|
Post by silkyice on Apr 8, 2021 9:14:50 GMT -6
If we are going to talk about offensive holding as a spot foul being too punitive and a "drive killer" then I would submit that no defensive fouls should result in an automatic first down. Mark off the yardage and give a first down if it puts the ball past the sticks, otherwise play whatever the remaining yards to gain are, like the change that was made to DPI a few years ago. I agree with this...Almost. It can come back to make it even better for the offense. The very first year the new rule came out, we had a team with 1st and 17. We get DPI. So guess what, they got 1st and 2!!!! We would have much rather that be 1st and 10. So fix that situation and then all is good.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 8, 2021 7:09:02 GMT -6
Offensive Holding being a 10 yd penalty from the LOS when it's committed in the backfield is the one I was going to add to the list. I've seen too many ticky-tack calls behind the play take us from 3rd & 7 to 2nd & 25. It's an absolute drive killer. Yeah, I get that, but on the flip side a 10 yard penalty from LOS (and repeat the down) vs a 7-10 yard loss and loss of down (sack). Doesn't seem like any type of punishment for offense. Much better to just hold than it is give up the sack. Not much incentive to not hold all the time and hope to get away with it. Disagree. 1st and 20 is plenty incentive to not hold. 1st and 27 is just to punitive. I understand what you are saying, but that is after the fact thinking. You get sacked, man, we should have held. Just because you hold, does not mean that you would have given up a sack for sure anyways. Another example is the wing t on buck sweep. Pulling lead guard gets called for holding (of course he really didn't - dang ref - ha). Let's say he is 4 yards in the backfield. It is now 1st and 24. If he doesn't even touch the guy, the hb most likely could have cut up for a 1 yard gain anyways. so 2nd and 9 vs 1st and 24. 2nd and 9 - fine in the wing t. 1st and 24, you aren't converting unless you are just better or get lucky.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 7, 2021 8:18:07 GMT -6
You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Couldn't you say that if the receiving team blocks a kick, that is muffing it? I mean, if you make no distinction as to the side of the neutral zone where touching occurs, a blocked kick is a touch without possession, right? If you don't want it that way, then you'd have to include an understanding as in Rugby Union (kick "charged down") or Rugby League ("rebound" from an opposing kick) with some criterion such as that the ball would have to be rising from the opponent's foot at the time of contact, or that it be a low ball in level flight with no attempt to catch it. I've been saying this since the last century, but don't seem to get any traction with it, and even you are iffy. I think I would make the rule that the kicking team cannot advance a ball behind the neutral zone once they kick or punt it. I would leave the rule past the neutral zone the same with one addition. If the kickers recover a muffed kick past the neutral zone, it has to be beyond the line to gain (first down marker) to get a first down.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 5, 2021 9:30:28 GMT -6
I would like to introduce a more analytical point of view. When you say "start slow" what exactly do you mean? It is one thing to start slow. Being down 31-0 doesn't qualify in my book as a slow start though. Break it down. Do you grade players and evaluate film? If so, how are those grades in the beginning of the game vs other parts? When you say they are "starting slow" are they playing with poor fundamentals, high pad level, no hustle, bad technique, committing mental errors in the beginning but then later on you see good fundamentals, low pad level, high hustle grades, good technique grades and no mental errors? The 31-0 start and then got going had me puzzled also. Did the other team pull their dudes, and y'all just got going against their scrubs? Or was it same kids vs same kids and made a legitimate comeback where winning was an actual possibilty?
