I'm perfectly fine with tying elements of revenue sharing to team payroll.

Often times, rebuilding is still the very much right thing to do - and sometimes a tear-down makes the most sense, but I'm perfectly fine with limiting owners of such organizations from profiting during the tear-down.

   7. Captain Supporter Posted: August 15, 2019 at 09:15 AM (#5871587)
Not even going to click it, just assuming that the writer is being silly.


Of course, the writer is just being silly and relegation is not practicable in any way, but if it could actually be done it would be great for baseball in many ways (no more tanking, fan interest for virtually every team for the whole season, far less salary dumps, minor league interest, etc., etc.,)
   8. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: August 15, 2019 at 09:35 AM (#5871593)
I love American writers suggesting relegation as if it is even a possibility.
   9. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: August 15, 2019 at 09:47 AM (#5871602)
One word: wins floor.
   10. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: August 15, 2019 at 09:58 AM (#5871610)
No.
   11. Misirlou gave her his Vincent to ride Posted: August 15, 2019 at 10:12 AM (#5871614)
So many things wrong with this concept. So you relegate the Orioles and replace them with their AAA team, a team which is likely to be far worse next year than the actual Orioles. How does that serve anyone's interest? So the theory is that under threat of relegation, teams will try harder to add talent to avoid that fate. What FA is going to want to sign with a bad team if there is a decent chance they will be playing in AAA next year? Meanwhile the teams temporarily in the minors will have no chance to add talent, as no one is going to want to go straight into the minors.

It's a ridiculous notion on so many levels.
   12. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 15, 2019 at 10:40 AM (#5871625)
It's a shame to see Sports Illustrated reduced to running this kind of clickbait drivel.

Such an obvious non-starter of an idea that it's not even worth getting upset about.
   13. PreservedFish Posted: August 15, 2019 at 10:57 AM (#5871632)
It is fun to think about though.

So the theory is that under threat of relegation, teams will try harder to add talent to avoid that fate. What FA is going to want to sign with a bad team if there is a decent chance they will be playing in AAA next year? Meanwhile the teams temporarily in the minors will have no chance to add talent, as no one is going to want to go straight into the minors.


European soccer leagues have to deal with all of this, and somehow the system (more or less) works. It's an impossibility because of the way that MLB is currently structured, but not because of these objections.
   14. bfan Posted: August 15, 2019 at 11:05 AM (#5871636)
I am tired of the ragging about this approach of concentrating wins when they matter, and deferring them into years when you can contend. The "tanking" of the Braves brought to their current roster Folty; Swanson; Inciarte; Fried, all under friendly contract terms that allow them to go on the open market for Donaldson; Kuechel and others.

There is no joy from a fans perspective in sitting in the 70 to 80 win range, every year; the wins they gave up in not having Evan Gaddis; the Upton Twins; and Miller were not worth the wins last year and this year.

Maybe the Braves could have kept that aging core and "gone for it" with a free agent signing of Pujols and Josh Hamilton; how would that have turned out?
   15. The Run Fairy Posted: August 15, 2019 at 11:22 AM (#5871643)
The only way it could conceivable work is if the AAA leagues were independent from the major leagues.


Except even that would require major changes to long-term contracts for MLB players... although if the Orioles are intentionally playing bad so they can get relegated and no longer be responsible for Chris Davis' major league contract, that would make some amount of sense.
   16. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: August 15, 2019 at 11:26 AM (#5871645)
Not even going to click it, just assuming that the writer is being silly.

The only way it could conceivable work is if the AAA leagues were independent from the major leagues. OK - send the Orioles, Tigers, and Royals down for a year (they will certainly be back next year after winning a bunch of games against the AAA schedule).

They would be replaced by the Durham Bulls, Las Vegas Aviators, and Round Rock Express, the top AAA teams of AL franchises. They get to be AL teams now, but will lose their best players to the Rays, A's, and Astros as soon as they are ready.

OK, we say that those teams are not farms anymore, they get to be independent MLB teams until they are regulated. The Orioles, Tigers, and Royals are assigned farm status. So of course Houston calls Kyle Tucker up before the end of 2019, or sends him down to AA so they can keep his rights (and call him up to AAA Kansas City early next year). The new MLB teams will, one way or another, head into 2020 without any high probability MLB talent.

