Luke Brooks

[Pawsandclaws]

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!

And if we do as you say = our half back would be?

Tedesco demonstrated a complete lack of loyalty towards his junior club (Wests) and club which stuck by him during his serious knee injuries. I'm from the Balmain side of the JV, so I cannot understand this mentality. From what we know of Brooks, he is a loyal character and hopefully we come up with a good offer which will see him remain at our club,

 

[Byron_Bay_Fan]

Presuming we lost the games when he went dead? then he cost us otherwise …
Take him back for peanuts and the fan's reaction will be his payback then if is he amazing in 2019 we begin from scratch again in 2020\. But do we have the position adequately covered? He could play fullback.

 

[yeti]

Presuming we lost the games when he went dead? then he cost us otherwise …
Take him back for peanuts and the fan's reaction will be his payback then if is he amazing in 2019 we begin from scratch again in 2020\. But do we have the position adequately covered? He could play fullback.

I really couldn't see the club wanting him back at any price to be honest. And I don't think he'd be willilng to play for peanuts.
His ego alone wouldn't allow either of those scenarios.
Does Parra have him contracted for 2019? If he's on their books, they are going to have to pay a hefty freight to get rid of him.

 

[bigsiro]

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!

And if we do as you say = our half back would be?

Tedesco demonstrated a complete lack of loyalty towards his junior club (Wests) and club which stuck by him during his serious knee injuries. I'm from the Balmain side of the JV, so I cannot understand this mentality. From what we know of Brooks, he is a loyal character and hopefully we come up with a good offer which will see him remain at our club,

a. **who would our halfback be?**
That isn't the question. But, as long as you're asking; a halfback who can kick, control a game and not go missing in big moments would be nice. This fear of the unknown is too overwhelming for too many on here! Be positive! I get the doom and gloom for when we lost Teddy or Prince. But for Brooks? It's totally unwarranted! I remember when John Morris was in the halves and fans called for him to be axed there were people who had grave fears …"but who are we going to replace him with?" Seriously!!

b. **re Tedesco and his disloyalty and how we need to reward Brooks for his**
Yes, Teddy left and it was disloyal. But, we wouldn't have stuck by him if he wasn't incredible. We didn't stick by many who weren't good and conversely we shouldn't have stuck by some who only showed glimpses but were continuously injured. But that's football. Anyway, Teddy showed loyalty initially by back-flipping on Canberra. But a season later this ship was sinking and everyone knew it. His time had come to move on. It still grates us to this day. Grates me too. But that's professional sport. And by that same standard we owe Brooks absolutely nothing; we gave him a start plus additional contracts.
Despite a promising start to his career (his first game), he didn't kick on until (arguably) his 5th season. There was no real indication that he was ever offered contracts from rival clubs at the time the ship sunk and the Big 3 left. IMO he took what he could get. Remember at that point he was 3 years in and bang average. He was in no position to test his value.
Loyalty was a brilliant card for him to play.
As a football club in this business/sport world, rewarding Brooks with another contract simply because he seems to be "a loyal character" would be unbelievably foolish. Do we want to win or make people have warm and fuzzies?

Sorry, I know I am harsh. But someone had to call it as they see it and I honestly don't think he is worth the hype.
I am just so sick to death of losing!!
Like the rest of us, I want to win. I just truly believe it won't happen with Brooks there. Maybe if we get him an AMAZING partner so that he can play 5/8...

 

[momo_amp_medo]

Michael Maguire identifies Luke Brooks as West Tigers' marquee player amid poaching rumours

Today’s sporting news Article by LUCIE BERTOLDO

Amid rumours that the Sydney Roosters are set to lure Luke Brooks from Leichhardt, Michael Maguire has identified the Dally M Halfback of the Year as central to the Wests Tigers' future.

Referring to the club as a 'sleeping giant', the new head coach believes that the Tigers are in a strong position to move forward with the right balance between senior and youth talent.

Once considered as the next Andrew Johns, Brooks is the marquee player who Maguire will build their short and long term future around.

MORE: South Sydney could split Burgess twins if Tevita Pangai Junior signs for 2020 | Cameron Munster agrees to four-year extension with Melbourne Storm

"I spoke to Luke and I’m really looking forward to working with him. I really like his style of playing," Maguire told Maquarie Sports Radio.

"He’s born and bred in that jersey. If we build what we want to build there, he's going to play a big part in that moving forward.

"He’s put a lot of time into that jersey and it would be nice to see him get some high reward now off the back of that.

