Texas Athletics: Taking Over the World

axx · Apr 1, 2014

Well, I suppose it would be an experience for the players to go to a place that most of them have never been.

Clears Cleaver · Apr 1, 2014

But they can't do an 8-team playoff because of the student athletes.

Old Fart Tree · Apr 2, 2014

This reeks to me of "pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered." Seriously, you cannot reconcile statements like that one with the non-profit, student athlete bullshit the NCAA spews on a regular basis.

Dan to Theo to Ben · Apr 2, 2014

This is a state that has a 60 million High school stadium.

Everything's bigger in Texas, maybe even including egos. And especially egos regarding football.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=JX1m8gqBcNk

Kremlin Watcher · Apr 2, 2014

Y'all are just jealous that you didn't go to Texas.

absintheofmalaise · Apr 2, 2014

RedOctober3829 said:
It's more like how much money can we make by flying these guys all over the world to promote our "brand". Growing the "footprint" of their department? Give me a break.

It's also about keeping the recruits in state and getting them to sign with Texas. Gotta help the sell if you are also offering them trips to different locations around the world to play a game.

LeftyTG · Apr 2, 2014

RedOctober3829 said:
http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10710069/texas-longhorns-ad-steve-patterson-not-interested-rivalry-texas-aggies

Only Texas would be this arrogant to eschew an in-state rivalry to play games in Mexico City, China, and Dubai. Yes, it's all about the money but are you kidding me here? Talk about treating your athletes like rented mules for monetary gains. This is ridiculous.

I guess I don't see the big deal, and I'm a bit puzzled at your seeming vehemence. Are you similarly upset when Notre Dame plays in Ireland?

Why lump Mexico City in with China and Dubai? The distance from Austin to Mexico City is about the same as Austin to Nashville. Would a trip to Ann Arbor to play Michigan be treating your athletes like rented mules? Hell, Mexico City is closer to Austin than Ames, where UT would play conference foe Iowa St.

If you want to take the angle that playing abroad with the naked and brazen motivation of expanding a brand flies in the face of the non-profit student athlete facade the NCAA puts up, then that's fine. I agree. But you lump together Texas' supposed arrogance, with their lack of interest in playing A&M, with treating the athletes poorly. It is muddled and doesn't make sense to me. If we value exposure to foreign cultures as a worthwhile educational experience, then why are trips to China, Mexico, and the UAE treating the players so poorly?

That doesn't even touch the weirdness of the UT/A&M relationship. I moved to Austin four years ago after a lifetime of living in the northeast, and I'm only beginning to understand the dynamic. Perhaps the UT and A&M grads on the board can offer more insight, but the fan bases can't seem to live with each other or live without each other. There are tons of hurt feelings on both sides related to the Longhorn Network and A&M's defection to the SEC (their immediate success has only served to inflame the tensions and bitterness). Bottom line - these two teams aren't going to play each other for a long time, and that is wholly unrelated to what Texas does, or doesn't do, regarding its branding playing games overseas.

canderson · Apr 2, 2014

I'll donate more if this happens. Screw A&M.

absintheofmalaise · Apr 2, 2014

RedOctober3829 said:
The trips don't matter as much to the kids as much as winning and the right coach does.

I get that, but those trips could make a difference to kids that are making a decision between UT and some other school that runs the same scheme and has just as good of a chance to play for a championship.

Bosoxen · Apr 2, 2014

RedOctober3829 said:
The trips don't matter as much to the kids as much as winning and the right coach does.

I wish you'd been around when I went to college so you could tell me what I did and didn't want. Would have saved me a whole lot of fucking around and experimenting. Kids these days are lucky to have you around.

LeftyTG said:
That doesn't even touch the weirdness of the UT/A&M relationship. I moved to Austin four years ago after a lifetime of living in the northeast, and I'm only beginning to understand the dynamic. Perhaps the UT and A&M grads on the board can offer more insight, but the fan bases can't seem to live with each other or live without each other. There are tons of hurt feelings on both sides related to the Longhorn Network and A&M's defection to the SEC (their immediate success has only served to inflame the tensions and bitterness). Bottom line - these two teams aren't going to play each other for a long time, and that is wholly unrelated to what Texas does, or doesn't do, regarding its branding playing games overseas.

