Transfer Thread 10.0 - 2017 January Window

[cgf]

sure most women like sex. most women do not seek multiple partners in a matter of week or two though.

If they're single, have the time and opportunity with people they're attracted to? I think you'll be surprised...and the single part isn't the biggest factor I mentioned.

you are confusing attraction with them actually **** you. sense of security is one of the most important thing for women, that's why even if they want to bang you right away it usually takes few dates for them to get to know you before they actually do. i did my fair share of whoring but i know what you see in resort towns like antalya far from normalcy in adulthood.

I've never been with a girl that there was any chemistry with who waited a few dates to take me to bed; over a third of them didn't get to know me until after we had woken up in each other's arms, and a few of those waited until we had done so a couple of times. A girl can feel comfortable around you very quickly.

And you may well be right on that last point, don't remember much of my time in turkey as I was a kid and not too worried about getting laid, so I can't comment on that. My gripe was just with the term loose since it's touches on some interesting conversations I've had the past few days and is one of those things that annoys me; just like I get annoyed when someone changes their gender just because they didn't fit established gender roles rather than having a real reason.

[El Turco]

i think you misunderstand the meaning of loose. it is not whether somebody likes sex or not, more to do with ease and willingness. and stop hanging around crackhouses pal :)

[cgf]

I know what you meant I just hate that word for it. Call them sexually aggressive and I don't have any qualms.

[magik9113]

glad that that's settled but forgot what i was going to say now...
:lol:

[Baphomet]

[J-Mezzy]

Loose is the right term. Guys are aggressive and thus people use the term dogs, girls give it up which makes them loose. Doesn't make one better than the other, but loose is the right term.

[J-Mezzy]

Btw, I personally hate how pathetic us guys act. Some guys really act like dogs chasing a bone. Quite pathetic and disrespectful to women and their own self worth.

[cgf]

Loose is the right term. Guys are aggressive and thus people use the term dogs, girls give it up which makes them loose. Doesn't make one better than the other, but loose is the right term.

That's my issue with the terminology. Women aren't "giving it up". They are getting what they want, just like us.

[DD12]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzRDjL-a5qY

oh now i like james

[J-Mezzy]

Meh. A lot of women are aggressive, but a lot of the girls who have have a lot of sex do give it up. It's often a matter of insecurity as it is with men. I've known girls to say not going to do it, not going to do it, and then they do.

Guys who chase are also insecure, need to prove their manhood to themselves.

[cgf]

Meh. A lot of women are aggressive, but a lot of the girls who have have a lot of sex do give it up. It's often a matter of insecurity as it is with men. I've known girls to say not going to do it, not going to do it, and then they do.

Guys who chase are also insecure, need to prove their manhood to themselves.

As you say though that's just that people being insecure, that happens with both genders. Especially since a lot of girls who have a lot of sex are just being aggressive/curious. Sometimes a girl may not aggressively be after it but still be possibly interested, just like you're more likely to be attracted to a girl hitting on you than if the same girl made you chase her.

I just hate the way the language makes sex this thing where men are taking something from women instead of two people sharing a magnificent experience. It's a archaic way of thinking about sex that perserveres on the same impulses that help all other outdated Puritanical thought that we have not yet eliminated survive and that underly America's ongoing cultural hang-ups with sex.

[DD12]

Y'all shut the **** up please. This is a transfer thread and look what you guys are talking about smh

[5DOM]

Yeah so where's Arda going to?

[J-Mezzy]

Arda should go to Galatasaray.

[ardee]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzRDjL-a5qY

oh now i like james

Man Colombion kids really love their soccer players.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Zq1ziDEuz4[/youtube]

Then again, if I met Kobe I'd probably bawl my eyes out and I'm in my 20s.

[El Turco]

Thats pathetic

[El Turco]

Arda should go to Galatasaray.

Eventually he will, for now it looks like he is going to england. Hopefully arsenal.

[treiz]

Huh, Ings looks like he's a lot taller than that.

I think you're being too harsh on the player Carroll was coming up because of how he bombed. At newcastle his work rate against the ball and his hold up play to bring others in were traits I remember their fans hailing, he was a lot more well rounded than someone like Crouch before he lost all confidence at the disaster known as Liverpool FC.

Either way I don't think he's good enough to be their primary backup given how injury prone Sturridge is.

Ings is pretty good in the air despite his size. Maybe that's why

Main difference between the two is that Carroll is a target man whereas Ings is more well rounded, he's also a decent dribbler with good pace. He's pretty good at getting behind the defenders with his pace as he did a lot this year playing with Ashley Barnes (who's really good at winning the first header after a long ball). Carroll never was & never will be a guy who beats a defender for pace, like you said he was a lot more well rounded than Crouch, but he's still completely different to Ings.

Nonetheless, I agree in that if he plays the majority of the games for Liverpool up front it's not going to be a good sign for them despite the talent behind him in Firmino/Sterling/Coutinho/Milner.

That and his bulky upper body, he reminds me of heskey's build now that I know he's short. So that's probably why I figured he was taller than me. Same way it always blows me away when I'm reminded that Hulk is short.

Is Ings actually good at getting behind the line, or did he just take advantage of some crap defending this year? Cause he hasn't looked very fast in this tourney.

The long ball was their main source of offense, with Ashley Barnes being the one that knocks it down. The stats even show that Burnley played the most long balls last year too.

I think he's actually average at best at it, but due to the high amount of long balls Burnley played Ings had plenty of opportunity to run in behind.

[magik9113]

Y'all shut the **** up please. This is a transfer thread and look what you guys are talking about smh

Anka Turkish Grill....good nyc restaurant?

[cgf]

Huh, I could guess I could see him being useful then, but moreso as a 3rd choice guy.

Either way I'm hoping they get Bacca so Firmino has someone to feed when Sturridge is hurt...assuming Markovic doesn't suddenly reach his full potential at this very second.