Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Carr VS Mariota
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Carr vs Mariota
Carr
70%
 70%  [ 33 ]
Mariota
29%
 29%  [ 14 ]
Total Votes : 47

Author Message
Bobikus


Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 9690
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Prescott's been receiving more media hype really, since he was the QB of a playoff bound Cowboy's team. Mariota's been more under the radar because the Titans are just boring and no one talks about them.

Carr's probably asked to do more than the others, yeah. Although I think Tennessee's offense would actually be much better if they played around Mariota more and played more to his strengths.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Breesus mode


Joined: 26 Feb 2014
Posts: 7245
Location: Tucson Arizona
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:

Tom Brady's first few years came vefore the rule changes in 2004, ditto for Brees and Peyton


YPA's inflated a bit less than the other stats. Brady's Y/A+ in his 2nd and 3rd years in the league (not playing his rookie year) were 103 and 90, compared to 94 and 96 for Carr.

Even era-adjusted the numbers aren't too far apart consider Brady was on an SB-winning team that had been in the SB 5 years before he started and their only recent losing season was 5-11 in BB's first year. Carr on the other hand came to a team that was coming off of two straight 4-12 seasons and 11 straight non-winning seasons.

Which ones? Because I find that highly dubious. And regardless, my point was you can't compare Carr's Rookie year to Brady, Brees or Peyton's rookie years considering the rule changes.


For Brady's 2nd and 3rd year in the league vs Carr's (because one played as a rookie and the other didnt):

First row Brady, second row Carr, using prefs' Advanced Passing Stats, which compare a player to the surrounding years
Code:

YPA+ NYPA+ AYPA+ ANYA+ Comp%+ TD%+ INT%+ Sack%+ Rate+
96.5 97.5 103.5 103.5 113.5 108.5 110 98.5 110.5
95  101.5 103.5 108.5   98  110.5 112  117 106


Brady's YPA is slightly higher, and his Comp% is far higher, which leads to a moderately higher Rating. Carr however has a better TD% and INT%, with a much better Sack rate (which isn't put into rating). Their Adjusted YPA is identical.

They're at most within half a standard deviation of each other in every stat except Comp% where Brady is far better and Sack% where Carr is far better.

Therefore, they're statistically very close in their early years when taking into account the change in era.

Huh, didn't know that. Point well made.
_________________
catcheryea wrote:
DalCowboyzRule wrote:
you missed a crying jordan in the middle of your sig man.
you missed a bowl game at the end of your season
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
MrOaktown_56


Joined: 15 Dec 2013
Posts: 8093
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
Prescott's been receiving more media hype really, since he was the QB of a playoff bound Cowboy's team. Mariota's been more under the radar because the Titans are just boring and no one talks about them.

Carr's probably asked to do more than the others, yeah. Although I think Tennessee's offense would actually be much better if they played around Mariota more and played more to his strengths.


Yeah, see I'm not denying that. I'd kinda want to see them all being asked to do similar things before I really can compare them. And it might benefit Prescott and Mariota if that were the case.
_________________
Danand wrote:
Carr is 22-25,no playoff games, I'd take Flacco over him.To me it seems like Flacco is just where he belongs. Behind the Brady, Roethlisberger,Rivers,Rodgers,Wilson and ahead of Carr,Tannehill,Cousins,Palmer,Dalton,Luck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobikus


Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 9690
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Breesus mode


Joined: 26 Feb 2014
Posts: 7245
Location: Tucson Arizona
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC
_________________
catcheryea wrote:
DalCowboyzRule wrote:
you missed a crying jordan in the middle of your sig man.
you missed a bowl game at the end of your season
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bobikus


Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 9690
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 22843
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 4:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.


I am surprised you didn't bring up these two important points:

1. Carr supporting cast has been miles better than what Brady had in his early years. Carr has the best cast in the league.

2. QBs these days are overall putting up better numbers than years past and young QBs are in a more pass friendly league to what somebody like Brady faced.

Therefore Comparing Carr to Brady is just disingenuous.

I think Carr is a good QB but slow down people
_________________


Be Humble. Sit Down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobikus


Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 9690
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

2nd point is moot because the comparison is through a stat that compares to peers of that era.

