He really struggled to fit into the game plan yesterday - even when the team showed glimpses of nearly every player on the field providing a link or option,

he was nowhere to be seen. Dare I say it? Yep - there was a real touch of the 'Daniher era' about him.

Hard to believe that he was 'untouchable' 2 years ago.

What happens to these young men? *sigh* Is playing AFL footy the worst job ever?

He needs to go to Casey and really, really dominate...

He'll come back into the side, and return to form because he's a good player. But what's his ceiling now?

I won't agre wholeheartedly with the naysayers, but the side we all follow is now the one that played in the month leading up to las weekend. Can Rivers be useful in that lineup playing that brand?

This is the first time since he's been at the club that I've put question marks beside his name. And in the current climate at MFC that means a lot. SO many players to be put in the side, the pressure is on.

He's safe for now I reckon, but give it a couple of years and what then?

Rivers made his well-deserved name taking the third opposition tall and knowing when to zone off to help out the other defenders who were often struggling. In any given week, he was minding 'one and a half' opponents.

Two things have changes -

'The third tall' position barely exists anymore!

The other defenders aren't struggling.

The effectiveness of Warnock and Frawley has basically allowed us the luxury of one less tall/one more runner, and the proven versatility of Garland means we have a even more options and structures to work with.

I have no doubt Rivers is and will continue to be a gun - a player with that level of courage, leadership and football awareness doesn't just drop out.

BUT it may take a while, including time with Casey, for him to develop the running attacking aspect and the ground level game that he will need.

My biggest concern, paradoxically, is that at Casey his most valuable role is his traditional one, and he is killing them all back there. Hardly reinforces the lesson that he needs to build new habits.

Rivers made his well-deserved name taking the third opposition tall and knowing when to zone off to help out the other defenders who were often struggling. In any given week, he was minding 'one and a half' opponents.

Two things have changes -

'The third tall' position barely exists anymore!

The other defenders aren't struggling.

The effectiveness of Warnock and Frawley has basically allowed us the luxury of one less tall/one more runner, and the proven versatility of Garland means we have a even more options and structures to work with.

I have no doubt Rivers is and will continue to be a gun - a player with that level of courage, leadership and football awareness doesn't just drop out.

BUT it may take a while, including time with Casey, for him to develop the running attacking aspect and the ground level game that he will need.

My biggest concern, paradoxically, is that at Casey his most valuable role is his traditional one, and he is killing them all back there. Hardly reinforces the lesson that he needs to build new habits.

Excellent point.

Riv will prove his doubters wrong before too long. He's still a sensational reader of the ball and he will continue to play a valuable role in our defence.

Try not to let this obsession with youth lead you to write off "senior" players who are in reality only 25ish as "the past" too quickly.

Riv will prove his doubters wrong before too long. He's still a sensational reader of the ball and he will continue to play a valuable role in our defence.

Try not to let this obsession with youth lead you to write off "senior" players who are in reality only 25ish as "the past" too quickly.

It's not my obsession with youth, it's my obsession to rid us of the 'daniherisms' of the club - including the game plan.

Riv will prove his doubters wrong before too long. He's still a sensational reader of the ball and he will continue to play a valuable role in our defence.

Try not to let this obsession with youth lead you to write off "senior" players who are in reality only 25ish as "the past" too quickly.

I think he has a lot of work to do to improve his skill set if je is going to stay at the club, otherwise he should be offered for trade.

It's always annoyed me that he's not best suited to holding down a KPD spot, that he's more a help-defender, but still lacks the skills and run to be the requisite rebounding defender.

He's stuck in between and I just think in a successful side he doesn't do enough to justify his position.

Hope he proves me incredibly wrong.

The problem Rivers has is while he was out injured, Garland has snuck back in and taken his spot!

From what I can see, they play similar roles.

Apart from Garland being younger (which is an advantage) I don't see a lot between them on field......I think they are both solid 3rd defenders.