"(The Tigers are) in a position to move forward and its about picking the right players who add to the quality that we've already got."

As of November 1st, Brooks has hit the open market and is free to enter discussions with rival clubs for 2020.

Last time the 23-year-old was off-contract he competed against James Tedesco, Aaron Woods and Mitchell Moses to remain at Concord Oval. Yet, Brooks was the only one of the Tigers' 'big four' to stay loyal to the club, and for much less than his current worth.

The Dally M Halfback of Year is currently earning $550k per year with the Wests Tigers.

According to Foxsports, the Sydney Roosters have emerged as the main contender for the halfback's signature, eyeing off the Wests Tigers star as a replacement for Cooper Cronk.

Brooks is managed by Isaac Moses, who is widely considered as the best player manager in the NRL for good reason. The broker organised the lucrative deal for James Tedesco to join the Roosters from the Wests Tigers in 2017, with the fullback winning his first Origin series and premiership title since.

Triple M's Mark Geyer believes that the move will come down to how much the Tigers are willing to spend to keep Brooks at Leichhardt.

"The bottom line is that if the Roosters want Luke Brooks, they will get Luke Brooks," Mark Geyer said on Triple M Rush Hour.

"Brooks is only going to get better, not worse. He had a breakout season this year and he’s only going to get better with the confident that exceeded this year throughout a great display on the footy field. With that he got second on the Dally M and then Dally M Halfback of the Year."

"He’s going to be in demand, you’re talking million dollar contracts.

"It's all about the Tigers and how much they want to spend. Do they want to delve into Luke Brooks, do they want to make him their franchaise player? I say yes. I say, open up your piggy banks, mortgage the house because Luke Brooks is your future."

With Michael Maguire focused on New Zealand's remaining match in the UK, it's expected that the Tigers will make their move for 2020 upon his return.

 

[Geo]

Whoopsie bigsiro better not read that..

 

[NT_Tiger]

"The bottom line is that if the Roosters want Luke Brooks, they will get Luke Brooks," Mark Geyer said on Triple M Rush Hour.

Why is it that everyone makes the same assumption and openly states it. Why will the Roosters necessarily get Luke Brooks? What are they offering that other clubs won't or can't? Is the NRL concerned by this common assumption?

 

[colmcd]

MM on nose at Parra, Tells you something

At a low cost, would be a good pick up for us.

Bravo. :master:

I could not think of a comment more likely to get a reaction on this forum… Ok Maybe make Issac Moses in charge of the board and Joe Wehbe head coach.

 

[NT_Tiger]

MM on nose at Parra, Tells you something

At a low cost, would be a good pick up for us.

Bravo. :master:

I could not think of a comment more likely to get a reaction on this forum… Ok Maybe make Issac Moses in charge of the board and Joe Wehbe head coach.

I thought he was joking. "On the nose" "Good pick"?

 

[bigsiro]

Whoopsie bigsiro better not read that..

haha….. :laughing: awkward...!

 

[Needaname]

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!

And if we do as you say = our half back would be?

Tedesco demonstrated a complete lack of loyalty towards his junior club (Wests) and club which stuck by him during his serious knee injuries. I'm from the Balmain side of the JV, so I cannot understand this mentality. From what we know of Brooks, he is a loyal character and hopefully we come up with a good offer which will see him remain at our club,

a. **who would our halfback be?**
That isn't the question. But, as long as you're asking; a halfback who can kick, control a game and not go missing in big moments would be nice. This fear of the unknown is too overwhelming for too many on here! Be positive! I get the doom and gloom for when we lost Teddy or Prince. But for Brooks? It's totally unwarranted! I remember when John Morris was in the halves and fans called for him to be axed there were people who had grave fears …"but who are we going to replace him with?" Seriously!!

b. **re Tedesco and his disloyalty and how we need to reward Brooks for his**
Yes, Teddy left and it was disloyal. But, we wouldn't have stuck by him if he wasn't incredible. We didn't stick by many who weren't good and conversely we shouldn't have stuck by some who only showed glimpses but were continuously injured. But that's football. Anyway, Teddy showed loyalty initially by back-flipping on Canberra. But a season later this ship was sinking and everyone knew it. His time had come to move on. It still grates us to this day. Grates me too. But that's professional sport. And by that same standard we owe Brooks absolutely nothing; we gave him a start plus additional contracts.
Despite a promising start to his career (his first game), he didn't kick on until (arguably) his 5th season. There was no real indication that he was ever offered contracts from rival clubs at the time the ship sunk and the Big 3 left. IMO he took what he could get. Remember at that point he was 3 years in and bang average. He was in no position to test his value.
Loyalty was a brilliant card for him to play.
As a football club in this business/sport world, rewarding Brooks with another contract simply because he seems to be "a loyal character" would be unbelievably foolish. Do we want to win or make people have warm and fuzzies?

