Remove this Banner Ad

News NWM stays at Saints (Will Faulkner wrong about being crows bound)

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

I agree. If Bergman had not signed on by now I think most of us would consider him gone.
I'm not convinced Bergman is staying. His trade value has increased because of him being "under contract". It's Ports way to buy their way into trade week with a 72 off suit poker hand.
 
I'm not convinced Bergman is staying. His trade value has increased because of him being "under contract". It's Ports way to buy their way into trade week with a 72 off suit poker hand.
So all that "talk" Bergman said was just lip service then? Hmmm interesting.:rolleyes:
 
I'm not convinced Bergman is staying. His trade value has increased because of him being "under contract". It's Ports way to buy their way into trade week with a 72 off suit poker hand.

If Bergman wanted to leave he would never have signed an extension because it is so much harder to leave when contracted.

He's a massive part of Port's future.
 
Trade value increased? Port illustrated last year that they will not hold players to contract anyway lol
That's beside the point. As it stands now we cant buy a ticket into trade week unless we do some clever accounting.

Unless we are resigned to Butters leaving this season for trade value, what have we got in reserve? future firsts til 2030?
 
Excuse my scepticism when it comes to AFL player contracts in the 2020's.

What was the benefit for the player (Bergman) to sign if he intended to move to St. Kilda at the end of this season?

He didn't even meet with St. Kilda to listen to their pitch. Didn't meet with any Club other than Port before electing to re-sign.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

What was the benefit for the player (Bergman) to sign if he intended to move to St. Kilda at the end of this season?

He didn't even meet with St. Kilda to listen to their pitch. Didn't meet with any Club other than Port before electing to re-sign.
Who said St. Kilda? There are multi team trades that is likely to occur. Just need a sucker club to hand over something of value to pass onto the Saints.
 
Who said St. Kilda? There are multi team trades that is likely to occur. Just need a sucker club to hand over something of value to pass onto the Saints.

You're missing the point.

What was the benefit for the player to sign an extension with Port if they intended on moving to Victoria at the end of the season?

You're looking at this from the view of benefitting the Club, not the player.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

You're missing the point.

What was the benefit for the player to sign an extension with Port if they intended on moving to Victoria at the end of the season?

You're looking at this from the view of benefitting the Club, not the player.
I’d personally give up on this one, you’d be better off trying to explain this to a door knob.
 
You're missing the point.

What was the benefit for the player to sign an extension with Port if they intended on moving to Victoria at the end of the season?

You're looking at this from the view of benefitting the Club, not the player.

So you mean Bergman is incapable of playing along knowing he is still gets a good deal and gets to go home. Otherwise if the trade falls through, then he still has security here.

Nothing in the rules that would prevent this trade strategy from occurring.
 
I’d personally give up on this one, you’d be better off trying to explain this to a door knob.

Maybe they're related to Phantom in the NWM thread on the main forum who keeps talking about Bergman as a trade possibility lol.
 
That tony ITK guy does not know a thing

Naisah has been ice cold with this, no one knows.

if his manager his haggling for extra money from the aints, then the media would be like 'hes looking to stay and finalising a deal' ect ect, the fact nothing has been said i actually think we are a chance.
 
So you mean Bergman is incapable of playing along knowing he is still gets a good deal and gets to go home. Otherwise if the trade falls through, then he still has security here.

Nothing in the rules that would prevent this trade strategy from occurring.

With all due respect, there is literally no benefit for the player to do that. It is much easier for a player to move whilst out of contract. For starters, why would they want their new club to pay more in trade compensation for him because he's contracted? That doesn't help his new Club at all. This isn't a bleeding heart scenario. Players are selfish. They want the best deal for themselves, they don't care about the Clubs once they decide to move on.

Even if he wanted to leave to go back to Victoria, and a trade couldn't be finalised, Port would have given him a further extension if necessary.

He was so fixated on staying at Port that he didn't even entertain listening to other pitches from Victorian clubs who were lining up to present to him, before he signed his new contract extension. That does not in any way, shape, or form, suggest he's a player who is looking to leave.

Your hypothetical is so far out there that it is bordering on lunacy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top