We just look too slow with both of them in the team.

I rate Rivers though, and way to early to start thinking about who we trade etc.

I disagree.

I still think Rivers has a place in our future. He played badly this week, but it's only his first game back so he gets latitude.

I think we will play 4 talls going into the future:

- Warnock to take the big forward that plays closest to goal

- Rivers to take the 2nd big forward/ floating ruckman that goes forward

- Garland and Frawley can take the most dangerous forwards, whether that be small, medium or tall forwards. These two players' versatility is why our defense is so promising!

I think the guy that has to go is Joel MacDonald.

At the draft event at the end of last year, one of our assistant coaches made an interesting comment about Joel Mac. They said "you would want to have some back up in case Garland doesn't come up." Essentially what that means is that Joel MacDonald was drafted specifically for Garland's position in case he never recovered from his LTI. (That position being the versatile defender who has speed to take medium/small forwards, but is also capable of playing against taller opponents).

Garland is superior to Joel Mac is every way imho. Faster, better mark, more agile, better spoiler. As long as Garland keeps fit and keeps improving he should be a core part of our future. And I don't think Joel Mac is good enough of a rebounder to take the place of Grimes, Strauss, Cheney etc long term.

So, in summery, imo those 4 guys should be the players in our team long-term. Joel MacDonald, McNamara and perhaps even Stef Martin should be depth players who can come in and fulfill a role when we inevitably have injuries

I think he has a lot of work to do to improve his skill set if je is going to stay at the club, otherwise he should be offered for trade.

It's always annoyed me that he's not best suited to holding down a KPD spot, that he's more a help-defender, but still lacks the skills and run to be the requisite rebounding defender.

He's stuck in between and I just think in a successful side he doesn't do enough to justify his position.

Hope he proves me incredibly wrong.

I think he will.

Not so sure on Jared any more. He's very one-dimensional. Should really be offered up for trade at the end of the season while he's still worth something.

Garland is better. He's faster, can play small and has much better foot skills.

McNamara is another one that will probably overtake Jared.

He really struggled to fit into the game plan yesterday - even when the team showed glimpses of nearly every player on the field providing a link or option,

he was nowhere to be seen. Dare I say it? Yep - there was a real touch of the 'Daniher era' about him.

Hard to believe that he was 'untouchable' 2 years ago.

What happens to these young men? *sigh* Is playing AFL footy the worst job ever?

He needs to go to Casey and really, really dominate...

Defenders like Jarrod must be good kicks to hit targets upfield or across the line. They also need to be able to run the ball effectively & link chains of handball aiding the offensive setup.

Also need the courage required to sit in the hole or go back with the flight.

He needs to go to Casey and really, really dominate...

Turns out he really dominated last week for Casey before his inclusion on the weekend.

Turns out he really dominated last week for Casey before his inclusion on the weekend.

Really, really dominate, not just really dominate - seriously though, I'm talking about hard running and offering an option. He's not doing it atm.

I wanted to trade him 2 years ago when he had some currency. If I could be bothered I'd dredge up a few old posts - and I don't mean the ones from late last year. Unfortunately, you wouldn't get a cold pie for him now.

He's too slow and not athletic enough for the way the game is now played. A good ordinary footballer.

Turns out he really dominated last week for Casey before his inclusion on the weekend.

Hes done this a few times over recent years. Stars against lesser talent in the magoos and finds it much touger going now in the seniors. Hes not quick and gets caght out many times by faster more agile forwards playing off of him. He was a good Daniher era defender, weve moved on from that game...he hasnt. Shame really as he will put in , but also gets niggled and distracted ( read frustrated) and gets beaten.

Rivers and Miller...touted as our twin pillars some years back... neither needed now.

Can anyone remember a game where Jared Rivers dominated circa 2004 in the past three years???

