Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Rule Changes for 2018

  • 26-08-2017 8:24pm
    #1
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭


    We won't be making any changes for 2017 but if you feel any changes would improve the leagues please post below.

    Please try to justify why your change should be made and how it would improve things. Please use the "Thanks" button if you agree with the proposed change.

    Feel free also to put down a counter agument if you feel the change should not be used, again hit the thanks button if you agree with the counter argument.

    Any proposals with good support will be put to a vote in a separate thread before next season, but this thread is just about putting forward ideas and hearing the pros and cons.

    Examples could include:

    *Changes to Roster/introducing a flex position
    *Scoring e.g 6 Points for a passing Td or more points for an interception etc.
    *Moving away from NFL.com
    *Use PPR/0.5 PPR
    *Using previous seasons position to determine draft order
    *Changes to Waiver order/using a Free Agent Auction budget
    *Have waivers process earlier in the week.
    *Switch from a snake draft to an auction
    *etc.

    Again this thread is just to discuss ideas, feel free to throw out anything you think will make the leagues work better.


«1

Comments

  • #2
    L.S.F
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 466 ✭✭L.S.F


    Would like to see the draft order decided before the draft itself. Not everyone will agree on draft time or have other commitments. Priority list is fine but would be different if I knew if I had 2nd pick while setting it up or 10th as first couple of rounds are vital and tactics for picks would change while thinking who would still be on the board.


    I'd also be in favour of minus points for missed PAT to spice kickers up a bit! :P


  • #3
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    L.S.F wrote: »
    Would like to see the draft order decided before the draft itself. Not everyone will agree on draft time or have other commitments. Priority list is fine but would be different if I knew if I had 2nd pick while setting it up or 10th as first couple of rounds are vital and tactics for picks would change while thinking who would still be on the board.

    Thing is though to do this you would then have to decide on changing the Draft from Random to Set Order.

    The only way setting the Draft order works is setting a linear draft and doing it based on final standings of last season.

    Other than that Snake and Random works best for not setting a draft order manually.


  • #4
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    I have 3 so I will give 3 separate posts:

    Always stays at 16 man league and can never be changed.


  • #5
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Previously voted in Rule changes cannot be voted on and changed for at least 3 (Or Enter number here) full Fantasy seasons.


  • #6
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Always keep it a Non PPR league rare these days to have non PPR leagues


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    Thing is though to do this you would then have to decide on changing the Draft from Random to Set Order.

    The only way setting the Draft order works is setting a linear draft and doing it based on final standings of last season.

    Other than that Snake and Random works best for not setting a draft order manually.

    Having spent 30 minutes on Monday night manually inputting the Div 5 fixtures for the season I don't think the two minutes it would take to manually input a draft order is too tricky. :)

    I'd always favour knowing well in advance where I'll be drafting so I can run a few mock drafts and get an idea of draft strategy based on the type of player likely to be on the board those first few rounds. too late now obviously but that would be my vote/recommendation for next year.


  • #8
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Beefy78 wrote: »
    Having spent 30 minutes on Monday night manually inputting the Div 5 fixtures for the season I don't think the two minutes it would take to manually input a draft order is too tricky. :)

    I'd always favour knowing well in advance where I'll be drafting so I can run a few mock drafts and get an idea of draft strategy based on the type of player likely to be on the board those first few rounds. too late now obviously but that would be my vote/recommendation for next year.

    I never said it was tricky. My point is we would have to agree on going to a Linear Draft and then figuring out if are going to base it on previous standing from last year. You really cant have one without the other as then you are asking the GM to set it manually in a random order just so people know about it outside the 30mins NFL.com gives you


  • #9
    MileHighGuy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭MileHighGuy


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    Previously voted in Rule changes cannot be voted on and changed for at least 3 (Or Enter number here) full Fantasy seasons.

    I can see this making sense from the point of view of not having recurring votes every year on the same proposed changes, but a lot of this stuff can have unintended consequences that only become apparent when you play the year out. I don't see it as benficial to have to hamstring ourselves by adhering to a rule/change if everyone agrees makes the league less fun/challenging or whatever.

    i.e. flex is voted in but it becomes apparent that everyone hates it, but we have to keep it because of a rule that says we have to.