No QBs that aren't just the starter and backup of the same team have had the same supporting cast, so pretty much every comparison ever made has an implicit error created by that discrepancy. Carr has a better supporting cast on offense, but has been playing with a worse ranked defense. Brady's team may have had worse surrounding players but also had a better coach leading it. His more efficient of the two seasons also had barely over 400 attempts. Also despite the bigger names in the receiving corps for Oakland they've been one of the top teams in drops each of the last two seasons. So not sure how much the bigger talent there has worked to better support in practice.

I really don't see the comparison as like, inherently disingenuous or anything though.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daineraider


Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 6957
Location: Salt Lake City
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.


I am surprised you didn't bring up these two important points:

1. Carr supporting cast has been miles better than what Brady had in his early years. Carr has the best cast in the league.

2. QBs these days are overall putting up better numbers than years past and young QBs are in a more pass friendly league to what somebody like Brady faced.

Therefore Comparing Carr to Brady is just disingenuous.

I think Carr is a good QB but slow down people


Nobody is comparing Carr to Brady. I used Bradys stats as they were very similar thru 3 seasons of playing(although Carr started as a rookie and Brady did not). I made that crystal clear several times during the post and additionally said that Carr isnt even a top 5 QB in the NFL. Reading comprehension goes a long way in a thread like this.

And your first point is Bogus. Carrs supporting cast year one was about as bad as you could ever wish for in the NFL.

RB: Darren McFadden, Maurice Jones-Drew(washed up version)
WR: James Jones, Vincent Brown
WR: Denarius Moore, Andre Holmes
TE: Mychal Rivera, Scott Simonson
LT: Donald Penn
LG: Gabe Jackson(rookie)
C: Stephen Wisnewski
RG: Austin Howard
RT: Menelik Watson

Defense was even worse

Bradys team helped him win a Super Bowl in his first year of playing. As good as Tom is, he wouldnt have been winning a Super Bowl with this roster. His defense consisted of Richard Seymour, Ty Law, Lawyer Milloy, Teddy Bruschi, Mike Vrabel, Willie McGiniest among others

His offense wasnt great, but his Oline was solid. And Terry Glenn and Troy Brown were solid WRs.

The Raiders have improved their roster immensely over the last two seasons, which I will admit has helped Carrs progression. But he wasnt in a good situation year 1. I think this year will show whether or not Carr will take that next step into the top tier of QBs or not. If he progresses again like he has in each of his first 3 seasons we will be talking about where in the top 5 QBs he belongs. Once again, he has a ways to go and needs to show a bit more before I can say he is a top tier QB.
_________________


Joe_is_the_best at making sigs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrOaktown_56


Joined: 15 Dec 2013
Posts: 8093
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 6:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.


I am surprised you didn't bring up these two important points:

1. Carr supporting cast has been miles better than what Brady had in his early years. Carr has the best cast in the league.

2. QBs these days are overall putting up better numbers than years past and young QBs are in a more pass friendly league to what somebody like Brady faced.

Therefore Comparing Carr to Brady is just disingenuous.


I think Carr is a good QB but slow down people


He used era adjusted metrics to show that there isn't a large discrepancy over their first 3 years statistically. All of this was more to show that quarterbacks aren't who they are until they have time to develop over 4-5 years.

No one is suggesting he'll be Brady, or that he hasn't had weapons over the last 2 years.

Carr only had this cast this year as well. The year before, it was good. The year before that, it was bottom of the league.
_________________
Danand wrote:
Carr is 22-25,no playoff games, I'd take Flacco over him.To me it seems like Flacco is just where he belongs. Behind the Brady, Roethlisberger,Rivers,Rodgers,Wilson and ahead of Carr,Tannehill,Cousins,Palmer,Dalton,Luck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 22843
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
2nd point is moot because the comparison is through a stat that compares to peers of that era.

