Moratoria Part II: Baseball Cliches That Need to Go
Posted by Corey Seidman, Thu, March 11, 2010 02:01 AM | Comments: 29
Posts
When esteemed colleague Michael Baumann sent the Phillies Nation crew an e-mail regarding his then-upcoming panning of baseball cliches, I replied that not only was I looking forward to it very much, but I wish I would’ve thought of the idea myself.
Mike’s article touched on a few phrases that need to go and I’m here to add to the list. Maybe we can even make this an ongoing theme; compile an assortment of every single baseball cliche that has been abused by lazy announcers and chubby sportswriters rushing to finish their article and pick up a free boxed lunch. (Sorry, I had to. “Joe Journalism Degree” sends shots at the common blogger every day of his life, it’s time we stand up and fight back! Even if, at the moment, I am very literally perpetuating a cliche of my own by “living in my mother’s basement” during Spring Break.)
Thus, here is an addendum of baseball cliches that should make us all want to hurl our collective “fists” at Chip Caray.
1) Innings Eater – if you read Phillies Nation or remember any of my previous work, you are well aware of the level of disdain I hold for the term “innings eater.” If you seek an everyday analogy, just think about every time you’ve ever said a fat girl has a pretty face or that a minority is “well-spoken.”
Analogy One applies because, if the girl was ACTUALLY good-looking, you wouldn’t mention her “pretty face” in relation to the rest of her appearance, you would just say she’s attractive, hot, or “bad”, or whatever word you crazy Justin Bieber fans use these days. The same goes for innings eaters; if the pitcher was actually talented or effective, you would just refer to him as a good pitcher, not an innings eater.
Think about it, every good pitcher, naturally, also eats innings. Roy Halladay pitches 200+ per year. Roy Oswalt, too. Do you ever hear them referred to as “innings eaters?” No, that term is reserved for the Jon Garlands, Livan Hernandez’, Steve Trachsels and Kirk Reuters of the world. And, until he morphed into a high K/BB ratio guy, it was also applied to Joe Blanton.
Simply put, “innings eater” is a euphemism for “average pitcher.” It’s a way of putting lipstick on a pig. (Yes, I see the irony in using an actual cliche to analogize a baseball cliche.)
2) “___ plays the game the right way” – the team that most often carries this label is the Minnesota Twins. The general perception is that the Twins bunt, hustle, and field their way to AL Central titles, even though bunting hurts a teams chances of scoring more often than it helps and there is no proof that hustling makes a difference in games played at the highest level.
In 2009, we inexplicably saw this label remain a staple of Minnesota-laden sports journalism, despite the fact that the Twins ranked fourth in the AL in runs scored, fifth in OPS, and fielded a lineup that included four hitters with 28 or more homers.
What is “playing the game the right way?” Diving after balls and sliding into first base? Running flamboyantly so as to avoid being labeled lackadaisical? My brother, Eric, and I discuss this frequently: Carlos Beltran has, in the past, been referred to as a lazy or cocky fielder for the simple reason that he is incredibly athletic and seemingly glides toward fly balls in the outfield.
Contrast Beltran’s style of running to Eric Byrnes or Shane Victorino, two men who make small, quick strides in order to cover ground. Beltran is smoother and thus looks like he cares less. Byrnes and Victorino move differently and exude the aura of “scrappyness.”
3) “Stat X doesn’t matter to me, I know what I see” – the biggest problem I have with the older generation of baseball fans is that many (not all) of them unjustly despise advanced statistics because these stats just-so-happened to come after their time. The most ridiculous misconception is that any “new-age” writer that implements statistics into his/her work is some geek who sits in his bedroom with taped-bridge glasses, jotting down equations all day and talking like a bad imitator of Jerry Lewis.
Nah.
I, for one, love being able to incorporate advanced metrics into my work because it helps prove points that could otherwise be deemed insufficient. It serves as evidence. It aids in reaching a conclusion. It tells a story.
Example: if, during a scorching month of April, you read an article mentioning Raul Ibanez’ notoriously streaky nature and regression to a certain overall slash-line, would you rather hear the writer mention that fact in passing, or have him back it up by showing you Ibanez’ Batting Average on Balls in Play (BABIP) in April in comparison to his previous year’s or career BABIP?