  • #10
    MileHighGuy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭MileHighGuy


    I do like the idea of a free agent budget, so we have some semblance of an auction when the season gets underway, not sure if this is even possible though under NFL.com

    Regarding an auction draft, again, while I like the changes it brings, i think we are better off leaving it as an offshoot/varient from the main boards leagues, which have run very succcessfully using the traditional snake draft.


  • #11
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,422 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Tight Ends added to the flex option.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    MileHighGuy wrote: »
    I can see this making sense from the point of view of not having recurring votes every year on the same proposed changes, but a lot of this stuff can have unintended consequences that only become apparent when you play the year out. I don't see it as benficial to have to hamstring ourselves by adhering to a rule/change if everyone agrees makes the league less fun/challenging or whatever.

    i.e. flex is voted in but it becomes apparent that everyone hates it, but we have to keep it because of a rule that says we have to.

    The thing is at some point we have to settle on a structure. To keep changing rules every year is counter productive and takes away the fun. The type of league that it is should be the type of league that it is and if people don't like it there is other options.

    I am all for voting on things but if we never settle on rule changes then it becomes a mess of constantly changing the rules and league type. Most leagues have their rules and stick by them. They may vote on minor changes every other year but for the most part dont and keep it original. Plenty of options out there.


  • #13
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Tight Ends added to the flex option.

    We dont currently have a flex option.


  • #14
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    you are asking the GM to set it manually in a random order just so people know about it outside the 30mins NFL.com gives you

    That's exactly what I'm suggesting - same as happens in almost every other fantasy football league I've ever played in. Whoever is running it does a random draw, tells everyone the order and inputs it into NFL.com. Then everyone knows where they are, what their options are likely to be and if they're not going to be around can set up a draft board accordingly.


  • #15
    MileHighGuy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭MileHighGuy


    My proposal, (which would mess up a lot of draft boards and weekly points prediction websites) is to try and find a way to make every position (read K, DEF) a little bit more equatable - not to a ridiculous degree, but enough to make them more than just an afterthought/disposible.

    Every draft is pretty predictable, pretty much a K and DEF is picked in the last two rounds, and are frequently swapped in and out from week to week (or maybe just plugged in and left without a second thought given to them)

    If we could increase the value of a kicker and the team DEF, we may see them go higher in a draft, see trades involving them, reward the top tiers of both the groups (at the moment there is little difference between a top K/DEF and a top 15) SAy we bump the value of an Fum/Int/Sack to 2 pts and a FG to 4 across the board, not just from 50+? (for example - I'm not proposing that particular amount)

    With 16 team in each league, we frequently hear complaints about a dearth of talent on waiver wire, this would add plenty of valuable pieces to the pool, without having to decrease the league size or the squad size.

    Probably too radical to have the league vote on it, but it would be interesting to run a varient league with it perhaps?


  • #16
    MileHighGuy
    Registered Users Posts: 1,702 ✭✭✭MileHighGuy


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    The thing is at some point we have to settle on a structure. To keep changing rules every year is counter productive and takes away the fun. The type of league that it is should be the type of league that it is and if people don't like it there is other options.

    I am all for voting on things but if we never settle on rule changes then it becomes a mess of constantly changing the rules and league type. Most leagues have their rules and stick by them. They may vote on minor changes every other year but for the most part dont and keep it original. Plenty of options out there.

    Yeah, I'm with you on that. I have to say, it's pretty much exactly as I like it right now!


  • #17
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,422 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    We dont currently have a flex option.

    Division 7 is setup that way presently...


  • #18
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Division 7 is setup that way presently...

    They shouldn't be.

    Charter : http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056426292

    w7d92e.png


  • #19
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Division 7 is setup that way presently...

    Have you drafted yet?


  • #20
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,422 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    adrian522 wrote: »
    Have you drafted yet?

