Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Retroactive War Gaming realignment
Author Message
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,622
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 222
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Top of Mt Rushmore
Post: #1
Exclamation Retroactive War Gaming realignment
I’m kind of fascinated with the idea of war gaming conference realignment with 1989 as the starting point. To properly conduct something like that I think I’d need to find multiple folks representing the interests of each of the major factions and then, with each proposed change determine an acceptable probability and then roll dice to resolve the outcome?

Has anyone ever tried something like this before? Any ideas on how to do something like that?
(This post was last modified: 02-18-2021 05:51 PM by Fighting Muskie.)
02-18-2021 05:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Arch Stanton Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 86
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
Muskie I enjoy your threads but this you lost me. Are you proposing a dungeon and dragons type game for realignment.
02-18-2021 10:19 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
utpotts Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,448
Joined: Oct 2004
Reputation: 62
I Root For: Toledo
Location: Canal Winchester, OH
Post: #3
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
WTF?
02-18-2021 10:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 608
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
One difficult part would be that there are so many factions. You could do it in phases (top I-A, bottom I-A, I-AA, in sequence). You could also assign actors different parts (ex. Texas and Penn State could be controlled by the same individual). I'd be interested to see a write up of objectives though.
02-18-2021 11:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,622
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 222
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Top of Mt Rushmore
Post: #5
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-18-2021 10:19 PM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  Muskie I enjoy your threads but this you lost me. Are you proposing a dungeon and dragons type game for realignment.

In essence yes. It’s not uncommon for military enthusiasts to try to either recreate historic battles or be given a hypothetical scenario and play it out. I watched a YouTube video once where some Naval historians fought out the Battle of Jutland to what results would have occurred had the strategies employed been different. . I’m wondering if a similar principle could be applied here.
02-19-2021 06:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,622
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 222
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Top of Mt Rushmore
Post: #6
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-18-2021 11:05 PM)Crayton Wrote:  One difficult part would be that there are so many factions. You could do it in phases (top I-A, bottom I-A, I-AA, in sequence). You could also assign actors different parts (ex. Texas and Penn State could be controlled by the same individual). I'd be interested to see a write up of objectives though.

It would be complicated. I’d strictly be interested in DI-A, particularly the Big 10, SEC, ACC, Big 8, Pac 10, SWC, Southern Independents, and Northern Independents. I think you’d need a player representing the interests of each of those conferences but, to avoid schizophrenic behaviors, you’d need one of the other parties involved to take on the interests of a given school—ex. Someone to entertain proposals offered to Texas since the SWC rep obviously isn’t going to want to part with them but the real Texas was certainly interested in shipping around.

I’d be interested to see how things play out if say:

Penn St to the Big 10 fails

FSU opts for the SEC

the SEC pulls off their 16 team plan

All the Indy’s rally under the Metro banner

Texas and Colorado to the PAC 10
02-19-2021 06:56 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Arch Stanton Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 86
Joined: Oct 2020
Reputation: 21
I Root For: Notre Dame
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-19-2021 06:56 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(02-18-2021 11:05 PM)Crayton Wrote:  One difficult part would be that there are so many factions. You could do it in phases (top I-A, bottom I-A, I-AA, in sequence). You could also assign actors different parts (ex. Texas and Penn State could be controlled by the same individual). I'd be interested to see a write up of objectives though.

It would be complicated. I’d strictly be interested in DI-A, particularly the Big 10, SEC, ACC, Big 8, Pac 10, SWC, Southern Independents, and Northern Independents. I think you’d need a player representing the interests of each of those conferences but, to avoid schizophrenic behaviors, you’d need one of the other parties involved to take on the interests of a given school—ex. Someone to entertain proposals offered to Texas since the SWC rep obviously isn’t going to want to part with them but the real Texas was certainly interested in shipping around.

I’d be interested to see how things play out if say:

Penn St to the Big 10 fails

FSU opts for the SEC

the SEC pulls off their 16 team plan

All the Indy’s rally under the Metro banner

Texas and Colorado to the PAC 10

I think you may need several people championing the northern independents interest since they were not a cohesive bunch
02-19-2021 07:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NJMark Offline
Water Engineer
*

Posts: 23
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 5
I Root For: Rutgers
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-19-2021 07:55 AM)Arch Stanton Wrote:  
(02-19-2021 06:56 AM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  
(02-18-2021 11:05 PM)Crayton Wrote:  One difficult part would be that there are so many factions. You could do it in phases (top I-A, bottom I-A, I-AA, in sequence). You could also assign actors different parts (ex. Texas and Penn State could be controlled by the same individual). I'd be interested to see a write up of objectives though.

