menu
Logo
dark_mode
Logo
dark_mode
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: OK for CFB player to bet on CFB games?
Page: 2 of 2
cbarber357
General User
C357
Member Since: 9/9/2012
Location: Pickerington, OH
Post Count: 1,262
C357
mail
cbarber357
mail
Posted: 6/15/2026 9:08 PM
Well, Sorsby decided to end all the uproar and declare for the NFL supplemental draft.
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,732
BLSS
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/16/2026 7:49 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
We've gone from "bet on baseball and you're barely ever allowed back in a stadium" to "bet on most of your own games and stay eligible for football" in a relatively short period of time.
We sure have. I was of the mind prior that legalizing gambling would just bring something that was happening anyhow into the light and make it easier to regulate.

I no longer feel that way. It's wild how much sports gambling has grown in a short period and how prevalent gambling is now in the US. Seems like the well's been poisoned very quickly.
It’s always been prevalent, it’s just now legal.

And to the clown that worships every post just wait, restraint on income will come around. Also same clown that told me the negotiated agreement would never take hold. Yeah, suck one. Because it has. If you want to out yourself by responding. Feel free to
Billy, my man, you are genuinely too stupid to follow along on this topic. Over the years, your stance has been completely inconsistent and nonsensical. I'm not sure if it's your regular late night drunken posting sprees that have made you brain mush, or what.

But here is an offer: if you can quote whatever it is you're talking about, and string together three sentences that actually make sense while explaining where I said the negotiated settlement will never take hold, I'll donate $1000 in your name to food insecurity in Southeast Ohio.

All of these conversations are still here. I truly have no idea what you're talking about, and if you knew how to read/had the slightest clue how courts worked, I don't think you'd be trying to take a victory lap.

I look forward to your explanation about how this isn't worth the effort.
Last Edited: 6/16/2026 8:38:16 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,860
BTC
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 6/17/2026 10:38 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
I truly don't know what kind of universe we are living in anymore.

First, not only is it OK to violently attack our US Capitol building, but now our president wants to reward them financially for all the trouble these rioters suffered.

Then, today, a judge grants a college QB eligibility for this season after the NCAA declared him ineligible for betting on college football, including bets on his own team.
How correct you are on both.

Is Texas Tech willing to get de facto booted from the Big12 who is threatening to cancel their league games over this? The SEC has already announced they will honor a boycott of Tech and whatever the SEC decides, the Big Ten will follow. If the ACC didn't want WVU right in their back yard, they sure as heck won't want a scandal ridden tainted Tech.

I know a former Yahoo sportwriter who has been predicting an eventual Big10-SEC super conference forever. If this destroys the Big 12 as we know it, the remaining super conference would happily absorb the best of the B12/ACC leftovers. That is what said writer has been claiming well in advance of this Texas Tech debacle.
The same court will rule against any boycott. The Courts and labor laws run college athletics now. Only way out of this mess is a CBA. The proposed federal law is going NO WHERE and courts will strike it down as well for restraining free trade.
I just texted a NLRB lawyer in the family to see if she has a feeling either way on the restraint of trade angle.

She also happens to be in Texas. (not sure that matters)
So far what I heard back (Quote)

Re: the Big12

It's going to depend on where the suit takes place and what laws if any are applied. The Texas case is being appealed and a higher court might continue the suspension pending the outcome of the case. Personally, it is Texas and you know how they are about football. The court could agree that he has a gambling addiction and only give him a two game suspension.

Other:
A new suit is filed in federal court in San Francisco where two players are suing the NCAA and several conferences for called violations of antitrust among other issues. One plaintiff is at USC and the other is at Stanford.
These cases might provide an impetus for Congress to actually do something and pass some limited anti-trust exemption. However, it'll probably take something even more scandalous to get those turkeys to do anything.
Take for what it’s worth, but from 5 head coaches in basketball and football I am friends with. A Congressional Bill is DOA. No support and fear of lawsuits.

Not my prediction, just passing along.

Personally though, I’m still enjoying those who told me the settlement wasn’t real and would not take place. Just another example of them not having a clue.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,860
BTC
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 6/17/2026 10:39 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
We've gone from "bet on baseball and you're barely ever allowed back in a stadium" to "bet on most of your own games and stay eligible for football" in a relatively short period of time.
We sure have. I was of the mind prior that legalizing gambling would just bring something that was happening anyhow into the light and make it easier to regulate.