Personally, I couldn't give less of a shit about A&M. I like to give their people shit because they're batshit crazy about being Aggies and I love watching them squirm. But my life and my enjoyment of Saturdays in the fall wouldn't be any different if that school didn't exist. I save all my vitriol for Oklahoma because fuck them.

Bosoxen · Apr 2, 2014

RedOctober3829 said:
Athletes good enough to go to Texas or a similar school in football or basketball are concerned about being in the right system/playing for the coach that gets the most out of them, getting to the BCS/NCAA tournaments, and going to the place that maximizes their chances of going pro. That's the truth. A trip to another country is an ancillary bonus.

As is always the case in this forum, people are only focusing on the elite athletes that have even a sliver of a chance of going pro. What about the bottom half of the roster (also known as roughly 40-50 kids)? Those kids generally have little to no shot at going pro or otherwise ever earning a dime playing football.

Say we're talking about some backup fullback or punter (forget about the star quarterback for a second). You really don't think an all-expenses paid trip to Mexico City would enter into his decision-making process? If you don't, I'm left with no choice but to believe you're out of your mind.

Dan to Theo to Ben · Apr 2, 2014

Bosoxen said:
As is always the case in this forum, people are only focusing on the elite athletes that have even a sliver of a chance of going pro. What about the bottom half of the roster (also known as roughly 40-50 kids)? Those kids generally have little to no shot at going pro or otherwise ever earning a dime playing football.

Say we're talking about some backup fullback or punter (forget about the star quarterback for a second). You really don't think an all-expenses paid trip to Mexico City would enter into his decision-making process? If you don't, I'm left with no choice but to believe you're out of your mind.

Cancun, Acupulco, maybe. I don't see the appeal of a trip to MC unless the kid is actually Mexican and wants to see his heritage. Granted, it may make more sense for Texas athletes, demographically, to go there then say, Alabama, but RO is correct that this is for the coffers and not the students.

Kremlin Watcher · Apr 2, 2014

I think Steve Patterson is going to prove to be a remarkable AD, potentially a transformational figure in college sports. He understands the importance of both winning as well as "selling the brand", and he understands the potential that the Texas brand has. It is already the largest athletic department budget by revenues in the nation, sells the most gear, and has its own television network. Raising the program's profile internationally is a smart way both to grow revenues and to give the programs a cache that would be unique among college sports programs, benefitting not just football and basketball, but the minor sports as well, and academics to boot (the Athletics Department gives money to the academic side of the school). Who wouldn't want to be part of a forward-looking and international scene like that, with the opportunity to play in front of a near-global audience? If you're giving me the chance to do that as opposed to living in College Station and taking road trips to Tuscaloosa and Baton Rouge, hell yes. Let aggy with their move to the SEC wallow in the middle of the league while Steve Patterson and Charlie Strong lead this program back not only to national prominence but international prominence as well.

I'm on board.

Stevie1der · Apr 2, 2014

Kremlin Watcher said:
I think Steve Patterson is going to prove to be a remarkable AD, potentially a transformational figure in college sports. He understands the importance of both winning as well as "selling the brand", and he understands the potential that the Texas brand has. It is already the largest athletic department budget by revenues in the nation, sells the most gear, and has its own television network. Raising the program's profile internationally is a smart way both to grow revenues and to give the programs a cache that would be unique among college sports programs, benefitting not just football and basketball, but the minor sports as well, and academics to boot (the Athletics Department gives money to the academic side of the school). Who wouldn't want to be part of a forward-looking and international scene like that, with the opportunity to play in front of a near-global audience? If you're giving me the chance to do that as opposed to living in College Station and taking road trips to Tuscaloosa and Baton Rouge, hell yes. Let aggy with their move to the SEC wallow in the middle of the league while Steve Patterson and Charlie Strong lead this program back not only to national prominence but international prominence as well.

I'm on board.

I'm curious, how much do you really think this is going to appreciably spread the Texas brand in any sense beyond American borders? Outside of some isolated locales such as London and Germany, the NFL is barely a blip on the international sports scene. The idea of college sports and the amateur athlete is a foreign concept to much of the rest of the world. This is a great PR move designed to generate buzz among recruits and the 24/7 American sports media cycle, but I'm struggling to see how an isolated football game here and there is going to result in some sort of International 'branding' boom for Texas.