The average BABIP hovers around .300 ever year, so an abnormally high or low BABIP (say, .357 or .243) shows that luck is playing a large part in Player X’s level of performance. Jimmy Rollins, for example, had a very low BABIP of .251 last year. On the mound, Cole Hamels allowed an abnormally high BABIP (.325,) representing the fact that his poor 2009 was, to some extent, due to bad luck.
Which do you prefer, evidence or no evidence?
This is why it is absurd to throw a hissy-fit or generalize statistic-driven scribes negatively. Every time I see the worth of advanced stats disregarded, I cannot help but internally respond with something like, “Okay, 77-year old scout that discovered a diamond in the rough in 1981, I understand the deep affection for your ‘eye test’ practices, but the numbers I’m throwing at you don’t aim to turn a human game into Excel workbooks, they serve as a way to provide an adequate sample size and relevant context to what your very own trusty eyes saw.”
4) Invariably using the closer in the 9th inning - unlike the above three, this is not a textual cliche, it is more a flawed, cliched way of thinking, which dictates that the designated closer MUST appear in the ninth inning of games. The problem with this widely regarded cliche is that nearly every manager refrains from going to his saver in the 7th or 8th inning, even if the heart of the opposing order is due up in that frame.
Does it make more sense to use Heath Bell against Ryan Braun-Prince Fielder-Corey Hart in the 8th, or for Casey McGehee-Craig Counsell-Gregg Zaun in the 9th? The answer should be self-explanatory. Unfortunately for some baseball fans and those fond of good ol’ common sense, it’s not.
97% of closers are not Mariano Rivera; they aren’t sure things in the ninth night-in and night-out. The reason that these men are closers is that, often times, they are the most effective member of the bullpen, they happen to be the best strike-out threat, or they perform at a higher level under pressure than their peers.
Billy Beane has properly valued the closer position as one of pleasantry, not necessity. Under his watch, the Athletics have seen Billy Taylor, Octavio Dotel, and Huston Street, all relatively underwhelming relievers in terms of “stuff,” flourish in Oakland before being sent packing in exchange for players at higher value positions (Street was part of the deal for Matt Holliday, Taylor was traded to the Mets for then-project Jason Isringhausen, who was cheaper, and turned out to be much more dominant than Taylor ever was.)
Since many closers are simply the best reliever on the team, there is no reason they should be specifically linked to the ninth inning if more trouble rests on the horizon in the eighth, or even the seventh inning. Barring LOOGYism and matchup concerns, the percentages dictate that it is best to use your best possible pitcher to combat the other side’s best hitter.
Call me crazy, but I think it makes more sense to have Heath Bell face Braun and Fielder than Edward Mujica.
5) “National Announcer X hates the Phillies”
Joe Buck doesn’t hate the Phillies. Tim McCarver doesn’t hate the Phillies. Neither do Jon Miller or Joe Morgan. Steve Phillips doesn’t. Nor do Eric Karros, Mark Grace, or Joe Simpson.
It seems that nearly every fan in every city feels that every national announcer plays favorites to the other side 100% of the time. I’ll tell you why. Because when something goes against your team, you want and expect the announcer’s tone to be ominous, the way it is during local broadcasts when, in the case of the Phillies, Tom McCarthy and Chris Wheeler don’t omit orgasmic tones when Chipper Jones belts a three-run bomb.
When you’re already annoyed at what just took place, an excited announcer exponentially increases your frustration and causes you to lash out at him, directing your anger at the messenger.
These guys don’t love the other team. They love the story. When Carlos Gonzalez killed the Phillies more and more with each at-bat in the 2009 NLDS, the TBS broadcasters weren’t thinking “Haha, take that Phillies,” they were thinking, “Wow, we’re witnessing history. This guy’s practically hitting .989 this series.”
Don’t take it to heart. We’re right in making fun of Tim McCarver for stating the obvious and attempting to turn every average announcer-line into a cutesy award-winning headline, and we’re right in wondering why Joe Morgan still has a job even though he, ya know, doesn’t seem to do any homework or watch any baseball other than on Sunday nights. But it’s time to give the rest of these guys a break.
