Luke Brooks

Status
Not open for further replies.
New coach MM definitely stated that Luke has been spoken to already and hat he is 100% wanted.

See the other thread with the Link to Macquarie Sports Radio interview
 
I want Brooksy to stay as much for his talent as for my sanity

but for those who say he took a pay cut last year to stay, I'd say he has broken even. Remember the few years before that when he was on reasonable $$$ and delivered little else but promises. I think its evened out in the wash.

Cant help thinking that the most over-rated player in the last 15years, Mitchell Moses, held Brooks back from growing earlier. The proof was in a proven (if not past it) number 6 running beside him last year.
 
@ said:
@ said:
But Luke's often poor choices in kicking last season left me a bit flattish towards him. Of course I prefer we keep him but if he wants to look around then that works both ways. He will end up another Mitch or Teddy???

Who do you replace him with though?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

sorry I don't have sufficient time to devote to come up possible alternatives that is why I stay out of some threads. But I only like a top price if a top consistent performer. I know he won awards or close to but would he ever be chosen for SOO - I doubt it
 
@ said:
I don't agree that Teddy actually took his game to another level at all, he's always been superb in my eyes. Just look at who he's playing for. He's playing for the team who recruits the cream of the crop, of the NRL. So is surrounded by high quality players. I was offended how he apparently only learned how to tackle under Robinson. Pfft. Cmon he's getting the golden boot because of the team he plays for and because people actually notice him now. TPJ, Munster and Holmes etc. are players who have taken their game to the next level. Even Taukeiaho or Kikau are a better example.

If Brooks goes, I hope its to the Storm. Players who go there genuinely want to become better players unlike at Roosters where everything is readymade for them.
That's why I loved JT as a player. He challenged himself at every level and became loyal to the club that gave him his first real crack at NRL. He was only ever fully committed to get Cowboys their first premiership.

One thing I do hope the Wests Tigers get right from this ordeal (of the past 2 years)as much as club stability is the focus on player retention. It is hard as a fan knowing we've let players like Taupau, Teddy and JAC go but IMO even players like Te Maire Martin and Papenhuyzen would've been great to still have in our system.
Click to expand...

Good post.
 
Good heavens the love-fest for Brooks is waaaay OTT.
He just is not that good.
"Dally M" blah blah. He can't control a game, goes missing for 3 out of 4 games, can't kick, throws hospital passes.
Yes, his defense improved and so did his running game - but a first grade 7 he is not.

I have thought for ages - as have many on here- that as long as Brooks is our 7 we will never win a thing. I'd love to be corrected, but I doubt it.

Teddy was different. He was (and is) special. Roosters just have more talent around him. And they would do so with Brooks too - but I'd take that risk. After 5+ years of mediocrity I'm happy to cut my losses.

I would love him to go to the Roosters.

Kills two birds with one stone: we release a huge weakness and and at the same time weaken the Roosters.
Brooks going would be nothing less than an absolute blessing.
Go in health young man!
 
@ said:
Good heavens the love-fest for Brooks is waaaay OTT.
He just is not that good.
"Dally M" blah blah. He can't control a game, goes missing for 3 out of 4 games, can't kick, throws hospital passes.
Yes, his defense improved and so did his running game - but a first grade 7 he is not.

I have thought for ages - as have many on here- that as long as Brooks is our 7 we will never win a thing. I'd love to be corrected, but I doubt it.

Teddy was different. He was (and is) special. Roosters just have more talent around him. And they would do so with Brooks too - but I'd take that risk. After 5+ years of mediocrity I'm happy to cut my losses.

I would love him to go to the Roosters.

Kills two birds with one stone: we release a huge weakness and and at the same time weaken the Roosters.
Brooks going would be nothing less than an absolute blessing.
Go in health young man!
Click to expand...

Humbly disagree with every word of this post
 
@ said:
Good heavens the love-fest for Brooks is waaaay OTT.
He just is not that good.
"Dally M" blah blah. He can't control a game, goes missing for 3 out of 4 games, can't kick, throws hospital passes.
Yes, his defense improved and so did his running game - but a first grade 7 he is not.

I have thought for ages - as have many on here- that as long as Brooks is our 7 we will never win a thing. I'd love to be corrected, but I doubt it.

Teddy was different. He was (and is) special. Roosters just have more talent around him. And they would do so with Brooks too - but I'd take that risk. After 5+ years of mediocrity I'm happy to cut my losses.

I would love him to go to the Roosters.

Kills two birds with one stone: we release a huge weakness and and at the same time weaken the Roosters.
Brooks going would be nothing less than an absolute blessing.
Go in health young man!
Click to expand...

Disagree
 
@ said:
I want Brooksy to stay as much for his talent as for my sanity

but for those who say he took a pay cut last year to stay, I'd say he has broken even. Remember the few years before that when he was on reasonable $$$ and delivered little else but promises. I think its evened out in the wash.

Cant help thinking that the most over-rated player in the last 15years, Mitchell Moses, held Brooks back from growing earlier. The proof was in a proven (if not past it) number 6 running beside him last year.
Click to expand...

You are right about Moses holding Brooks back,i feel most of that was because coach JT told Moses to play a more dominant role in the team.
 