Clears Cleaver · Apr 2, 2014

It won't. At all. It may help some of the Board of trustees do business in the Middle East. That's about it.

This is purely ego gone wild. Patterson probably pitched this nonsense and got the trustees all excited. Then he hired Charlie Strong.

Kremlin Watcher · Apr 2, 2014

Stevie1der said:
I'm curious, how much do you really think this is going to appreciably spread the Texas brand in any sense beyond American borders? Outside of some isolated locales such as London and Germany, the NFL is barely a blip on the international sports scene. The idea of college sports and the amateur athlete is a foreign concept to much of the rest of the world. This is a great PR move designed to generate buzz among recruits and the 24/7 American sports media cycle, but I'm struggling to see how an isolated football game here and there is going to result in some sort of International 'branding' boom for Texas.

Clears Cleaver said:
It won't. At all. It may help some of the Board of trustees do business in the Middle East. That's about it.

This is purely ego gone wild. Patterson probably pitched this nonsense and got the trustees all excited. Then he hired Charlie Strong.

Ha ha. You guys all wish you were Texas.

The point is that playing abroad doesn't have to spark a spike in interest in Texas football in Dubai or China. That's not the goal. The point is that it will have financial and other benefits within the US, and especially in Texas.

The gear sales are potentially significant. The logo and colors are awesome and everyone loves them. It's already the largest college gear brand and could gain significant sales if exposed abroad.

TV revenue is potentially significant: broadcast LHN worldwide to the hundreds of thousands of Americans living abroad and reap the reward.

Recruiting bump could be meaningful, especially for basketball, as the mount of foreign talent that would be seeing the team play is significant.

Patterson is going to force college sports to take a long look at its revenue model. With the football players unionizing and TV contracts getting so big, plus the addition of the playoff, the college football landscape is changing fast, and Patterson is trying to get Texas ahead of that change. Great to see.

Dan Murfman · Apr 2, 2014

Yeah but Rick Barnes will still be coaching

Kremlin Watcher · Apr 2, 2014

RedOctober3829 said:
Like I said: using the athletes to make as much money as they possibly can. Rented mules.

Man I hope you don't hurt yourself when you fall off that high horse.

Old Fart Tree · Apr 3, 2014

I don't think it's "getting on a high horse" to point out when a system - of which Texas is a large part - is hopelessly, fundamentally corrupt. I mean, if I were to ask "won't the international travel and jet lag screw with these student-athletes' study patterns?," we would all fucking laugh.

I think this backlash is more a coincidence that it came out a few days after the Northwestern decision. This AD is doing a great job of growing his business' brand, but it just makes it even more crystal clear that it's a *business* with a *brand*, and also one that has *unpaid employees*. Texas is no different than other schools in this respect, but this is just the latest egregious proof of that hypocrisy.

LeftyTG · Apr 3, 2014

Old Fart Tree said:
I don't think it's "getting on a high horse" to point out when a system - of which Texas is a large part - is hopelessly, fundamentally corrupt. I mean, if I were to ask "won't the international travel and jet lag screw with these student-athletes' study patterns?," we would all fucking laugh.

I think this backlash is more a coincidence that it came out a few days after the Northwestern decision. This AD is doing a great job of growing his business' brand, but it just makes it even more crystal clear that it's a *business* with a *brand*, and also one that has *unpaid employees*. Texas is no different than other schools in this respect, but this is just the latest egregious proof of that hypocrisy.

In all fairness, the "high horse" comment was directed specifically at RedOctober. You've done a good job touching on the underlying issue with the system, of which Texas is part (as you point out). RedOctober hasn't really bothered to take a thoughtful approach and comes off more like he just has a thing against Texas. Which is cool and all, but the high horse comment is appropriate to him in this particular thread,

Old Fart Tree · Apr 3, 2014

LeftyTG said:
In all fairness, the "high horse" comment was directed specifically at RedOctober. You've done a good job touching on the underlying issue with the system, of which Texas is part (as you point out). RedOctober hasn't really bothered to take a thoughtful approach and comes off more like he just has a thing against Texas. Which is cool and all, but the high horse comment is appropriate to him in this particular thread,

OK.

I always liked Texas. They were very kind to the Stanford Band when we went there to watch Stanford lose 69-17 in 108 degree heat. Plus the barbecue is good.