That’s all for now, but rest assured that the Phillies Nation crew will be back at it with more played-out references and decision-making models in the future.
This offseason has felt like it’s been four years long, but Opening Day is less than four weeks away. Don’t know about you, but I cannot wait to get past the frivolities and speculation and start talking about meat-and-potatoes baseball once again.
Posts: 0 Malcolm
Great work.
Posted: 03:41 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Heather
Re: #3, I think you’re missing the point. When people say, “I don’t care about stat X, I know what I see,” they’re often taking the point contrary to what the stats indicate. You seem to think that when people say that, the stats will always support their assertion.
However, I really think people get too wound up about stats-haters. It’s all about knowing your audience. I wouldn’t talk to my 14 year old cousin about the relative merits of the Pinot Noir versus the Merlot. I wouldn’t talk to my dad about my interest in needlepoint. If I try to engage someone in a statistical conversation who has no interest in it, I am not respecting my audience.
(Let me just caveat that by saying I think stats are fair game on a baseball website…just not always appropriate in conversation about baseball depending on the audience.)
Posted: 06:28 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 bfo_33
Agree with all but the innings eater. I think it is more than a euphemism for average pitchers. They may have average stuff (usually have a record just north of 0.500), but they throw 200 innings or more a year, never visit the DL, and tend to go deep into a game, saving the bullpen for the next day. Hernandez is a great example. Until lately, rarely gets knocked out before the the 6th inning.
Jim Edmunds and Andruw Jones is another example of a guy who “played the right way”vs “lazy fielder. 2 of the best centerfielders of the 90′s, early 00′s, but Edmunds made every catch look like a circus catch (Victorino type), while Jones was always in the right poisition, took great lines, made the same play without breathing heavy. Edmunds was more exciting to watch, but I’d take Jones first.
Posted: 07:08 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Brooks
Corey, I do agree with your assessment on a few of these items.
Innings eater – what a crock. Almost as goofy or meaningless as “Quality Start” (the euphemism for lasting 6 innings or more, giving up 3 runs or less). True, this is a term that would describe what a team would want out of a #3, 4 or if lucky a #5 starter!
Plays the game the right way – one name – Bobby Abreu. Perhaps someone who is lazy, does not want to “give it up” for his team should be termed an “Abreu”?
Modern stats – they are the bomb. It may require more wheat germ (and less beer) to figure the stats out but they do not lie.
Item 4 – Invariably using the closer in the 9th. Not always true that this would be your best relief pitcher. I believe that the most effective pitcher should be considered, determined by the circumstance. If you have a kid throwing near 100 mph for 6 to 8 innings and in the 9th put a Jamie Moyer in to close the game, well you probably get my drift. Mixing it up – which might entail closing by committee. No one has a Rivera. A Lidge (08 version) comes along only in dreams or in 09, a nightmare.
And finally, the National Announcer Hates the Phillies. Corey, you heard the games as well as I did. Didn’t you feel that every occasion of a Dodger on base was a sure comeback or a “rally in the making”? It was sickening to listen to. Call it home team pride, that’s fine. But, the fact is – the Phils looked and played better than the Rockies and demoralized the Dodgers once again.
Here’s one that a few of us remember fondly – “He looks runnerish..”
Posted: 07:27 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 You Should Talk » Name Reverse search
[...] Moratoria Part II: Baseball Cliches That Need to Go | Phillies Nation [...]
Posted: 07:45 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 WFC010
I quite like all sorts of stats, but I also know better than to take every stat I read as 100% gospel. While stats can be a great reference points for what to expect, they are not foolproof and should not be thought of as such. They are a great help in figuring out what kind of player you have on your hands, but certain things can never be represented in the stats.
Posted: 08:06 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 The Dipsy
Great work, fellas. By the way, are these articles doubling as your Masters’ thesis (es) (es) whatever.?
I’ll tell ya why “innings eaters” are effective and good. A guy that can pitch effectively, I said “effectively”, into the seventh inning is a real advantage because it keeps you away from your middle relievers, which is generally dreck (SEE: CONTRERAS, Jose). I have always said that hitters should take more pitches so they can run the pitcher’s pitch count up, so they can get into the bullpen faster. Its almost like that old NBA maxim that “the first team to a 100 almost always wins the game”. I would apply the same theory to the first team to get into the others teams crappy bullpen.