I no longer feel that way. It's wild how much sports gambling has grown in a short period and how prevalent gambling is now in the US. Seems like the well's been poisoned very quickly.
It’s always been prevalent, it’s just now legal.

And to the clown that worships every post just wait, restraint on income will come around. Also same clown that told me the negotiated agreement would never take hold. Yeah, suck one. Because it has. If you want to out yourself by responding. Feel free to
Billy, my man, you are genuinely too stupid to follow along on this topic. Over the years, your stance has been completely inconsistent and nonsensical. I'm not sure if it's your regular late night drunken posting sprees that have made you brain mush, or what.

But here is an offer: if you can quote whatever it is you're talking about, and string together three sentences that actually make sense while explaining where I said the negotiated settlement will never take hold, I'll donate $1000 in your name to food insecurity in Southeast Ohio.

All of these conversations are still here. I truly have no idea what you're talking about, and if you knew how to read/had the slightest clue how courts worked, I don't think you'd be trying to take a victory lap.

I look forward to your explanation about how this isn't worth the effort.
No, it’s not, you just like to move the target. And I still say f--- you and your opinion doesn’t matter. I’ve done more and still do more in college athletics than you will ever do. You don’t matter
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,977
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/18/2026 12:41 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Take for what it’s worth, but from 5 head coaches in basketball and football I am friends with. A Congressional Bill is DOA. No support and fear of lawsuits.

Not my prediction, just passing along.

Personally though, I’m still enjoying those who told me the settlement wasn’t real and would not take place. Just another example of them not having a clue.
I understand that this is not your predication and you're just passing on what others have told you, but it's very confusing. Who are the legislators who are afraid of lawsuits? They can't be personally sued for legislation that they pass. And, SCOTUS has already signaled that it's open to at least a limited anti-trust exemption. Again, this is not a matter of constitutional law. It's a matter of statutory law, and Congress is free to amend our anti-trust law any way they want that doesn't run afoul of the constitution, or to completely abolish it. The concept of trust-busting is nowhere in the Constitution. Either way, SCOTUS will almost certainly not interfere. It's the kind of case they routinely refuse to hear, unless a lower court has gone rogue, which these days is a common occurrence.
The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,732
BLSS
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/18/2026 8:52 AM
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
We've gone from "bet on baseball and you're barely ever allowed back in a stadium" to "bet on most of your own games and stay eligible for football" in a relatively short period of time.
We sure have. I was of the mind prior that legalizing gambling would just bring something that was happening anyhow into the light and make it easier to regulate.

I no longer feel that way. It's wild how much sports gambling has grown in a short period and how prevalent gambling is now in the US. Seems like the well's been poisoned very quickly.
It’s always been prevalent, it’s just now legal.

And to the clown that worships every post just wait, restraint on income will come around. Also same clown that told me the negotiated agreement would never take hold. Yeah, suck one. Because it has. If you want to out yourself by responding. Feel free to
Billy, my man, you are genuinely too stupid to follow along on this topic. Over the years, your stance has been completely inconsistent and nonsensical. I'm not sure if it's your regular late night drunken posting sprees that have made you brain mush, or what.

But here is an offer: if you can quote whatever it is you're talking about, and string together three sentences that actually make sense while explaining where I said the negotiated settlement will never take hold, I'll donate $1000 in your name to food insecurity in Southeast Ohio.

All of these conversations are still here. I truly have no idea what you're talking about, and if you knew how to read/had the slightest clue how courts worked, I don't think you'd be trying to take a victory lap.

I look forward to your explanation about how this isn't worth the effort.
No, it’s not, you just like to move the target. And I still say fuck you and your opinion doesn’t matter. I’ve done more and still do more in college athletics than you will ever do. You don’t matter
I don't even know what the target is, because you're not smart enough to use your words to describe it. That's how confident I am betting against your intelligence. I'll happily put up $1000 against the idea that you can, you know, read and string together a full paragraph that makes any sense at all.