Obviously it is all a complete non-starter. The current owners will never agree to it under any circumstances. So it's all kinda pointless.

But the only way it could even kinda realistically work, would be to split the current Major Leagues up. Maybe something like 20 teams in the top league, and 14 (including 4 expansion franchises) in the lower leagues. Obviously the exact numbers are just as an example. Then have promotion and relegation between those 2 leagues.

Still a lot of problems. Especially if you want to keep geographic divisions. I mean what happens when 2 teams from the West get promoted, and 2 from the East demoted (or vice versa). Are you going to have the Angels playing in the Eastern division? The Phillies in the West? Realignment every season?

Still obviously never going to happen, so whatever.
   17. bunyon Posted: August 15, 2019 at 11:28 AM (#5871647)
It's completely unworkable without a complete destruction of pro ball as we know it in the USA.

Still, I kind of wish it had started that way. The minor leagues would still function the same way, just not tied directly to one team. You couldn't "hide" a guy or play funny games with the service clock (assuming we end up with the same sort of CBA, which is a stretch in this what-if). The Cubs don't want to bring Kris Bryant up at the start of the season? Cool, the Indians will take him.

But, as said, it's just not possible given where we are and we're way too far down the road to switch. It seems to me tanking teams do get punished. Attendance and fan loyalty crumble unless the rebuild quickly brings you back to championship level. They should definitely play with revenue sharing but you probably can't design a system without relegation that is completely tank-proof.
   18. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: August 15, 2019 at 11:36 AM (#5871652)
Relegate the owners. Why should the fans be punished?
   19. Fernigal McGunnigle Posted: August 15, 2019 at 11:56 AM (#5871661)
The easiest way to get promotion and relegation in baseball would be to build a time machine, go back to 1877, and convince William Hulbert to not only get the teams in the biggest cities to start a league, but to set up an entire league pyramid incorporating every team organized enough to wear something approaching a uniform.

(I've run OOTP leagues on something like the model of #16. It's hell on traditional rivalries, but at least the #### don't float.)
   20. PreservedFish Posted: August 15, 2019 at 12:07 PM (#5871667)
I'd enjoy playing an OOTP league with that structure, but I'll be damned if I'm doing the hard work of setting it up. Anyone got something I can just download?
   21. Rennie's Tenet Posted: August 15, 2019 at 01:28 PM (#5871689)
I'm not sure EPL competition is more fierce. You have a group of clubs who expect to play in Europe, a group who feel pretty secure in the EPL middle, and then a group that makes its living bouncing up and down. Most of that last group isn't rebuilding to anything, it's just up and down. They compete, but I'm not sure if it's anything we'd care about.

   22. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 15, 2019 at 01:38 PM (#5871691)
This sounds like a terrible, stupid ide—
no longer be responsible for Chris Davis' major league contract
—nevermind. Sign me up.
   23. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 15, 2019 at 01:40 PM (#5871692)
Relegation is a complete non-starter for MLB, but I assume that it has has financial consequences that could be mimicked to some degree in MLB’s revenue distribution system. There’s no reason that tanking teams should be rewarded with a greater share of the central revenues, or non-tanking teams should be taxed to reward the tanking teams. There are options on where you draw the lines, but incentivizing teams to be non-competitive over multiple seasons is poor policy.
   24. Kiko Sakata Posted: August 15, 2019 at 01:42 PM (#5871693)
The thing is, the Orioles aren't really "tanking" in the sense that people object to. They're just a bad team. And guess what: in any sport, wins are zero-sum, for every game won, somebody's got to lose a game. The White Sox are in the middle of a "tank" - they made a conscious choice to trade away their core major-leaguers - Chris Sale, Jose Quintana, Adam Eaton - and shift their attention to 3-5 years out. Obviously, the Cubs and Astros did something similar.