Sabremetrics: Alright. Ya gotta point. These stats CAN explain what we previously didn’t know or understand about the game. In that sense it is good. But what Bill James, and his progeny, have done is seemingly reduce the game to nothing BUT numbers. That part is a turn off to many. I know baseball is a game of stats, but Sabremetrics is very close, if not already there, to reducing the game to a series of numbers and calculations. Its not that people think the numbers are wrong its just that many regard the majority of the numbers as minutia that just make your head hurt. Simply put, I think most fans like the numbers in moderation, but when you play the “deep cuts” (record industry term), eyes start to glaze over.
When you can think of a better phrase to describe a guy that plays the gam the right way that “that guy plays the game the right way”, I will be happy to start using it. There are some guys that: hit behind runners, always throw to the right cutoff man, get the run in no matter what he has to do, etc. And some guys who don’t. Chase Utley is an example. Shane Victorino, while very talented, not so much. What she would say in the future to differentiate between the two?
Once again, Mike and Corey, excellent work. Keep the beat movin my young friends. I hereby dub thee the “Archimedes Twins”.
The Dipsy
Posted: 08:18 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Heather
Also, re: #5, I don’t think any (or at least very few) national baseball announcers HATE the Phillies; however, I think they are biased in favor of teams that have national audiences and followings, such as the Red Sox, Yankees, etc. Why? Because those teams will draw the largest audiences for a national telecast. So while it’s going a little far to say I think the broadcasters HATE the Phillies, I think they are more biased towards the teams they feel will garner the biggest audience. Some of the time, that’s the Phillies, most of the time, it’s not.
Posted: 08:19 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Chuck
Ok….here’s my quick two cents on all of this:
#1) I HAVE heard Roy Halladay called an”innings eater”. And he’s FAR from average.
#2) Just because Shane Victorino exudes “scrappyness” doesn’t mean he always “plays the game the right way”. I’ve seen him do LOTS of dumb things out there.
#3) Stats. There are great. They are useful. I like them and appreciate them. BUT…….sometimes “what I see” is really all I need.
#4) It’s just the way it is. “Closers” have a defined role, just like “set-up guys” and “middle-relievers”. Everyone should know they’re role and be comfortable with it. MAYBE you sometimes see your closer being asked to get 2 out or 4 out saves, but otherwise it’s important to have defined roles.
#5) You can’t deny that in 2008 Fox Sports was pretty much rooting for the Rays to win. They didn’t come out and actually SAY that, but you just knew that they were on the “Cinderella story bandwagon.”
Posted: 08:48 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 George
I think that Brooks is being a little harsh in his assessment of Abreu. He doesn’t like walls, but other than that, I think anyone who’s been around as long as he has, with the kind of stats he’s still capable of, is anything but lazy.
I’ll take BOTH sides in the “national announcer” thing. Many times the announcer has to have ratings in mind, or he’ll be canned by the network. This sometimes involves playing up the underdog and being overly dramatic when there’s a scoring threat. At the same time, some of their comments smack of hostility toward a given team, player, or manager. We’ve all heard this; it’s not so much what is said, but the inflections of voice when it’s said.
As far as closers pitching in other situations, it’s been tried, and usually found wanting, for whatever reason. “Closer by committee” has been a failure in almost every case, and in tie games, when the closer has been brought in to pitch the ninth against top hitters, the game is lost in the tenth because some lesser reliever gives up a hit to a bench warmer. Ninth inning closers have evolved; years ago the relief specialist sometimes pitched three innings. This was too much, so setup men came along, then lefty specialists, righty specialists, etc. While makes sense on the surface to have your best guy pitch to their best guys, in practice it doesn’t seem to always work. Setup men (remember last year’s Madson?) don’t always do well in the ninth, even against Craig Counsel.
“Innings eater” is not only a useless description of “average,” but has been so overused it’s definitely a cliche, and should be banished from the baseball lexicon. Call a guy “decent,” “adequate,” “fourth starter,” or even “healthy,” but heaven forbid, don’t call him “innings eater.” Same for “plays the right way,” If he didn’t, he’d be in an independent league, the restricted list, or jail.
