Brooks is tanking

Yanz 85 said:
Moh said:
Couldn't care less if Brooks is in the team or not - my point is everyone hates him so much they don't care who replaces him, even if it's Wakeham who almost everyone agreed is barely a first grader when he was signed.

I think Wakeham is a worse footballer than Brooks. To me that's clear as day, and I am not going to let my hate/frustration for him get in the way of that. I'd also bet every other club would pick Brooks over Wakeham.

And, I will repeat it once again - I do NOT want Brooks/AD in the halves. We need sign a halfback, and the rest of them can fight for the 6 until we bring through one of the touted juniors.
Click to expand...

Can’t pass
Can’t kick
Can’t organise.
Obviously you’re a fan boy. Let’s give brooks 5 more years he might make the top 8 at 34 years old.
Click to expand...
Every other club wants Brooks. Don’t argue with these people, they don’t get football. Our attack slowed down when Wakeham came on.
 
Brooks might be struggling but in our top 17 he is still the most likely to make a break or back a break up. Sure replace him, but there are about ten players who need the chop before him.

Moses is not coming you would imagine, so go and buy a pommy no7 and give Brooks the no6 and sell AD to rugby
 
supercoach said:
Brooks might be struggling but in our top 17 he is still the most likely to make a break or back a break up. Sure replace him, but there are about ten players who need the chop before him.

Moses is not coming you would imagine, so go and buy a pommy no7 and give Brooks the no6 and sell AD to rugby
Click to expand...
Mate when was the last time he made a line break? All he does is get smashed when he runs the ball.
 
upthetigers said:
Mate when was the last time he made a line break? All he does is get smashed when he runs the ball.
Click to expand...

He set up the last try we scored via making a bust.


I've done this already today. He is involved in all the tries we score. He didn't have a great game but when we actually scored some points he was the main man.

If you are debating this point then you clearly have no idea at all. Just watch the highlights.
 
Moh said:
Couldn't care less if Brooks is in the team or not - my point is everyone hates him so much they don't care who replaces him, even if it's Wakeham who almost everyone agreed is barely a first grader when he was signed.

I think Wakeham is a worse footballer than Brooks. To me that's clear as day, and I am not going to let my hate/frustration for him get in the way of that. I'd also bet every other club would pick Brooks over Wakeham.

And, I will repeat it once again - I do NOT want Brooks/AD in the halves. We need sign a halfback, and the rest of them can fight for the 6 until we bring through one of the touted juniors.
Click to expand...
If you think wakeham is worse than Brooks you need to go to Gibb and Beeman . You'rve probably never heard of them
 
Earl said:
He set up the last try we scored via making a bust.


I've done this already today. He is involved in all the tries we score. He didn't have a great game but when we actually scored some points he was the main man.

If you are debating this point then you clearly have no idea at all. Just watch the highlights.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was talking about games prior to Sunday. He never makes line breaks like other halves. Yet fans keep on talking about his running game.
 
upthetigers said:
Sorry, I was talking about games prior to Sunday. He never makes line breaks like other halves. Yet fans keep on talking about his running game.
Click to expand...

The best part of his game has been his running game and it hasn't been good. It's actually improved a lot this season so far though. He made a bust I think the previous week from our half as well.

He is a limited player but I think there are two massive issues:-

1. His salary
2. Fans expectations. Too many people judge him in relation to being a great half. Guys like Johns who could create don't come around very often. Cleary is a good player but he is not creative. The thing is Cleary's defense and kicking game are top notch. Brooks is a runner who can do some other stuff but you have to have someone else in the team to take control in the opposition attacking zone. He is never going to be great player.

On small dollars with a gun half beside him I'd have no problems with Brooks. Even then you have to be looking for a replacement.
 
Earl said:
The best part of his game has been his running game and it hasn't been good. It's actually improved a lot this season so far though. He made a bust I think the previous week from our half as well.

He is a limited player but I think there are two massive issues:-

1. His salary
2. Fans expectations. Too many people judge him in relation to being a great half. Guys like Johns who could create don't come around very often. Cleary is a good player but he is not creative. The thing is Cleary's defense and kicking game are top notch. Brooks is a runner who can do some other stuff but you have to have someone else in the team to take control in the opposition attacking zone. He is never going to be great player.

