Luke Brooks #167

I think the winner of the Dogs/Manly game has a golden opportunity. They’ll most likely play the Roosters in week 2 who are down on troops. One of them could be playing a prelm within the blink of an eye. So this game is huge.
 
Why are we still talking about Brooks? Do some really think he dogged the club somewhow by signing with Manly?

My recollection, and I could be wrong, is we low balled him and Manly stepped in with a better or similar offer. As a player, you would pick a club that could make finals...so yeah...he seems to just be saying he picked Manly in his position because they were a club capable of playing in the big games.

He did his best here and like many players and coaches before him, it wasn't enough to get us off the bottom. As a player, he is the same. Does a few good things, does a few bad things - he just doesn't have the spotlight on him and the responsibility he did here.

We are in a better position now with Luai and Galvin. He is playing finals. Worked out well for all.
 
GNR4LIFE said:
I think the winner of the Dogs/Manly game has a golden opportunity. They’ll most likely play the Roosters in week 2 who are down on troops. One of them could be playing a prelm within the blink of an eye. So this game is huge.
Click to expand...
This is the level of footy DCE gets up for. Dogs will struggle to contain manly in the middle. Dogs will work the ball to their left flank.
should be an interesting game.
 
weststigers said:
Why are we still talking about Brooks? Do some really think he dogged the club somewhow by signing with Manly?

My recollection, and I could be wrong, is we low balled him and Manly stepped in with a better or similar offer. As a player, you would pick a club that could make finals...so yeah...he seems to just be saying he picked Manly in his position because they were a club capable of playing in the big games.

He did his best here and like many players and coaches before him, it wasn't enough to get us off the bottom. As a player, he is the same. Does a few good things, does a few bad things - he just doesn't have the spotlight on him and the responsibility he did here.

We are in a better position now with Luai and Galvin. He is playing finals. Worked out well for all.
Click to expand...
Well said mate....
 
weststigers said:
Why are we still talking about Brooks? Do some really think he dogged the club somewhow by signing with Manly?

My recollection, and I could be wrong, is we low balled him and Manly stepped in with a better or similar offer. As a player, you would pick a club that could make finals...so yeah...he seems to just be saying he picked Manly in his position because they were a club capable of playing in the big games.

He did his best here and like many players and coaches before him, it wasn't enough to get us off the bottom. As a player, he is the same. Does a few good things, does a few bad things - he just doesn't have the spotlight on him and the responsibility he did here.

We are in a better position now with Luai and Galvin. He is playing finals. Worked out well for all.
Click to expand...
Brooks sure has done well for himself. His stats look better than both Luai’s and Galvin’s. I’m one of the people who thought he was checked out in his last 2 seasons with us. He’d had enough and the club wouldn’t let him go. I think the $550k offer at the 11th hour was a symbolic gesture given the coaches wanted(needed) him. The ink wasn’t dry when they handed the same paperwork to Dud and Brooks got the BBQ. Shows you where we’re struggling to compete.
 
weststigers said:
Why are we still talking about Brooks? Do some really think he dogged the club somewhow by signing with Manly?

My recollection, and I could be wrong, is we low balled him and Manly stepped in with a better or similar offer. As a player, you would pick a club that could make finals...so yeah...he seems to just be saying he picked Manly in his position because they were a club capable of playing in the big games.

He did his best here and like many players and coaches before him, it wasn't enough to get us off the bottom. As a player, he is the same. Does a few good things, does a few bad things - he just doesn't have the spotlight on him and the responsibility he did here.

We are in a better position now with Luai and Galvin. He is playing finals. Worked out well for all.
Click to expand...
Good luck to Brooks as he seems like a really decent human, but not many would agree the Tigers lowballed him.

Any offer over 400k a year was paying overs.
 
weststigers said:
Why are we still talking about Brooks? Do some really think he dogged the club somewhow by signing with Manly?

My recollection, and I could be wrong, is we low balled him and Manly stepped in with a better or similar offer. As a player, you would pick a club that could make finals...so yeah...he seems to just be saying he picked Manly in his position because they were a club capable of playing in the big games.

He did his best here and like many players and coaches before him, it wasn't enough to get us off the bottom. As a player, he is the same. Does a few good things, does a few bad things - he just doesn't have the spotlight on him and the responsibility he did here.

We are in a better position now with Luai and Galvin. He is playing finals. Worked out well for all.
Click to expand...
He was never lowballed. He got offered market value after coming off a contract in which he was one of the highest paid players in the game and performed worse than our 18 year old rookie did this year. He then bailed when he realised he was no longer in a position to get paid massively to do basically nothing on the park
 
lathami said:
Pot meet kettle, weren’t u banging on about woodsy the other day??? Like u couldn’t stop even if you wanted too!!
Click to expand...
What’s that got to do with the price of rice in China? Woods is in the short line of players that failed. Very fitting might I add.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 429 (members: 19, guests: 410)
Back
Top