Stats are fine, but stats are flawed. The “advanced metrics” (Pecota, Chone, whatever) don’t always entirely agree with each other. They also make boring reading for a lot of people. Even though I can see their value in presenting a clearer picture of the usual stats, I don’t enjoy reading the explanations of just what they’re indicating or how they’re indicating it. Generally, when you watch a player, it’ll soon be obvious whether he’s good or not, why he bats second or third or eighth, or why he starts or relieves.
Posted: 09:00 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 George
One other thought on closers (and I hope I don’t skip over too many words like I did in my last post):
There is probably a psychological thing going when a team has a really effective closer. Braun, Fielder, and Hart might be pressing more in the eighth because they know that the bottom of the order guys don’t stand a chance against a Trevor Hoffman, a K-Rod (sorry about that “cliche” nickname, but that’s what people call him) or an ’08 Lidge. If the batters are trying too hard to get something done, it probably gives that second tier setup guy a big advantage. Confidence–or its lack–definitely plays a part in any game.
Posted: 09:28 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Chuck
“K-Rod”
Yeah, THAT’S what he’s called. Just like “A-Rod” and “Dice-K”
Are we maybe nitpicking too much here??
——
George, good point about the “psychological” effect of certain closers. And it can go the other way, too….just ask Jonathon Broxton about that.
Posted: 09:37 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 chitown Philly Fan
Good article, I do have one comment to make on the announcers, specifically Joe Buck. As far as the alleged anti Philly bias, I def think thats false, my problem with him is the fact that he does NOT seem to enjoy the story or his job for that matter. If you go back and listen to his call of the David Tyree catch in SB 42, its like he’s reading a eulogy at a funeral….just awful. You witnessed one of the greatest plays in SB history, and you cant get excited for that!?!? Furthermore, he’s gone on record saying that does not like commentating games anymore cause they are too long….which maybe he is right, but think about what his job is…he gets paid to watch sports and talk about it while its happening….I am pretty sure most people would kill for that job
Posted: 10:16 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Don M
I can’t wait to see tomrw’s list of things we hate !!!
..
I think that “_______ plays the game the right way” is legit..
Guys that do the small things (“Professional hitters”), etc.. they “play the game the right way”
Among the reasons, I really am not a big Shane Victorino fan.. is that he doesn’t do things for the good of the team. He’s arguably the fastest player on the roster.. yet he never bunts .. which could either move a runner up.. or just to bunt for a hit, to have the corner infielders be on their toes a little more.. open up some room for him to hit one through..
We would all say that Utley, Derek Jeter, etc play the game the right way
…
somebody mentioned it before, but there is no secret that FOX wanted Dodgers-Red Sox as the World Series, because it was a much more interesting story than Phillies-Rays. Can’t say I blame them… since sports (and the personal lives of athletes) has become a 24-7 Drama series, etc.. they wanted to see Manny vs. Boston …..more than they wanted to see the two best teams of 2008.
Joe Buck has said before.. he’s a Cardinals fan.. and while I don’t think he has a true routing interest in any other team.. I can’t help but think he wants the biggest story, and the most eyes on him.. so to a degree.. #5 would be marked TRUE on a test
Posted: 10:17 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Chuck
And last year , FOX was salivating over the idea of a Yankees-Dodgers match-up. Who could argue that or even say that they were wrong for wanting it?
I’m not a big Joe Buck fan…..but, to be fair to him, just because he doesn’t “get excited” for certain plays in whatever game he’s doing….that doesn’t translate into him being a TERRIBLE announcer. Because he doesn’t have a “true routing interest” simply means that he’s REPORTING what he’s seeing. It’s really no different than a professional news journalist reporting on whatever story he/her is reporting on.
Posted: 10:52 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Clem Clines
Interesting article, Nice job.. However, I enjoy those baseball cliches. Warms the heart in cold weather.
Posted: 11:05 AM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 RichieAllen
I disagree with #5…Joe Buck and Mccarver DO Hate the Phils ..I’ve heard it with my own 2 ears in the postseason.
Posted: 02:11 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 RichieAllen
Wait ,Hold on,….Last year Buck and Mccarver really were not too bad.
It was the year before that their comments were definately biased .