On small dollars with a gun half beside him I'd have no problems with Brooks. Even then you have to be looking for a replacement.
Click to expand...
Probably one of the best posts on Brooks and there has been a million. Too often he gets judged on his pay packet. The club are the ones who offered him the contract. I have seen some very average no7 at this club since it was formed and Brooks is in front of plenty, but that is not saying much.
 
supercoach said:
Probably one of the best posts on Brooks and there has been a million. Too often he gets judged on his pay packet. The club are the ones who offered him the contract. I have seen some very average no7 at this club since it was formed and Brooks is in front of plenty, but that is not saying much.
Click to expand...
Pay packet? Got nothing to do with it.
Give him a billion dollars, give him one dollar - it makes no difference.
Brooks has glaringly obvious basic skill and leadership limitations (which clearly cannot be fixed), and no matter how hard he tries, he is just nowhere near an acceptable first grade level. It’s magnified because he wears No. 7, but that is his plight. And as far as expectations go, seriously, I couldn’t have any lower expectations of him. Yet week in week out he consistently has an adverse impact on our team.

Yet I don’t actually blame Brooks himself.
The frustration should be squarely aimed at the coach and management. Brooks needed to be punted eons ago and every time he gets selected, it indicates to me that our management have zero desire to win and change our fortunes.
 
Yanz 85 said:
Exactly ^^^ people on this forum 😂😂 brooks has been at it a decade he just isn’t built for first grade. Brooks needs to go to reserve grade not 6. Api is outsmarting brooks he is to stupid to even read his own 9. This club is a disaster. The second we let jock madden go I knew we were in for another spoon. Results don’t lie. Stats don’t lie. AD was very poor too but how would you feel knowing the guy inside you is on a [This word has been automatically removed]ing million dollars and gives late, shit ball and can’t kick. AD and the entire side will lift with brooks out they CLEARLY lose confidence with him at 7. The moment wakeham came on api fired and points came it’s not a coincidence
Click to expand...
I didn't see any lift in confidence when Brooks was injured last year and Madden and AD showed us what they had
 
I thought i would elaborate on my post from our attack in one word to weigh in on the great Brooks debate.

Someone posted a while back that the Brooks backers and Brooks baggers see the Brook's role differently and thus judge him differently. I thought it was a good point but didnt get the discussion it deserved.
The way i figure there are four aspects to halfbacks game. Each aspect could be broken down further into subcategories but i will leave at 4 for now.

Organisation: Organising attacking shape and play calling. This is the main point of contention between our factions. Their is no hiding from the fact Brooks is a poor organiser, amongst the worst in the league.
Running: Brooks running is first class. He has the speed and footwork to get on the outside of defenders. Earl has already highlighted much of our attack this year has been off the back of Brooks running.
Kicking: Brooks is average. Not average as in bad but average as in middle of the pack, average. Possibly slightly better than that. I expect to get some pushback here as people frequently criticise his kicking game. But IMO although limited, it is solid. He doesn't have the range of kicks in his arsenal that the elite kickers do nor quite the same distance as the elite but he typically makes fewer kick errors per kick than the average half and is typically ranked mid table for halves try assists off kicks. He plays the percentages with his kicking game fairly well.
Defence: Most agree Brooks is a good defender but far from the elite in this category. Many will point to miss tackle statistics to citicise his defence but this is a false representation. Brooks does often miss tackles, but he does so by dropping off tackles after halting the attackers progress or when shooting up to turn an attacker in field when we are short on numbers on his side. I've said before this is textbook defence for a smaller body. Having said that he is still a smaller body and as such can be successfully targeted at times, though this is typical of the majority of halves, thus again i consider him good but far from elite.

