Bombertalk

Jazz_84 wrote:bulldogs wouldn't need bradshaw would they??

I reckon Bradshaw would be a better get for the Dogs than Akermanis.

I must admit that i am disappointed that Aka won't be with us next season. I kind of liked the idea of him up forward with Lloyd and Lucas.

Who should we be targeting as a club now?? I heard on the news tonight that about 12 saints players (including Goddard) are out of contract and are pissed that Thomas has gone. Some might be wanting to leave the club... i would be interested to hear who those players were.

GET RIEWOLDT

beer-man wrote: One club wanted me to front the leadership group to convince them to take me. That's not my go, It is the coach that should make those decisions not the players.

A plan for the future was important.

I was impressed by clubs that explained to me their goals. I'm not just talking about on-field, but the way they intended to grow and improve the place. I wanted to see a clear direction and to be told the role they proposed I would play in that plan.

I thought these were key points. First, was it Essendon that wanted him front the leadership group?

Second, the fact that our board isn't in the best state of affairs given McKissock's lack of "leadership" and subsequent stepping down this year... has this contributed to Akermanis ruling out EFC given the seeming lack of "forward planning" now that we don't have a chairman? Of course, this has only just happened but would the events with McKissock have contributed to his decision?

Just thoughts after reading his column...

Akermanis can state where he wants to go all he likes but if The Doggies don't come up with the best deal, they won't get him.

There is still much wheeling and dealing to be done before the fat lady can sing.

Filthy wrote:

Dizzy_69 wrote:Power + 2nd round pick 4 Aker

Gee how dumb are the Bears? They could have had our 2nd round pick plus as sweeteners to prove what nice guys we are thrown in Reynolds, Bolton and Henno for free!!

Reynolds? Thats about as sweet as a lemon.

I hope the players take note of this as well. Aker would rather play for the dogs than us (and rightly so). I hope it burns the players that a champion would rather go to another team than our team, basically because we are no good.

Jazz_84 wrote:bulldogs wouldn't need bradshaw would they??

I think he would be exactly what they need.

Not done and dusted yet guys and gals.

Lions to decide where Akermanis goes

15 September 2006 Herald-Sun
Damian Barrett and Mark Stevens

THE Brisbane Lions last night threatened to block Jason Akermanis's plans to join the Western Bulldogs next year.


Not a done deal: Brisbane chief executive Michael Bowers has indicated the Lions are prepared to hold off on accepting a deal on Jason Akermanis until the final hour of trade week.

Minutes after waking from an anaesthetic required for shoulder surgery, Akermanis yesterday told the Herald Sun he wanted the Bulldogs to be his new home.

But Brisbane chief executive Michael Bowers indicated the Lions were prepared to hold off on accepting a deal on Akermanis until the final hour of trade week.

``It means nothing. Absolutely nothing. You never know where these things end up,'' Bowers said.

``Trade week hasn't even started yet and, as we all know, not much ever gets done until a couple of minutes before deadline.

``Jason is contracted to the end of next year, and there are three parties who need to agree to any new deal - us, the player and another club.''

After falling out with Lions coach Leigh Matthews this season, Akermanis said he was excited about nominating the Bulldogs as his preferred home.

``I am excited, but I know that until it happens it hasn't happened,'' Akermanis said.

``I just hope Brisbane and the Bulldogs can do the deal.

``I was privately told (by the club) I would get to where I would like to go and I hope that that is still true.

``I would hope they would fulfil that commitment to me.

``I'm not stuffing anyone around by doing this, everyone can see where I want to go and everyone can now move on with that.

``The Bulldogs are where I would like to go, and I would like to think it is good news for me and good news for them.

``It was a difficult decision, but as much as it was difficult, it was a very exciting one.

``I pretty much made my mind up a week ago and I am hopeful that we can now go away and sort out a deal so that we can all move on with our football lives.''

Essendon and the Bulldogs have made the strongest running for Akermanis but Geelong, Richmond, Collingwood and Melbourne are also interested.

The Bulldogs have made it clear they are not prepared to give up a first-round draft pick for Akermanis. With recruiters forecasting a ``super draft'', the Dogs will have pick No.11 if their finals tilt ends tomorrow night in Perth.

The Dogs may be able to nab Akermanis with a second-round pick, but could also have to throw a player into the mix.

Bulldogs coach Rodney Eade last night declined to comment on Akermanis, saying his full focus was on the finals.

Club chief executive Campbell Rose, who met Akermanis last week with president David Smorgon, said yesterday the player's decision was proof of the club's improved status.

``It's great that he's chosen us. We're very pleased,'' Rose said last night. ``But quite frankly, we can't do any more now until trade week.''

``We are keenly and very sharply focused on a very important event on Saturday night.''

The Bombers still haven't ruled themselves out of the hunt and will eagerly watch how events unfold in the lead-up to trade week.

