Summing Up The Parts Of The Offensive Line
by Kevin HD on Jul 14, 2009 9:34 AM EDT
in Football
60 comments
Where it all starts, as they say.
A large part of Penn State's success last year was the result of a very solid o-line. Kinlaw took the majority of the carries in '07 and averaged 5.5 ypc; Royster was able to improve on that by a full yard last year. Now no one thing can be credited for any single improvement, but it didn't hurt that three Penn State lineman made the All-Big Ten, with a fourth on the second team.
Wisniewski comes back from the second team but is moving over the replace one of the best centers in the nation last year. And with one of this seasons buzz stats offensive line starts returning, it might appear on the surface troubling that Penn State is bringing back a league worst 39 starts.
But this is of course a stupid stat with no context.
So Steele comes to the rescue, kind of. He listed his projected first four all-conference teams, and to arbitrarily score what he thinks of the Big Ten's upcoming offensive lines, I've scored them like so: a first team lineman gets you four points, second team three points, ect.
| Team | Points | Players |
| Penn State | 10 | 3 |
| Iowa | 7 | 2 |
| Wisconsin | 7 | 3 |
| Ohio State | 6 | 2 |
| Michigan State | 5 | 2 |
| Illinois | 5 | 2 |
| Minnesota | 3 | 2 |
| Indiana | 3 | 2 |
| Michigan | 3 | 1 |
| Purdue | 1 | 1 |
| Northwestern | 0 | 0 |
So there are potentially non-scrubs taking over, which helps us rationalize Penn State as the most inexperienced line in the conference. Wisniewski, Landolt and Eliades are all expected to be very good at what they do.
But, it gets a little more interesting and a little less optimistic as the pages turn. Steele then goes on to rank the lines as a whole, unfortunately without explanation, and claims Iowa as the best of the group (7 points above), Michigan the runner-up (3), and later Penn State (10), Illinois (5), and Indiana (3) all tied for sixth.
So what gives? The two other projected starters, Stankiewitch and Pannell, are young (redshirt freshman and sophomore, respectively), but both come in extremely large and with three starts from the services. They also have three full games to get their stuff together and are surrounded by what Steele calls the best group of three linemen in the Big Ten. However to "score" Penn State a pretty distinctive (although admittedly highly un-scientific) first based on personnel but sixth based on overall skill means he must be highly discounting these two young players, which, I'm not sure I fully understand. I guess no experience means little to go on, but it appears the optimists have reason to express themselves.
0 recs |
60 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
seems like taking the long way to say
we have an inexperienced, but potentially very talented Offensive line. I do believe games are won and lost in the trenches though.
The secondary and O-line had better be eating their Wheaties. Here’s hoping they grow up quick.
by NittanySeaLion on Jul 14, 2009 9:40 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I’m getting jealous of all the vintage RR is getting up. But point taken.
Order your copy of "We Are Penn State" The offseason is long. So is this magazine.
by Kevin HD on Jul 14, 2009 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I actually like it
You can see Walker Lee Ashley getting ready to sack Marino/crush Pitt’s RB.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 14, 2009 10:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
We'll play switcharoo
Order your copy of "We Are Penn State" The offseason is long. So is this magazine.
by Kevin HD on Jul 14, 2009 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pannell will be fine
he’s got some experience and he’s well built. I’m more worried about the youth at Stank’s guard position. Hopefully Eliades will stay healthy also. Having a good center like Wiz can really help a young OL though.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
by psuphiman80 on Jul 14, 2009 9:55 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Pannell's a sophomore
because he actually got PT as a true freshman. There’s only one guy on the line with absolutely NO experience. Wiz was 2nd team All Big Ten last year as a sophomore, and Landolt barely missed with honorable mention. If we didn’t get spoiled by last year’s line, nobody would be worried.
Steele has Michigan’s line 2nd? OK.
by WorldBFat on Jul 14, 2009 10:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
KHD, why are so many...
“gurus” tossing around starts as the end all be all in determining success?
Why are starts so important? Wouldn’t # of snaps be a more useful stat for determining experience? Why is the first snap of the game the only playing time that matters in the stat of the day?
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
by rahpsu92 on Jul 14, 2009 10:20 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
My guess?
It’s a lot easier to count. Doing snaps would be much more interesting, but also much more time consuming. Even snaps, though, has it’s problems because quality snaps are a lot different than 4th quarter Temple snaps.
