View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently November 1st, 2014, 7:11 am



Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
 Watkins scenario Pros/Cons 
Author Message
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: March 11th, 2010, 4:39 pm
Posts: 127
Post Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
As the draft nears and speculation runs rampant I began thinking of the full scope of what trading up to get Watkins may be and I'm interested to hear other perspectives.

I went from looking at the first round and trading down scenarios to strongly believing that if the Lions are indeed in a "win now" mentality, then trading up to get Watkins makes a lot of sense. Forgive me if I'm regurgitating discussions that already exist but here is MHO:

I believe that trading up to get Watkins is a smart move that will immediately pay dividends - provided the asking price isn't akin to being raped. He is generally compared to AJ Green and will contribute right away, whether it be from the slot or wide out opposite Johnson. Having the versatility to move each of our top receivers around plus having Joique/Bush & Fauria/Pettigrew will give D coordinators nightmares (even more so than we believed the addition of Bush would).

I think Mayhew has a good track record of draft strategy which could translate into an acceptable price to pay for moving up. True, the picks haven't always panned out but he has made smart moves from fleecing the Cowgirls to adding UDFAs Fauria and Waddle (surely with evaluation help from Xander who is still on staff). A high price may still be worth it, but with a deep draft, 3 picks in the top 76 as well as 2 compensatory 4th round picks, this may be the best opportunity to add a difference maker (also analyst speculate that next year's draft class will not have the level of talent so trading away next year's picks - if this is a possibility - may not have as big a negative impact).

Without speculating too much (this Kool Aid tastes great!), Watkins COULD be the next CJ. With only a few exceptions, top 10 receiver picks produce pretty well and being under the tutelage of CJ and Tate could develop him into CJ's eventual replacement.

Of course I understand there are a lot of cons to going this route, mainly the cost of trading up. The sure bet would be to trade up to No. 2 but seeing the high price St. Louis charged the Skins for RG3 just to move up from 6 to 2 doesn't bode well for Mayhew's chances of making a sensible deal. With all the hype (or smoke) the news has made of our pursuit of Watkins, any team willing to trade down will smell blood and go for the jugular. I am wondering if it is all smoke, what the end result of that would be. If we're not seriously considering Watkins and try to make other teams think we are - what will that accomplish other than taking focus off of who we really are targeting?

Another con would be the depth at receiver in this draft. Why break the bank if the gap between 1st rounders and 3rd rounders isn't too great? Unfortunately we'll only find out a few years down the road where taking Watkins is a virtual guarantee we're getting a playmaker.

So what do you guys think?

_________________
Slow is smooth, smooth is steady, steady is fast!


April 10th, 2014, 10:52 am
Profile
ST Coordinator – Danny Crossman
User avatar

Joined: March 30th, 2006, 12:48 am
Posts: 3841
Location: Davison Mi
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
Im staring at the "watkins or Bust" bandwagon and stongly considering getting on. i think the BEST case scenario would be to trade away next year picks to move up this year, as so many juniors have gotten into this years draft that I cant help but think that next year will provide a pretty thin draft.

With the way the O-line is playing I cant help but think our WR core is the only thing holding us back from having an ELITE offense. (providing the 2nd half of Stafford's season was a fluke and not a new trend). if teh strength of the team is on the offensive side of the ball, it only makes sense to fill in the one missing piece left, then conecntrating fully on the defense.

I am all for tradin up to get him if we A) "give" only 1 pick away from this years draft (im ok with it even if it is a 2nd rd pick) or B) less than 2 picks from next year are sacrificed.

I wouldnt sell the farm to get him, but i would "buy high", so to speak

_________________
2013 Lionbacker Fantasy Football Champion


April 10th, 2014, 11:02 am
Profile
Heisman Winner
User avatar

Joined: March 28th, 2005, 7:50 pm
Posts: 805
Location: Burbs of De-town
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
As the OP of the Watkins thread, I'm going to sound like I'm contradicting myself a bit here but I actually think it's a bad idea to try and go this route. That pains me to say because I really like the guy as a player and the persona that I see being brought to the table.