Kremlin Watcher · Apr 3, 2014

Yes, it's largely about money. But all of that money is plowed back into the University. They are building a new medical school in downtown Austin. They need a new basketball/general purpose arena. They need to add a bunch of sports like gymnastics and wrestling. Running a 50,000 student, highly-ranked flagship research university is an expensive proposition. But it's not like they're a profit-making corporation.

And yes, the athletes are to one extent or another exploited. But I do know at Texas at least they are all given a massive support network to help them succeed in the classroom if they choose to. In any case, I think the status of football and basketball players will be evolving in the coming years, and I would not be at all surprised if they do unionize and fight for, and win, better "working conditions".

Old Fart Tree · Apr 3, 2014

Kremlin Watcher said:
Yes, it's largely about money. But all of that money is plowed back into the University. They are building a new medical school in downtown Austin. They need a new basketball/general purpose arena. They need to add a bunch of sports like gymnastics and wrestling. Running a 50,000 student, highly-ranked flagship research university is an expensive proposition. But it's not like they're a profit-making corporation.

And yes, the athletes are to one extent or another exploited. But I do know at Texas at least they are all given a massive support network to help them succeed in the classroom if they choose to. In any case, I think the status of football and basketball players will be evolving in the coming years, and I would not be at all surprised if they do unionize and fight for, and win, better "working conditions".

Gotta unwind that ball of string.

1) It's not largely. It's all about the money.
2) Plowing it back into the university - as you immediately detail - means in 2014 "funding exorbitant administrator and tenured faculty salaries" and "empire building/keeping up with the Joneses by building massive new facilities."
3) Somehow Harvard Medical School managed to produce top-notch doctors thirty years ago at a fraction of the inflation-adjusted cost. Somehow. Now, technology is always expensive, and newer technology is MORE expensive... but ever think about not taking the "it's expensive to produce a quality doctor/journalist/econ major/lawyer" at face value and ask "Well, why is it SO MUCH more expensive than it used to be?"
4) It is exactly like they are a profit-making corporation. They just don't issue dividends. They are so much like a profit-making corporation that the IRS threatened the Harvards and Stanfords of the worlds with losing their non-profit status if they didn't actually spend some of their $20+ billion endowments. TWENTY BILLION. What were they saving for? A rainy day? A space program? An invasion?

Bosoxen · Apr 4, 2014

All of the hand-wringing is making it easy to forget that there could be another potential side benefit to playing games overseas: foreign student enrollment. Wouldn't the exposure to that market increase their visibility as a potential landing spot for the students considering going to college overseas? Sure, a school's stature in that student's field would be the most influential factor but if all things are equal, I could see that exposure as a potential bump in Texas' direction.

I have had several cousins from Mexico enroll in colleges here in the States. For one reason or another, they chose the school that they chose but I have to believe that if Texas had played a football game in Monterrey or Mexico City, more of them would have likely ended up in Austin. My family is big into sports, so YMMV.

I'm not going to pretend that this is more important than the economic aspect but I can't imagine this didn't enter into the decision making process.

canderson · Apr 4, 2014

Central Florida plays Penn State in Ireland next September. Dallas host numerous neutral-site preconference games that mean nothing and is thousands of miles away from universities.

Patterson's trying to keep up with the Joneses in the way Texas can do, by going bigger.

Dan to Theo to Ben · Apr 4, 2014

canderson said:
Central Florida plays Penn State in Ireland next September. Dallas host numerous neutral-site preconference games that mean nothing and is thousands of miles away from universities.

Patterson's trying to keep up with the Joneses in the way Texas can do, by going bigger.

You've just proven OFT's point.

Bosoxen · Apr 4, 2014

Dan to Theo to Ben said:
You've just proven OFT's point.

He never argued against OFT's point.

Dan to Theo to Ben · Apr 4, 2014

Bosoxen said:
He never argued against OFT's point.

Not the point.

canderson · Apr 4, 2014

Dan to Theo to Ben said:
You've just proven OFT's point.

Right, because he's right. If you're in the system you might as well use it to your advantage. Texas could throw all its weight and power and making collegiate athletics "pure" and it wouldn't make any damn difference in the world.

Expanding the university is only a positive in my eyes. Like I said, I'll up my annual donation more if this comes to fruition.