This seems to really be catching steam this summer, maybe in part because even the WSJ is talking about it, but like most numbers in football they don’t really mean much by themselves.
Order your copy of "We Are Penn State" The offseason is long. So is this magazine.
by Kevin HD on Jul 14, 2009 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
But even Temple snaps
are real game experience against live bodies.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
by rahpsu92 on Jul 14, 2009 10:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
# snaps would probably be pretty relevant
but as someone said, 4th quarter “junk” time is barely more meaningful than practice time. Also, the other problem with # snaps (and especially # starts) is that I’d still take Penn State’s inexperienced O-line over plenty of other teams “experienced” O-lines (Indiana, anyone?). If there was a way to track it, perhaps # snaps vs other team’s starting line would be the most relevant. You cut out the effects of junk time, and see how many snaps a guy has against D1 starters (yes, just like everything else, I think 1-AA should be neglected).
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 14, 2009 1:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
The best way to do it is to come up with some sort of criteria for “quality” snaps i.e. all first half snaps, during 3rd quarter if deficit/advantage < 29 pts, 4th quarter <22. Obviously you need to run some sort of statistical analysis to come up with the exact cutoff points.
There has been a lot of headway made over the past couple years with football stat. analysis due in large part to football outsiders. Its definitely going to continue to evolve and become more predicting.
http://sportinvestments.blogspot.com
by HolyBuckeye on Jul 14, 2009 3:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Stats
We’re way overdue for someone to come up with a set of useful stats for an offensive lineman.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
by BSD on Jul 14, 2009 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Off on a tangent...
How about a points system? One point if a lineman is on the field for a play that results in a net yardage gain, two points if they’re in on a scoring play, minus one if the play results in negative yardage, so on and so forth… You’d have to normalize the results in some way to account for the fact that one team’s skill players are better than another’s, but I’m thinking it would be a start.
Any statisticians (either football statisticians or the mathy kind) among us who could speak to the viability of this?
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 14, 2009 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure
about the results oriented look of the entire offense. I like the point system (plus/minus or whatever you want to call it) but it would need more isolation.
For an offensive lineman, the fact of scoring is in some ways an uncontrollable circumstance. Same can be said for net result. If the line breaks down and someone gets into the backfield, but Clark avoids the rush and gains an inch, why does that get the same credit as pushing the line 8 yards down field before the running back is touched? And why would that same circumstance get double credit because the team is on the one inch line instead of the 50? You would need some way to isolate the individual lineman and his assignment. Like plus one for nailing down at the point of attack, or for a tackle pushing the end upfield and out of the play. Minus one for getting beat (although getting beat might need to be weighted heavier, because it should happen much more rarely).
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 14, 2009 11:52 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
exactly, you have to reward then linemen for their completing their assignment, which is very difficult.
"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.
by millzners on Jul 14, 2009 11:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
Each play would be a series of +/- for both teams. You’d have to figure out how to reward the OL and RB’s for a 4 yard run. Did the OL block well or did the RB just make a great play and make a couple people miss? Also, how do you grade a team on a play that is more a result of deception and execution (i.e. Zach Mills type PA bootleg)?
by Screen Name 20 on Jul 14, 2009 12:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep
The problem is that you have to figure out a way to rate the offense as a whole, apply it only to the linemen who were on the field at the time, but then take the skill players out of the equation.
If it were easy, it would have already been done.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 14, 2009 12:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was just offering food for thought
Honestly, I just wanted to get a little discussion going.
I was thinking about the example of a minimal gain on a blown play counting the same as a 90-yard gain where the ball carrier is brought down just outside the end zone, but no system is going to be perfect, and if you keep the system simple enough, it seems (to me, anyway) that things like that would average out over a large number of snaps and the end result would have more meaning.
It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times?!?! You stupid monkey!
by leeharvey418 on Jul 14, 2009 12:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it's a good system
But it sounds more geared to the offense as a whole. Give the offense a score based on outcome.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 14, 2009 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's probably more advanced stats for OL
but it’s probably tough to correlate them to success. In football there are many relationships at any time on one particular play (i.e. LT vs. DE, RG vs. DT, WR vs. DB, etc) where as in other sports with advanced stats (such as baseball) it can easily be broken down into groups of one vs. one relationships. For example, the pitcher vs. the batter, then if the batter hits the ball, the batted ball vs. fielder.