1. It will cost us picks/players we need now in the deepest draft in years.
2. We have already proven that a gluttony of WR talent does not translate to winning in the NFL. Strong lines, good/great QB play and a very good/great defense do.
3. I don't think we are quite in the win now mode. Not until Stafford cleans up his game, the secondary can hold it's own and we get a defensive play maker or two.
4. A third premier talent at WR simply doesn't fit the Jim Caldwell profile of offense. They are adding a FB and look to be trying to balance the run/pass ratio which to me lessens the need for a top flight #3 and puts more of an emphasis on a good blocking TE and a center position upgrade all of which require draft picks for us.
5. Even IF you can argue we are in a win now mode, WRs rarely jump out of college and make a significant difference until a few years down the road.

Watkins is the hot chick we are infatuated with that has a fantastic, outgoing personality that everyone wants to bang but not marry. We are better off going the safer route with the girl next door IMO.


April 10th, 2014, 12:07 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1391
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
yostevo wrote:
As the OP of the Watkins thread, I'm going to sound like I'm contradicting myself a bit here but I actually think it's a bad idea to try and go this route. That pains me to say because I really like the guy as a player and the persona that I see being brought to the table.

1. It will cost us picks/players we need now in the deepest draft in years.
2. We have already proven that a gluttony of WR talent does not translate to winning in the NFL. Strong lines, good/great QB play and a very good/great defense do.
3. I don't think we are quite in the win now mode. Not until Stafford cleans up his game, the secondary can hold it's own and we get a defensive play maker or two.
4. A third premier talent at WR simply doesn't fit the Jim Caldwell profile of offense. They are adding a FB and look to be trying to balance the run/pass ratio which to me lessens the need for a top flight #3 and puts more of an emphasis on a good blocking TE and a center position upgrade all of which require draft picks for us.
5. Even IF you can argue we are in a win now mode, WRs rarely jump out of college and make a significant difference until a few years down the road.

Watkins is the hot chick we are infatuated with that has a fantastic, outgoing personality that everyone wants to bang but not marry. We are better off going the safer route with the girl next door IMO.


1. I don't see the large amount of needs the Lions must fill through the draft. The only real things they need on defense is an upgrade at CB and a Sam backer. CBs have even less of a chance to make a difference in their first year than a WR and Watkins is a better talent than any CB in this draft. LBs are found in late rounds pretty often and they may find it easier to fill the spot now that they aren't looking for a 250lbs LB that can do everything and focusing more on a rush guy.

2. The Lions have not put out a gluttony of WR talent on the field since 1995 and that got them to the playoffs. It seems to me they at least have an example of how good it can be. Also Caldwell spent a good amount of time with Harrison and Wayne in Indy as an assistant.

3. The FO already said they are in win now mode and it's one of the main reasons they even looked at Caldwell and Whisenhunt as head coaches.

4. Caldwell came from a passing offense in Indy and Lombardi came from NO. The passing game is going to remain a huge focus even with a FB. NO often mixed in formations using a FB with their other passing formations.

5. I don't think their can be an argument against them being in win now mode. No position other than kicker and punter often make an impact in the first year. It just depends on the qualty of the player and how well their style of play translates. One of the pros of Watkins game is experts feel he is NFL ready, so he's got a better chance than most to make a difference in year one.


April 10th, 2014, 1:43 pm
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: March 11th, 2010, 4:39 pm
Posts: 127
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
I agree with rao's response and respectfully disagree with regularjoe with this to add:

1. If Mayhew can finagle future picks instead of too many of this year's, I'd break the bank for him, especially since IMO there is no doubt the Lions are in win now mode regardless of Stafford coming off a down year (under the instruction of an aggressive OC and "hot headed" HC). We need the picks a little less due to the compensatory picks.

