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!

     

mass gainers


Saint J

Recommended Posts

I prefer cytogainer, at least thats what I used the last run I had at it. Never really had monster, but I like it over true mass and up your mass.

Of course if you are not eating right and have a strict routine, you'll get fat quick.

Remember that the best protein comes straight from lean foods and no supplement can beat that, so make sure you combine this with the gainer.

On a side note: NOxplode was a crazy experience. It had a crazy bad taste that was really strong, but adding 10lbs in barbells was no effort what-so-ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more with Pstall on this one. Fug mass. Guys that look like Jersey Shore ****** with the fake ass muscles, 9 times out of 10 I could kick their asses. It just shows they're compensating for lack of fighting skill by trying to look physically larger, or compensating from lack of mass below the belt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more with Pstall on this one. Fug mass. Guys that look like Jersey Shore ****** with the fake ass muscles, 9 times out of 10 I could kick their asses. It just shows they're compensating for lack of fighting skill by trying to look physically larger, or compensating from lack of mass below the belt.

Well a lot of people don't take mass gainers to get huge like those guys. The idea is that you do a bulk phase followed by a cut phase. Muscles need calories and protein and thats what these gainers provide.

A lot of the huge guys you see don't do it on mass gainers, believe that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well a lot of people don't take mass gainers to get huge like those guys. The idea is that you do a bulk phase followed by a cut phase. Muscles need calories and protein and thats what these gainers provide.

A lot of the huge guys you see don't do it on mass gainers, believe that.

But the one's who aren't using mass gainers have fat. Like you said, you need protein and calories in your diet, which means unless your eating special diet foods your probably getting a lot of fat too. They don't have that ridiculous definition. If a guy looks like he got his muscle on a farm, I'll leave them alone. If a dude looks like he spends all day alternating between the gym and tanning booth, I'll make him choke on his Prada sunglasses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I know what you're saying. Anyone staying on mass gainers for an extended period are setting themselves up for trouble.

For some of those guys, the shots in the butt really don't help.

I like the Popeye ones, all arms, no body.

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...