No QBs that aren't just the starter and backup of the same team have had the same supporting cast, so pretty much every comparison ever made has an implicit error created by that discrepancy. Carr has a better supporting cast on offense, but has been playing with a worse ranked defense. Brady's team may have had worse surrounding players but also had a better coach leading it. His more efficient of the two seasons also had barely over 400 attempts. Also despite the bigger names in the receiving corps for Oakland they've been one of the top teams in drops each of the last two seasons. So not sure how much the bigger talent there has worked to better support in practice.

I really don't see the comparison as like, inherently disingenuous or anything though.


Wait are you referring to the pro football reference stats?

If you're gonna compare QBs across eras you're better served doing cross era comparisons which really isn't possible.

I don't see how having a worse defense hurts his stats when if anything it helps him. In terms of winning games? Yes it a big factor but in isolation of QBs it doesn't really have a noticeable impact. Yes they drop the ball which hurts but they're also getting open someway, somehow.
_________________


Be Humble. Sit Down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bobikus


Joined: 07 Jun 2009
Posts: 9690
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 8:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrOaktown_56 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.


I am surprised you didn't bring up these two important points:

1. Carr supporting cast has been miles better than what Brady had in his early years. Carr has the best cast in the league.

2. QBs these days are overall putting up better numbers than years past and young QBs are in a more pass friendly league to what somebody like Brady faced.

Therefore Comparing Carr to Brady is just disingenuous.


I think Carr is a good QB but slow down people


He used era adjusted metrics to show that there isn't a large discrepancy over their first 3 years statistically. All of this was more to show that quarterbacks aren't who they are until they have time to develop over 4-5 years.

No one is suggesting he'll be Brady, or that he hasn't had weapons over the last 2 years.

Carr only had this cast this year as well. The year before, it was good. The year before that, it was bottom of the league.


There always seems to be this thing where like, once a player is a consensus HoF guy, let alone potential GOAT caliber, that it starts to become blasphemous to compare any younger player to them in any way, even if it's just comparing some subset of seasons or a single trait or something, and I really object to that concept. There are young QBs who have had seasons as good as or better than what Brady had early in his career. You can say this without implying that they're going to have a better career than Brady or whatever.

But also I just find the accusation that era wasn't considered to be funny when adjusting for era was the entire point of the discussion that was being responded to.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrOaktown_56


Joined: 15 Dec 2013
Posts: 8093
PostPosted: Mon Jul 17, 2017 9:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
MrOaktown_56 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.


I am surprised you didn't bring up these two important points:

1. Carr supporting cast has been miles better than what Brady had in his early years. Carr has the best cast in the league.

2. QBs these days are overall putting up better numbers than years past and young QBs are in a more pass friendly league to what somebody like Brady faced.

Therefore Comparing Carr to Brady is just disingenuous.


I think Carr is a good QB but slow down people


He used era adjusted metrics to show that there isn't a large discrepancy over their first 3 years statistically. All of this was more to show that quarterbacks aren't who they are until they have time to develop over 4-5 years.

No one is suggesting he'll be Brady, or that he hasn't had weapons over the last 2 years.

Carr only had this cast this year as well. The year before, it was good. The year before that, it was bottom of the league.


There always seems to be this thing where like, once a player is a consensus HoF guy, let alone potential GOAT caliber, that it starts to become blasphemous to compare any younger player to them in any way, even if it's just comparing some subset of seasons or a single trait or something, and I really object to that concept. There are young QBs who have had seasons as good as or better than what Brady had early in his career. You can say this without implying that they're going to have a better career than Brady or whatever.

But also I just find the accusation that era wasn't considered to be funny when adjusting for era was the entire point of the discussion that was being responded to.


Agreed. Reading comprehension is important
_________________
Danand wrote:
Carr is 22-25,no playoff games, I'd take Flacco over him.To me it seems like Flacco is just where he belongs. Behind the Brady, Roethlisberger,Rivers,Rodgers,Wilson and ahead of Carr,Tannehill,Cousins,Palmer,Dalton,Luck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
reckless123


Joined: 02 Jun 2011
Posts: 22843
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Bobikus wrote:
MrOaktown_56 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.


I am surprised you didn't bring up these two important points:

1. Carr supporting cast has been miles better than what Brady had in his early years. Carr has the best cast in the league.

2. QBs these days are overall putting up better numbers than years past and young QBs are in a more pass friendly league to what somebody like Brady faced.

