NSAC Does Not Re-License Big John McCarthy
by Kid Nate on Sep 22, 2009 10:34 AM EDT
in MMA News
Email
Print
Per Sherdog:
In a mailed letter from Keith Kizer, executive director of the Nevada State Athletic Commission, McCarthy, who submitted his application Sept. 10, was informed that the state "[does] not anticipate adding any additional referees at this time. We will place your application in the pending file in case the situation changes."
...
"I don’t look at it like that. A license to referee or judge with an athletic commission -- it’s not a right," he said. "It’s a privilege. Everyone kept bringing up the fact that I wasn’t licensed in Nevada, so I said, ‘Alright, I’ll apply.’"
As to the whys and wherefores of refusing to re-license McCarthy, Kizer denied that it had anything to do with critical comments that McCarthy has made about the quality of refereeing in Nevada:
Asked if McCarthy’s past comments or a perceived animosity felt for McCarthy by the UFC over his Affliction gig may have played a role in his application for a Nevada license being placed in the "pending" file, both Kizer and McCarthy declined comment.
Kizer said the NSAC currently has six referees licensed to work MMA fights, with a current "pending" list of 20-30 applicants vying for an opening in one of those existing slots, most of which will never work in Nevada due to the high qualifications demanded and extreme rarity of an opening. The short list is exactly that, he adds, so qualified referees get enough work to stay sharp.
Obviously the commissioner of the NSAC is well within his rights to deny McCarthy's license, but as a fan who is painfully painfully aware of the desperate shortage of top quality referees in MMA it pains me to see the best and most experienced referee in the game locked out of the biggest state in MMA.
This has everything to do with politics and punishing McCarthy for speaking truth to power at the expense of what's best for the sport.
If a fighter is grievously injured during a high-profile bout in Nevada due to sub-par refereeing, I hope that Mr. Kizer is ready to defend his actions and decision making.
Dana White is also washing his hands of it, because of course the head of the biggest MMA promotion in the world has no say or influence with the NSAC.
98 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Outside of just giving him license, I would have liked to see them just say due to a perceived conflict of interest, his license will not be issued at this time.
This is akin to a little kid saying he didn’t eat the candy, when there is chocolate all over his face and hands. What a joke.
If anything, Dana should have supported the licensing, to at least attempt and cover the obvious influence they have with the NSAC. Now, I am more suspicious than ever of their relationship.
www.knees2thehead.com
Check it out!!
I’d feel more comfortable if they came out and said that instead of this, but the “we only have 6 refs, and we already have 6 refs” seems like a legit excuse.
I’d like to see him reffing again, but we can’t act like what he said back then doesn’t matter. There are consequences for your actions and statements. If you quit your job and tell your boss to go f himself, you can’t really expect him to rehire you a year later, no matter how well qualified you are.
by Phildo on Sep 22, 2009 10:53 AM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
yeah but that's their problem
as a fan I could give a shit about their bullshit on both sides.
The sport needs its #1 ref working the biggest fights.
Everything else is just politics.
Big John needs to apologize, crawl on his belly, whatever.
NSAC needs to get over themselves and relicense him.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
by Kid Nate on Sep 22, 2009 11:04 AM EDT up reply actions 2 recs
I agree Nate.
But until Big John is willing to do those things there probably is no way they will ever consider bringing him back.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
Ultimately, the main person affected by this, is the fighter. I would like to see what any semi-intelligent fighter has to say on this, especially one under contract with the UFC.
www.knees2thehead.com
Check it out!!
Agree completely,
but this is something that has to be done by both sides.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
I think this is one of those rare affairs where (how rhymee of me) every party is in the wrong.
The NSAC should license him because, simply put, he is talented enough to deserve a license.
The UFC’s in the wrong for playing politics with the (potential) health of fighters.
And lastly Big John is at fault for running off his mouth and thinking there would be no blowback.
Just drop all 3 of em in a locked room until they kill each other or work it out.
by argyle on Sep 22, 2009 12:31 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Or a cage.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 12:36 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
What is completely bogus however is the NSAC’s claim of “there simply isn’t any openings right now”. It’s painfully obvious to me that they’d have him back if there wasn’t politics going on.
And besides that, I don’t think he really said anything that bad, I mean what does Dana expect? He was employed by Affliction! Of course he’s going to promote them to the best of his abilities. I don’t remember anything he said about Dana that isn’t general public knowledge. I just have a hard time seeing that John really needs to apologize unless I’m missing something, and that’s a very strong possibility.