It would be complicated. I’d strictly be interested in DI-A, particularly the Big 10, SEC, ACC, Big 8, Pac 10, SWC, Southern Independents, and Northern Independents. I think you’d need a player representing the interests of each of those conferences but, to avoid schizophrenic behaviors, you’d need one of the other parties involved to take on the interests of a given school—ex. Someone to entertain proposals offered to Texas since the SWC rep obviously isn’t going to want to part with them but the real Texas was certainly interested in shipping around.

I’d be interested to see how things play out if say:

Penn St to the Big 10 fails

FSU opts for the SEC

the SEC pulls off their 16 team plan

All the Indy’s rally under the Metro banner

Texas and Colorado to the PAC 10

I think you may need several people championing the northern independents interest since they were not a cohesive bunch

The "Northern" independents were semi-cohesive, and were commonly regarded as the Eastern independents. The 7 of them played each other every year as if a conference, they drew officiating crews from the same place, and at times, had a syndicated TV package. The Athlon magazine that previewed them was called "Eastern Football." After Penn State went to the Big Ten, the remaining 6 were the nucleus for forming the Big East football conference, with Miami coming in as a "power," and Virginia Tech bringing it to 8.

Some of the southern independents played each other, but it wasn't a round robin. The only "cohesiveness" among them was that most of them were in the Metro conference for non-football sports.
02-19-2021 04:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ChrisLords Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,548
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 137
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Earth
Post: #9
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
I'd like to see a North East Conference with PSU and Maybe ND as anchors in a world that values basketball as much as football.

Something like:

North East
-----
BC
UConn
Syracuse
Temple
Penn State
Pitt

South
-----
WVU
Cincy
Notre Dame
Louisville
Memphis
Virginia Tech
(This post was last modified: 02-20-2021 04:55 AM by ChrisLords.)
02-20-2021 04:54 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 608
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
Let’s War Game the early-2020s realignment.

Not that this entire board hasn’t already been doing that for the past decade.
02-20-2021 07:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Crayton Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 608
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 51
I Root For: Florida
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
I imagine we’d also need Network representatives for ESPN, Fox, and Other.
02-20-2021 07:52 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


BePcr07 Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,488
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 126
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-20-2021 04:54 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I'd like to see a North East Conference with PSU and Maybe ND as anchors in a world that values basketball as much as football.

Something like:

North East
-----
BC
UConn
Syracuse
Temple
Penn State
Pitt

South
-----
WVU
Cincy
Notre Dame
Louisville
Memphis
Virginia Tech

Instead of Connecticut, shift West Virginia to the North and Miami (FL) to the South.
02-20-2021 11:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,425
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 3006
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-18-2021 05:17 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  I’m kind of fascinated with the idea of war gaming conference realignment with 1989 as the starting point. To properly conduct something like that I think I’d need to find multiple folks representing the interests of each of the major factions and then, with each proposed change determine an acceptable probability and then roll dice to resolve the outcome?

Has anyone ever tried something like this before? Any ideas on how to do something like that?

We've done this before on multiple occasions as a draft. However for your purposes if we start with the conferences as they were prior to Penn State joining and start with the SWC, Big 8, Big 10, PAC 12, ACC, SEC and Big East you might have some interesting outcomes if you presuppose these criteria:
1. SMU has the death penalty and the SWC is suffering a loss of leverage for having so small a footprint.
2. The Big 8 is concerned about loss of footprint.
3. The Big East is seriously thinking about poaching the ACC and vice versa.
4. Roy Kramer is going to expand the SEC for the CCG and move to divisions but the initial grand plan was to jump to 16 (the SEC settled for 12).
5. The Big 10 is seriously considering Penn State and perhaps is influenced sooner by Kramer's plan in the SEC and moves more decisively to get to 12 or more.
6. GOR's don't yet exist.

Now get somebody to represent each of those conferences while you roll the dice for the Big 10.

What you do to make this absolutely interesting is get an independent actor to whom each conference director PM's his plans for the next set of moves detailing the arrangements. That independent party opens each PM and announces the plans at the same time. Unconflicted plans are counted as moves. Conflicted plans have to negotiated out. When all conferences make a move the a second round is started.
02-20-2021 12:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,622
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 222
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Top of Mt Rushmore
Post: #14
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
We’ve done plenty of fantasy drafts in the past; I’m thinking a bit more analytical. You’re right though someone has to act as a moderator and receive by PM everyone’s proposed actions. And then, as a group, reveal each proposal, determine the probability of success, and then roll some dice to determine if each move fails or succeeds.

I also think the participants acting as representatives for given leagues, should interact and potential joint proposals—ex. The Big 10 and SWC conspiring to take Big 8 members at the same time.

I’d be interested in moderating something like this and JR I think you’d make a great representative for the SEC.

