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!

     

Tats: sexy or no?


lola

Recommended Posts

I love tats on guys and think they look hot on girls too, in moderation of course. Do you guys think tats in general are trampy or does it just depend on what and where it is?

Edit: I already know what you think Biscuit :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tats are like Christmas lights in the yard. Too many and its busy and annoying. A few strategically placed and its all good. I dont like when people are literally going out of their way to wear something just so you see the ink. Seems self centered to me.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The person makes the tats. Not the other way around.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

 

This..granted I still don't care for them on females. My ex was infatuated with them and as soon as we broke up she probably went and added a couple more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's something about a woman with a half-sleeve that gets me every time.

I endorse this message. Also My ex had a big one from her hip bone all the way up her side that was hot. Any thing on the legs or lower back I'm not a fan of *** tats are trashy as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not gonna lie, that's hot.

 

Yeah it is.

 

I mean pstall is right... if a girl is hot, she's hot... but yes, in general tastefully done tats are very hot.  It adds a... mystique... idk.

 

Let me put it this way... nice tats can make an avg person 5-7, a 8-9...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lola has a point as well (went back and re-read)... type and placement is key...

 

Barbed wire on the bicep is pretty much analogous to an angel wing tramp stamp.

 

 

There's a chick in our gym...  thin, avg looking, nothing really special about her, but she has this tat on her leg that's like a tail that runs from under her shorts down the back of her leg... my god it's hot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Congratulations do they know who the father is?
    • In my opinion Fitterer was probably right about not paying McCaffrey. Now not wanting to "pay RBs" in my opinion isn't something you want to set in stone, to me it all comes down to the individual.
    • Maybe I'm just not understanding, but everywhere that I have read says that signing bonuses go against the cap prorated by as much as five years. The following example uses Andrew Luck's rookie contract as an example. "Take Andrew Luck, the first overall pick in the 2012 NFL draft. Luck signed a four-year contract with the Colts worth $22.1 million and included a $14.5 million signing bonus. Rather than a $14.5 million cap hit in 2012, the Colts spread out his signing bonus over the life of his contract. The hit against the cap would be $3.625 million per year over four years instead of a direct cap hit of $14.5 million directly in 2012. This gave the Colts more leverage and cap flexibility in signing other players." https://www.the33rdteam.com/nfl-signing-bonuses-explained/ I don't know why some of you think that signing bonuses aren't counted against the cap over the length of the contract, but whatever.   "The bonus with a signing is usually the most garish aspect of a rookie contract. Bonus is the immediate cash players receive when they ink a deal. It factors into the cap, but only for the whole contract duration, in terms of salary cap calculations. In the case of Bryce Young’s $24.6 million signing bonus, that’s prorated to approximately $6.15 million per season over a four-year deal. This format allows teams to handle the cap and provides rookies with some short-term fiscal stability, which is important given the high injury risk in this league." https://collegefootballnetwork.com/how-rookie-contracts-work-in-the-nfl/ I understand how signing bonuses can be a useful tool in order to manage the cap, and as one of the article suggests, signing bonuses may become important if you have a tight cap, but the bill is always going to come due. I'm not necessarily referring to you Tuka, but it seems to me that others simply don't want to understand that fact which is why they're reacting to what I'm saying negatively. How odd. In any event, I have a better general understanding of why signing bonuses are used now, and it's generally to fit salaries under the cap. Surely players, whether they be rookies or not, love a signing bonus because they get a good portion of their money up front. This in turn gives them more security and probably amounts to tax benefits as well. I also understand why teams would not want to use signing bonuses, particularly for players or draftees who have a higher probability of being gone before a contract even ends.
×
×
  • Create New...