And on a side note. I can’t believe that Dana was able to not only reconcile with Tito, but give him a huge contract, and he can’t get over his thing with Big John.
You’re missing something.
http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/blog/cagewriter/post/Kizer-and-Ratner-call-out-Big-John-McCarthy?urn=mma,92674
That’s one link i can find that talks about it. It wasn’t the affliction stuff, on the fight network he talked badly about the UFC and the NSAC after he left refereeing.
As for Tito, tito will make Dana a lot more money than McCarthy can, not a valid comparison.
I understand it is in within their right
to refuse his license application, but how can they reasonably deny it?
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
Well they didn’t actually deny him license, they put him on a waiting list to get licensed. This isn’t a situation where they said “no you can’t ref fights in Nevada” it’s a situation where they said “you can wait till there is an opening in Nevada”. Yes it’s a crock but it also isn’t something he can actually fight because there are 20 to 30 guys also in the same situation on a waiting list. The actual response from NSAC is reasonable it’s just that it is obvious to anyone who seriously follows this stuff that there is more going on behind the scenes besides their response.
he shouldn't have quit
for me, that’s just life. he’s my favorite ref next to dean but he blew it…. are they supposed to give Dan M. the boot because big John wants his job back? I wish. or Steve.
by cagefightonacid on Sep 22, 2009 10:55 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
I find it odd that everyone bitches about Big John not reffing in Nevada because they don’t like what he said about them but nobody ever mentions that he never brought any of that stuff up until he got paid to do it. Did anyone ever hear him complain when he was working for the NSAC? Not a word. Strange coincidence huh?
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 10:57 AM EDT via mobile reply actions
Poor John! Despite his full dedication to being a ref, he gets pushed out of doing the job he’s best at by the UFC and the athletic commissions. Then, John tried to be a man about it, but the UFC and NSAC criticized John and burned their bridges with him. John knows that refereeing might not be the highest compensated work during the current MMA boom, but he doesn’t care because he has always been 100% about being a ref and improving his profession. If you ask me, it’s the UFC and NSAC that don’t deserve John. How can John know that after a few more years of working hard to make the UFC more successful and famous, the organization won’t turn around and fire him again?
Really, what’s the fucking deal with these people anyway? Is this America or Nazi Germany? I quit jobs and professional licensing organizations and then trash their leaders and practices all the time, and I’ve never had any problems getting rehired or re-licensed.
uh, Big John wasn't fired.
by cagefightonacid on Sep 22, 2009 11:27 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, does this guy even know what went down there? He did not get “pushed out”, he QUIT.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 11:38 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
and he wasn’t ‘always 100% about being a ref. he took the path to what he thought were greener pastures. bjm got famous from the ufc and now that he’s not in it, he’s not so famous. sure some would like to see him come back, thinking it all solve everythg. john made plenty of fuck-ups when reffing, he wasn’t always perfect, and he wasn’t under the spotlight and scutiny nearly as much as some of the current refs. it doesn’t seem like he’s missing out on jobs either, i see him at every strikeforce, adreneline and “cough” bully beatdown event. it sounds like a senority thing to me. he lost his when he QUIT, b/c his head got to big. he put himself in this situation. i think big john is a little full of b.s too, and don’t beleive everything will be solved b/c the all-mighty bjm comes back. i yes i am taking a side just like kid nate is.
No one is saying he’s going to solve all the problems.
The large majority of hard-core fans want him back (not just some).
No one’s claiming he’s perfect either, he’s simply the best we’ve got.
And the fact that you see him regularly on every other show should tell you that the guy has a lot to offer, and the only reason he’s not reffing the UFC is because of petty politics.
you're getting into the he-said she-said bullshit
and then taking the side of the UFC and NSAC.
Personally I could care less about who killed who, we NEED Big John in the ring.
When a fighter dies on a UFC PPV and the whole thing falls down around our ears don’t blame me.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
If a fighter dies it most likely will
not be the refs fault, enough with the chicken little crap.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 11:37 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 1 recs
don't break rule #4
“chicken little crap” is not productive dialogue. consider yourself warned.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
When a fighter dies on a UFC PPV and the whole thing falls down around our ears don’t blame me
that was a pretty dramatic line…
yup
but that’s ultimately what’s at stake when we talk about fighter safety and quality refereeing. Dana White has been outspokenly critical of at least 2 of the 6 refs currently licensed by Nevada because he feels their actions have endangered fighters.