Therefore Comparing Carr to Brady is just disingenuous.


I think Carr is a good QB but slow down people


He used era adjusted metrics to show that there isn't a large discrepancy over their first 3 years statistically. All of this was more to show that quarterbacks aren't who they are until they have time to develop over 4-5 years.

No one is suggesting he'll be Brady, or that he hasn't had weapons over the last 2 years.

Carr only had this cast this year as well. The year before, it was good. The year before that, it was bottom of the league.


There always seems to be this thing where like, once a player is a consensus HoF guy, let alone potential GOAT caliber, that it starts to become blasphemous to compare any younger player to them in any way, even if it's just comparing some subset of seasons or a single trait or something, and I really object to that concept. There are young QBs who have had seasons as good as or better than what Brady had early in his career. You can say this without implying that they're going to have a better career than Brady or whatever.

But also I just find the accusation that era wasn't considered to be funny when adjusting for era was the entire point of the discussion that was being responded to.


Ok so what is the point of the comparison? Like what was the purpose of putting their numbers side by side. I mean wasn't it too long ago Raiders fans were comparing him to A-rod.
_________________


Be Humble. Sit Down.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
daineraider


Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 6957
Location: Salt Lake City
PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 11:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

reckless123 wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
MrOaktown_56 wrote:
reckless123 wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
Breesus mode wrote:
Bobikus wrote:
To be fair including Carr's actual rookie season would drop those numbers by a fair amount. Comparing early years though between someone who played as a rookie and those who didn't kind of complicates comparisons a bit. I'm personally of the belief that a year on the bench is usually better or at least as good in terms of long-term development than throwing a QB out on day one though.

The results for starting vs not starting are pretty mixed IIRC


Yeah, and there's a lot of factors that can really affect that including things like how different the offensive system is compared to what they did in college. Guess the point I was mostly trying to stick with though is that in terms of the stat sheet it's hard to compare a non-rookie first year starting season to a true rookie season. In Carr's case especially his 2nd/3rd seasons are fairly close statistically while 1st season to 2nd is a pretty huge jump.


I am surprised you didn't bring up these two important points:

1. Carr supporting cast has been miles better than what Brady had in his early years. Carr has the best cast in the league.

2. QBs these days are overall putting up better numbers than years past and young QBs are in a more pass friendly league to what somebody like Brady faced.

Therefore Comparing Carr to Brady is just disingenuous.


I think Carr is a good QB but slow down people


He used era adjusted metrics to show that there isn't a large discrepancy over their first 3 years statistically. All of this was more to show that quarterbacks aren't who they are until they have time to develop over 4-5 years.

No one is suggesting he'll be Brady, or that he hasn't had weapons over the last 2 years.

Carr only had this cast this year as well. The year before, it was good. The year before that, it was bottom of the league.


There always seems to be this thing where like, once a player is a consensus HoF guy, let alone potential GOAT caliber, that it starts to become blasphemous to compare any younger player to them in any way, even if it's just comparing some subset of seasons or a single trait or something, and I really object to that concept. There are young QBs who have had seasons as good as or better than what Brady had early in his career. You can say this without implying that they're going to have a better career than Brady or whatever.

But also I just find the accusation that era wasn't considered to be funny when adjusting for era was the entire point of the discussion that was being responded to.


Ok so what is the point of the comparison? Like what was the purpose of putting their numbers side by side. I mean wasn't it too long ago Raiders fans were comparing him to A-rod.


No... Several NFL players and media guys made the comparison. And people said his release was similar to Rodgers, but yes, that must mean we all think he is just as good if not better than Rodgers.

The point of the comparison is to see who his first 3 years compare to. Lots of people saying Carr isn't a franchise QB and so you show comparisons of how ridiculous that is. Its not to say that Carr is Brady or Rodgers(nobody is doing that, but your reading comprehension isn't top knotch based on this thread). He has played 3 years and has a ton of work to do to be considering even close to their level, but it's interesting to see what his first several years look like compared to the best in the game.
_________________


Joe_is_the_best at making sigs
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 11 of 12

 
Jump to:  
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
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group