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 5, 2021 7:28:59 GMT -6
Try and make practice similar to games. Warmup and then do something competitive with a reward system. Could be just a 5 minute period. Winners get sprints off or something like that.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 4, 2021 20:57:08 GMT -6
I have a very talented team. The only problem is they always start games slow like they are trying to feel out the other team. To the point where one time we were down 31-0 before we could blink. We came back and made it close but it didn’t have to be that way. They also do that during 7v7 tournaments. My question...how do you fix this problem? I like being business like and even keeled and build emotion on the rise. Maybe your team needs to have a pre-game speech or amped music. Other thoughts: how are warmups? I like short and sweet. Maybe they need longer or shorter. Are they getting enough film work of the opposition? Throw a blitz in there early on defense. A trick play in early on offense. Script plays so they know what is coming. Run a fake punt or onside kick early.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 4, 2021 20:41:17 GMT -6
8) By kickers, I mean the entire kicking team. Same for returners. The entire return team. You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Which reminds me of some more rules. 11) Offense can't advance a fumble. If you fumble, the best you can do is recover it. If you fumble, forward and recover or goes out of bounds, it should go back to the spot of the fumble. You should not gain an advantage by messing up - fumbling or getting a kick blocked. I would make an exception for non-contact fumble. Especially the qb dropping a snap or the rb dropping a handoff where the defense wasn't responsible. I guess the best way to describe it would be like catching a kick. Call a dropped a snap or handoff a "muff". Offense can advance a muff. This probably needs to be cleaned up. 12) Change the fumble out of the endzone from a touchback to the offense getting the ball on the 20 (instead of the defense). If it was 4th down, then the defense gets the ball on the 20. I just don't like the fact that if you have the ball on the 5 yard line going in and you fumble to the 1 inch yard line, the offense gets the ball on the 1 inch. But if they fumble and it goes 1 inch in the endzone and out of bounds, the DEFENSE gets it on the 20. Think of that difference, not only 20 yards, but also change of possession just based on a pylon and how the ball bounces. 13) I am actually not crazy about extra points. If you really think about it, those are weird. Not weird because we all grew up with it. TD's 7 points. I am iffy about this one. * & 11 -I guess i get where you're going with the 'mishandle ball' .... IE keep it consistent. 12- what keeps the OFF from just 'fumbing' the ball through the endzone to get a new set of downs and another try from the 20? 13- what's wrong with a 'kick try'?? I'm all for allowing the 'try for point' to be advanced by the defense for a score. I'm kind of up in the air for whether that should be 2 or 6 for the defense..... I could go either way. 12) The down stays the same with my rule. 2nd and goal from the 4. You fumble through the endzone or out the side of the endzone, 3rd and goal from the 20. If you do it on 4th down, the defense now has the ball at the 20 and 1st down.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 4, 2021 19:47:24 GMT -6
1-College Hashes 2-Can throw ball away outside the box - college and NFL rule 3-minimum of 6 refs 4-Loss of down with ineligible downfield 5-I would have changed the cutting rule to immediate cutting in the box, but that is a new rule. 6-Offensive holding is 10 from LOS or downfield. 7-Maybe eliminate kickoff 8-Kickers can't advance a blocked punt or fg 9-If a ball is touched beyond the neutral zone by the returners and is recovered by the kickers (punt or fg), it has to get past the first down marker for the kickers to get a first down. Otherwise, it is still the returners ball. 4th and 30 and you kick a crappy punt that accidentally hits a returner 10 yards down field. Returners still get the ball. 10-Overtime from the 25. Much better than the 10 in high school. I would move the college ot back to the 40 or 50. 1 - hades no 2- oh hades no 3- agree, but we as coaches don't help this AT ALL. We need to actively recruit our graduating players to consider the profession. ANd on top of that quit being such arseholes to them during the games. OH and yeah get the hades out of the box and let them focus on the field. 4- okay that 1 I can get behind.... if they call it 5- as a defensive guy I'm all for cutting anywhere on the field... as long as you don't post&cut/double team 6- ehhh, it's a spot foul all over the field 7- ehhhh, I'm with the hoser from up north Chris Clement .... I would look for more ways to include kicking. It adds to the game. 8- not sure why you exclude the kicker from that situation 9- makes sense 10- to me it's a matter of semantics. If you're looking to make the OT more like the actual game go with the old NFL rule-ish. 1 extra period and then just settle for a tie. Starting at the 10/25/40/50/etc... yard line.... all you're doing is deciding on whether the offense or defense should decide a tie game. I like the list though... 