Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

jack_spain wrote:

Neil Appleby wrote:I don't want Fev at our club and I'm starting to breathe easier!

Eddie wants him and the majority of supporters want him if you believe the polls. The Board is divided.

This article says the Board will finalise its position over the weekend. Maxy comes out on Saturday night and says no. Maxy wouldn't say this unless it was cleared at the highest level. I reckon the Board decided Saturday some time to leave this one alone.

To all the Pro-Fev people in here, you will watch as Fev implodes again and again and thank your lucky stars that Collingwood said no.

I'm loving the way this issue has split the Nick's great divide. People are totally unpredictable on this issue.

Fancy me, RR and Pietillidie getting into the same bed over this one.

But I think you are absolutely right this time Neil. Fev is worse than a loose cannon. He's a suicide bomber ready to go off.

There is no way Eddie can possibly save face after the way he was publicly humiliated over the Heater-Didak incident, and then turn around and welcome the biggest off-field boozer and layabout in the AFL.

Listen people, if Judd couldn't help steer a Fev goalfest to a premiership, Fev will have little impact on our chances at all.

Jackie I feel the love!

What staggers me is the conclusion people have come to that our great weakness is the full forward line when its clearly still our developing midfield. Putting Fevola at full forward isn't going to do a thing to change that situation. In fact its likely that he will be subject to the same pressures the rest of our forward line is when a Johnson helicopter floats in.

People say we need to learn from teams like Geelong. They are right, we should. And the key lesson from them is the importance of continuity in list development. Geelong are who they are now because they kept their young players together through thick and thin until they have reached a point where the understanding and bonding between them is very highly pitched indeed. I suspect we are going down that path too and to trade away developing players who are part of that group for a self-centred, undisciplined individualist who plays for no-one but himself can do nothing but harm to the fabric of the team in the long run.

Watching Nicks this week has been like watching a bunch of myopic lemmings searching for Eldorado but heading straight for the cliff...

rocketronnie wrote:

People say we need to learn from teams like Geelong. They are right, we should. And the key lesson from them is the importance of continuity in list development. Geelong are who they are now because they kept their young players together through thick and thin until they have reached a point where the understanding and bonding between them is very highly pitched indeed. I suspect we are going down that path too and to trade away developing players who are part of that group for a self-centred, undisciplined individualist who plays for no-one but himself can do nothing but harm to the fabric of the team in the long run.

+1

rocketronnie wrote:
Watching Nicks this week has been like watching a bunch of myopic lemmings searching for Eldorado but heading straight for the cliff...

It's the fevola virus.

rocketronnie wrote:
Watching Nicks this week has been like watching a bunch of myopic lemmings searching for Eldorado but heading straight for the cliff...

What, just this week???

There's many scenario's that could have occurred for Max to say this.


Personally I think we should be going hell for leather for Fev. I laugh at you guys saying Pick 30 or nothing. You guys have no clue. He is a contracted player, so Carlton can retain him if they want. Fev is worth a first round pick + more.



But, these scenario's could have all occurred.


1. Carlton are requesting a ridiculous trade for Fev. That would tell me that they were never serious about getting rid of Fev to begin with. It was all just a ploy to scare him.


2. Brisbane's offer has been accepted, in which case Collingwood are ruling themselves out of the trade to take the moral high ground as opposed to being publicly embarrassed that our offer was beaten.


3. Maxwell is making a stance on behalf of the players.




Personally, unless the Fev deal has already been done and we are trying to deny we were ever in the hunt....I would've preferred Max to say:

"I'm sure we've approached him, but its up to the selectors to determine whether he is a good fit for our club or not. We don't want to stall the progress of guys like Dawes, Anthony and Cloke and getting Fevola may mean less opportunities for these guys. But you can't ignore Fev and I'm sure the recruiters will make the right call"



--------------------------------

Further, I was speaking to my best mate who is cousins with the membership boss at Carlton.

Though she has little input in recruiting etc, she told him that Carlton under no circumstance would ever trade Fevola to Collingwood. We are close to a flag and the fans would be in uproar if Fev won a flag at Collingwood. They would lose far too many members.

It's far easier to deal with Brisbane because the fans wouldn't be so outraged.


One of the problems with being a high profile club like Collingwood. No one wants to deal with us...especially our biggest rival.

swoop42 wrote:^Think you'll find the majority of those against Fevola were some of MM biggest supporters!

Let's not let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy though.

Really, I have seen atleast 2 of Micks biggest haters voicing very strong anti Fevola feelings

2. Brisbane's offer has been accepted, in which case Collingwood are ruling themselves out of the trade to take the moral high ground as opposed to being publicly embarrassed that our offer was beaten.

Dave

I thought it was illegal for trades to occur until trade week?

Correct me if I am wrong.. we all know players are approached by clubs, but actual deals I thought had to wait

rocketronnie wrote: People say we need to learn from teams like Geelong. They are right, we should. And the key lesson from them is the importance of continuity in list development. Geelong are who they are now because they kept their young players together through thick and thin until they have reached a point where the understanding and bonding between them is very highly pitched indeed. I suspect we are going down that path too and to trade away developing players who are part of that group for a self-centred, undisciplined individualist who plays for no-one but himself can do nothing but harm to the fabric of the team in the long run.

That's the last word on this issue for me. Well said. I really hope the Board gets to the right answer this weekend. If they decide it's Fev, I'll support, but I can't believe they will see it other than as you suggest, Rocket.

Not denying what you've been told Dave, but that would be cutting off their nose to spite their face. Brisbane and Carlton are at about the same level, giving Brisbane a top name FF effectively raises them up with Pies/Dogs/Crows. I would say the Lions are as big a threat to the Blues at the moment as Collingwood, if not more.