A lot of people noticed this .Even in the comments to this thread at the time.
Maybe somebody got to them.Last year was different for sure.
Posted: 02:34 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 305 Corey Seidman
To those mentioning Joe Buck’s excitement level, Bill Simmons wrote a very interesting take on this several weeks ago.
I’m paraphrasing, but he wrote that there are three types of announcers:
1) Gus Johnson – the type who gets overly excited about every big play, acting like a super-fan
2) Joe Buck – the type that rarely gets excited for anything, tries not to sway one way or the other, attempts to be bias-free
3) Jim Nantz – the type that mixes those two; doesn’t pick a side but will “get up” and raise his octaves for a big play.
Just thought it was worth mentioning.
Posted: 02:39 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 George
Too many people here seem to think that Victorino doesn’t “play the game the right way.” I’ll grant that he makes mistakes, (so does every other player) but just because he doesn’t bunt as often as a particular fan thinks he should means nothing. A sacrifice is always called by the manager. Some players can’t master the art of bunting for a hit. Victorino’s bunting skills are probably one of the reasons Polanco will be batting second.
By the kind of standards some people are spouting, Rollins isn’t playing the game the right way either, because he, too, doesn’t bunt all that often, and has a really crappy OBP in the bargain, or that Ryan Howard plays the game wrong because he’s bad at throwing to second and strikes out a lot, or that Utley doesn’t play right because he made some bad throws in the ’09 post season.
Victorino is a .290 hitter, a gold glove winner, has tied and won important games, makes very few errors in the outfield despite not always taking the best route to the ball, and appears to be giving every play his best effort. In what way is that playing the game wrong?
Posted: 03:19 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Georgie
Well, Joe Buck, in his attempt to be “bias-free”, is very BORING when he announces baseball. It is so obvious that he is not a big baseball fan, and that’s my problem with him. As we were saying on a gameday thread, maybe back in ’08, there are tons of people who would LOVE to be given the chance to work in the broadcast booth, why have someone there who doesn’t even enjoy the game?
I agree with those of you who said the national tv announcers are just looking for the largest market teams to make the playoffs, it’s all about the ratings and, ultimately, the bucks (not Joe).
Ahhh, statistics, stats, sabremetrics, sis boom baa…… as one of the “older” fans here, I’ll admit I don’t get heavily into alot of the newer stuff, but I’m not going to criticize you young-uns for doing it. If an article or comment gets too stat-happy for me, I’ll just skip it :-0
Posted: 03:32 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 beta sigma shag
I have to totaly disagree with your stats argument, many of these new stats are made up to prove a certin point. Really bat avg on balls in play. and luck, yes luck does play a part in every competition, but it does not make or break a guys seaon, just like on base plus slugging percentage is another joke of a stat. I know I will killed for this, but most of there hyper metric numbers are like any other stat, you can use them for any reason to back up your argument
Posted: 04:09 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 305 Corey Seidman
Please explain to me how OPS is a joke of a stat.
Posted: 04:27 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 AM
“National Announcer X hates the Phillies” is my favorite on the list.
Posted: 06:55 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 Star Trek Forever!
[...] Moratoria Part II: Baseball Cliches That Need to Go | Phillies Nation [...]
Posted: 10:39 PM on March 11, 2010
Posts: 0 SS1530
I agree with everything in the post except that Joe Buck does not hate the Phillies. Technically, he just hates the city of Philadelphia. Since sports are a representation of the city, he hates all sports teams from Philadelphia. His emphatic “and the Phillies have won the world series,” or any of his off-color comments during an Eagles game are enough evidence of this. You just don’t get that bias from other PROFESSIONAL play-by-play broadcasters.
Posted: 12:38 PM on March 12, 2010
Posts: 0 Keith E
ZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!!!
GO PHILS!!!
Posted: 05:30 PM on March 12, 2010
Posts: 0 Aracely Feery
Live girls online here to please you. With so many different sites out there try out this one.Iamamcamgirl. be sure to come by as often as possible.
Posted: 06:54 PM on March 17, 2010
Posts: 0 Tiesha Hidden
hi,The Motive of your blog is very fit to me, I hope more alternate with you this Subject.
Posted: 06:27 PM on July 1, 2010