8) By kickers, I mean the entire kicking team. Same for returners. The entire return team. You get a kick blocked, no way you should be able to pick that up and then get a first down. You kicked the ball and lost possession in my opinion. I would actually clean up that rule even more. Did you realize that you can kick a -5 yard punt and go pick it up and run it for a first down? Just a bad rule. In my opinion, once you kick it, you have lost possession and the only team that can benefit is the return team. Of course if the return team muffs it, you should be able to recover. Which reminds me of some more rules. 11) Offense can't advance a fumble. If you fumble, the best you can do is recover it. If you fumble, forward and recover or goes out of bounds, it should go back to the spot of the fumble. You should not gain an advantage by messing up - fumbling or getting a kick blocked. I would make an exception for non-contact fumble. Especially the qb dropping a snap or the rb dropping a handoff where the defense wasn't responsible. I guess the best way to describe it would be like catching a kick. Call a dropped a snap or handoff a "muff". Offense can advance a muff. This probably needs to be cleaned up. 12) Change the fumble out of the endzone from a touchback to the offense getting the ball on the 20 (instead of the defense). If it was 4th down, then the defense gets the ball on the 20. I just don't like the fact that if you have the ball on the 5 yard line going in and you fumble to the 1 inch yard line, the offense gets the ball on the 1 inch. But if they fumble and it goes 1 inch in the endzone and out of bounds, the DEFENSE gets it on the 20. Think of that difference, not only 20 yards, but also change of possession just based on a pylon and how the ball bounces. 13) I am actually not crazy about extra points. If you really think about it, those are weird. Not weird because we all grew up with it. TD's 7 points. I am iffy about this one.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Apr 4, 2021 17:17:47 GMT -6
College Hashes
Can throw ball away outside the box - college and NFL rule
minimum of 6 refs
Loss of down with ineligible downfield
I would have changed the cutting rule to immediate cutting in the box, but that is a new rule.
Offensive holding is 10 from LOS or downfield.
Maybe eliminate kickoff
Kickers can't advance a blocked punt or fg
If a ball is touched beyond the neutral zone by the returners and is recovered by the kickers (punt or fg), it has to get past the first down marker for the kickers to get a first down. Otherwise, it is still the returners ball. 4th and 30 and you kick a crappy punt that accidentally hits a returner 10 yards down field. Returners still get the ball.
Overtime from the 25. Much better than the 10 in high school. I would move the college ot back to the 40 or 50.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Mar 11, 2021 19:58:57 GMT -6
Here is something crazy.
Many "goals" are contradictory.
One example, turnovers/negative plays and explosive plays. We all want to limit turnovers/negative plays and make explosive plays on offense.
But unless you are just better than the other team (which means these stats don't even matter) and can run dive for huge gains, plays called to be explosive carry risks. Whether it is throwing the ball downfield, reverse, option pitches, trick plays, etc.
Same for defense. If you are trying to get a turnover or sack/run stuff, you are inherently more susceptible to giving up an explosive play.
You can't be a bend but don't break defense and an aggressive turnover making defense in the same down.
Just food for thought.
Also, I said this years ago, we I ran trap and belly years ago, it was explosive! Because the dude running it was 6' 235, ran a 4.5 and signed with Nebraska.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Feb 2, 2021 8:55:12 GMT -6
Crazy to add to this....our game field was redone this summer, and we didnt have a season yet. Soccer plays its first home game later today....The company who fixed our field did a great job, and promised they would come back and reset the corners. Our AD called and texted them continually over the last couple of months. Bottom line, they have not came back and set our corners on our new game field. Like I said, there hasnt been a game of any kind on it yet, soccer has first go at it today, we dont play until later this month. So I take my father in law and wife out there yesterday afternoon. My father in law has an engineers mind, is great at Math and figuring things out.....me not so much. Anyway, we find the middle of the field from goal post to goal post. We measure out to corners, we are trying to find the corners on the football field, so the soccer coach can use that to set the soccer field....he is using the the whole 3/4/5 rule and the pythagoreum therum, and it looks good.....we get what we thing is the 4 corners set, measure the width of the field.....perfect 160 feet..... measure the length of the first sideline and we are 10 inches too short. I just dont see how we could have gotten it any better. We were very careful... I am at a loss on what to do. cancel soccer hahahahahahaha
|
|
|
Ethics
Jan 25, 2021 9:50:04 GMT -6
Post by silkyice on Jan 25, 2021 9:50:04 GMT -6
4. when the opponents broke away on a big play, to get in front of a blocker and stop thereby getting a clipping call. Is it any DIFFERENT than getting a charge call in basketball? Yes. Taking a charge is good clean fundamental basketball. You have good defensive position and the offensive guy tries to go through you. Is it any different than a complete bs flop while attempting to take a charge? No. But that is now a penalty in basketball, so...