But the Orioles? Nah, they just stunk, their shitty farm system caught up with them, and they're going to be bad until they can fix that. Which, in the world of zero-sum wins, has happened forever and will continue to happen forever. And if it happens for long enough, MLB does have a sort of historical parallel to relegation - the St. Louis Browns were sufficiently terrible for sufficiently long that they eventually moved and became ... the Baltimore Orioles.
   25. QLE Posted: August 15, 2019 at 02:10 PM (#5871703)
I'm not sure EPL competition is more fierce. You have a group of clubs who expect to play in Europe, a group who feel pretty secure in the EPL middle, and then a group that makes its living bouncing up and down. Most of that last group isn't rebuilding to anything, it's just up and down. They compete, but I'm not sure if it's anything we'd care about.


That was an issue that came to mind for me- the Premier League has been around for 27 seasons, and, in that time, 25 of its titles have been won by the same four teams. Moreover, this isn't a new issue, as demonstrated by Liverpool's dominance in the 1970s and 1980s, nor is is just a championship issue, given that the same handful of teams have held the top positions in the League most years.

Based on all this, there's really no reason to think MLB would be more competitive with relegation.
   26. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: August 15, 2019 at 02:12 PM (#5871704)
The top end wouldn't be more competitive. The bottom end would be more competitive. There would be a reason to watch subpar teams in the latter half of the season. They would be playing for something.
   27. Barry`s_Lazy_Boy Posted: August 15, 2019 at 02:15 PM (#5871706)
There would be a reason to watch subpar teams in the latter half of the season. They would be playing for something.

This is the same bad argument for more WC teams. The focus of the league shouldn't be the bad teams.
   28. The Mighty Quintana Posted: August 15, 2019 at 02:30 PM (#5871709)
I like the win floor idea:

Set it at 62...

first year - no penalty
second year in a row - $15 million, loss of 3rd round pick
third year in a row - $30 million, loss of 2nd round pick
fourth year in a row - relocated to Charlotte or Austin
   29. Crispix Attacksel Rios Posted: August 15, 2019 at 02:36 PM (#5871711)
It's not the focus of the league. It's the focus of the fans of the bad teams. They would be focusing on their baseball team instead of focusing on something else.
   30. Ziggy is done with Dominican discotheques Posted: August 15, 2019 at 02:49 PM (#5871715)
it would be great for baseball


You say this like "baseball" is a thing. There's MLB, there are the various teams, there are the owners, there are the players, there are the fans, but there's no such things as "baseball". Many of these groups have interests that do not align with those of other groups.

There’s no reason that tanking teams should be rewarded with a greater share of the central revenues, or non-tanking teams should be taxed to reward the tanking teams. There are options on where you draw the lines, but incentivizing teams to be non-competitive over multiple seasons is poor policy.


Poor policy from whose perspective? The Marlins obviously thinks that it's in their best interest. Moreover, the more teams don't try to put a competitive team on the field, the more wins go to the Yankees. Now, whether or not it's good for the Yankees to subsidize non-competitive teams in order to have someone to beat up on, I don't know - maybe revenue sharing levels are high enough that it's not worth it to them. But then again, maybe the extra revenue from those additional wins makes up for what they're sending out in revenue sharing.

Basically, here's what I'm trying to say: arguments that teams ought not to be allowed to intentionally field non-competitive teams for a year or a range of years are really just fans saying that they don't like watching such teams. But there are lots of stakeholders in major league baseball, and the fans are just one of them. Whether or not it's good policy, all things considered, depends on how the various interests of those various stake holders manage to overlap (or not). And it may well be that everyone else's interests are such that fielding non-competitive teams for some range of seasons satisfies those interests, even if it doesn't satisfy the interests of the fans. And if so, then subsidizing non-competitive teams may in fact be good policy, and fans' arguments to the contrary really just amounts to fans complaining that they don't like it.
   31. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: August 15, 2019 at 03:02 PM (#5871719)
My guess is that the lawyers for the cities are canny enough that the leases specify that the clubs will play in MLB.

After reading the Field of Schemes site for so many years, my guess is that the lawyers for the cities are barely canny enough that the leases don't simply state, "Our city promises to give you $_________________________" with the blank to be filled in by the team.
   32. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: August 15, 2019 at 04:44 PM (#5871743)
The three writers who write the three stupidest articles for Sports Illustrated this year should be forced to spend all of 2020 producing their own webzines.
   33. BrianBrianson Posted: August 15, 2019 at 04:48 PM (#5871745)
The thing is, the Orioles aren't really "tanking" in the sense that people object to. They're just a bad team.