We need to best ref in the business in the Octagon for the biggest fights, its literally a matter of life and death.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
out of curiosity what is the most high profile boxing death? this might be obvious to people who closely follow boxing, but i really have no clue. was there ever a guy who died during or shortly after a major PPV?
And safety is one issue, but what about decisions that affect the quality and outcome of a fight? As a fan, and for many others, it’s such a relief to see BJM in there, knowing that there’s the slimmest chance of all for bs stand-ups, letting people lay and pray too long, bogus warnings, etc.
Surely respect for fans and fighter safety should trump the petty need for politics and apologies?
Yeah but u can’t say anything about it or you’ll get in trouble.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 11:57 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
It probably won’t be the refs fault, but what if it was? I mean there is the chance right? And if there is the chance, albeit slight, why wouldn’t you just eat crow and do the right thing? I mean, people are saying that BJM needs to get on his knees and grovel, when fighter safety and quality decision making in your sport is at stake? Shouldn’t fighter safety and proper calls trump the petty idea that you’re waiting for an apology, especially when the warrant of said apology is absolutely questionable?
Forget about the damned apology, and for the sake of the fights and the fans, get the best in the business in your cage and you have one less thing to worry about.
I apologize for the choice of words but the point stands.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 12:04 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
fair enough
but what annoys me more than the word choice is your assumption that i’m taking a pro-Big John anti NSAC/UFC position.
They’re all assholes who fucked up.
I want them all to eat shit and do what it takes.
We need Big John in the cage.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
but what annoys me more than the word choice is your assumption that i’m taking a pro-Big John anti NSAC/UFC position.
Well you seem to imply it when you bash them for not bringing him back when Big John has yet to “eat shit and do what it takes”.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
I'll tend to be harder on the more powerful players
in any situation.
you can kneel before the throne all you want, not my gig.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
There is nothing he-said she-said about the fact that John decided to quit refereeing and burned several bridges in the process. I agree that John is needed in the ring, but I think he needs to take responsibility for repairing the bridges he burned. Refereeing at the highest level should not be something that you can easily jump in and out of depending on which lucrative opportunities are open to you.
Big John needs to man up and belly crawl
I’ve said that many times.
I don’t care who has to eat shit, we need the best ring in the biz reffing the biggest fights.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I don’t get it, you agree that Big John needs to accept some of the blame and apologize or whatever yet he hasn’t done that and you are still bashing the NSAC and/or UFC for not welcoming him back, that doesn’t add up.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 12:35 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
Perhaps, but neither side has extended an olive branch so don’t just bash NSAC/UFC.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
So are you saying that you aren’t being hypcrotical when you say “Big John needs to apologize, crawl on his belly, whatever” and yet you only criticize the other side? You seem to agree that Big John fucked up too yet you hold the NSAC and UFC to different standards.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
I dont think that is what Nate is saying at all.
He is saying that John is one man & the NSAC/UFC are huge organizations who should make more effort for the betterment of their products.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
He has said many times that Big John should apologize. Well, he hasn’t. The UFC isn’t the one who talked shit on BJM, it’s the other way around, so BJM should be the one extending the olive branch.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
He is saying that a company
should realize an opportunity to improve & not hold grudges. He has also said (many times) that both are at fault.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
I do hold them to different standards
because they are the controlling authorities. This isn’t an even contest it’s one in which they have 90% of the power.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
The way I see it, if I quit my job and then spent time going into the media and trashing the company that used to pay me. Then they have no responsibility, no matter how good I am at my job, to bring me back. Yeah, as a fan I can be bummed out…but the truth is, it’s clearly reasonable for the NSAC to find reasons to not bring him back
Editor - BloodyElbow.com - SBNation's mixed martial arts headquarters.
by Brent Brookhouse on Sep 22, 2009 11:34 AM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Right on.
I mean if you quit BE & then went on Sherdog & trashed BE they likely would not have you back even though we love when you go crazy on posters here! jj Brent
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
Then say that. Call a spade a spade.
Saying that there’s a surplus of qualified refs to the point where they just can’t find any work for Big John not only strains credulity, it insults the intelligence of the entire community.
We watch the fights. We know that too many qualified refs in Nevada is not the problem.
Although detractors decry (MMA) as a brutal, bloody form of human cockfighting, aficionados know it is a brutal, bloody, totally fucking awesome form of human cockfighting. -The Onion
by The Kittitas Kid on Sep 22, 2009 11:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Yeah, definitely too many qualified refs in Nevada to give Big John any work.
What a fucking joke.