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jan 5, 2021 14:50:13 GMT -6
I'm along the same line of thinking as the OP, kind of feel the same, but really what's the big deal? I've been on teams that got fitted for rings and we have several hot dog eaters that basically did nothing for the 4 years of their high school career other than do the dynamic warm up, our speed/agility circuit, and then stand on the sidelines and talk for 2 hours. Their rings said the same thing as the 3 year All State starter. This is not necessarily directed at you, but this comment made me think about coaches who don't always show any love to the sandwich eaters. Don't we want buy in from the hot dog eaters though? Should they not have pride in that ring? Do we want buy in only from the kids who can help us? This might not directly apply, but I think it is worth the 2 minute read no matter what. medium.com/kelly-lytle/it-dont-cost-nothing-to-be-nice-a-bear-bryant-story-b28f10c9e1e4Don't forget that one of those people that might not "deserve a ring" but get one, just might help you somehow someday.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 22, 2020 8:59:35 GMT -6
Congrats!!
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 19, 2020 8:48:50 GMT -6
This is going to sound somewhat harsh, but I don't mean it to be. How does this info help you win games? Hey guys, let's get the ball inside their 30 with a first down. I mean, aren't you trying already trying to do that? How does this help you be successful? I just think this is just data or stats. Not necessarily analytics. This is something that I look at during post season breakdown and use it to inform decisions moving into the next season. This also helps me select which games should be the focus of finding our deficiencies in scheme as anything sub 30% is probably a team with kids that would out talent us 9/10 times and anything over the 75% are teams that we would out talent 9/10 times. I also use this when looking at all of the playcall data from the year to see if there are places where I created inefficiencies by relying on certain formations or calls in certain parts of the field. Has very little impact in season, but post season helps guide my iteration process in addition to other data. Good stuff Coach! 100% AGREED!! That was exactly my point.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 17, 2020 12:13:24 GMT -6
Im wanting to look over any stats pertaining to win percentage im just trying to see which elements of the game have significant effect on the outcome, but im not sure entirely where to find these stats. I did a basic google search and found a couple things, but if you know where i can find others please let me know So I've been keeping pretty in depth statistics for my teams the last 3 years. We have not been very good over that time, but the data still shows some interesting trends. Yards per play usually does a good job of telling who won without looing at the score of the game when you compare the two teams. "Scoring Opportunity Creation" is a stat that shows whether we won the football game or not just by looking at it. Bill Connelly defines a scoring opportunity as "a 1st down inside the opponents 40" and obviously if you score from outside that range it is considered a scoring opportunity. In high school I've changed that to inside the 30 as our kickers are not normally as good as collegiate kickers. So, looking at the percent of drives in a game that created a scoring opportunity can you tell me which games we won during this season: Game 1: 8%, Game 2: 82%, Game 3: 22%, Game 4: 22%, Game 5: 27%, Game 6: 44%, Game 7: 56%, Game 8: 18%, Game 9: 10%, Game 10: 55%. Spoiler alert, any game over 50% we won. This is going to sound somewhat harsh, but I don't mean it to be. How does this info help you win games? Hey guys, let's get the ball inside their 30 with a first down. I mean, aren't you trying already trying to do that? How does this help you be successful? I just think this is just data or stats. Not necessarily analytics.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 10, 2020 10:44:31 GMT -6