Baseball has some advanced stats, such as Win Probability Added, which looks at the added/subtracted value of a play to the team’s chance of winning. Baseball is much easier to accomplish something like this as you’re usually dealing with one on one situations where a play is only dependent on a few relationships (i.e. Pitcher vs. Batter; or when a batter hits the ball, batted ball vs. fielder).
To make a long story short, I’d imagine it be time consuming to come up with OL stats and even if you had them it’d be difficult to correlate those stats (the result of the relationship (i.e. LT vs. DE) has on the play) to the end result of the game when there are many other factors (relationships) involved.
by Screen Name 20 on Jul 14, 2009 11:55 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Indeed.
I think this has no relevance on winning percentage. I remember Dick Vermeil stating that they looked hundreds of statistics, and the only statistic that clearly affected winning percentage was net turnovers. Everything else was largely irrelevant.
A scatterchart proves this.
All 119 FBS schools have been plotted. PSU highlighted in red.
by Cairo on Jul 14, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you can correlate OL play to net turnovers, maybe you can create a viable stat.
by Cairo on Jul 14, 2009 11:12 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
too bad
Vermeil and his staff weren’t intelligent enough to realize that recovered fumbles is a completely random event, and that there is a much better way to look at it.
http://sportinvestments.blogspot.com
by HolyBuckeye on Jul 14, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
and I'm
*not intelligent enough to realize the plural version of “to be” is “are”
http://sportinvestments.blogspot.com
by HolyBuckeye on Jul 14, 2009 3:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
well technically you were talking about the singular stat of "recovered fumbles"
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 14, 2009 4:01 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thx...Now that I'm not embarrassed..
I guarantee Vermeil also didn’t try and come up with original never before used stats, and just construed numbers they print in the newspaper a hundred different ways. No disrespect to my elders, but older experts/coaches/analysts refuse to believe there’s another way of doing something and tend to discredit new information and statistics any way they can.
Their way has worked the past 30 years, how can some smartass young geek know a better way to analyze their sport?
http://sportinvestments.blogspot.com
by HolyBuckeye on Jul 14, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure Stank is the guy
Troutman is pretty likely.
by speedomike on Jul 14, 2009 10:23 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think they end up platooning through the first couple games.
Hopefully for the Temple game they’ll have one main OL for awhile to get ready for Iowa.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
by psuphiman80 on Jul 14, 2009 10:42 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wallstreet journal
Ever since the stupid Wallstreet Journal released that article, it’s been like a frickin firestorm. Every blog everywhere has done some type of analysis based on the thing b/c it’s so concise, but I really have some issues with it.
Starts. Ok, I get it, if you start the game you’re the #1 at that position. But what happens when it’s 35-7 midway through the second quarter and your 2nd string O-line is now getting mixed in. It doesn’t get counted for that analysis, and it may have as well have been a 0-0 slug-fest. So why give all the credit to a guy who started when there’s many times throughout the season when he didn’t even play all 4 quaters?
Talent. So Indiana may (if I remember correctly) have one of the most experienced O-lines returning, but that says nothing of the talent they are putting on the field. We, by all accounts, are putting some major talent on the field at O-line.
Gelling. I’m not sure about this but to me it seems a little over-rated. These kids are often room-mates, friends off the field, work out together, eat together, watch flim together, not to mention practice together, so they’re litterally all attached at the hip most of the year. But because they didn’t all start a game together it’s often portrayed like they’re perfect strangers, like before the first snap at Akron Wis goes up to Pannel like “hi, my name is Stefen, nice to meet you”. Of course they need to get game experience together as a unit, but I resent the emphasis placed on this idea.
So the point is, it’s really difficult to get a clear idea of “stats” for the O-line when it’s probably the #1 or #2 most important thing about a team. You can go nuts with stats for every other position except Oline, which only really has starts and playing time… So we get into this one-dimensional analysis b/c aside from watching every game and logging game time for each guy (I swear I’m this close to doing that for the sake of argument) what else do you have to go by?
"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.
by millzners on Jul 14, 2009 10:42 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
You would think
Someone should be able to come up with a good set of stats for olinemen. Some I would suggest would be
Run Behinds – How many times did the offense choose to run behind them
Pancakes – how many times did he knock a guy on his butt
Sacks given up
Holds/Offsides – How many penalties did they commit
I guess the problem is there just isn’t enough time in between plays to sort all of this stuff out.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
by BSD on Jul 14, 2009 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hmmm
Don’t know that I buy the not enough time, they could work that out I’m sure. I do think it’s easier to rank a line as a whole, and there is some sense of interdependence at these positions more than others.