2. Agree with rao but do acknowledge that the Seahawk's strong D put the smack down on Denver's prolific O which may make focusing on Watkins a mistake over focusing on the D

5. Randy Moss (17 tds/1300 yrds), Bill Groman (14/1500) Anquan Boldin (8/1400), Mike Williams (11/964), Marquis Colston (8/1000), were rookies who made an impact in year one.

_________________
Slow is smooth, smooth is steady, steady is fast!


April 10th, 2014, 2:39 pm
Profile
Modmin Dude
User avatar

Joined: December 31st, 2004, 9:55 am
Posts: 12153
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
One thing I haven't seen mentioned here yet is the health of CJ. While he isn't old, he's not young either. He's had problems with his knees for a few years now(I think), can anyone really say how much he has left? He hasn't had much, if any, help when it comes to a consistent WR compliment. The idea of CJ, Tate & Watkins sure sounds nice. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to rest CJ from time to time? Perhaps allow him to stay healthy for a playoff run?

_________________
Quote:
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right....


April 10th, 2014, 2:49 pm
Profile
Heisman Winner
User avatar

Joined: March 28th, 2005, 7:50 pm
Posts: 805
Location: Burbs of De-town
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
rao wrote:
yostevo wrote:
As the OP of the Watkins thread, I'm going to sound like I'm contradicting myself a bit here but I actually think it's a bad idea to try and go this route. That pains me to say because I really like the guy as a player and the persona that I see being brought to the table.

1. It will cost us picks/players we need now in the deepest draft in years.
2. We have already proven that a gluttony of WR talent does not translate to winning in the NFL. Strong lines, good/great QB play and a very good/great defense do.
3. I don't think we are quite in the win now mode. Not until Stafford cleans up his game, the secondary can hold it's own and we get a defensive play maker or two.
4. A third premier talent at WR simply doesn't fit the Jim Caldwell profile of offense. They are adding a FB and look to be trying to balance the run/pass ratio which to me lessens the need for a top flight #3 and puts more of an emphasis on a good blocking TE and a center position upgrade all of which require draft picks for us.
5. Even IF you can argue we are in a win now mode, WRs rarely jump out of college and make a significant difference until a few years down the road.

Watkins is the hot chick we are infatuated with that has a fantastic, outgoing personality that everyone wants to bang but not marry. We are better off going the safer route with the girl next door IMO.


1. I don't see the large amount of needs the Lions must fill through the draft. The only real things they need on defense is an upgrade at CB and a Sam backer. CBs have even less of a chance to make a difference in their first year than a WR and Watkins is a better talent than any CB in this draft. LBs are found in late rounds pretty often and they may find it easier to fill the spot now that they aren't looking for a 250lbs LB that can do everything and focusing more on a rush guy.

2. The Lions have not put out a gluttony of WR talent on the field since 1995 and that got them to the playoffs. It seems to me they at least have an example of how good it can be. Also Caldwell spent a good amount of time with Harrison and Wayne in Indy as an assistant.

3. The FO already said they are in win now mode and it's one of the main reasons they even looked at Caldwell and Whisenhunt as head coaches.

4. Caldwell came from a passing offense in Indy and Lombardi came from NO. The passing game is going to remain a huge focus even with a FB. NO often mixed in formations using a FB with their other passing formations.

5. I don't think their can be an argument against them being in win now mode. No position other than kicker and punter often make an impact in the first year. It just depends on the qualty of the player and how well their style of play translates. One of the pros of Watkins game is experts feel he is NFL ready, so he's got a better chance than most to make a difference in year one.


