Frawley, McDonald, Garland, Watts, Dunn, Sellar

Doesnt look too bad when you look at it like that, but i hope we keep Rivers just for depth.

Perhaps if we get Dawes and Pedersen over the line he may be keen to hang around too.

Edited October 14, 201212 yr by Pitty

Doesnt look too bad when you look at it like that, but i hope we keep Rivers just for depth.

Perhaps if we get Dawes and Pedersen over the line he may be keen to hang around too.

On the contrary, I would say that it hardly warms the cockles of my heart.

Potential but not a lot of confidence.

Doesnt look too bad when you look at it like that, but i hope we keep Rivers just for depth.

Perhaps if we get Dawes and Pedersen over the line he may be keen to hang around too.

Bigtime lolz... You think Rivers would only be depth among that list?! FMD

I will miss Rivers - I'd prefer him to stay.

However, the fact that Neeld took him out of defence and played him in the forward line for much of the season, suggests to me that Neeld doesn't think he's our most important defender. (It also indicates that Neeld didn't think much of our other forward line options beyond Clark.)

And what's clear at the moment is that the MFC is going like a bat out of hell to improve our forward line with lateral recruits - so one would think Rivers stint in the forward line has come to an end.

If Watts can play his position, Rivers is possibly not as important to the MFC as he may be to another club (despite finishing 5th in our B&F).

As stated, I hope he stays. But I also hope he lets the club know what he intends to do sooner rather than later - this thing is dragging on far too long, and it must make it very difficult for the club to sort out other contracts.

My issue is with this - the idea that a 2 year contract means sense and a succession plan in place, but 3 years is irresponsible?

I think it would have been far worse had we gone into 2013 with Martin, Spencer, and Gawn as our ruck contingent than giving Jamar a contract at 32.

So if 3 years is fine, why not give him 4 or perhaps even 5? Of course there is a difference between 2 and 3 otherwise we wouldn't bother haggling over deals and only offering guys like Bruce 1 year and Rivers 2.

I don't think I ever said we should have gone into 2013 without him and even so I don't see much of a difference between Jamar or Martin as first ruck with Spencer as a back up and then Fitzpatrick and Gawn further down the scale. That is 5 ruckman who can't do much else on our list I think we can afford to lose one.

I was just thinking the same thing hardtack.

Looks like Rivers deal will be done next week to me.

I think there are a lot of deals waiting for some dominoes to fall.

I will miss Rivers - I'd prefer him to stay.

However, the fact that Neeld took him out of defence and played him in the forward line for much of the season, suggests to me that Neeld doesn't think he's our most important defender. (It also indicates that Neeld didn't think much of our other forward line options beyond Clark.)

Really, Neeld didn't have much choice once Clark went down. Apart from Clark there wasn't much else performing up forward. Rivers (and/or Garland) had to go forward, because Frawley and McDonald were the two performing linchpins down back. They're the backbone for beyond and moving McDonald forward - who was in good nick - may have stymied his consistency, confidence and therefore development down back where he excelled.

I'd prefer Rivers to stay, and I will think its unfortunate if he does leave, it's only natural. But in the name of moving the list on and improving there is a job to do. And FA allows him to explore options.

If geelong want rivers but need a list spot opened up, what about a trade for mitch brown?

Yes he rivers is a FA but so was monfries but port still traded.

Would impact our FA compo but if we got brown he might be able to do the pederson role nullifying this "negative"

It seems that Geelong are trying to fit both Jared Rivers and Hamish Mcintosh in but having difficulties.

If they get Jared and not Hamish we will have a pick to get cam Pederson

If they get Hamish will they be as keen to flick off cam or if they get hamish and not Jared we may not have pick to play with.

If Rivers can't get a buyer we offer him a one year contract with the knowledge that he will be still a FA next year and may look elsewhere should he wish to.

So if 3 years is fine, why not give him 4 or perhaps even 5? Of course there is a difference between 2 and 3 otherwise we wouldn't bother haggling over deals and only offering guys like Bruce 1 year and Rivers 2.

I don't think I ever said we should have gone into 2013 without him and even so I don't see much of a difference between Jamar or Martin as first ruck with Spencer as a back up and then Fitzpatrick and Gawn further down the scale. That is 5 ruckman who can't do much else on our list I think we can afford to lose one.

The extra year is what other teams were prepared to give him. And as a FA he would have been able to get there very easily.