This is the real "problem" - teams have realised that being good is by far the most profitable state, so it makes sense to be bad while trying to organise a good team (though, you won't always be successful), than to put all your assets into being bad-ish to mediocre forever, with no hope of ever being good.

People seemingly want every team to win at least 85 games a year, and every team to sign at least half the available free agents. That's simply impossible. Teams aren't trying to lose, they're just not willing to "maximise" wins this season at the expense of future seasons when they're definitely going to win less than 80 games this year. I'd much rather be a fan of the 2009 Houston Astros than the 1996 Pirates if you're not going to win the division anytime soon, and yet so many people are arguing teams should be forced into the latter mode.
   34. escabeche Posted: August 15, 2019 at 05:39 PM (#5871766)
But the Orioles? Nah, they just stunk, their shitty farm system caught up with them, and they're going to be bad until they can fix that.


The Orioles were pretty good until 2 years ago, and their "shitty farm system" is already back to being ranked #8 by Baseball America and #13 by MLB. I think I like this version of the team better than the 2000-2009 "always kinda bad and never really improving" equilibrium.
   35. DFA Posted: August 16, 2019 at 01:50 AM (#5871899)
I agree escabeche, our Orioles in the 2000s were never quite bad enough. Always trying to put a decent field on the team, signing guys like Marty Cordova and Danys Baez for some reason. Not tanking simply prolonged their losing, though in fairness how they started winning in 2012 had more to do with luck, or possibly karma, rather than any grand master plan hatched by Dan Duquette. I don't really buy that their farm system has improved so much over the season, but regardless, I have more faith in the club since Elias took over than I have at any time since the Gillick years.
   36. QLE Posted: August 16, 2019 at 04:49 AM (#5871901)
After reading the Field of Schemes site for so many years, my guess is that the lawyers for the cities are barely canny enough that the leases don't simply state, "Our city promises to give you $_________________________" with the blank to be filled in by the team.


I'd be somewhat cautious about placing too much of that blame on the professional civil servants- my experience in connection with this subject is one in which, if they had their druthers, they'd never make such agreements, but they tend to be hamstrung by the demands of the elected officials they serve.
   37. villageidiom Posted: August 16, 2019 at 09:12 AM (#5871909)
While we're proposing systems that won't happen...

1. At the end of each season, free agents are removed from the 40-man rosters.

2. Every year, 20 additional people on the 40-man roster will be temporarily released from team control. The team chooses 10, the other teams in the league choose the other 10.

3. The 20 who are released are ranked in descending order by guaranteed $ remaining on their contract(s). The first 5 on that list who wish to stay with the team that just released them are added back to their roster. Assuming every team has at least 5 of their 20 who want to stay, that puts each team roster at 25 (minus free agents), and a pool of 450 players who remain released from team control (not counting free agents).

4. The players in that pool are drafted by the teams in the same order as is done today for the June (Rule 4) draft. The draft takes place on December 1, and continues until either there are no more drafting teams or no more players in the pool.

5. At any time, a team can walk away from the remainder of the draft. They can fill the remaining roster spots with free agents or their own minor-leaguers as is done today. The moment they fill any roster spot with a free agent or a minor-leaguer, they are considered to have abandoned the draft. If they sign a free agent after the season but before December 1, they do not get to draft at all.

6. The draft continues until every team abandons it. If there's one team left and 10 players in the draft pool, they can draft all 10 if they have the roster space to do it.

7. Throughout this process, any outstanding salary obligations are held by the team that originally signed the contract. Salary obligations are not transferred. If a player and his new team wish to rip up the contract and sign a new one, the salary obligations reset. Contracts will be for playing in MLB, not necessarily for a specific team; but the contract will stipulate that the salary is to be paid by the specific team that was a party to the contract.

8. Because of that contract structure a player and a team can "stack" contracts: they can sign a new contract without ripping up the old one. So let's say somehow that the Orioles end up drafting Jacoby Ellsbury from the Yankees. They can simply continue to let the Yankees pay him per the terms of his original contract; they can tear up the contract and start over, taking on all salary obligations of the new contract; or they could sign him to a contract paying him $X, which they'll be responsible for on top of what the Yankees are already on the hook for. A team might do this to push that player into the top 5 threshold, allowing the player to choose to stay where he is. It's really the only avenue the team has for possibly retaining a player, other than (a) nobody wanting him to be released or (b) taking a chance of re-drafting him.

