View Full Version : Do you want ACKER?
doggies
17 Aug 2006, 18:07
Following up from the other thread, Eade saying that we are chasing him....what do u all think about getting ACKER?
I like pembleton view - if the price is right - for me, that's a second round pick and a player at the very most
He certainly would be a big help to the Bulldogs side. He is an experienced player with 3 GF medlas he would be a nice fit.
However I do not want to give up a lot to get him. I would be pretty annoyed if we give our first round pick to Brisbane. I would much rather a 2nd. Then they would also want a player and who would that be? I don't think Power would seal the deal. Brisbane are going to take the best possible deal for him which is understandable, why wouldn't they? But if another team stepped up like Richmond or Essendon and offered a 1st Rd'er and a player I would prefer the Bulldogs just let him go there. If they don't I'd be more than welcome to get him for a bargain price.
doggies
17 Aug 2006, 18:32
well, the one vote for the 1st rounder is from a port adelaide supporter - the reason why its called a donkey vote, so lets just ignore that one.
Monkster
17 Aug 2006, 23:32
Nope and I would refuse to renew my membership if we got him. Couldn't stand to see that piece of dirt running around in a Bulldogs jumper.
stevebiscuit
18 Aug 2006, 09:44
I am at a bit of a loss here.
In what way would he improve the structure of our team long term?
At best he might play as a forward pocket for a couple of years and take up a portion of our salary cap, would he be taking over Robbins' spot?
Scoring is not our problem. (When we have Hahn, Guido and Murphy anyway)
soupaman
19 Aug 2006, 00:23
The point is by recruiting him we would have a high profile matchwinner who qwould not only win several matches for us (we would have beaten Geelong, Roos...) but would take a good defender, meaning Johnno and Robbins would be on a lesser defender than usual, making our entire fowardline more dangerous. Also enables Johnno to swap with him through the middle for short bursts.
I am at a bit of a loss here.
In what way would he improve the structure of our team long term?
At best he might play as a forward pocket for a couple of years and take up a portion of our salary cap, would he be taking over Robbins' spot?
Scoring is not our problem. (When we have Hahn, Guido and Murphy anyway)
Yes, agree. Aker has been a great player, but I don't believe he is what we should be targeting. According to Thursday's Age, Eade said this :
"The thing where we are at, with 25 or 26 to pick from and no tall players, (running hard is) really our big asset. We don't take pack marks, we haven't got tall players, we haven't got strong bodies....so that's what we've got to do every week."
So why get another running / outside player into the team when run and carry has been dismantled by strong defensive teams? We need pack markers and talls, says Eade about the state of our team now. But shouldn't we be targeting these type of players for the future. I reckon we have to go for another stronger body in the middle (a Mitch Hahn type) and a moblie tall who can pack mark and play 200 games for us (like a Chris Grant). Perhaps we have Tom Williams in the wings, but injuries are with all teams and we need to be able to cover such injuries. And I would want any inclusions to be younger than 25 because I do not think a grand final is automatically just around the corner. We will have to pay our dues first. A tougher, more intense brand of football will be needed if we are to break the defensive shackles of teams like the Swans and Crows in the biggest game of the year.
I wonder what the affect will be of having yet another player retire in a couple of years, if we get Aker. JMHO.
bulldogtragic
20 Aug 2006, 13:28
I am at a bit of a loss here.
In what way would he improve the structure of our team long term?
At best he might play as a forward pocket for a couple of years and take up a portion of our salary cap, would he be taking over Robbins' spot?
Scoring is not our problem. (When we have Hahn, Guido and Murphy anyway)
Agreed. I think Acker would be looking at Robbin's spot.
Sam Power with Acker is better than Matty Robbins with Acker - For structure, future and many things. So if a player had to be sacrificed i'd say begrudingly Matty Robbins.
Benno From Berwick
20 Aug 2006, 13:59
Agreed. I think Acker would be looking at Robbin's spot.
Sam Power with Acker is better than Matty Robbins with Acker - For structure, future and many things. So if a player had to be sacrificed i'd say begrudingly Matty Robbins.
Matty Robbins will retire at the end of next season.
Why would the Lions be interested in him?
Make sure that the deals that we are suggesting makes sense.
bulldogtragic
20 Aug 2006, 18:10
Matty Robbins will retire at the end of next season.
Why would the Lions be interested in him?
Make sure that the deals that we are suggesting makes sense.
I dont think we need him. For me it's a second rounder only - Without another player. Particularly, not Sam.