But I'm sure you're right. All the posts are just a search away, as is a nice donation to a cause that matters. Go for it, man. Prove your very smart, not at all incoherent point.


And by the way, I think I owe you a a thank you. College athletics is in great shape. Your leadership has been really, really excellent. Good job. The people who have been working in college sports for the last 25 years certainly didn't crash the plane into a side of a mountain or anything. Good job, man. I, for one, am glad we have people in positions of power in college athletics who couldn't pass a 6th Grade Civics exam about the basic workings of the court system. Thank God that never comes up. You've accomplished a lot. You and your colleagues ran an American institution into the ground. That took a truly elite level of obliviousness. Well done. We all owe you a debt of gratitude. Thank you so much for mattering.
bobcatsquared
General User
B
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 5,924
B
mail
bobcatsquared
mail
Posted: 6/18/2026 10:19 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Either way, SCOTUS will almost certainly not interfere. It's the kind of case they routinely refuse to hear, unless a lower court has gone rogue, which these days is a common occurrence.
Another OCF dig against the left, perhaps a little subtle? Despite OCF stating on multiple occassions that he only criticizes the left in reply to a verbal attack against the right?

Are lower courts going rogue more than the current supreme court?
Last Edited: 6/18/2026 10:22:47 AM by bobcatsquared
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,977
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/18/2026 10:57 AM
bobcatsquared wrote:expand_more
Either way, SCOTUS will almost certainly not interfere. It's the kind of case they routinely refuse to hear, unless a lower court has gone rogue, which these days is a common occurrence.
Another OCF dig against the left, perhaps a little subtle? Despite OCF stating on multiple occassions that he only criticizes the left in reply to a verbal attack against the right?

Are lower courts going rogue more than the current supreme court?
Me thinks you are a bit too sensitive. Not necessarily a right or left thing, just an acknowledgment that in some cases district courts have gone rogue. For instance, in immigration cases many district courts have gotten involved when the statutory law specifically states that deportation appeals must start at the court of appeals level. I think some right-leaning district court judges in recent years have also overstepped the bounds of their authority. A good example would be Biden v. Texas (No. 21‑954). In this case SCOTUS ruled that the district court erred in ruling that President Biden lacked the authority to end the so-called "Stay in Mexico" policy. Once SCOTUS remanded this case back to the district court, the district court judge still refused to fully impliment the SCOTUS ruling, leading to further litigation. I think that's a pretty good example of right-wing rogueness.
The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org
giacomo
General User
G
Member Since: 11/20/2007
Post Count: 2,801
G
mail
giacomo
mail
Posted: 6/18/2026 5:08 PM
When I was just a little boy, I asked my mother what lies ahead?
Will there be rainbows day after day on Bobcatattack?
Here's what my mother said:
Que Sera Sera, whatever will be, will be
The future's not ours to see
Que Sera Sera
What will be, will be
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,732
BLSS
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 8:35 AM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Take for what it’s worth, but from 5 head coaches in basketball and football I am friends with. A Congressional Bill is DOA. No support and fear of lawsuits.

Not my prediction, just passing along.

Personally though, I’m still enjoying those who told me the settlement wasn’t real and would not take place. Just another example of them not having a clue.
I understand that this is not your predication and you're just passing on what others have told you, but it's very confusing. Who are the legislators who are afraid of lawsuits? They can't be personally sued for legislation that they pass. And, SCOTUS has already signaled that it's open to at least a limited anti-trust exemption. Again, this is not a matter of constitutional law. It's a matter of statutory law, and Congress is free to amend our anti-trust law any way they want that doesn't run afoul of the constitution, or to completely abolish it. The concept of trust-busting is nowhere in the Constitution. Either way, SCOTUS will almost certainly not interfere. It's the kind of case they routinely refuse to hear, unless a lower court has gone rogue, which these days is a common occurrence.
Billy's knowledge of the legislative process comes entirely from college basketball coaches, who are famously well-versed legal scholars.

I don't actually know the content of the bill going to a vote now; but the major opposition comes from the rich -- the SEC and Big 10. And you're absolutely right that "fear of lawsuits" is a truly dumb explanation. The entire point of congressional action is to create exemptions that make lawsuits less destabilizing. The current state of things -- where the NCAA and college sports leadership do absolutely nothing -- is the reason that policy is being dictated exclusively through lawsuits and court challenges.