1. IMO, just because the Lions are ok in most areas doesn't mean they have true playmakers. Defensive playmakers more often than not, are found in early in the draft.
2. Ok, let me rephrase. They have attempted to have a gluttony of talent at WR and have failed but the overriding concern to me is putting so much money and resources into that position in the first place. WRs don't win you championships. Just ask Baltimore, Seattle, New England, NYG, and the New Orleans Saints as of late. Sure they had some nice players but none of them loaded up at WR. They put their picks into the more important positions.
3. We are talking about our FO here. If they knew how to build a winner, we'd have more than one playoff win in the last 50 years. They are going about it wrong if they chase a WR in the first and especially if they move up to get him.
4. If you are talking Caldwell in Indy, you are talking about Peyton Manning and that's not a comparable situation. Let's talk Baltimore as the OC. He had an old Boldin, a young Torrey Smith and a slew of nobodies over the years. Same could be said about Lombardi in NO. No top flight WRs at all and none of them were high draft picks.
5. Even if you feel that we are in a win it all mode now, I can still argue that LBs like Mack or Barr could come in and be an immediate impact type of player on an every down basis more so than your WR3. Watkins could be a great player but you have to put it into the context of your current team. His value is diminished in the role he would play here now and for the next few years. He might replace Calvin down the road in 3-4 years and that's great, but you just made my point. That's not in line with the win now mentality we supposedly have.


April 10th, 2014, 4:34 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3365
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
TheRealWags wrote:
One thing I haven't seen mentioned here yet is the health of CJ. While he isn't old, he's not young either. He's had problems with his knees for a few years now(I think), can anyone really say how much he has left? He hasn't had much, if any, help when it comes to a consistent WR compliment. The idea of CJ, Tate & Watkins sure sounds nice. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to rest CJ from time to time? Perhaps allow him to stay healthy for a playoff run?


My thoughts as well. Though Calvin is still the best WR in the game, he isnt going to last forever. And I think M2K said this before and I agree, I only see a couple more years left before hes not the same player. Watkins isnt just "this years best WR". Hes in the tier of AJ Green and Julio Jones. I think moving up (as long as we dont give up the farm) is a move with both the present and future in mind. The guy has a great worth ethic, great character, he is a complete WR with good size, great speed, great hands and route running. Durability isnt an issue neither. This guy is the complete package.

I dont believe it would take what Washington had to give up neither. Last year, Miami traded a 2nd round pick to Oakland to move from 12 to 3. I think this year with the draft being so deep that should convince the trading partner that each pick is more valuable.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


April 10th, 2014, 5:11 pm
Profile
5th Round Pick - Traded

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 1061
Location: Wolverine, Mi.
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
Initially I thought the whole thing was smoke. But now I find it difficult to believe the Lions would go to these lengths to manufacture a ruse. Or maybe they just want the fan base to believe they are making every effort to improve. Adding Watkins won't necessarily put us over the top, in the play-offs. With that being said, I'm all for making the trade as long as the cost isn't prohibitive. This years 1 and 2, or this years 1 and next years 1, that's only if we're trading with the Rams for the 2nd pick. Do I think this is the smart move? Not necessarily.
Staying put and getting 2 future starters is probably the best medicine. Even if their not immediate plug and play talent. Or better yet, trading back for more opportunities.
For example, the Lions stay put and take the CB Gilbert, then in the 2nd take WR Moncrief, now we have two future starters. Like I said this is just an example. We have no way of knowing who they really like.


April 10th, 2014, 7:32 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1391
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
yostevo wrote:
rao wrote:
yostevo wrote:
As the OP of the Watkins thread, I'm going to sound like I'm contradicting myself a bit here but I actually think it's a bad idea to try and go this route. That pains me to say because I really like the guy as a player and the persona that I see being brought to the table.

1. It will cost us picks/players we need now in the deepest draft in years.
2. We have already proven that a gluttony of WR talent does not translate to winning in the NFL. Strong lines, good/great QB play and a very good/great defense do.
3. I don't think we are quite in the win now mode. Not until Stafford cleans up his game, the secondary can hold it's own and we get a defensive play maker or two.
4. A third premier talent at WR simply doesn't fit the Jim Caldwell profile of offense. They are adding a FB and look to be trying to balance the run/pass ratio which to me lessens the need for a top flight #3 and puts more of an emphasis on a good blocking TE and a center position upgrade all of which require draft picks for us.
5. Even IF you can argue we are in a win now mode, WRs rarely jump out of college and make a significant difference until a few years down the road.