Most halves are good to elite in one or two categories. Currently only Cleary is probably amongst the elite in all but running, and it is not as though he is subpar running a ball. Most have an obvious deficiency in one category. For Brooks it is clearly organising. Many suggest this is a halfback's main role so since he cant do that to an acceptable standard he should be punted. I would argue it depends on your attacking style and game plan. If your attack relies on shape and set plays then i would agree. Brooks is not your guy and should either be a 6 or punted. There is nothing wrong with this traditional game play. Panthers do it to great effect, Roosters have done it for years and the Cowboys had some success with it last year. Typically though it relies on a lock who is a genuine ball player to be successful. Though i wouldn't like Brooks playing to this game plan anyways, i will note we haven't ever really had a ball playing 13 paired with him.

A half that cant organise can be overcome with powerful middles and a disciplined, well coached team. Unfortunately, thus far we have never had the team around Brooks to overcome his limitations in this category. A fact myself and other Brooks backers continuously point out. To me we should be long past the days of needing a little bloke standing in the middle telling the big blokes what to do. With professionalism our hole runners shouldn't need telling where to be. They should know from their hours on the training field. The Jahrome Hughes error Storm are the shining example of this. Neither Hughes (or Munster) do much in the way of organising. Their edges know who their targeting and their middles draw in defenders and play the ball quickly. Hughes (or Munster) than use their running games to isolate defenders off of this. It is no surprise to see Hughes' effectiveness decline late last season and early this season with the Storm's forward depth being tested.

Anyways that's my long way about saying. Yes, yous are right Brooks cant organise to acceptable standard. But also, yous are right he has a high level skill set that hasn't been able to flourish at our substandard club. I think it is just what type of halfback you want in your team that determines what type of right you are.
 
gregjm87 said:
I thought i would elaborate on my post from our attack in one word to weigh in on the great Brooks debate.

Someone posted a while back that the Brooks backers and Brooks baggers see the Brook's role differently and thus judge him differently. I thought it was a good point but didnt get the discussion it deserved.
The way i figure there are four aspects to halfbacks game. Each aspect could be broken down further into subcategories but i will leave at 4 for now.

Organisation: Organising attacking shape and play calling. This is the main point of contention between our factions. Their is no hiding from the fact Brooks is a poor organiser, amongst the worst in the league.
Running: Brooks running is first class. He has the speed and footwork to get on the outside of defenders. Earl has already highlighted much of our attack this year has been off the back of Brooks running.
Kicking: Brooks is average. Not average as in bad but average as in middle of the pack, average. Possibly slightly better than that. I expect to get some pushback here as people frequently criticise his kicking game. But IMO although limited, it is solid. He doesn't have the range of kicks in his arsenal that the elite kickers do nor quite the same distance as the elite but he typically makes fewer kick errors per kick than the average half and is typically ranked mid table for halves try assists off kicks. He plays the percentages with his kicking game fairly well.
Defence: Most agree Brooks is a good defender but far from the elite in this category. Many will point to miss tackle statistics to citicise his defence but this is a false representation. Brooks does often miss tackles, but he does so by dropping off tackles after halting the attackers progress or when shooting up to turn an attacker in field when we are short on numbers on his side. I've said before this is textbook defence for a smaller body. Having said that he is still a smaller body and as such can be successfully targeted at times, though this is typical of the majority of halves, thus again i consider him good but far from elite.

Most halves are good to elite in one or two categories. Currently only Cleary is probably amongst the elite in all but running, and it is not as though he is subpar running a ball. Most have an obvious deficiency in one category. For Brooks it is clearly organising. Many suggest this is a halfback's main role so since he cant do that to an acceptable standard he should be punted. I would argue it depends on your attacking style and game plan. If your attack relies on shape and set plays then i would agree. Brooks is not your guy and should either be a 6 or punted. There is nothing wrong with this traditional game play. Panthers do it to great effect, Roosters have done it for years and the Cowboys had some success with it last year. Typically though it relies on a lock who is a genuine ball player to be successful. Though i wouldn't like Brooks playing to this game plan anyways, i will note we haven't ever really had a ball playing 13 paired with him.