It's up to the NCAA to create a policy framework that can withstand legal challenges. Instead, the people on charge are all just crying about how the big, bad court system won't let them have their blatantly illegal business model. The House settlement provides a basic outline that's withstood legal scrutiny, at least.

It may not be this bill, but congress will pass something relatively soon. The only people not convinced of that are the college sports "insiders" who are most responsible for this mess, and who have proven themselves completely incapable of action. Their main motivation is to act like their hands are tied and none of this is their fault, as if someone else had been in charge for the last 3 decades.
FishBates
General User
Member Since: 3/6/2026
Post Count: 265
mail
FishBates
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 6:04 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Prove your very smart
He's probably smart enough to spell YOU'RE correctly.

ROTFLMAO!!
💯👍😎
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,732
BLSS
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 6:35 PM
FishBates wrote:expand_more
Prove your very smart
He's probably smart enough to spell YOU'RE correctly.

ROTFLMAO!!
💯👍😎
You might want to read that sentence again, my man.
Last Edited: 6/19/2026 6:38:20 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,977
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 6:36 PM
FishBates wrote:expand_more
Prove your very smart
He's probably smart enough to spell YOU'RE correctly.

ROTFLMAO!!
💯👍😎
Here I thought you were greencat, but now you're sounding like the SBH grammar police. I looked and BLSS used "you're" correctly numerous times in recent posts, but you pick the one time he messes up. It was clearly a typo, and not an indication that he doesn't know word usage and English grammar. I'm sensitive to this kind of selective "post quote shaming" because I make a number of these dumb errors myself even though I know better.

[In my case these errors are result of a combination of dyslexia, ADHD, and having been the subject of a failed experiment where I learned to read by the "sight method" rather than phonetics.]
The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,732
BLSS
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 6:40 PM
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Prove your very smart
He's probably smart enough to spell YOU'RE correctly.

ROTFLMAO!!
💯👍😎
Here I thought you were greencat, but now you're sounding like the SBH grammar police. I looked and BLSS used "you're" correctly numerous times in recent posts, but you pick the one time he messes up. It was clearly a typo, and not an indication that he doesn't know word usage and English grammar. I'm sensitive to this kind of selective "post quote shaming" because I make a number of these dumb errors myself even though I know better.

[In my case these errors are result of a combination of dyslexia, ADHD, and having been the subject of a failed experiment where I learned to read by the "sight method" rather than phonetics.]
It's actually not incorrect. "Your" is referring to the point -- i.e. Billy's 'very smart, not at all incoherent point.' That sentence is not saying to Billy to prove "you are very smart".

Not the clearest sentence in the world, sure. But Greencat is still, as usual, wrong.
Last Edited: 6/19/2026 6:56:33 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
FishBates
General User
Member Since: 3/6/2026
Post Count: 265
mail
FishBates
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 7:18 PM
Billy told you to f--k off just as I also recently did.

That makes us two for two on putting you in YOUR place.
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,732
BLSS
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 7:24 PM
FishBates wrote:expand_more
Billy told you to f--k off just as I also recently did.

That makes us two for two on putting you in YOUR place.
I hope you enjoyed that hour of feeling smarter than me. I know you've been working towards that for years now. Please don't let the fact that you were wrong distract you from how good it felt. You finally sorta did it, dude. Good job almost.
Last Edited: 6/19/2026 7:25:03 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
FishBates
General User
Member Since: 3/6/2026
Post Count: 265
mail
FishBates
mail
Posted: 6/19/2026 8:42 PM
Truth be told, you are not smarter than a single person on this forum.

Being a horse's ass with an overly high inflated opinion of yourself doesn't make you smart. It just means you are an unrealistic horse's ass. Then again, it worked to get a certain person the gig in the White House. You probably have a hideous combover and orange spray-painted face as well. A perfect match to go with your malignant narcissism.
Last Edited: 6/19/2026 8:56:18 PM by FishBates
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,977
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/20/2026 10:04 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Prove your very smart
He's probably smart enough to spell YOU'RE correctly.