Sadly I think injury may have had the better of him. Nether the less I remain confident a premiership defence can be built round Garland, Warnock and Frawley

I wanted to trade him 2 years ago when he had some currency. If I could be bothered I'd dredge up a few old posts - and I don't mean the ones from late last year. Unfortunately, you wouldn't get a cold pie for him now.

He's too slow and not athletic enough for the way the game is now played. A good ordinary footballer.

I think there was a caveat on that two years ago. He was still to return from long term injury. I think that killed his trade value. But your inference two years ago was correct that he was not critical to our needs. I think your assessment is right on the money now.

Can anyone remember a game where Jared Rivers dominated circa 2004 in the past three years???

Harsh when he has been injured.

Leaving aside the past month, can anyone remember a game where MFC has dominated in the past 3 years? Its very hard to dominate when your midfield has been 3rd world and destroyed each week.

I think there was a caveat on that two years ago. He was still to return from long term injury. I think that killed his trade value.

It's difficult to remember discussions from so long ago with complete clarity, however I reckon that when I made the declaration to consider trading him we weren't fully aware of how much time he'd subsequently spend on the sidelines. He's actually got on the park every year before breaking down.

I doubt I'd recommend a trade if there was no hope of any suitors, or that we'd receive said "cold pie" in return. So I'm assuming that the thought was he'd have some currency given his NAB Rising star performance and age at the time.

It's difficult to remember discussions from so long ago with complete clarity, however I reckon that when I made the declaration to consider trading him we weren't fully aware of how much time he'd subsequently spend on the sidelines. He's actually got on the park every year before breaking down.

I doubt I'd recommend a trade if there was no hope of any suitors, or that we'd receive said "cold pie" in return. So I'm assuming that the thought was he'd have some currency given his NAB Rising star performance and age at the time.

That might all be true, but two years ago we had no defenders, none, so we didn't trade him because a half decent tall was better than nothing.

Now he is surplus and is probably third or fourth in line for the tall defensive position.

But I still think we could get something decent for him in a trade because with a compromised draft, Rivers might be a safer, better proposition for clubs desperate for tall defenders.

Edited May 3, 201015 yr by Jaded

Really dumb to start getting into Jared after one game back anyway.

Let's just see how things unfold over the rest of the season before calling time on a player.

A number of players were poor on the weekend, not just Rivers...........Garland and MacDonald both looked average on Saturday too.

It's funny. North's Scott Thompson was probably running around the VFL when Rivers won his Rising Star. Now he shows Rivers up for the better player he is.

Another one for the late maturers I guess.

Edited May 3, 201015 yr by Hannabal

It's difficult to remember discussions from so long ago with complete clarity, however I reckon that when I made the declaration to consider trading him we weren't fully aware of how much time he'd subsequently spend on the sidelines. He's actually got on the park every year before breaking down.

I doubt I'd recommend a trade if there was no hope of any suitors, or that we'd receive said "cold pie" in return. So I'm assuming that the thought was he'd have some currency given his NAB Rising star performance and age at the time.

I would concur with this view. He was indeed tradable at that time. His value was that divided mainly into two schools. Some couldnt indulge the notion of a demon stalwart ..a dinky di Daniher demon finding himself on the trade table if only in the minds of certain followers. In the minds of some he had peaked and for a team going forward , at some near time in the future, his upside was disappainting. His true value was in a trade and securement of a player, whose time was yet to come. I feel we left our chances swinging in the breeze onthis and a few others. Hopefully we'll learn more about astute timing.

Really dumb to start getting into Jared after one game back anyway.

Let's just see how things unfold over the rest of the season before calling time on a player.

A number of players were poor on the weekend, not just Rivers...........Garland and MacDonald both looked average on Saturday too.

Agreed, i think its funny how people jump on the rivers is a dud bandwagon. i think there were many players who didnt play aswell as they should have, and i think that peoples expectations are so high on rivers due to his form in past seasons, so when he has a poor match everyone wants to get rid of him.