Our players got to go to the 10, but coaches was still the 25. Honestly, it was still nice though because you didn't have the mass gathering between the 25-30 yard line when we were in the redzone. I've been in favor of extending the zone for years. In smaller stadiums the stands can be pretty close to the bench area. The team can get pretty packed into a relatively small area and can be a safety hazard. Agree here. Why exactly can't we go all the way to the goalline. I mean why is the box not goalline to goalline. Fine if it is just 10 to 10. It used to be 30 to 30 and then got changed to 25 to 25. I literally have no idea why it hasn't been 10 to 10. I somewhat get the reason for not goalline to goalline. I could see where it could be problematic for officials and calling touchdowns, etc. I can see where the media needs a place to be and take pictures or whatever. But 25 to 25 is just stupid.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 8, 2020 7:25:21 GMT -6
COVID sucks!! Coaches box to 10 yard line - AWESOME! Hope this stays. I have argued for this for years and never understood why we were limited to the 25. Made zero sense. No handshakes at end of game sucks and is good at the same time. But the one big win of all this is a pretty freaking great deal. NO PEP RALLIES!! Let’s go!! Huge win!! We can have players to the 10 but coaches still can only go to the 25. Is this a state by state or fed ruling and do have we just misinterpreted it? They have allowed us all the way to the 10 in Alabama.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 7, 2020 22:23:08 GMT -6
COVID sucks!!
Coaches box to 10 yard line - AWESOME! Hope this stays. I have argued for this for years and never understood why we were limited to the 25. Made zero sense.
No handshakes at end of game sucks and is good at the same time.
But the one big win of all this is a pretty freaking great deal.
NO PEP RALLIES!! Let’s go!! Huge win!!
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 5, 2020 13:10:42 GMT -6
Just saw one on film from a playoff game last weekend. Team A is kicking a 20 yard field goal. Kicker shanks his kick and the ball hits the butt of Team A's tackle behind the line of scrimmage. Ball pops up in the air and a member of Team B swats the ball into the ground. His touching of the ball is past the line of scrimmage. Team A recovers after this, but first down awarded to Team B at their own 3 yard line. Was that right? I'm thinking due to the member of the Team B touching the ball it should have been first and goal Team A. But...does the fact the kick touched a member of Team A first negate this? Sorry...not a very easy play to describe... I would say Team A touching first would negate the Team B touch for sure. Also, where did Team B touch? If it was in the expanded neutral zone then that touching is ignored.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Nov 4, 2020 9:25:25 GMT -6
Must have been a "point of emphasis" one year. Love this. I say this every year about "point of emphasis". After a few years they forget that rule even exists.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Oct 28, 2020 17:30:55 GMT -6
I don't believe you're allowed to have a coach in the endzone, even if he's working as the filmer. Might as well put a coach on the chain crew and let him stand on the opponents sideline too About 15 years ago we had a parent working the chains. Apparently he got into a rather spirited discussion with a member of our opponents coaching staff. The officials made the chain crew change over to the home side, and the League passed a rule that from that point on, all chains were kept on the home team's sideline. As far as headsets are concerned, I think that they are only allowed in the box. The coach has to remove them when goes out onto the field. I thought the chains had to be opposite the press box so you could see them on the film. Our sideline is opposite the pressbox, so we get the chains every week.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jul 23, 2020 20:50:21 GMT -6
I think you should have gone up to them coughing into your hand and saying how you don't feel good and then shaking their hands. Then casually mention that you spent the weekend with friends who all tested positive and that you are waiting on your results.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jul 17, 2020 20:00:29 GMT -6
We are not going to change each others minds on this issue. My rationalization is that if you are afraid of becoming infected then it is best for you to just stay home. Why should I have to become a shut-in because people of your mindset choose to be irresponsible? So everyone should be a shut-in? Not understanding your point.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jul 17, 2020 18:48:47 GMT -6
How do we decide that the situation with this virus is driving 70 and not 140? Legitimately, maybe the best thing I have read on the coronavirus response ever.