A half that cant organise can be overcome with powerful middles and a disciplined, well coached team. Unfortunately, thus far we have never had the team around Brooks to overcome his limitations in this category. A fact myself and other Brooks backers continuously point out. To me we should be long past the days of needing a little bloke standing in the middle telling the big blokes what to do. With professionalism our hole runners shouldn't need telling where to be. They should know from their hours on the training field. The Jahrome Hughes error Storm are the shining example of this. Neither Hughes (or Munster) do much in the way of organising. Their edges know who their targeting and their middles draw in defenders and play the ball quickly. Hughes (or Munster) than use their running games to isolate defenders off of this. It is no surprise to see Hughes' effectiveness decline late last season and early this season with the Storm's forward depth being tested.

Anyways that's my long way about saying. Yes, yous are right Brooks cant organise to acceptable standard. But also, yous are right he has a high level skill set that hasn't been able to flourish at our substandard club. I think it is just what type of halfback you want in your team that determines what type of right you are.
Click to expand...
Brooks cannot be considered an elite runner when his running has yet to actually win us games.............. like i'm sure he runs a fast 100m but what does that matter when we're down 26-6 and his running has given us 0 points up to that point? When was the last time his running specifically won us a game?

You need to understand that a halfback that has played as many seasons as he has with no finals series is elite in no category. Luke Brooks' will be halfback in a team that hasn't made the finals for 10 years straight. That is historic.
 
gregjm87 said:
I thought i would elaborate on my post from our attack in one word to weigh in on the great Brooks debate.

Someone posted a while back that the Brooks backers and Brooks baggers see the Brook's role differently and thus judge him differently. I thought it was a good point but didnt get the discussion it deserved.
The way i figure there are four aspects to halfbacks game. Each aspect could be broken down further into subcategories but i will leave at 4 for now.

Organisation: Organising attacking shape and play calling. This is the main point of contention between our factions. Their is no hiding from the fact Brooks is a poor organiser, amongst the worst in the league.
Running: Brooks running is first class. He has the speed and footwork to get on the outside of defenders. Earl has already highlighted much of our attack this year has been off the back of Brooks running.
Kicking: Brooks is average. Not average as in bad but average as in middle of the pack, average. Possibly slightly better than that. I expect to get some pushback here as people frequently criticise his kicking game. But IMO although limited, it is solid. He doesn't have the range of kicks in his arsenal that the elite kickers do nor quite the same distance as the elite but he typically makes fewer kick errors per kick than the average half and is typically ranked mid table for halves try assists off kicks. He plays the percentages with his kicking game fairly well.
Defence: Most agree Brooks is a good defender but far from the elite in this category. Many will point to miss tackle statistics to citicise his defence but this is a false representation. Brooks does often miss tackles, but he does so by dropping off tackles after halting the attackers progress or when shooting up to turn an attacker in field when we are short on numbers on his side. I've said before this is textbook defence for a smaller body. Having said that he is still a smaller body and as such can be successfully targeted at times, though this is typical of the majority of halves, thus again i consider him good but far from elite.

Most halves are good to elite in one or two categories. Currently only Cleary is probably amongst the elite in all but running, and it is not as though he is subpar running a ball. Most have an obvious deficiency in one category. For Brooks it is clearly organising. Many suggest this is a halfback's main role so since he cant do that to an acceptable standard he should be punted. I would argue it depends on your attacking style and game plan. If your attack relies on shape and set plays then i would agree. Brooks is not your guy and should either be a 6 or punted. There is nothing wrong with this traditional game play. Panthers do it to great effect, Roosters have done it for years and the Cowboys had some success with it last year. Typically though it relies on a lock who is a genuine ball player to be successful. Though i wouldn't like Brooks playing to this game plan anyways, i will note we haven't ever really had a ball playing 13 paired with him.

A half that cant organise can be overcome with powerful middles and a disciplined, well coached team. Unfortunately, thus far we have never had the team around Brooks to overcome his limitations in this category. A fact myself and other Brooks backers continuously point out. To me we should be long past the days of needing a little bloke standing in the middle telling the big blokes what to do. With professionalism our hole runners shouldn't need telling where to be. They should know from their hours on the training field. The Jahrome Hughes error Storm are the shining example of this. Neither Hughes (or Munster) do much in the way of organising. Their edges know who their targeting and their middles draw in defenders and play the ball quickly. Hughes (or Munster) than use their running games to isolate defenders off of this. It is no surprise to see Hughes' effectiveness decline late last season and early this season with the Storm's forward depth being tested.