Although detractors decry (MMA) as a brutal, bloody form of human cockfighting, aficionados know it is a brutal, bloody, totally fucking awesome form of human cockfighting. -The Onion
by The Kittitas Kid on Sep 22, 2009 11:39 AM EDT reply actions
And?
It is kind a natural progression for athletic commission people to join large promotions at some point to make more money.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
The point is that it’s a conflict of interest.
by MMAEruption on Sep 22, 2009 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions
Really?
That maybe Kizer will someday end up working for the UFC is a conflict of interest? Your definition of conflict of interest is different than mine then.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
It is also different than the dictionary definition.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 12:08 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
good lord man
you’ve clearly never spent anytime lobbying or working in politics. Its called a revolving door and is a manifest conflict of interest.
There are laws against congressional staffers quitting and immediately going to work for companies who lobbied their bosses because what happens is the staffers will write exactly the legilslation the lobbyists want and then go take a huge pay increase to go to work for the lobbyist.
it’s a manifest conflict of interest.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
"you’ve clearly never spent anytime lobbying or working in politics"
You are correct. But those same staffers do end up going to wk for companies who lobbied their bosses all of the time. My point is that is an accepted & probable outcome so you cant call it a conflict of interest. It would be a conflict of interest if Kizer was actively seeking UFC employment while employed at the commission. Until that happens you cant call it a conflict of interest by any stretch of the imagination. Saying that he "MAY’ end working for the UFC “SOMEDAY” is a conflict of interest is ridiculous. We could say the same for you then I guess. The UFC could call you someday to run their site, etc so are you supposed to stay out of UFC news now?
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
And Nate dont get me wrong.
I am not trying to be argumentative & I am not claiming to be a political theorist, but I cant call someone possibly moving on from a company they deal with currently a current conflict of interest.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
we're way into hypothetical country here
with a lot of Ifs and Thens.
The reality is that Zuffa is extremely influential with the NSAC, if they wanted Big John back, he’d be back.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
And by that logic was Marc Ratner
having a conflict of interest before joining the UFC from the ath comm or now that he works for the UFC? The laws are there for people to not go immediately to lobbying companies, not to not go at all.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
it's all very cozy
and makes me consider those who believe Dana has no influence at the NSAC to be very naive.
Lorenzo was a voting member of the NSAC at one time. They have that placed buttoned up tight.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I am not disagreeing with you about Dana
having influence w/NSAC. I was responding to a comment earlier about Kizer having a conflict of interest. Nothing else.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
"They have that placed buttoned up tight."
And as far as this goes, this is exactly the way that any company tries to work. Within legal limits, you always want to have “friends” in influential places.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
I'm not saying they shouldn't
I’m just saying people who buy it when they disingenuously claim to have no influence are being duped.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Then we agree,
we just got off track a bit.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
NSAC doesn’t just regulate MMA, Keith Kizer has a lot of friends in boxing that would love to throw bucks at him to move to that private industry too. The UFC almost certainly does have some influence with NSAC as far as MMA in Nevada is concerned due to their size, stature and connections but in Nevada boxing is still king and the UFC is only one major organization that does business with NSAC.
he's needed in other places more than nevada
wouldn’t you say the most gaping hole in the system right now is when smaller athletic commissions like Oklahoma, Texas, wherever, end up putting guys who are completely unqualified in the ring?
obviously another great ref would be a good thing anywhere, nevada included. but when talking about fixing the MMA refereeing problem, is nevada really the #1 priority, or even close?
Agree completely,
I remember a Southern ref somewhere last year in a UFC event who was on top of the fighters constantly screaming FIGHT FIGHT & really not letting the fight happen as it should by standing them up as soon as they hit the mat.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
Nevada is where the biggest fights are
and let’s cut the shit, the whole NSAC thing is a smokescreen the UFC hides behind to excuse their refusal to bring back Big John — even in jurisdictions like the UK where they ARE the de facto commission.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
I think the UFC & other large promotions
should get with the athletic commissions & make an effort to have refs who contracted by that MMA promotion & are licensed by each ath comm. MLB & NBA are great examples of this. I know we are probably a long way from this happening, but it really is the only way to ensure the highest level of officiating for your events.