I think it is disingenuous to sit there and say 'happy for him to get a contract till he is 31, but not till he is 32.'

Our ruck stocks are not as healthy as you intimate. Spencer has shown glimpses but has limited ability, Gawn has had two knees recos, Martin is far from proven and not big enough to compete with the best ruckmen, and Clark should be kept from the centre bounces as he is such an investment.

And you may not have said we shouldn't go into 2013 without him, but without that 3rd year we may have gone into 2013 without him.

Bigtime lolz... You think Rivers would only be depth among that list?! FMD

When i say it would be good to keep rivers for depth, i agree he would be in starting lineup, but you can almost guarantee at least one of our backmen will be out injured.....

I wonder how deeply involved JR was in the player revolt prior to 186?

He seemed to be the spokesman after the match and was a considered captain material before this.

Maybe hes a FA whether he wants to be or not.

Maybe Balmey rates him?

Or maybe he can see the writing on the wall after playing forward all year.

Watts and Tom Mac seem to have him covered down back.

Good luck to him at the Cathouse.

Did a solid job for us but the RIsing Star seems more like a curse now.

The extra year is what other teams were prepared to give him. And as a FA he would have been able to get there very easily.

I think it is disingenuous to sit there and say 'happy for him to get a contract till he is 31, but not till he is 32.'

Our ruck stocks are not as healthy as you intimate. Spencer has shown glimpses but has limited ability, Gawn has had two knees recos, Martin is far from proven and not big enough to compete with the best ruckmen, and Clark should be kept from the centre bounces as he is such an investment.

And you may not have said we shouldn't go into 2013 without him, but without that 3rd year we may have gone into 2013 without him.

Pretty sure I never said our ruck stocks were much chop - in fact I said the oppposite earlier in the thread. All I said in the post you quoted was that we have a lot of dead wood/list cloggers on our list in the form of one dimensional ruckman who haven't even shown they have what it takes to make it at AFL level. Hopefully following the trade period we see at least one of them dropped from our senior list (though from memory Spencer is still on the rookie list anyway?)

Pretty sure I never said our ruck stocks were much chop - in fact I said the oppposite earlier in the thread. All I said in the post you quoted was that we have a lot of dead wood/list cloggers on our list in the form of one dimensional ruckman who haven't even shown they have what it takes to make it at AFL level. Hopefully following the trade period we see at least one of them dropped from our senior list (though from memory Spencer is still on the rookie list anyway?)

No, Spencer is OOC on the primary list. They are holding off on re-signing a number of players to see what is around in the ether. I think they will keep Spencer.

They are shopping Martin around and it seems Pedersen has been earmarked for the FP/back up ruck role.

I think it is possible we will have Pedersen, Martin, Jamar, Gawn, and Spencer as rucks for next year.

I do think they would prefer to trade Martin out however.

I wonder how deeply involved JR was in the player revolt prior to 186?

He seemed to be the spokesman after the match and was a considered captain material before this.

Maybe hes a FA whether he wants to be or not.

I had the same thought Biff. He was good last season and his attitude seemed to be great but i do wonder if Neeld is keen to cut all of the key senior players from 2011. Rivers going would only leave Davey i would have thought. With RIvers though they no doubt want to tread carefully as i guess he'd be a pretty popular player at tye club.

I had the same thought Biff. He was good last season and his attitude seemed to be great but i do wonder if Neeld is keen to cut all of the key senior players from 2011. Rivers going would only leave Davey i would have thought. With RIvers though they no doubt want to tread carefully as i guess he'd be a pretty popular player at tye club.

When Neeld stated that he was giving everyone a clean slate to begin 2012 I think he meant,"I''ll have a clean slate for 2013."

Green ,Brent ,Riv gone.

A cultural revolution worthy of Mao.

We have our own Little Red-Blue book didn't you know !!

It's Official...Riv is now a Cat

Great servant of the MFC I wish him well for the future.

Ahh well I guess It's time for a name change

All the best Jared, I think he'll be good for Geelong.

Sad to see him go.

Ahh well I guess It's time for a name change

perhaps T-Mac? or C-Gar (unless you don't like smoking!)

Disappointed to see him go, but can understand why he has moved on. All the best Riv!

Edited October 18, 201212 yr by Oucher

Good luck to Jared, I really would've liked him to stick around but I can understand why he wanted to have a crack with Geelong.

soooo we have pretty much traded rivers for brynes.....