I think you’re on to something with this run behind idea.
by PSUinBOSSton on Jul 14, 2009 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If there's one guy who could do it
It’d be Phil Steele. He watches 12 TVs every week! He had Penn State as his #1 surprise team LY with 3 VHT OL!!!
by speedomike on Jul 14, 2009 11:13 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
+1
I’m still reading through his mag but it’s written just like that. Dude uses random bold statements and lot’s of exclamation points!!! Meanwhile 80% of the information is how he somehow, loosely predicted something that happened 5 years ago.
In 2006 only 1 out of the 7 major publications had Boise State ranked in the top 20, but I had them #9 on my teams that could improve list!!! They went undefeated that year!!! I predicted it!
Phil’s approach is to create as many lists as possible so that next year when the top 5 AP poll teams are announced he can say “ZOMG I had that team listed #6 on my list of Teams With Coaches Who Have Mustaches!!, no one else predicted them to be ranked in the top 10!!!”
I would guess out of the 120 D1 teams Phill includes around 60 of them on these stupid lists so that he’s got a good shot at claiming he predicted something accurately.
"We hugged as grown men do. It was a great moment. Then, it was business as usual." -- LJ Sr.
by millzners on Jul 14, 2009 11:32 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Typically
I like this analysisessess..es or analysi? anyway, he does like to toot his own horn WAY too much, but he is admittedly more accurate than most “experts”. Granted that isn’t saying much.
by PSUisMyHeart on Jul 14, 2009 12:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess the end game is the
guy wants to sell magazines and whatever other services he has cooked up.
Why buy Guru1 over Guru2? Because they have a history of being right. How do you know they were right – because they are out there shouting it from the rooftops.
You don’t even have to have a history – heck, even being right once usually makes a career.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
by rahpsu92 on Jul 14, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
False starts committed
Rich Ohrnberger would have killed us with that stat.
by Cairo on Jul 14, 2009 11:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
now i'm no offensive lineman,...
but these guys have the size, they’re not new to the program, and they’ve worked together to some degree for quite some time. wiz in the center is great, because the guards can feed off of his leadership. the guard sandwiched between wiz and landolt is in great shape. so the only one to worry about is the tackle that’ll be hanging out there, right? But, i guess wiz wasn’t that good last year either, because he had limited PT as a freshman. Right. Not to mention, nothing builds experience like facing a great d-line every week…OMG they PRACTICE with one every day…we’ll be fine. who’s with me!
"They stalk their prey to within two or three great leaps and then launch a lightning-fast charge, striking their prey. Victims are most often killed by suffocation with a prolonged bite..."--Hinterland Who's Who
by afields16 on Jul 14, 2009 11:35 AM EDT reply actions 0 recs
I think young Wiz...
has started just about every game since he came on board – while not at center he has had plenty of game time.
One man doing the work of 100's for the good of 1000's
by rahpsu92 on Jul 14, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
...was going to post comment re: your last statement...
- And you are correct.
From what “we know” + reviewing many of the preseason mags; – the very ones that pretty much agree that PSU’s D front 7 are pretty much “tops” in the nation…
The O-line has been drilling and practicing against ‘the best’…what can we glean from that? Alot. What’s more, our 2nd and 3rd / back-ups on the O-line get practice time against the front 7 as well. So, guys like ’Trout/Pannell, Farrell, Shrive…et al are going against some of the best they might ever go against ’live"..?
That is worth something!
Comparison I can also relate to: ever wrestle against your coach in practice – or drill against a guy 1 or 2 weight classes above you, then wrestle you live match..? Your body / mind seems quicker to respond and stronger…just say’n…
"...goon-a-la-goun-ga...gung-ga-la-gun-ga...he said; there will be no money exchanged..."
by BlueWhiteLife on Jul 14, 2009 1:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
daryll clark
will be the o-line’s best friend. He can move around inside the pocket, scramble, roll-out, and throw on the run.
I think that having an experienced and talented backfield with Royster, Clark, Green, etc as well as Wiz in the middle should provide enough of a foundation to let these new guys grow into their roles.
