Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Guys, do you agree with this?


Matt Foley

Recommended Posts

Since i'll probably never meet any women on the huddle I feel safe saying this.

If I see her from the front the first thing I analyze are the tits, then the face, then the ass.

If I see her from the back first, the first thing I notice is her ass,then i come around to see the tits and face.

and if their overweight and don't carry it well then i dont notice anything unless i'm drunk and lonely..at this point i will analyze the lips

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i look at her left ring finger....
Honestly, only if I'm past vaguely interested. Usually it goes: Eyes, boobs, cheekbones, rear, smile, hands (ring glance here, once I've seen if they have man-hands or not), that spot on her neck right above the collarbone (whatever the hell that's called...), legs, eyes again.

Not a fan of red lipstick unless it's worn at night and done in a classy way. Some women can get away with it, but quite a few others can't. It depends on how much else is worn with it, but for me, the less makeup on a woman, the better. Personally, I think all of it is garbage for the most part, but every now and then, I like my woman to get "dressy" like I'd wear a nice suit to a function.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, only if I'm past vaguely interested. Usually it goes: Eyes, boobs, cheekbones, rear, smile, hands (ring glance here, once I've seen if they have man-hands or not), that spot on her neck right above the collarbone (whatever the hell that's called...), legs, eyes again.

Not a fan of red lipstick unless it's worn at night and done in a classy way. Some women can get away with it, but quite a few others can't. It depends on how much else is worn with it, but for me, the less makeup on a woman, the better. Personally, I think all of it is garbage for the most part, but every now and then, I like my woman to get "dressy" like I'd wear a nice suit to a function.

i look at her ring finger to see if the rock is nice....if so, ill attempt to steal it.....

why? what do you look at the ring finger for? :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • It's a decent vid with compelling reasons for his opinion. But, my thing is is that you simply can't draft McMillan thinking he is a surefire WR1. There are questions. His 40---rightly or wrongly---will play a part. I'd think that his splits (which will speak more to his game translating to the pros in my mind) are more important.  As much as you're trying to sell us that McMillan is a don't-overthink-it-type-of-player, I wouldn't say that's the case. Workouts will play a part in all of this.  At this point, I like the thought of Tetairoa. That's as much as I can give you right now.
    • If Canales has helped Bryce a “poo ton” and this is what we have then what’s the fuging point? And the offense wasn’t humming with Dalton in there either, except against the raiders who’ll likely be firing their coach after this season.  XL is probably the fourth best looking receiving option on the team right now behind thielen, Coker, and sanders. I don’t think anyone would disagree with that. Who cares about total receiving yards when everyone else has missed time and there’s like 180 yards of receiving a game to go around   and lmao they were “believing” shut the fug up. They lost and for the most part those games were all the defense shutting down the other team. The chiefs turned around and gave up an actual impressive stat line to Aiden O’Connell and I not even the most delusional raiders fans think that means anything. Bryce did nothing against the eagles, the Bucs are a mash unit, and any one of us could have done that Bryce did against the giants and saints.  And as far as who they’d get, they didn’t have any trouble hiring the guy you’re tripping over yourself to defend. They also could have hired Dan Quinn, who’s actually succeeding with a young qb.  And people are acting like the risk of getting paid for not working for five years is a negative. Canales is going to spend the next half a decade getting paid to watch porn in his Bible camp office.
    • the Dallas game definitely quelled the hype. his biggest issue will always be his size, and that shows when he gets sacked. he's simply not big or strong enough to protect the ball. even in the KC game, he fumbled it on a basic sack and thank god icky landed on it. INT's are going to happen, most fans don't understand that tipped balls and wrong routes account for most interceptions. but the wet-bar-of-soap type fumbles upon contact are a huge reg flag. the common theme with players like Darnold and Mayfield who previously played for us and are now excelling makes me want to practice patience more when it comes to the QB position. I think Bryce bought himself another season, perhaps with more weapons. I do like the idea of adding a QB whether that's a FA or mid round rookie. if the same mistakes occur next season and we see no further growth or most importantly, wins, then it will be time to move on. just a quick reminder though, football is not an individual sport. QB is just one position, albeit the most important. 
×
×
  • Create New...