    We have


  • #21
    gerryfed
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 691 ✭✭✭gerryfed


    Yeah the obvious one for me is that there should be a flex spot instead of a WR spot. But if you's have already voted on this recently, then fair enough! Agreed that you don't want to be conducting 10 polls every year for every lil thing!


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    We haven't made any changes in the last few years so everything is up for discussion for 2018. I think the point is if we vote on something for the 2018 season and it is accepted/rejected then we would not revisit it for at least 3 years. That is what is being proposed above.

    I'll set a poll for everything we want to vote on. I think it is valid to at least have a discussion on introducing a flex or publishing a draft order prior to the draft.


  • #23
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    Anthoer thing we don't currently have is points for an offensive player recovering a fumble and scoring a TD. At least I don't think we do.


  • #24
    Johnny_Fontane
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,098 ✭✭✭Johnny_Fontane


    90 second draft time is way too much. surely 45 seconds or even 60 seconds is plenty.

    Small thing, but the draft is looooooooooooong.


  • #25
    adrian522
    Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 16,156 Mod ✭✭✭✭adrian522


    Happy to put that to the vote, though I didn't fin it too long as I'd done an auction draft that went 3+ hours last week.


  • #26
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    adrian522 wrote: »
    Anthoer thing we don't currently have is points for an offensive player recovering a fumble and scoring a TD. At least I don't think we do.

    We don't no, that's what I said to you was currently included in the Div 5 scoring until I turned it off.


  • #27
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    Johnny_Fontane wrote: »
    90 second draft time is way too much. surely 45 seconds or even 60 seconds is plenty.

    Small thing, but the draft is looooooooooooong.

    People don't take that long though, 90 seconds is usually set that way just to factor in any technical glitches/disconnections etc. Most picks will be within 30 seconds no matter the limit.


  • #28
    JaMarcusHustle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭JaMarcusHustle


    In Division 6 right now, Chiefs and Patriots FAs are on waivers until next week so can't be picked up for this week's game. Is that right? If so, surely we should be changing that?


  • #29
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    JaMarcusHustle wrote: »
    In Division 7 right now, Chiefs and Patriots FAs are on waivers until next week so can't be picked up for this week's game. Is that right? If so, surely we should be changing that?

    That is wrong. If the waiver period has been set to 2 days then they should be on waiver until tomorrow morning.


  • #30
    JaMarcusHustle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,719 ✭✭✭JaMarcusHustle


    It's set to 2 days. I think what's happening is that the draft was tonight, and in 2 days time the Patriots and Chiefs will have already played, so it defaults to after the game week is opened up again for week 2.

    Edit: Even if I change it to 1 day, they still wont process until the 13th :confused:


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    JaMarcusHustle wrote: »
    It's set to 2 days. I think what's happening is that the draft was tonight, and in 2 days time the Patriots and Chiefs will have already played, so it defaults to after the game week is opened up again for week 2.

    Edit: Even if I change it to 1 day, they still wont process until the 13th :confused:

    Oh crap didn't realize you guys only drafted tonight. Yeah NFL.com is horrible for its waivers and how bad the settings are for it.


  • #32
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭Guffy


    Ok... im gona say it...

    Fancy moving platform. Nfl.com suckity sucks


  • #33
    hots
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,200 ✭✭✭hots


    Would definitely prefer a full flex (wr/te/rb) option instead of the 3rd WR. To try and get at least 5 WRs into your roster (3 starting and a couple for cover) is extremely difficult in a 16 man league whereas RBs are fairly easy.


  • #34
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,422 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Guffy wrote: »
    Ok... im gona say it...

    Fancy moving platform. Nfl.com suckity sucks

    NFL gets some bad raps. That said, it has some plus points when compared to ESPN:

    - it has much more reliable performance the past couple of years, and hasn't suffered the kind of disruption ESPN suffered to start the last couple of years
    - for people autodrafting, the ability to edit your pre draft rankings is a simple feature that is quite effective
    - on demand clickable highlights of all scoring plays is nice. Fantasy is supposed to be fun after all
    - the desktop app is nice, and superior imo to competing ones I've seen (their mobile app does leave a small bit to be desire usability wise)


    Just playing Devil's Advocate here. The grass is always greener, but there's a robustness to NFL.com that shouldn't be sniffed at.