I’m definitely cautiously optimistic about the o-line; I think we have the intelligence at the key spots (Clark, Wiz) to use whatever advantages they offer us to the biggest advantage possible.
I wouldn't trust old rooster me neither.
by spakajewia on Jul 14, 2009 12:42 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
Clark
hardly had to run at all last year, and actually seemed to stay too long at times to prove a point. I think Newsome is getting some of that same school of thought, that it’s important to be a throwing quarterback first, and having that mindset really helped Clark come along as far a confidence in the pocket.
I suspect he will have to run a little more this year than last, especially while we are breaking in new receivers, but I’m in the cautiously optimistic boat as well.
Order your copy of "We Are Penn State" The offseason is long. So is this magazine.
by Kevin HD on Jul 14, 2009 12:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think I remember him giving up some runs in favor of staying in the pocket. Maybe he just didn’t see the holes.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
by psuphiman80 on Jul 14, 2009 12:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe he just didn’t see the holes.
That’s what she said.
I bleed Blue and White.
by Horse N Buggy on Jul 14, 2009 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
If that's the case
he needs to get a better feel for the game.
by Screen Name 20 on Jul 14, 2009 1:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eh
He was 1st team All B10. I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt.
"I'm colonel cool! And I'm the captain on this rocket to the stars!"
by psuphiman80 on Jul 14, 2009 1:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's what she said
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 14, 2009 1:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
One point on our "new / young O" that I have
disagreed with this off season; moreso than the O-line:
“New WR’s”
Yeah, we graduated 3-solid guys – no, doubt / no issue with that. “But”; Brackett/Moye/Zug … add in Shuler/AQ…I feel it is a hand in a glove…and balls in the hand (whatever RR,, ha).
Yeah it is “something to write about in the off season,” I just see these guys performing well, seriously; not on my radar. I feel their blocking skills / size is an improvement and will pick-up where they left-off. As blockers (better blockers), they will HELP the O-line look better; therefore the O shall perform better.
This is some S O L I D shit man!
"...goon-a-la-goun-ga...gung-ga-la-gun-ga...he said; there will be no money exchanged..."
by BlueWhiteLife on Jul 14, 2009 1:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
The read option
I wish they would run a little more read option plays with clark. Just to keep the defense honest and force that defensive end to stay home and contain the outside. It would help Pannel tremendously.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
by BSD on Jul 14, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
though I'd also wish they run him not so much
As I’d like to see him take as few hits as possible.
by The JuggerNitt on Jul 14, 2009 4:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh???
What are you talking about? Devlin played and led us to a hard fought victory.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 14, 2009 4:18 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right, what was i thinking?
How could I forget that?
by Screen Name 20 on Jul 15, 2009 7:41 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Better yet...
Run the read option with Zug and Green. UNSTOPPABLE.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 14, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is what I mean
Zug lines up at QB, Clark lines up at receiver (think of M*r*ll* during the Alamo Bowl), and blah blah.
Anyway, Zug can either hand to Green, run an option with some receiver, or pass.
WE MUST TRY THIS.
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 14, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Zug can also throw it deep and catch it himself.
by Cairo on Jul 15, 2009 9:16 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Of course
DO YOU HAVE PRIDE, DANNY?
by ReadingRambler on Jul 15, 2009 10:00 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Running is not necessarily a good thing.
It just means that the O-line has to learn how to pull and block downfield in pass block mode. That’s more to learn. It helps immensely that Wiz is at center.
by Cairo on Jul 14, 2009 12:58 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here is an question I have.
What helps a green o-line? If they aren’t that great, what can offset that? Great RB? Athletic QB? Fast WR’s? Solid TE’s? I mean its not like a grean o-line has NEVER won. I just feel like we have certain tools that can help an o-line develop if it is a little shaky. Now on the other hand, if it is a complete disaster then we are f’ed.
Maybe I’m offbase here. The stupidity of this statistic is astounding.
Black Shoes. Basic Blues. No Name. All Game.
"Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth."
by Roland86 on Jul 14, 2009 1:01 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs
One thing I like about this group
Unlike in 2006 when we had to replace everyone, this year there is competition everywhere. In 2006 we had starters by default because all they had to do was beat out the ham sandwich. Consequently the 2006 oline sucked.
This year there is competition with two or three guys at every position. So I’m confident we’ll find at least one guy in every spot.
Mike
Black Shoe Diaries
by BSD on Jul 14, 2009 3:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2009 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