ROTFLMAO!!
💯👍😎
Here I thought you were greencat, but now you're sounding like the SBH grammar police. I looked and BLSS used "you're" correctly numerous times in recent posts, but you pick the one time he messes up. It was clearly a typo, and not an indication that he doesn't know word usage and English grammar. I'm sensitive to this kind of selective "post quote shaming" because I make a number of these dumb errors myself even though I know better.

[In my case these errors are result of a combination of dyslexia, ADHD, and having been the subject of a failed experiment where I learned to read by the "sight method" rather than phonetics.]
It's actually not incorrect. "Your" is referring to the point -- i.e. Billy's 'very smart, not at all incoherent point.' That sentence is not saying to Billy to prove "you are very smart".

Not the clearest sentence in the world, sure. But Greencat is still, as usual, wrong.
+1
The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,860
BTC
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 6/22/2026 8:03 PM
FishBates wrote:expand_more
Truth be told, you are not smarter than a single person on this forum.

Being a horse's ass with an overly high inflated opinion of yourself doesn't make you smart. It just means you are an unrealistic horse's ass. Then again, it worked to get a certain person the gig in the White House. You probably have a hideous combover and orange spray-painted face as well. A perfect match to go with your malignant narcissism.
+1
mid70sbobcat
General User
M70
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 823
M70
mail
mid70sbobcat
mail
Posted: 6/22/2026 10:31 PM
FishBates wrote:expand_more
Truth be told, you are not smarter than a single person on this forum.

Being a horse's ass with an overly high inflated opinion of yourself doesn't make you smart. It just means you are an unrealistic horse's ass. Then again, it worked to get a certain person the gig in the White House. You probably have a hideous combover and orange spray-painted face as well. A perfect match to go with your malignant narcissism.
I can say with certainty you are smarter than at least one person on this forum. After all, you have 2 ID's and one of them must be smarter than the other. Flip a coin to see who wins.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,977
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 6/22/2026 11:24 PM

mid70sbobcat wrote:expand_more
Truth be told, you are not smarter than a single person on this forum.

Being a horse's ass with an overly high inflated opinion of yourself doesn't make you smart. It just means you are an unrealistic horse's ass. Then again, it worked to get a certain person the gig in the White House. You probably have a hideous combover and orange spray-painted face as well. A perfect match to go with your malignant narcissism.


I can say with certainty you are smarter than at least one person on this forum. After all, you have 2 ID's and one of them must be smarter than the other. Flip a coin to see who wins.

a smiley face is laying on its back with the word " delm " written around it

 

 

The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org
100%Cat
General User
Member Since: 1/17/2013
Post Count: 2,763
mail
100%Cat
mail
Posted: 6/23/2026 4:25 PM
Redirect in an effort to get this train back on the tracks...

The NFL has now elected to NOT hold a supplemental draft this year.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/49155214/no-2026-supp...

Sorsby could be stuck in limbo for the upcoming season. The saga deepens!
Last Edited: 6/23/2026 4:25:33 PM by 100%Cat
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,860
BTC
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 6/23/2026 8:36 PM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
Redirect in an effort to get this train back on the tracks...

The NFL has now elected to NOT hold a supplemental draft this year.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/49155214/no-2026-supp...

Sorsby could be stuck in limbo for the upcoming season. The saga deepens!
$20 says lawsuit is coming.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,860
BTC
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 6/23/2026 9:11 PM
100%Cat wrote:expand_more
Redirect in an effort to get this train back on the tracks...

The NFL has now elected to NOT hold a supplemental draft this year.

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/49155214/no-2026-supp...

Sorsby could be stuck in limbo for the upcoming season. The saga deepens!
Well, here is the hint.

Brendan Sorsby's attorney, Jeffrey Kessler, tells ESPN of the NFL's decision to not hold a supplemental draft: "It is a violation of the CBA and the law. We will pursue this immediately with the NFLPA."


What I find funny is there is ZERO in his body of work that he’s draft able without being an addict. Art Schlister needed this agent.
Showing Messages: 26 - 49 of 49
View Other Ohio Football Topics
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
MAC News Links
chevron_left
Saturday, October 17, 2026
chevron_right
Who's Online

There are 143 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

143 Guests