Brooks on 700k for 4 years?

[crazycat]

Manly have signed Luke Brooks on a 4 year deal for 700k+ a year.
Would you have wanted the Tigers to do this?

 

[king_sirro]

Oh yes another thread and another opportunity to talk about Brooks. There just hasn't been enough chat about him IMO.

 

[TigerSJ]

I think the price per year is probably right but would have offered 3 years and a club option for the 4th. From what I’ve read the club offered him $550k per year for 2 years which if true was a bit of a weak deal i think.

 

[jadtiger]

4 years is to long, imho 3 years at 600k would have been fine but as a 6 only

 

[bathursttiger1]

If DCE does retire at the end of ‘24 that leaves Brooks as their halfback.😂

 

[crazycat]

No. My disappointment is as per usual. Very little evidence of any forward thinking or contingency plan.

So no to Brooks, but angry that the club did not plan for no Brooks..?

 

[Yossarian]

If there were decent options to replace him for cheaper? Probably not. But we’re not exactly flush with options to replace him right now.

 

[Tito Santana]

If I was a Manly fan I’d be devo. So as a Tigers supporter I’m ecstatic!

 

[Tucker]

Oh yes another thread and another opportunity to talk about Brooks. There just hasn't been enough chat about him IMO.

Whinge and whine…just answer the bloody question or leave the thread. Simple.

 

[clokan]

I'm OK with the $700K but would have liked 2 or 3 years at most, 4 years is too much

 

[TrueTiger]

I couldnt care less what Manly pays Luke...he has had everything his way for years while with us and by that I mean every EXCUSE under the sun why he hasnt reached his potential and delivered us to the finals...
Good luck Luke and I cant wait for the excuses coming out of the silvertails why they bought him...
This is exactly what happens when you hype up a kid with talent and potential in lower grades and they cant produce in the big arena ...pressure and lack of football smarts at a top level...

 

[king_sirro]

Whinge and whine…just answer the bloody question or leave the thread. Simple.

Don't be a sore loser. Take the L and move on is my advice. Maybe even try to learn a thing or 2 from it.

 

[innsaneink]

More than 75% = NO

 

[crazycat]

We probably offered a fair deal but for a halfback in the current market is was never being taken up.

Look 550k for 2 years. It's a pretty bottom barrell deal.
I wouldn't start anywhere else with an Issac Moses managed player other then NO DEAL>

 

[twentyforty]

Look 550k for 2 years. It's a pretty bottom barrell deal.
I wouldn't start anywhere else with an Issac Moses managed player other then NO DEAL>

The club knew he was going. It’s been reported that some members of the board didn’t want him. So why make that lowball offer?
Brooks left the relationship with dignity.
Can we say the same for Tigers?

 

[Tucker]

Don't be a sore loser. Take the L and move on is my advice. Maybe even try to learn a thing or 2 from it.

Answer the question or leave the thread. No one gives a damn about listening to you trying to chastise, you boring sook.

 

[Tucker]

12 people said they would have given Luke a 4 year extension.
It would be good to hear their thoughts as to why they would have done so.

 

[Jedi_Tiger]

650k for 2 years would have been about right

 

[Tucker]

650k for 2 years would have been about right

Yes I would have gone something similar simply because we have no one else.
For mine he really hasn’t earned an extension here and his body is starting to breakdown.
4 years is a huge gamble from Manly.

 

[Lukic]

Absolutely no. Not even close.

On price alone, it's a poor deal. Brooks isn't worth 700k. He's having a good year (for his standards) and we're still basically last, despite having a forward pack of internationals and origin players. Sure our backs aren't great, but Brooks just isn't that good a player. Given there is a lack of proven first grade halves on the market, Brooks' market value is probably in the 500-550k range (which is what we correctly offered). He won't win you a game on his own, but can be a complementary piece in a winning side.

The length of the deal is also bad. 2 years or 2 years + option is the most he should be getting. 4 years is what you're locking down a rep level player for, or a youngster who you think is going grow throughout the term of the deal so they're on unders come years 3 and 4. Brooks is going to be 29 starting that deal, 33 finishing it. He's absolutely not a rep level player, nor is he someone who is going to improve throughout the deal. Given he's lost a step of pace (which is his biggest attacking asset) and is now starting to have injuries creep in (calf, hamstring), it's much more likely he regresses throughout the term of the deal.

Ignoring everything about his past at the club, the fact he needs a change of scenery etc, we made what I think was a pretty reasonable offer based on his ability, experience and future projection. 2 years at 550k a year. The contract he's received from Manly is absurd and unless he immediately hits the ground running and shows far more than he has here, it will be a deal that works out very poorly for them.