Watkins is the hot chick we are infatuated with that has a fantastic, outgoing personality that everyone wants to bang but not marry. We are better off going the safer route with the girl next door IMO.


1. I don't see the large amount of needs the Lions must fill through the draft. The only real things they need on defense is an upgrade at CB and a Sam backer. CBs have even less of a chance to make a difference in their first year than a WR and Watkins is a better talent than any CB in this draft. LBs are found in late rounds pretty often and they may find it easier to fill the spot now that they aren't looking for a 250lbs LB that can do everything and focusing more on a rush guy.

2. The Lions have not put out a gluttony of WR talent on the field since 1995 and that got them to the playoffs. It seems to me they at least have an example of how good it can be. Also Caldwell spent a good amount of time with Harrison and Wayne in Indy as an assistant.

3. The FO already said they are in win now mode and it's one of the main reasons they even looked at Caldwell and Whisenhunt as head coaches.

4. Caldwell came from a passing offense in Indy and Lombardi came from NO. The passing game is going to remain a huge focus even with a FB. NO often mixed in formations using a FB with their other passing formations.

5. I don't think their can be an argument against them being in win now mode. No position other than kicker and punter often make an impact in the first year. It just depends on the qualty of the player and how well their style of play translates. One of the pros of Watkins game is experts feel he is NFL ready, so he's got a better chance than most to make a difference in year one.


1. IMO, just because the Lions are ok in most areas doesn't mean they have true playmakers. Defensive playmakers more often than not, are found in early in the draft.
2. Ok, let me rephrase. They have attempted to have a gluttony of talent at WR and have failed but the overriding concern to me is putting so much money and resources into that position in the first place. WRs don't win you championships. Just ask Baltimore, Seattle, New England, NYG, and the New Orleans Saints as of late. Sure they had some nice players but none of them loaded up at WR. They put their picks into the more important positions.
3. We are talking about our FO here. If they knew how to build a winner, we'd have more than one playoff win in the last 50 years. They are going about it wrong if they chase a WR in the first and especially if they move up to get him.
4. If you are talking Caldwell in Indy, you are talking about Peyton Manning and that's not a comparable situation. Let's talk Baltimore as the OC. He had an old Boldin, a young Torrey Smith and a slew of nobodies over the years. Same could be said about Lombardi in NO. No top flight WRs at all and none of them were high draft picks.
5. Even if you feel that we are in a win it all mode now, I can still argue that LBs like Mack or Barr could come in and be an immediate impact type of player on an every down basis more so than your WR3. Watkins could be a great player but you have to put it into the context of your current team. His value is diminished in the role he would play here now and for the next few years. He might replace Calvin down the road in 3-4 years and that's great, but you just made my point. That's not in line with the win now mentality we supposedly have.


1. I don't feel they need playmakers on defense if their offense is getting ahead and not going 3 and out in the second half of games. They do have what should be playmakers on the Dline and with just average production from the rest the defense should be able to hold on to leads.

2. Seattle traded for Percy Harvin and paid big money for Sidney Rice. They have made an effort to get more talent at WR and thats even with not running a pass heavy offense. Baltimore had 2 very good WRs and a top level pass catching TE along with another decent WR in Jacoby Jones. New England has Tom Brady and NO had Drew Brees, the Lions on the other hand have Matt Stafford. Stafford is going to make up for his WRs mistakes, so they need to get WRs that can reduce those mistakes and maybe make up for his.

3. What the FO has done previously is irrelevant to whether they are in win now mode or not. No matter what you think about the job they are doing is also irrelevant. They have said they are expecting results now not latter. Lets also be real here and note that win now mode for the Lions is get to the playoffs not win a super bowl. I don't really see how they are badly hurting themselves completing their offense by spending 1 or 2 extra picks.