  • #35
    KayJay86
    Registered Users Posts: 66 ✭✭KayJay86


    A few from me but mostly thanks to Adrian and the league GMs who have a relatively thankless job setting all this up for our enjoyment!

    As others have said - definitely a flex position in place of the 3rd WR
    Happy enough with NFL.com. NFL and ESPN have their advantages and disadvantages. There really isn't a huge difference.
    I'd favour PPR.
    Support using previous seasons position to determine draft order with newbies assigned randomly thereafter.
    Don't like the auction craic, wouldn't want changed to it.

    GRMA.


  • #36
    BaronVon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,662 ✭✭✭BaronVon


    hots wrote: »
    Would definitely prefer a full flex (wr/te/rb) option instead of the 3rd WR. To try and get at least 5 WRs into your roster (3 starting and a couple for cover) is extremely difficult in a 16 man league whereas RBs are fairly easy.

    I would argue the opposite is true. Most teams deploy 3 WR's and only 1 RB, so it is far easier to stock up on WR's. That said, the 3rd WR being a flex player would certainly help as the Waiver is fairly bereft of talent in a 16 team league!


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    hots
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,200 ✭✭✭hots


    infacteh wrote: »
    I would argue the opposite is true. Most teams deploy 3 WR's and only 1 RB, so it is far easier to stock up on WR's. That said, the 3rd WR being a flex player would certainly help as the Waiver is fairly bereft of talent in a 16 team league!

    There are a lot of fantasy relevant rb2s in the league, not so many wr3s and beyond I'd say...


  • #38
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,422 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Can I clarify what the H2H tiebreaker criteria is supposed to be please?


  • #39
    Pat the Patriot
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 146 ✭✭Pat the Patriot


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Can I clarify what the H2H tiebreaker criteria is supposed to be please?

    I believe its H2H matchups during the season. I finished in 8th place with the same record as the two teams who finished ahead of me (All 3 of us on a 7-6 record). After checking back over the weeks, both of the teams ahead of me had defeated me previously in our matchups & therefore they may have won any tie-break? I'm not 100% sure though....


  • #40
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    H2H is how it works. Starts off with H2H to against each other and then if that is tied H2H against common teams played. Same as the actual NFL.

    Edit : I was wrong here. See the Post below. Their rules are misleading at best.


  • #41
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Best Breakdown I have seen for it is this:

    By default, tie breakers for season standings in the case of an overall W-L-T record tie are as follows:

    Head-to-Head Record (NFL-Managed Default) the name is misleading; this means the winning percentage in games against other tied teams. In situations with more than two tied teams, the record between any two of the tied teams is irrelevant. This means one team could have beaten another and be ranked below them.

    Divisional Winning Percentage (if your custom league uses multiple divisions)
    Points Scored For
    Points Scored Against (Most Difficult Schedule)
    TO BREAK STANDINGS TIES, DEFAULT SETTING

    The default standings tie-breaker setting for NFL Fantasy (and the NFL itself) is called �Head-to-Head�: when multiple teams have the same record, they are ranked in order of win-loss-tie percentage in matchups played against all the other tied teams together/combined. Individual matchups are irrelevant.

    EXAMPLE: Say A, B, C, and D are 3-1, and that A beat B and C, B beat C, and D didn't play anyone in the group.

    A is 2-0 against teams in the tied group.
    B is 1-1 against teams in the tied group.
    C is 0-2 against teams in the tied group.
    D is 0-0 against teams in the tied group.
    So A is first, B is second, and C and D are tied.

    In leagues with divisions, the second tie-breaker is Divisional Winning Percentage, followed by Points For. In leagues without divisions, the second tie-breaker would be Points For.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    FastFullBack
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,460 ✭✭✭FastFullBack


    hots wrote: »
    Would definitely prefer a full flex (wr/te/rb) option instead of the 3rd WR. To try and get at least 5 WRs into your roster (3 starting and a couple for cover) is extremely difficult in a 16 man league whereas RBs are fairly easy.