``Ultimately, it's Brisbane's decision where he goes,'' a Bombers spokesman said yesterday.

``There is still a lot of water to go under the bridge.''

The Tigers yesterday confirmed they were out of the race for Akermanis.

``We spoke to him three or four weeks ago and we'll probably leave it at that,'' Tigers director of football Greg Miller said.

Brisbane can dream.

If they are left with Acker on their list at 4:00pm on the last day of trade week, they will have either; had a fire sale of other players, or be delisting other players for us to pick up in the PSD.

They don't have the cap room for Acker, so they can beat their chest all they like but they HAVE to trade Acker and if Acker is only interested in the dogs, then the dogs it shall be....

I was wondering about how they go if a deal isn't struck. Given Akermanis still has a year left on his contract, if no deal comes about by 2pm on the Friday then they're stuck with him on their list... with a clear clash between player and coach. Can they delist a contracted player? I guess so, but they'd have to pay out his contract... and would that put them over the salary cap?

The only way Brisbane get out of this is if they come to a trade agreement. beer-man is on the right track. Brisbane can claim all they like that they have the last say, but when push comes to shove they're the ones who lose if they can't make a deal. They'll either be forced to take less than what they want, or fork out to delist a top line player... or keep his spot on the list next year when he doesn't want to play there and Matthews doesn't want him there.

Boyler_Room wrote:I was wondering about how they go if a deal isn't struck. Given Akermanis still has a year left on his contract, if no deal comes about by 2pm on the Friday then they're stuck with him on their list... with a clear clash between player and coach. Can they delist a contracted player? I guess so, but they'd have to pay out his contract... and would that put them over the salary cap?

The only way Brisbane get out of this is if they come to a trade agreement. beer-man is on the right track. Brisbane can claim all they like that they have the last say, but when push comes to shove they're the ones who lose if they can't make a deal. They'll either be forced to take less than what they want, or fork out to delist a top line player... or keep his spot on the list next year when he doesn't want to play there and Matthews doesn't want him there.

You also need to consider that a number of clubs have expressed interest in Akermanis. If one or more clubs really want him, they may get into a bidding war and Brisbane might end up with more than they expect.

Would/could Aka be the first to bust open the AFL's restictive labour laws, or at least threaten to, if he doesn't get his way?. I would , if I were in his shoes, and Brissy wanted to send me to Carlscum, or the Filth , for example.

uptick wrote:Would/could Aka be the first to bust open the AFL's restictive labour laws, or at least threaten to, if he doesn't get his way?. I would , if I were in his shoes, and Brissy wanted to send me to Carlscum, or the Filth , for example.

If Brisbane did a deal that he didn't like and he decided to go to court over it, by the time it actually got to court and sorted out, trade week, the draft and pre-season draft would all probably be over.

Would the club of his choice leave a spot open on their list in the hope that he would win and would the AFL then allow that club to put him on their list.

It would be a risk IMO

Matthews doesnt like Aker, Brissy no longer like Aker and comments he has made may now come back and bite him. I wouldnt put it beyond Matthews to say "screw you Aker if you want the dogs then we will trade you to Bombers".
We are not out of it by a long shot.

Brisbane's needs: Key Position Defenders (sounds familiar doesn't it)

Bulldogs' needs: more key position players at both ends.

Where does Aker fit?

Pazza wrote:Brisbane's needs: Key Position Defenders (sounds familiar doesn't it)

Bulldogs' needs: more key position players at both ends.

Where does Aker fit?

Probably Collingwood straight swap for

2 words - LUKE BALL.

Out of contract and one of the members of the leadership group spewin about the sacking of Grant Thomas. He'd be a better pick up than aka.

Aker can't be traded without his permission, so Brisbane can't simply trade him to a club he doesn't want.

Given the rumours that his contract had a requirement that he can't be dropped except for form, then I'd say he probably has Brisbane over a barrel.

Personally, I'm relieved he isn't coming here. I don't think we're anywhere near premiership contenders yet, and its unlikely that we will be while he's playing his best footy. Better to get youngsters with picks 18 & 20.

swoodley wrote:
You also need to consider that a number of clubs have expressed interest in Akermanis. If one or more clubs really want him, they may get into a bidding war and Brisbane might end up with more than they expect.

Works both ways. There won't be a bidding war. It'll be a case of who can pick him up the cheapest, IMO. Brisbane can't move without Akermanis giving the nod and vice versa.

I'm curious as to how it plays out if no trade is agreed to.

In this mornings Age, Hutchy reported that Aka was turned off by our offer of a 2 year contract. But we could hardly do otherwise having just given Scotty a 2 year deal, our B&F!!

Plus the Bears are saying whoa!! What about us?

http://www.realfooty.theage.com.au/real ... 36494.html