9. No reserve for players on the 40-man. None of this six years of MLB service time crap.

---------
OK, what are the consequences of this system?
   38. Dingbat_Charlie Posted: August 16, 2019 at 10:24 AM (#5871925)
I think I like this version of the team better than the 2000-2009 "always kinda bad and never really improving" equilibrium.

Agree 100%. I'm more interested than I've been in years, and doing daily checks of minor league boxes to see how Adley and the baby birds fare.


in fairness how they started winning in 2012 had more to do with luck, or possibly karma, rather than any grand master plan

Luck and Buck!
   39. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: August 16, 2019 at 10:46 AM (#5871931)
#37, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
   40. villageidiom Posted: August 16, 2019 at 11:01 AM (#5871938)
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.
So you're saying it's a much better idea than relegation. Great!
   41. Benji Gil Gamesh VII - The Opt-Out Awakens Posted: August 16, 2019 at 11:45 AM (#5871953)
What arguably makes this even worse is the very next paragraph after the one excerpted above:

This won’t happen. There are too many logistical issues and holes, and neither the league nor the Players Association would ever agree to it. But when the other alternative is letting the Orioles make a mockery of the sport day in and day out, it’s clear that MLB has to do something—anything—to force those teams to be better.


They should totally do this!

Except they totally can't and won't, for good reasons!

But dammit they should totally do it anyway!
   42. shoelesjoe Posted: August 16, 2019 at 12:44 PM (#5871969)
Two weeks into August and the Orioles have already mathematically guaranteed that 2019 will be a losing season. They’ve lost a hundred games in a row to their most hated rival (well, everyone’s most hated rival) while surrendering more HRs to them in one season than any team in history. Every home game is populated 40% to 60% by jeering fans of the visiting team, and the play on the field most nights would embarrass the Bad News Bears.

And now some idiots step in and want to make losing MORE painful? Seriously?

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Mike Emeigh
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT - Catch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (November 2019)
(127 - 4:28am, Nov 20)
Last: Ben Broussard Ramjet

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-19-2019
(23 - 4:10am, Nov 20)
Last: Walt Davis

NewsblogOT- Soccer Thread- October 2019
(520 - 3:09am, Nov 20)
Last: manchestermets

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread, Start of the 2019-2020 Season
(945 - 2:04am, Nov 20)
Last: If on a winter's night a traveling violation

NewsblogOT - November* 2019 College Football thread
(320 - 12:37am, Nov 20)
Last: calming him down with his 57i66135

Sox TherapyGumbo Limbo, Mookie Betts and “Not My Money”
(52 - 10:15pm, Nov 19)
Last: Darren

NewsblogRob Manfred’s plan to destroy minor league baseball
(107 - 10:06pm, Nov 19)
Last: Meatwad

NewsblogPASSAN: Astros exec suggested using cameras to spy in '17, sources say
(139 - 9:23pm, Nov 19)
Last: The Duke

NewsblogRyan Thibs’ Hall of Fame Tracker
(98 - 8:56pm, Nov 19)
Last: My name is RMc and I feel extremely affected

Hall of MeritMock 2020 Modern Baseball Ballot
(64 - 2:47pm, Nov 19)
Last: cookiedabookie

Hall of Merit2020 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(231 - 1:44pm, Nov 19)
Last: rwargo

NewsblogThe next step in the new Rangers Way just unfolded in the Dominican Republic as they seek ways to separate from competition
(1 - 8:18am, Nov 19)
Last: The Anthony Kennedy of BBTF (Scott)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 11-18-2019
(44 - 11:58pm, Nov 18)
Last: KJOK

NewsblogA's GM David Forst says bullpen improvement main priority for 2020
(3 - 11:09pm, Nov 18)
Last: Jose Canusee

Gonfalon CubsRegrets
(114 - 10:35pm, Nov 18)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.4655 seconds
46 querie(s) executed