Anyways that's my long way about saying. Yes, yous are right Brooks cant organise to acceptable standard. But also, yous are right he has a high level skill set that hasn't been able to flourish at our substandard club. I think it is just what type of halfback you want in your team that determines what type of right you are.
Click to expand...
Good post.
I will add that Sheens was asked in the media prior to the game what specifically is Brooks’ job in the side, he mentions he holds the left corridor, he is there to organise the left of the field and he is a left footer which is handy as an alternative to a right kicking game.
Contrast that to when Reynolds was asked about his role in his team and he mentions his job is to control the middles, the forwards and tighten up the middle of the field to enable more space for Erza and Walsh to play out the back of.

It’s a left side / right side shape that Sheens is / was using with Doueihi and Brooks. Though it is unclear what Sheens saw as Doueihis role in the team. Prehaps it’s currently Api who does a similar job to Reynolds which is very similar to Farah. Before Maguire no coach forced Brooks into playing a traditional HB role like Reynolds ands it’s no surprise that given he used to coach Reynolds he attempted to convert Brooks into a similar player.
Back to Sheens comments. What he is describing is a 5/8 in todays game.
Do we currently play with 2 5/8s I wonder.
Anyway we’ll see if Wakeham gets named in the 6 or 7 jersey or left right out this week.
 
BAGNF05 said:
Good post. It would be interesting to see Brooks in a strong system like a Melbourne. I suspect his dally m type form would return pretty quickly. We need to devise a game plan and recruitment needs to land some role players so that overall our attack involves less of Brooks (and we’d all have someone else to talk about).
Click to expand...
Last year and early this year approx, 75% of the forum (mostly Brooks haters) said;- King Douehie,- great leader-best player,etc etc. Then the Laurie crowd- he's fast, a big heart etc etc. Of cause they compared Brooks to Cleary and DCE etc in top sides, but no comparison for AD to Munster, LUI or every 5/8 in the comp!
No, he is not a great half , but at the moment , it's him,Naden and Staines that look the most likely to get our backline scoring tries.
 
BAGNF05 said:
The problem with brooks is he tries to do way too much and that’s due to the lack of quality around him. Compare his 16 runs 168m with the 40 odd metres Adam Reynolds and Sam Walker run in their teams wins over the weekend. They have the luxury of sitting back and allowing the quality around them to shine. Brooks hasn’t had that since Teddy.
Click to expand...
100% correct in what you say.

As far as some saying that he is not even a first grade player is just total bull shit and is surely based on him having had that #7 label forced on him and his supposedly over the top pay rate which seems to get higher every time the subject is brought up by one of those so called journalists.

Brooks is a very good first grade player and also a very good five-eight, his pay level is not his fault, it's not his fault that the fools running this shit show keep saying that it is his team etc., etc. on so on.

As far as five-eights go I would say that Brooks is as good if not better than Dylan Brown at Parramatta when you consider Brown's output, which I believe at times can be brilliant and at other times totally missing in action and what are the Parra-sites paying him?

If we had a decent controlling half teamed up with Brooksy he wouldn't have anywhere near the pressure on him that he currently has and he could just concentrate on his running game.

As far as Brooks tanking goes that is bull shit as well because I believe he puts in every game that I have seen apart from one I can recall.

I believe he tanked in the last game of 2021 vs Dogs, but then he wasn't on his own that day and whether that game was an attempt by some of the playing roster to have Madge sacked in the off season we can only speculate.

I any case, Wests Tigers were never in that "F*cking Game."

Sure he does some brain dead things but that is only because he has been labelled with the # 7 and he has had way too much responsibility put on him, responsibilities that he should never have had placed on him.

I know plenty on here will not agree with me but that is what I genuinely believe to be the case.

Still can't believe the brain dead morons extended Doueihi's contract for a year at God knows however much and did it before a game was even played, unbelievable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 692 (members: 15, guests: 677)
Back
Top