The consolidated Fev thread

Joel · Post by **Joel** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:00 pm

As I said in another thread, we'd have the 2 best set shots at goal in the league with him in the side. He'd also provide a foil for Anthony while he develops.

I've made my mind up - we should get him, provided the price is right.

Podpicken · Post by **Podpicken** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:07 pm

RudeBoy wrote:
Piesnchess wrote:Anyone heard from Bucks or MM on this ??
I'd love us to get Fev, but I seem to recall the last time Carlton shopped him around, Bucks suggesting he wouldn't be in his side if it was up to him. The one thing going for us is that apparently Eddie quite likes Fev. I guess we'll all know soon enough.

Bucks is the one who actually wants him as his pet project

Piesnchess · Post by **Piesnchess** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:07 pm

^ I read on here that the "football department" are hesitant to get him. Just WHO is on this football dept?-not left overs from the Macallister days is it, when we missed out on the Plugger.???

melliot · Post by **melliot** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:09 pm

favourites 2008 wrote:

I think this says it all. We have our very own fev sitting in our laps.

Edit. Sorry. My mistake. Comparision is legit.

Piesnchess · Post by **Piesnchess** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:09 pm

I would say the YES vote is overwhelming, the ayes have it folks.

Piesnchess · Post by **Piesnchess** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:13 pm

rocketronnie wrote:
Piesnchess wrote:^ Bite the bullet or we miss out Ronnie. That is what we would have to give if we went thru with this, it wont be an easy deal. Whats MM thinking, and Bucks i wonder.?
Do you ever think beyond YOUR immediate needs?

And if you think it would end with who we lose in the deal your dead wrong. So we give up our next 10 year player full back/CHB in Nathan Brown. Dawes will want out also - no way he'll sit in the seconds with that tool prancing around in the seniors. So there goes your ten year full forward. I doubt Jack and him will work well either so there goes Jack's development. Fevola's goal hungry demands for the ball, if honoured at Collingwood, will marginalise Medhurst. Leon and the other small forwards that are the extra dynamic we have in the forward line. Down goes their output.

And what happens when he goes missing every second game as he tends to do?

Fevola won't win us a premiership, deficiencies in his position is not the reason why we lost this year and his addition won't value add in those positions we need to improve in.

Just say no to Fevola!

Just remember Ronnie, we kicked a measley SIX pathetic goals in the Prelim Final, with this forward line. I repeat, SIX lousy goals.

charmer · Post by **charmer** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:29 pm

The Collingwood heirarchy are being very quiet about it - which is a good sign IMO. we are working on something behind closed doors and aren't letting the media ruin it (ala when we almost landed Wayne Carey at the last second except this time we'll go one better).

lets get him pies!! i'd love him to kick a bag against the scum and put them out of finals contention!!

melliot · Post by **melliot** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:30 pm

Its the reverse of the Plugger one.

Get Lockett?
Footy Dept Voted - Yes
Board Voted - No

It seems (from the roumors and press) to be the opposite with Fev.

Get Fev?
Eddie Votes - Yes
Footy Dept - No

Hmmmmmm. Wonder if Eddie can talk em around?

rocketronnie · Post by **rocketronnie** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:45 pm

melliot wrote:Its the reverse of the Plugger one.

Get Lockett?
Footy Dept Voted - Yes
Board Voted - No

It seems (from the roumors and press) to be the opposite with Fev.

Get Fev?
Eddie Votes - Yes
Footy Dept - No

Hmmmmmm. Wonder if Eddie can talk em around?

The Football Department - including Malthouse, Buckley and Walsh - know a thing or two about the Collingwood Football Team and its needs going forward. Which is more than I can say for the majority of the posters in all these Fevola threads who once again are unfortunately caught in our traditional mode of big-name quick-fix hysteria. Ho-hum.....

gobbles21 · Post by **gobbles21** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:46 pm

Piesnchess wrote:Anyone heard from Bucks or MM on this ??

Yep. They both phoned me this afternoon...

rocketronnie · Post by **rocketronnie** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:50 pm

Piesnchess wrote:
rocketronnie wrote:
Piesnchess wrote:^ Bite the bullet or we miss out Ronnie. That is what we would have to give if we went thru with this, it wont be an easy deal. Whats MM thinking, and Bucks i wonder.?
Do you ever think beyond YOUR immediate needs?

And if you think it would end with who we lose in the deal your dead wrong. So we give up our next 10 year player full back/CHB in Nathan Brown. Dawes will want out also - no way he'll sit in the seconds with that tool prancing around in the seniors. So there goes your ten year full forward. I doubt Jack and him will work well either so there goes Jack's development. Fevola's goal hungry demands for the ball, if honoured at Collingwood, will marginalise Medhurst. Leon and the other small forwards that are the extra dynamic we have in the forward line. Down goes their output.

And what happens when he goes missing every second game as he tends to do?

Fevola won't win us a premiership, deficiencies in his position is not the reason why we lost this year and his addition won't value add in those positions we need to improve in.

Just say no to Fevola!
Just remember Ronnie, we kicked a measley SIX pathetic goals in the Prelim Final, with this forward line. I repeat, SIX lousy goals.

Due to the midfield collapsing. How's recruiting the scum's defective cast-off going to improve that? Do tell...

John Wren · Post by **John Wren** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:59 pm

jack_spain wrote:You know what really riles me about this speculation?

Last year some Collingwood supporters (including myself) were resigned to getting rid of Heater and Dids because of their off-field stuff-ups.

Now some people want the biggest off-field stuffer-upper around.

Sure he might kick some goals, but at what price? Affecting the culture of our playing group and further delaying the important development of our youngsters.

I for one would not be keen to trade Dawes away (with ten years of good football in him) for a Fev who might have two years at best.

but the eddie football club may entertain the idea.

thebaldfacts · Post by **thebaldfacts** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:05 pm

Pick 14 at the absolute most. He is damaged goods.

If they want Dawes, then pick 30 and Dawes.

Remember the scum don't want him because he is trouble and not too much interest being shown by other clubs at this stage.

No-one is going to give more than a late 1st round pick for a 29 year old who is a nutcase and who you can't guarantee wont go off the rails.

Magpie_Dan · Post by **Magpie_Dan** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:07 pm

Excellent post Witty mate, lets get Fev! This is a bloke that could help take us to the promised land!

fence-banger · Post by **fence-banger** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:08 pm

jmcp wrote:i'd like to change my vote to YES.

Just made a slight correction ... ahh, now that's better

This is an unofficial Bulletin Board - owned and run by its users. We welcome all fans of the Mighty Collingwood Football Club.

The consolidated Fev thread

Fevola?