Now to find:

PAC 10
Big 8
SWC
ACC
Big 10
Eastern Independents
Southern Independents

shmolick is a Penn St guy and probably a good Eastern Indy. We’ve got a few UNC fans who could represent the ACC core. Nerdlinger would probably be game for something like this too.
02-20-2021 12:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ChrisLords Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,548
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 137
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Earth
Post: #15
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-20-2021 11:30 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(02-20-2021 04:54 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I'd like to see a North East Conference with PSU and Maybe ND as anchors in a world that values basketball as much as football.

Something like:

North East Conference
-----
BC
Syracuse
Temple
Penn State
Pitt
WVU
Cincy
Notre Dame
Louisville
Memphis

Instead of Connecticut, shift West Virginia to the North and Miami (FL) to the South.

I decided to remove UConn and VT and just make it a 10 team league.
02-20-2021 07:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ChrisLords Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 6,548
Joined: Jun 2007
Reputation: 137
I Root For: Virginia Tech
Location: Earth
Post: #16
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-20-2021 07:18 PM)ChrisLords Wrote:  
(02-20-2021 11:30 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(02-20-2021 04:54 AM)ChrisLords Wrote:  I'd like to see a North East Conference with PSU and Maybe ND as anchors in a world that values basketball as much as football.

Something like:

North East Conference
-----
North
-----
BC
UConn
Syracuse
Rutgers
Temple
Penn State

South
-----
Pitt
WVU
Cincy
Notre Dame
Louisville
Memphis

Instead of Connecticut, shift West Virginia to the North and Miami (FL) to the South.

I decided to remove UConn and VT and just make it a 10 team league.

Better yet, stay at 12 and add Rutger's instead of VT. (ND would never go for it but I like it.)
(This post was last modified: 02-20-2021 07:25 PM by ChrisLords.)
02-20-2021 07:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,425
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 3006
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #17
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-20-2021 12:59 PM)Fighting Muskie Wrote:  We’ve done plenty of fantasy drafts in the past; I’m thinking a bit more analytical. You’re right though someone has to act as a moderator and receive by PM everyone’s proposed actions. And then, as a group, reveal each proposal, determine the probability of success, and then roll some dice to determine if each move fails or succeeds.

I also think the participants acting as representatives for given leagues, should interact and potential joint proposals—ex. The Big 10 and SWC conspiring to take Big 8 members at the same time.

I’d be interested in moderating something like this and JR I think you’d make a great representative for the SEC.

Now to find:

PAC 10
Big 8
SWC
ACC
Big 10
Eastern Independents
Southern Independents

shmolick is a Penn St guy and probably a good Eastern Indy. We’ve got a few UNC fans who could represent the ACC core. Nerdlinger would probably be game for something like this too.

Well here we are with one key move to consider. In he 80's FSU applied to the SEC several times. If the SEC had taken them and stuck to 11 what would have changed when the 90-2 alignment happened?

Well for one thing the ACC would not have landed a premier football program and because of that things might have changed with regards to the Big East. Perhaps it's the Big East that convinces the 8 member ACC to join them.
Virginia, North Carolina, Duke, N.C. State, Wake Forest, Clemson, Georgia Tech and Maryland merge with the Big East when it is clear that football is going to be the primary factor moving forward.

The SWC would still have had too little potential and too many schools for the Big 8 to merge with. So the SEC moves to 12 with Arkansas in 1992. Clemson feeling even more alienated in the new merger joins the SEC in 1992 as well.

A&M , Texas, Baylor and Texas Tech join the Big 12 initially as they did. But the SEC needing even numbers for a division takes closer looks at Virginia Tech, West Virginia, Houston, and T.C.U. all of which expressed interest in 1990-2.

T.C.U. is ultimately added to the SEC to get into Texas's largest market.

So the SEC sits at 14 at the end of 1992.
Alabama, Arkansas, Florida State, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, T.C.U.

Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

I will assume that Penn State joins the Big 10 right on schedule. And that for the time being the Big 12 thrives. I believe the Big 10 would have snagged Maryland away from the Big East the same way the SEC snagged Clemson, and remember there are still no GOR's and that Maryland would have gone for the same reason that Clemson did. Yes the basketball was fine but the overall athletic fit still not what the Terps would want and with Penn State already in the Big 10 the lure was the same.

The ACC additions of the late 90's are gone because they are merged with the Big East.

Boston College, Connecticut, Louisville, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia
Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech

The Big East still loses adds Louisville to fill departed Maryland's position.

Things rock along like this until the troubles start in the Big 12. Only this time when trouble starts there are no decent backfill schools. The composition never changed in the merger that led to the Big 12 so it is reasonable to assume the same problems would arise again.

So with contract clauses promising raises for raids the same forces are in play heading into 2010. Only this time the Big 10 takes Nebraska and Oklahoma to move to 14, and then pick up Missouri and Kansas to 16. Colorado still heads to the PAC 10 and Utah joins them. Then Texas decides late to work a deal with ESPN and the SEC gets a renegotiation without 2 new markets when Texas and A&M decide that with T.C.U. already in the SEC it suits their business model and their monetary and exposure needs to join the Frogs in the SEC.