4. Like I mentioned before the Lions have Stafford, so to make an offense run like it did in Indy or like what Lombardi saw in NO they have to compensate for the lesser QB talent somewhere on offense. They aren't going to turn Stafford into Brees or Manning, but they can put more talent around him to help bail him out with players that can get themselves open for easier throws and better hands to catch his fastballs. The Lions team isn't built like Baltimore it makes no sense for him to try and run the offense like them, but your also forgetting Baltimore had Pitta, Jones, Dickson and that old Boldin had 17 plays over 20+ yards. Boldin may have been old but he was still playing at a high level.

5. With what we know right now your making a leap saying either of those LBs will make a bigger impact than Watkins. Both of those players are for the most part consider lesser talent than Watkins. Mack could be argued to be equal, but he's a small school kid and has very few games against top talent. We really as of yet know nothing about the extent of their need of a rush LB, but we have no indication the Lions won't still be using a above average amount of 3 WR sets. If you also consider the need to give players a breather there are times where the offense will need to still run without CJ on the field, so having Watkins means the Lions will never be without 2 starting quality WRs on the field. Also given the Lions history of injuries at the WR spot it makes even more sense to have another guy that can be a 1b-2a guy like Watkins.

I don't feel the Lions should trade off their whole draft for Watkins and I don't think Mayhew would anyways. If they can trade up for a 2 and a 4 or their 2 and a future pick I think it would be a great value move for the team.


April 10th, 2014, 7:43 pm
Profile
Team MVP
User avatar

Joined: February 20th, 2007, 10:51 pm
Posts: 3365
Location: Saginaw, MI
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
Now heres another question though, as much as I love Watkins, if they trade up to, lets say #2, and Clowney is there..WHAT DO YOU DO? Technically, we need a DE.

_________________
April 22nd, 2010 @ 7:44p.m. "The Detroit Lions select...Ndamukong Suh". Those are some beautiful words.


Lionbacker2 Fantasy Champion 2011


April 10th, 2014, 8:25 pm
Profile
5th Round Pick - Traded

Joined: March 21st, 2005, 2:11 pm
Posts: 1061
Location: Wolverine, Mi.
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
kdsberman wrote:
Now heres another question though, as much as I love Watkins, if they trade up to, lets say #2, and Clowney is there..WHAT DO YOU DO? Technically, we need a DE.



Then the price goes up, as well as the amount of suitors. At that point believe we'd be looking to deal with Jax for their pick.


April 10th, 2014, 8:49 pm
Profile
NFL Veteran

Joined: November 28th, 2007, 12:50 pm
Posts: 1391
Location: Newport Beach, Ca
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
I don't think they would trade until they knew who was there. I couldn't see the Rams making the deal before their pick is up because if Clowney falls to them I think it brings better offers for their pick.


April 10th, 2014, 9:51 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 25th, 2007, 3:20 am
Posts: 2799
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
Mack and Barr are good LB prospects, but people keep mentioning 3rd LB when the 3rd LB has become a 1-2 down player because of pass heavy offenses. You don't draft a 1-2 down player that high in the first round. Are you going to make Tully or Levy a 1-2 down player if you draft one of them? I think one of the corners would be a better pick if they stay put at #10 even though both big name prospects there scare me. Same with safety. neither is worth that high a pick.

The way I see it, if they trade up, it's not going to hurt us. Will we get more picks if we stay put? of course, but there's no guarantee that those picks pan out. It's always a guessing game either way.


April 11th, 2014, 10:49 am
Profile
Pop Warner Vet

Joined: March 11th, 2010, 4:39 pm
Posts: 127
Post Re: Watkins scenario Pros/Cons
I don't get the infatuation with picking CB in the first round. Results are somewhat mixed but usually there is around a 50/50 shot that they can become a pro-bowler and with a couple exceptions not many do that in year 1. So it would be the Lions that would take a 50/50 shot over a much more sure thing. Here is an interesting article on rookie CBs

http://sethbeccard.wordpress.com/2011/0 ... nfl-draft/

_________________
Slow is smooth, smooth is steady, steady is fast!


April 11th, 2014, 12:21 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 45 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.