Kremlin Watcher · Jul 26, 2014

Charlie Strong now wrecking shop in Austin. He has dismissed the following players from the team in an effort to clean house and get rid of the late-Mack-Brown era sense of entitlement and laziness that infected and almost destroyed the program:

- LB Kendall Thompson
- RB Joe Bergeron
- S Josh Turner
- RB Jalen Overstreet
- WR Kendall Sanders
- WR Montrell Meander
- DB Chevoski Collins

It appears that Thompson may be leaving of his own volition due to concussion issues, but the rest are being kicked off the team for various rules violations.

In my mind this is addition by subtraction as Strong weeds out the malcontents and sends a strong signal to the team that rules are rules. Not that this team was going to contend for anything major in 2014, but this I believe sets the stage for a full rout of the Mack Brown culture and the institution of a tougher, more disciplined one that will produce results in a year or two.

Hook 'em Charlie!

canderson · Jul 26, 2014

It's a good start but he needs to up the recruiting if they want to be a major factor. Will he? Time will tell, not seen much yet really.

LeftyTG · Jul 26, 2014

Kremlin Watcher said:
Charlie Strong now wrecking shop in Austin. He has dismissed the following players from the team in an effort to clean house and get rid of the late-Mack-Brown era sense of entitlement and laziness that infected and almost destroyed the program:

- LB Kendall Thompson
- RB Joe Bergeron
- S Josh Turner
- RB Jalen Overstreet
- WR Kendall Sanders
- WR Montrell Meander
- DB Chevoski Collins

It appears that Thompson may be leaving of his own volition due to concussion issues, but the rest are being kicked off the team for various rules violations.

In my mind this is addition by subtraction as Strong weeds out the malcontents and sends a strong signal to the team that rules are rules. Not that this team was going to contend for anything major in 2014, but this I believe sets the stage for a full rout of the Mack Brown culture and the institution of a tougher, more disciplined one that will produce results in a year or two.

Hook 'em Charlie!

seems odd to write all that and not at least note that Sanders and Meander aren't dismissed because of some weeding out of malcontents (technically they aren't even dismissed, but are indefinitely suspended), but because they have been arrested for felony sexual assault (pretty awful allegations too, if you read the police officer affidavit).

All that being said, good for Strong. The Texas program was undeniably soft in the later Mack Brown years, so this kind of thing is needed and inevitable.

Kremlin Watcher · Jul 27, 2014

LeftyTG said:
seems odd to write all that and not at least note that Sanders and Meander aren't dismissed because of some weeding out of malcontents (technically they aren't even dismissed, but are indefinitely suspended), but because they have been arrested for felony sexual assault (pretty awful allegations too, if you read the police officer affidavit).

All that being said, good for Strong. The Texas program was undeniably soft in the later Mack Brown years, so this kind of thing is needed and inevitable.

Acknowledged, but one of Strong's rules is to respect women, so I suspect that whatever the outcome of their case, Strong has no patience for guys who abuse women and they will be gone, so I include them in the "dismissed" category presumptively.

In any case, this is a good article on what's going on in Austin. A sample:

Strong identified the bad apples early (and bad fruit takes many forms for Strong - it's not just about legalistic rule-breaking, it's about comportment and character), put them on highly supported, easy-to-follow academic, disciplinary and character-building plans and monitored them over several months, both directly and through his proxies in the staff, S&C and academic support. Folks who are all aligned with Strong. No place to hide. No coach to smooth things over for you, because he wants you starting for his position group. Strong's assistants are a united fist.

Good luck trying to find a finger to twist.

Along the way, he administered surprise drug tests (beyond NCAA standards), forced players to meet with tutors daily, followed up on their commitments and mercilessly tracked down and confronted dishonesty or laziness. Parents were brought up to speed and every bit of bad action was brought to light. It was up to the player to change. The tools for that change were laid at their feet. They simply had to cast down their bucket where they were.

The bizarre thing is, by most college football team's standards, we're on the good side of the bell curve. The things Strong won't tolerate are offenses many coaches made peace with years ago. Some out of mercenary interest, some of out pure exhaustion. Some live in simple denial.