@ said:
@ said:
@ said:
This is EXACTLY where I think the NRL has lost the true essence of the game that most of us growing up in the 70's, 80's and 90's had. We have lost that one club player that us kids idolised while we grew up. Most clubs nurtured their juniors and brought them through to the top grade and that's where most stayed until they retired. It would have been unthinkable that the club's marquee junior would leave to play else where.

This is a luxury that we dont have today. Rare is it for a club to have a one club player. Rugby league is a business now on both sides of the game. From the players to the clubs, it's all about the money and I guess there's nothing wrong with that.

With that being said, I strongly believe that the NRL can fix this where everyone gets the money and we get our one club players back!

Let's use Luke Brooks and the Roosters as our example.

Luke Brooks is a Wests Tigers junior. He played all his junior footy with us, all the way through to the top grade. From the time Luke Brooks hits the top grade, he should be exempt from the tigers salary cap and the Tigers be allowed to pay him what they think he is worth as a reward for the time and effort they spent on bringing him through.

The NRL in turn should lower everyone's salary cap to deter clubs like the Roosters from buying juniors who have been developed by other clubs and encourage them to build their own nurseries.

For me, this is a win/win situation where players get the money they deserve from the club that nurtured them through, the fans keep their one club players and ALL the NRL clubs are forced to pump money back into grass roots footy which builds the game from underneath.

Totally agree , but this will never happen with a salary cap

Lose the salary cap and you will have a two tiered comp unfortunately

Agree with Chris 100%, but teams like the Chooks also target the elite juniors and put them into their junior systems for a couple of years so than they can call them juniors. You would have to define a local junior as a kid who has only played in one junior system and that than becomes unfair as families move around these days
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

My thoughts were similar to this, but to apply cap discounts year-on-year, so a player gets cheaper (under the cap) every year they play for your club. Sort of like the old long-term player discount, but in more micro detail.

So for example every kid at age 15 gets marked as a junior of one club, or as a non-affiliated club. Every year they remain with your club, you get a 5% discount on their salary cap, such that when they turn 18, a legitimate junior would be 15% cheaper for you than for anyone else.

If the junior leaves, fine, but the discount resets and they cost 100% for another club. That way after 3 years, you have a 15% advantage against your rivals.

You then grade the player and after 3 years of FG they are 30% cheaper against your cap. After juniors, and 2 x 3-year contracts, the player is 45% discounted from your cap. You would then find yourself in a position with a guy like Tedesco to be able to essentially outbid your rivals by 45%.

Short-term contracts, i.e. players who move around, they continue to reset their discount and as such are free game to all clubs, as they are now. But long-term players become harder and harder to poach, especially if a club stuck with the junior for the early contract and then there was an upswing in form. It might even eliminate the idea of a player being "squeezed out", as after a long career of service, they'd be so heavily discounted as to encourage the club to retain.

This idea is all about cap space only - you'd still have to actually pay the player their full salary. Just that you could afford within your cap to outbid your rivals. Also the % could be changed - perhaps 5% is too much. Perhaps also you can get a bigger discount if you debuted the player (and minimum # games in their first 1/2 years).

Question would also be - do you only discount for continuous service, or can a guy like Benji come back and pick up his discount from previous years with the Tigers?

When trying to thinking about negatives, my original reaction was that this strategy would encourage clubs to stockpile juniors, e.g. if Roosters just bought up big in the 15 y-o market. Those juniors would get gradually cheaper, but still I think the discount 5% YOY would not be sufficient to mitigate the cost of hoarding juniors - same as clubs can technically hoard juniors now, but at some point they want to play grade and for decent salaries. Perhaps you only apply the discount once they actually play grade, so juniors cost doesn't change.

The other question is whether discounting players on the cap could create imbalance - because not only would you have a discounted long-term clubsman, but you'd also have cap space for other players as a result. If a team like Manly was able to maintain several long-term players on heavy discounts, I don't know if that would create an imbalance because they might have a strong and discounted team, with lots of salary cap space freed up to buy other players. Theoretically the other clubs would have strongly discounted players too, so you'd still be hard-pressed to poach them.

Also clubs like Brisbane would probably prosper as they do well with juniors and you'd be giving them extra cap space to make other purchases, and they have much deeper pockets than regular clubs. I.e. if Broncos had 30% cap space through discounts, they can afford to spend beyond the standard cap without much concern.
 
I really like the idea of players getting discounts for staying at a club and resetting back to 100% if they leave. This format would have clubs like the Roosters re-think their player acquisitions.
 
@ said:
Good heavens the love-fest for Brooks is waaaay OTT.
He just is not that good.
"Dally M" blah blah. He can't control a game, goes missing for 3 out of 4 games, can't kick, throws hospital passes.
Yes, his defense improved and so did his running game - but a first grade 7 he is not.

I have thought for ages - as have many on here- that as long as Brooks is our 7 we will never win a thing. I'd love to be corrected, but I doubt it.

Teddy was different. He was (and is) special. Roosters just have more talent around him. And they would do so with Brooks too - but I'd take that risk. After 5+ years of mediocrity I'm happy to cut my losses.

I would love him to go to the Roosters.

Kills two birds with one stone: we release a huge weakness and and at the same time weaken the Roosters.
Brooks going would be nothing less than an absolute blessing.
Go in health young man!
Click to expand...

And if we do as you say = our half back would be?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Staff online

Members online

Total: 604 (members: 47, guests: 557)
Back
Top