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jul 13, 2020 17:14:30 GMT -6
Looking to buy a Tek Sled. Anyone have one for sale? Anything better than the Tek Sled?
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jul 10, 2020 16:44:49 GMT -6
True on that he supposes. But there is also no evidence that was NOT the case!! As a matter of fact, there is tons of evidence that the usual case does not receive this treatment. None of the people that I personally know that have had COVID, have received any treatment like this. There is zero doubt that the prevailing medical wisdom is to NOT treat until the symptoms get severe. People have been sent home without this treatment. THAT IS HIS FREAKING POINT!!!! Is there really a debate that early treatment is not better? This is just your personal opinion of a man you don't even know. And has nothing to do whether or not this treatment is effective. But his real point isn't just this treatment, but that we should treat EARLY!!! Everything is in the details of how patients present. In my experience, people who go to an emergency room with several days of wheezing and who have no contraindications will take home bronchodilators and steroids. In fact many doctors are too free with systemic steroids, but this is just a matter of a difference of medical opinion and doctors' attitudes toward patients they expect never to see again; some act irresponsibly and others very conservatively. Although inhaled steroids are pretty safe, when it comes to the early presentations there's always the fear of doing someone harm rather than good. In particular, what if someone turns out to have, not a viral pneumonia, but a bacterial one? (Or both?) Anti-inflammatories have been known to make such cases worse. In an ER situation, where you're not admitting the patient, this is always a serious possibility. It's different if you're seeing your regular patient, and it's different with an inpatient. 2 years ago I had a respiratory infection, waited several days thinking it was just my usual cold -- I get bad ones, I'm asthmatic, sometimes develop sinusitis or bronchitis -- then went to the emergency room, got outpatient treatment. Took drugs for a day, second day after went back and was admitted for a few days. Turned out to be something weird, but as with Covid-19, viral and with no specific treatment. The combination of inpatient and then outpatient steroid treatment did me both good and harm, and I should have used my own judgment sooner toward the end rather than the physician's plan, so had to go back for an emergency. Had I not had my own medical knowledge, I might have died from the treatment. Repeat scenarios like this many times with Covid-19 and I could see doctors killing more with "early treatment" than the disease itself would kill. Early treatment is good if your diagnosis is right and you don't go overboard. In the case of the type of drug Dr. Bartlett's referring to, it's unlikely to do harm once bacterial pneumonia's been ruled out. So the bit about "early treatment" is vapid. Agreed. But aren't we discussing giving this treatment when someone has a confirmed case of COVID?
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jul 10, 2020 12:18:48 GMT -6
See, this is an example of where you can trust me over this politically-connected practicing physician, even though I didn't finish med school. But yet you say something about his ego? Great point and I agree. Absolutely agree. True on that he supposes. But there is also no evidence that was NOT the case!! As a matter of fact, there is tons of evidence that the usual case does not receive this treatment. None of the people that I personally know that have had COVID, have received any treatment like this. There is zero doubt that the prevailing medical wisdom is to NOT treat until the symptoms get severe. People have been sent home without this treatment. THAT IS HIS FREAKING POINT!!!! Is there really a debate that early treatment is not better? This is just your personal opinion of a man you don't even know. And has nothing to do whether or not this treatment is effective. But his real point isn't just this treatment, but that we should treat EARLY!!!
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jul 10, 2020 7:52:15 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Jun 5, 2020 6:36:58 GMT -6
Basically don’t beat up your team during the week. Don’t run old school conditioning drills/runs. Don’t stack back to back high intensity practices. Do less team and less full contact. Give players time to recover so they can go full speed. Sprint a couple a times a week to help develop speed. THIS Being doing this for twenty years. Well except actual "sprinting" in football practice to develop speed. We of course are doing that in the off-season. But, I think they are getting enough sprinting running routes and running through holes full speed, etc. I am a huge minimum effective dose guy.
|
|