For Strong, this isn't just about football. He's trying to change a culture that he despises that has a grip on far too many young men. These aren't frivolous dismissals. Nor is it a power trip. Trying to change how Texas plays football is secondary to his main mission: changing how his players approach life. He believes doing the latter will lead to long-term success in the former.

Infield Infidel · Aug 5, 2014

This is a neat, long story about Strong's background and first few months at Texas

http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/11295756/texas-coach-charlie-strong-rebuilds-longhorns-way-espn-magazine

canderson · Aug 5, 2014

That's a good read. Hopefully he can start turning up the recruiting machine soon. Texas is lacking talent of all things, which is weird since they couldn't really win with all the talent they recently had. Go figure.

Infield Infidel · Aug 14, 2014

In case you didn't see it, here's Bill Connolly's mega-preview for Texas

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/7/3/5861036/texas-football-2014-preview-schedule-roster

He's not exactly bullish (the alternate headline is: Texas in 2014? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ) , but he thinks the defense could be solid, but he's worried about the offense

Bosoxen · Aug 19, 2014

Infield Infidel said:
In case you didn't see it, here's Bill Connolly's mega-preview for Texas

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/7/3/5861036/texas-football-2014-preview-schedule-roster

He's not exactly bullish (the alternate headline is: Texas in 2014? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ) , but he thinks the defense could be solid, but he's worried about the offense

It should be noted that all of this was written prior to the dismissal of so many players. I don't know that his overall assessment would change, but I'd imagine his apparent disdain for the Charlie Strong toughness angle would wane a bit. Strong is pushing all the right buttons so far, so we'll see how it goes on the field.

With that said, I do think he's right that Ash could be the difference between a miserable season and a decent one (I'm not getting my hopes up for anything more than 8 wins), but I don't share his overall skepticism of the defense. If I'm confident of one thing, it's that Strong and Bedford will turn the Horns into a strong defensive team. Much of the defense's problem with the running game under Diaz was piss-poor tackling. I don't believe for a second this coaching staff will put up with arm tackling and going for highlight reel plays, so there's really nowhere to go but up.

ethangl · Sep 1, 2014

Ash suffered another concussion Saturday and at this point just needs to stop playing football.

Kremlin Watcher · Sep 1, 2014

So in the epic victory over North Texas, we lost our most experienced offensive lineman, Dom Espinoza, for the season to a broken ankle, and now David Ash is out against BYU with concussion symptoms. That was a very expensive win. If Ash, who was not hit hard during that game, is out for an extended period (and possibly all season), our prospects for the year have slipped dramatically.

So next week against BYU we'll see Tyrone Swoopes at QB and freshman Jake Raulerson at C. My optimistic outlook of a 9-win season just fell off a cliff. Hope we make a bowl.

And I agree that David Ash should probably retire. Poor guy.

Charlie Strong's job just got a lot more difficult.

canderson · Sep 1, 2014

Ouch.

Kremlin Watcher · Sep 1, 2014

Oh, and Daje Johnson and Josh Turner are still suspended for BYU, so at least there's that.

canderson · Sep 1, 2014

Going in I would be happy with 7 wins.

Which sucks when Sumlin's making A&M a top fucking 5 program.

Kremlin Watcher · Sep 3, 2014

RedOctober3829 said:
@ChipBrownHD: A source close to the situation has told @HornsDigest starting Texas OTs Desmond Harrison and Kennedy Estelle have been dismissed from team.

Sheesh. Our O-line now has approximately no experience. Hope the defense can hold everyone to zero points, because this new Texas offense, with no experience at QB an OL, isn't going to score a whole lot of points.

I believe long term in the Charlie Strong approach, and that ultimately it will produce championships, but this purge is going to be painful in the short term.

Texas Athletics: Taking Over the World

Member

Member

Member

Lil' Bill

the maven of meat

Banned

Member

too many flowers

Member

Member

Mr. Brightside

too many flowers

Bounced back

Member

Bounced back

Banned

Member

Member

Lil' Bill

Member

Member

Member

Member

the maven of meat

Member

Member

the maven of meat

Member

the maven of meat

Bounced back

Mr. Brightside

Banned

Bounced back

Banned

Mr. Brightside

Member

Mr. Brightside

Member

Member

teaching korea american

Mr. Brightside

teaching korea american

Bounced back

Member

Member

Mr. Brightside

Member

Mr. Brightside

Member

Member