If a club makes list decisions based on "oh no the members wont like it" then they deserve everything they get (and don't get).

*edit* In principle agreements can be made, clubs just aren't allowed to talk to players, but they can contact each other and talk with managers.

The great thing about our midfield now, IMHO, is that if you get a "big body" midfielder, ie. Burgoyne, Harris, all the others who have been thrown around, very quickly their spot will be taken by one of our up and comming mids. You remember those ones, the ones on our list already!

You don't need 8 big bodied mids to win a premiership, but you need a few I agree, so that's Swan / Didak / O'Bree tick, is Burgoyne going to take Pendlebury or Davis spot? no. So he's going to be fighting for a spot with Beams / Wellingham / Sidebottom? already one of those is going to miss out.

So who is it? And how long do they miss out for? Is there a spot for him for the rest of his career? And if so (ie 5 years or more) who do we get rid of in order to fit him in? Of all those mentioned, Sidebottom and Beams look like they will be BETTER than Borgoyne in the next two years. Wellingham probably, or at least as good as. O'Bree? He's the obvious target (although probably unfairly, he does his job).

So we've replaced a mature midfielder with a mature midfielder.

It just doesn't make sense.

Get Jolly, then see if we can get Fev without giving away the kitchen sink.

- Ben

pietillidie wrote:

RudeBoy wrote:

pietillidie wrote:

Doska#6 wrote:Expect Maxy to come out and say we don't need Jolly because Fraser is his best mate, this club is a joke if our players are calling the shots.

Surely the alarm kicks in when you reach the stage you actually imagine your opinion ought to be worth more than that of the club captain.

Disagree with you there pietillidie. Maxwell should not be commenting on who the club might or might not trade for. His job is to lead whoever is on our list. Naturally, he will be loyal to his current teammates, but he should not be speaking about possible trades. If anyone, that is the job of the coach.

I'm not sure why you would assume just because his opinion does not align with yours he's not speaking for the club.

As captain his job is also to set the ethos of the team. Few do it better. I think I'll stand by the bloke who puts his body on the line for the club week in week out and came second in the B&F.

In any case, the actual comments he made are not a definitive statement on Fevola. They have been craftily arranged as such in the article.

I see your point pietillidie, but even if Maxy had come and said he'd like us to get Fev, I don't think it's appropriate for the captain to comment on these matters. I think there are roles and responsibilities within clubs, and recruiting is not one of the captain's. Just my opinion.

Fev or no Fev

It aint Maxwells call.

DaVe86 wrote:There's many scenario's that could have occurred for Max to say this.


Personally I think we should be going hell for leather for Fev. I laugh at you guys saying Pick 30 or nothing. You guys have no clue. He is a contracted player, so Carlton can retain him if they want. Fev is worth a first round pick + more.

We're not desperate for Fev. No one is. Carlton though, do seem desperate to get rid of him, it seems the players don't want him back, nor does Fevola want to be back anymore.

DaVe86 wrote: 2. Brisbane's offer has been accepted, in which case Collingwood are ruling themselves out of the trade to take the moral high ground as opposed to being publicly embarrassed that our offer was beaten.

Brisbane are out of the race mate. There would be no deal accepted now anyway. This one will go down to Friday, teams will wait it out, hoping the Blues really are desperate.

DaVe86 wrote: 3. Maxwell is making a stance on behalf of the players.

Not the only possibility, but a fair one. They are the ones that would have to play with nonce. Much more likely, especially given Mick's Copeland comments, that the club has already made the decision, doubt Nick would be speaking out of turn.

DaVe86 wrote: One of the problems with being a high profile club like Collingwood. No one wants to deal with us...especially our biggest rival.

Wouldn't say no one. But, if Fev were going cheap, which I think he will, as I don't see too many teams showing strong interest, Carlton would do whatever they can to make sure he doesn't come here. Suits me fine, I don't want him whatever the price, I think he'd set us backwards not take us forward.

nulla wrote:

2. Brisbane's offer has been accepted, in which case Collingwood are ruling themselves out of the trade to take the moral high ground as opposed to being publicly embarrassed that our offer was beaten.

Dave

I thought it was illegal for trades to occur until trade week?

Correct me if I am wrong.. we all know players are approached by clubs, but actual deals I thought had to wait

in-principle agreements.

perhaps deals can't be officially done until trade week. But all the discussions have happened.

If we've met with Carlton and they've told us that what we have to offer is not going to get the job done....then I'm not suprised Maxwell has come out and ruled us out of the race.

Makes it look like we were never interested and therefore it wasn't that we were too stingy at the trade table.

Wokko wrote:Not denying what you've been told Dave, but that would be cutting off their nose to spite their face. Brisbane and Carlton are at about the same level, giving Brisbane a top name FF effectively raises them up with Pies/Dogs/Crows. I would say the Lions are as big a threat to the Blues at the moment as Collingwood, if not more.

If a club makes list decisions based on "oh no the members wont like it" then they deserve everything they get (and don't get).

*edit* In principle agreements can be made, clubs just aren't allowed to talk to players, but they can contact each other and talk with managers.

Everyone has their sources come trade week and 99.99% of them turn out to be wrong. Mine most likely is bullshit as well...but its still worth putting up what you've been told...its what makes trade week fun learning about all the rumours.


I think at the end of the day, Carlton would much prefer to see Fev go anywhere other than Collingwood. You are right, surely decisions don't come down to the fans, but with a guy as popular as Fevola, it would be in Carlton's best interests to play it safe...and handing him cheaply to Collingwood would be their worst case scenario.