    +1 for this change. I saw the comments that most NFL teams deploy 3 WR's so it should be easier to find WR's to fill 3 spots, but I think any given Fantasy teams in a 16 man league could have either a good WR roster or a good RB roster. Right now my team has 4 viable RB options, but I've been scaping all year to find 3 WR's.
    I'd love the option to play 3 RB's.


  • #43
    LuckyLloyd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 36,422 ✭✭✭✭LuckyLloyd


    Thanks for the explanation. Really think straightforward points for is the best way to go for deciding tie breakers. That's really a much better indicator of who has had the better roster consistently over the course of a regular season.


  • #44
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    LuckyLloyd wrote: »
    Thanks for the explanation. Really think straightforward points for is the best way to go for deciding tie breakers. That's really a much better indicator of who has had the better roster consistently over the course of a regular season.

    Is it though? One of the leagues I am in the highest scoring guy failed to make the playoffs and in fact in the Prem the highest scoring team failed to make the playoffs. From my experience the highest scoring team doesn't always make the better team especially in a standard lineup and scoring league.

    Looking at the Prem I am 10-3 and 2 games up on the 2nd 3rd and 4th ranked teams who are 8-5 and 4th best team in scoring and as I said the first best team failed to make the playoffs and finished 6-7.

    In my opinion I don't think highest scoring is any fairer than the Head to Head system as is. Just my opinion though. We could debate this until the cows come home and to be honest even if it was voted in it will never please everyone. Pros and cons to both systems


  • #45
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭Guffy


    Dont know if it allows it on the nfl platform but i always thought the final playoff spot should be reserved for the next highest scoring team.

    4 x division winners
    1 x highest ranked non division winner
    1 x highest scoring team not in playoffs


  • #46
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Guffy wrote: »
    Dont know if it allows it on the nfl platform but i always thought the final playoff spot should be reserved for the next highest scoring team.

    4 x division winners
    1 x highest ranked non division winner
    1 x highest scoring team not in playoffs

    NFL.com doesn't allow you to change the Tied Rules either 1 of 3 of their options.


  • #47
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭Guffy


    Is there a reason we stick with nfl.com?


  • #48
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    It was the original platform used and not sure if we voted on it but you could propose the change and let people decide what they want.

    But you then would also have to propose how the Playoff Ties are handled.

    So

    Your two Proposals

    - Go to other platform

    - Change how the ties are done.


  • #49
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭Guffy


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    It was the original platform used and not sure if we voted on it but you could propose the change and let people decide what they want.

    But you then would also have to propose how the Playoff Ties are handled.

    So

    Your two Proposals

    - Go to other platform

    - Change how the ties are done.

    Not ties... but to give the 6th playoff spot to the next highest point scorer not qualified. May need a site where playoff teams can be set manually. If that can be done on nfl.com wouldnt need to propose a change of platform.


  • #50
    TOss Sweep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,905 ✭✭✭TOss Sweep


    Guffy wrote: »
    Not ties... but to give the 6th playoff spot to the next highest point scorer not qualified. May need a site where playoff teams can be set manually. If that can be done on nfl.com wouldnt need to propose a change of platform.

    Manually adjusting playoff teams still falls under a vote though.

    You would have to get everyone to vote in your whole proposal which right now goes against the current settings.

    We got to remember there is what 8 league now and 16 teams in each league. We have to give everyone the option to agree to the changes. These are community based leagues after all.


  • #51
    Guffy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,215 ✭✭✭Guffy


    TOss Sweep wrote: »
    Manually adjusting playoff teams still falls under a vote though.

    You would have to get everyone to vote in your whole proposal which right now goes against the current settings.

    We got to remember there is what 8 league now and 16 teams in each league. We have to give everyone the option to agree to the changes. These are community based leagues after all.

    O i get that sorry. What i meant was that if it was possible to do that i wouldnt necessarily propose a change of platform.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement