I'd rate them as almost identical players, skillset wise.Brooks is a better player than Croft.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I'd rate them as almost identical players, skillset wise.Brooks is a better player than Croft.
Sorry champion @Demps, gotta disagee there - I think Brooks is the better player. Both 1st graders = tick. But running game, Brooks is way better, imo.I'd rate them as almost identical players, skillset wise.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion...Sorry champion @Demps, gotta disagee there - I think Brooks is the better player. Both 1st graders = tick. But running game, Brooks is way better, imo.
I thought he was our best in round 1. People are so influenced by msm that they can’t even bring themselves to praise his good deeds on the park.Doubt it. Throw him in a good side with quality around him and there’s no reason he couldn’t succeed.
Walker x Keary is a very interesting pairing.If it was that easy for any half to slot into a strong club and be successful the real good ones wouldn't command the amount of money that they do. The Roosters have not found it easy to replace Cronk and their results show it - even with their wealth of talent and resources.
So are you saying it’s not a team game? We have a perfect team except for one player. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣The old chicken and the egg...
Which sucked first?
The club or Brooks...
😂🙄
Brooks going to carve up tomorrow against a weak spine knights, his future club.
It is... what it is... 😂So are you saying it’s not a team game? We have a perfect team except for one player. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Look at it in the sense that one has played almost 200 games, has an NRL contract, and even if he left our club tomorrow, would have other NRL clubs interested. Croft left the Broncos, had no interest from any other NRL club and went overseas. And not even to a glamour club like St Helens or Wigan. He signed with Salford. Brooks would find a significantly better club if he were a free agent.Everyone is entitled to their opinion...
I'm sure a lot of Tigers fans would agree with you but when you break it down;
Brooks has played over 100 more games than Brodie Croft and you probably have not watched a lot of BC's 65 games so you're always going to lean towards Brooks....
I think they're the same and they're both average.
It’s not just the media, they get on the back of other supportersI thought he was our best in round 1. People are so influenced by msm that they can’t even bring themselves to praise his good deeds on the park.
I heard one commentator mention about 4 players in the side as being our best. Unable to mention the word Brooks, suggested the “team” looked good when they kicked to the corner for Maumalo.
Incidentally, which player got the most Fantasy points in round 1?
Walker a talent and may prove to be an exceptional player but he is a work in progress that the Roosters have had to commit to - many mixed results last year. It didn't work with Flannagan and they didn't waste any time in moving him on.Walker x Keary is a very interesting pairing.
Both very similar.
I can see it working though.
I think he's been blessed with an extremely lucky run for many years.Look at it in the sense that one has played almost 200 games, has an NRL contract, and even if he left our club tomorrow, would have other NRL clubs interested. Croft left the Broncos, had no interest from any other NRL club and went overseas. And not even to a glamour club like St Helens or Wigan. He signed with Salford. Brooks would find a significantly better club if he were a free agent.
brodie croft didntYou're clutching at straws now.
Anyone could look decent at a team like Melbourne.
Neither would Brooks.brodie croft didnt
He played better at Storm then he did Broncos same with Curtis Scott the Storm just have a good systembrodie croft didnt
Cmon mate, give him another 4 years. He deserves it.173 games not long enough ?
That’s because he has already hit his talent ceiling.Melbourne are known for making nuffies look like superstars...
Roosters, much the same.
I believe both clubs coaches wouldn't even bother with Brooks...
4 more years! 4 more years!Not too mention TIME.
As the article states, Luke is only 27.
I was simply agreeing with the fact that Brooks is a victim of playing for a poor club for a long time.Because they were in the same boat Brooks is in now. Had to leave to find success. Which is what Brooks would benefit from doing.