Arguing on the internet is like being in the special olympics, even when you win you are still retarded.
isn’t that ‘he said she said’ though?
by cagefightonacid on Sep 22, 2009 11:58 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
hmmm but even with this nevada “setback” i think you are seeing these two sides (UFC and big john) getting closer and closer to getting back together. this latest chapter with nevada might be a pretty good indication that they are going to work it out.
it’s a sign from john that he wants back in. it’s a sign from “the man” that they are still pissed at big john. so they are dancing around each other and in a subtle way, coming to terms. maybe that’s a wacky way to interpret all of this but i think we have precedent in how UFC has patched things up with other 3rd parties in the past.
Don’t forget a crucial element- third parties who make them money. Big John doesn’t.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 12:01 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I’m just saying the only people that the UFC (Dana White in particular) ever gets back on good terms with after being at odds are those that make money for them, like Tito.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 12:10 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
doesn’t sound wacky to me, you’re probably right
by cagefightonacid on Sep 22, 2009 12:02 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
isn’t that ‘he said she said’ though?
by cagefightonacid on Sep 22, 2009 12:00 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
sorry about the double post
by cagefightonacid on Sep 22, 2009 12:00 PM EDT via mobile up reply actions
You’re sort of combining a lot of things here.
Because of what John said when he retired, I don’t see anything wrong with the NSAC denying his license, or the UFC not bringing him to Europe.
If the NSAC denied his license because Zuffa told them too, that’s wrong, but there’s nothing wrong with everything else.
I said they're within their rights
but with the dearth of quality refs — at least 1/3 of their current staff are guys Dana has bashed for endangering fighters — its bullshit to keep the best ref in the game out of the cage.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Everytime I watch the UFC now, Iam thinking.....
Where the fuck is Big John at? How long will it take to get his ass back in the cage? Dawg Iam thristy, I have a big cup of Big John Lemonade and I NEED to drink this shit man!
for all intents and purposes, just consider all my posts as works of satire.
Nate did not even talk about the voodoo doll that Kizer and Dana had made!
In all seriousness, I do think there is some malice behind this, but not the same ones talked about here. John opted to walk away for greener pastures and now wants to come back. I think they are telling him that just because he is interested in returning, he should not expect them to let him in right away.
Is Dana trying to keep him out? I don’t know if I think that. But I would say he is likely not making any attempts to smooth the way for his return.
I am not going to get too worked up over it. According to the SD article, the NSAC has added only two refs in the last couple of years. If BJM was turned down and they were adding guys at the same time, it would likely bug me more.
This is not the first time he has tried to get licensed in Nevada. This also has nothing to do with him coming back to greener pastures. You are a ref, and a good ref should be able to work in every state and provided good officiating for the same of the sport and fighters. This is ironically funny because Dana is always complaining about the lack of good refs. Hmm…. =)
by MMASuPreMaCy on Sep 22, 2009 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
You are a ref, and a good ref should be able to work in every state and provided good officiating for the same of the sport and fighters.
He WAS able to do that, he chose to go in another direction. Now that his other endeavors have gone belly-up he wants back but things don’t always work that way.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 2:05 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
this isn't about punishing Big John
this is about having the best possible refs working to ensure fighter safety.
Is there a better ref in MMA than Big John McCarthy?
No.
The man should be reffing the big fights.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
You do realize HE is the one who decided to quit reffing, right? Everyone acts like the guy was fired.
Walla walla walla I'm an idiot.
by ufc4 on Sep 22, 2009 3:23 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
True
but it is also a matter of employment. He is applying for a job. If what Kizer said is correct, that they have added two refs since 06, then they would have to remove somebody else to make space for BJM.
I realize plenty of us could toss names we would like to see gone (and would likely be tossing out many dif names), but I don’t know that you just add him if you don’t have an openning.
Is it as simple as that? Likely not, but it is also not as simple as just bringing him back.
Where are the list of rules?
I can’t find them anywhere on here and rule #4 keeps getting mentioned in this thread.
I need to do a post elaborating on them
and they’re separate from the SBN policy in the footer. Essentially SBN says we can ban anyone at anytime for any reason.
But as the writers and editors of this site, we have created some guidelines as we collaborate on trying to manage the community so that we can have productive free-wheeling discussions of MMA:
1) No threats
2) No fighter bashing, no ethnic slurs, no obscenities, no name-calling
3) No religion or politics unless it’s directly relevant to the MMA topic under discussion and even then, make your point and stop talking about it.
4) Don’t piss off the people who run the site.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
can you call someone a honky?
for all intents and purposes, just consider all my posts as works of satire.
we prefer that you stay away from that sort of stuff
as a redneck cracker ofay whitebread peckerwood myself I can get touchy at unpredictable intervals.
Follow me on Twitter @KidNate
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 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.