With the Big 12 and ACC as part of history Notre Dame joins the Big East in full as we move to a P4 model and the CFP is born. Cincinnati joins with them.

So the Big East becomes:

Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

The Big 10 is:
Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Michigan State, Ohio State, Penn State, Purdue

Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Northwestern, Oklahoma, Wisconsin

The SEC becomes:
Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana State, Mississippi, Mississippi State, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Christian

Auburn, Clemson, Florida, Florida State, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Vanderbilt

The PAC is still at 12 with the same schools. Kansas State Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Baylor, and Iowa State help form the AAC which picks up Tulane, the service academies, Temple, East Carolina, the Florida twins, Houston, and Memphis, SMU, and maybe Tulsa.

IMO a scenario like this would have been much better for the game as a whole. So if ESPN in an effort to cobble together a conference that gave them East Coast leverage had stayed out of FSU's affairs everything may have turned out much differently, and realignment would have been more organic and less contrived. The changes wouldn't have been major other than the survival of the Big East which would have been best for its region and the ACC as essentially a whole division within it would have at the core been as healthy as ever in a basketball first conference with an assemblage of decent and competitive football schools. The Big 10 would have grown in ways that pleased the Northern Midwesterners and given expansion into the East, and the SEC would have been more compact in its two divisions than now. Not much changes for the PAC.
(This post was last modified: 02-21-2021 11:35 AM by JRsec.)
02-21-2021 11:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
vandiver49 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 8,380
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation: 300
I Root For: USNA/UTK
Location: West GA
Post: #18
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-21-2021 11:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  So the Big East becomes:

Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

You BE has has just as much instability as the current ACC in my opinion. Not having Clemson or FSU around only serves to increase the above conferences vulnerabilities in football.
02-22-2021 11:16 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Fighting Muskie Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 5,622
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 222
I Root For: Ohio St, UC,MAC
Location: Top of Mt Rushmore
Post: #19
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
Right—the Florida St move is perhaps the most consequential of all the moves of that era. If Florida St opts for the SEC a multitude of alternatives could have unfolded:

1. If Florida St moves to the SEC, maybe the other powers sought—Texas, TAMU, Oklahoma, and Clemson follow suit.

1a. You better believe that sends shockwaves across the college sports landscape and the Big 10 would be looking to add too with the Big 8 and Eastern Independents being who they go for. The Eastern Independents leftover combine with the ACC; the leftover SWC and Big 8 schools do likewise.

2. Let’s say the SEC stops at 12 after Florida St. This puts the ACC on the clock—they’ve got a bunch of options—Miami, BC, Syracuse, Pitt, WVU, VT, Rutgers, and SC. The Conservative option is they take Miami and stop

2a. The ACC had a strong relationship with Raycom at the time and as we recall, Raycom had a fresh study on hand on the potential of uniting the Southern and Eastern independents into a conference as large as 16 members. Let’s say they tweak that plan and approach the ACC:

Pod 1: BC, Syracuse, Pitt, Rutgers
Pod 2: WVU, Maryland, UVA, VT
Pod 3: UNC, NC St, WF, Duke
Pod 4: Clemson, SC, GT, Miami

Now rotate those pods each season so you’ve always got 2 divisions of 8 who played round robin (7 games) For the 8th conference game, pair historic rivals or try and build the best match ups (ex Pitt vs WVU, UVA vs UNC, etc)

2b. Let’s say Miami isn’t interested in the ACC and wants to keep their football semi-independent. They join the ACC and form a mini conference scheduling agreement with their 3 schools, ND, and possibly others. Even if Miami opts for the Big East with the 8 team line up that actually did occur, they’d be a better conference than the ACC’s 8 + SC.
(This post was last modified: 02-22-2021 11:25 AM by Fighting Muskie.)
02-22-2021 11:18 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 26,425
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 3006
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #20
RE: Retroactive War Gaming realignment
(02-22-2021 11:16 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  
(02-21-2021 11:20 AM)JRsec Wrote:  So the Big East becomes:

Boston College, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Rutgers, Syracuse, West Virginia

Duke, Georgia Tech, Miami, North Carolina, N.C. State, Virginia, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest

You BE has has just as much instability as the current ACC in my opinion. Not having Clemson or FSU around only serves to increase the above conferences vulnerabilities in football.

The whole idea was to stop the football first politics. The non football basketball schools would still be present, Georgetown, Villanova, Providence, Seton Hall, etc. The conference would be a powerhouse for East Coast basketball, which if you will remember was the emphasis of most of the schools listed in the ACC except for Clemson and F.S.U. at the time. We are talking early 90's. The question would be whether Miami and Va Tech would stay. I think so once the ACC schools came aboard.
02-22-2021 11:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.