Sorry, I know I am harsh. But someone had to call it as they see it and I honestly don't think he is worth the hype.
I am just so sick to death of losing!!
Like the rest of us, I want to win. I just truly believe it won't happen with Brooks there. Maybe if we get him an AMAZING partner so that he can play 5/8...

It’s a tough call. I think it’s a cost for value equation with me.
If we are talking anywhere north of 800,000 then as I’ve already mentioned I’d prefer to get Chad Townsend or Adam Reynolds for that kind of cash.
But you would have to agree there is a lot more upside with retaining Brooks than compared to signing anyone of those 2, but they are 2 of the more ‘steady’ halves in the game and could really help with keeping the team consistent.
I feel Brooks and Keary are quite similar halves so I’m not too sure how they would pair together.
We’ll just have to see how it plays out.

 

[bigsiro]

It’s a tough call. I think it’s a cost for value equation with me.
If we are talking anywhere north of 800,000 then as I’ve already mentioned I’d prefer to get Chad Townsend or Adam Reynolds for that kind of cash.
But you would have to agree there is a lot more upside with retaining Brooks than compared to signing anyone of those 2, but they are 2 of the more ‘steady’ halves in the game and could really help with keeping the team consistent.
I feel Brooks and Keary are quite similar halves so I’m not too sure how they would pair together.
We’ll just have to see how it plays out.

See your point but it's not a value equation for me. I guess I'm not thinking about money at this stage. I'm more thinking that halfback is really the most crucial position to a team's success. A helluva lot rides on the 7\. It's almost like a QB in NFL. Without a solid, dynamic, creative, effective, consistent and clutch 7 you're no chance of winning the league (unless you have a really great 5/8 beside you).
So, for mine it is moot whether Brooks is asking for 1mil or 100,000\. That position is just too important to settle on a cheap option (which, Brooks will not be anyway).

 

[momo_amp_medo]

This time last year the majority were voting Brooks off our team and considered him average player.
Wow how times and opinions have changed in just 12 months?

 

[Pawsandclaws]

"The bottom line is that if the Roosters want Luke Brooks, they will get Luke Brooks," Mark Geyer said on Triple M Rush Hour.

Why is it that everyone makes the same assumption and openly states it. Why will the Roosters necessarily get Luke Brooks? What are they offering that other clubs won't or can't? Is the NRL concerned by this common assumption?

Geyer needs to suck it big time and curry favour for his next pay check. I don't bother reading or listening to him,

 

[Pawsandclaws]

MM on nose at Parra, Tells you something

At a low cost, would be a good pick up for us.

Bravo. :master:

I could not think of a comment more likely to get a reaction on this forum… Ok Maybe make Issac Moses in charge of the board and Joe Wehbe head coach.

If we have the Eels subsidise his contract significantly and with the often stated tough coach Maguire on station, he could be a good signing. Yes his selfish antics aren't likely to win favour but he can play.

 

[happy_tiger]

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

The problem with the salary cap now is every time they increase it , the gulf between the top and bottom clubs just grows and grows

 

[earl]

"The bottom line is that if the Roosters want Luke Brooks, they will get Luke Brooks," Mark Geyer said on Triple M Rush Hour.

Why is it that everyone makes the same assumption and openly states it. Why will the Roosters necessarily get Luke Brooks? What are they offering that other clubs won't or can't? Is the NRL concerned by this common assumption?

If this is truly the case then it is simply admitting that the salary cap isn't working and the Rorters rort the system. I don't actually believe it's true. The rorters don't get every top player in the game and they do let players go. I think that they are scamming the cap though. I also think that it's not as bad as what it appears to be and it seems worse than what it is because players like Tedesco are people with low character.

 

[Balmainian]

MM on nose at Parra, Tells you something

At a low cost, would be a good pick up for us.

Can't agree. I'd have Woods and Teddy back, but I draw the line at MM.

i would have addo car, or taupau back as well as teddy

Id rather Gary Freeman come out of retirement than mm comeback to the club.

 

[Swordy]

So far today we have seen…..

Brooks is not a first grade halfback and Moses 'can play'

That will do me.

Sounds like a bad load of gear is being sold on the streets.

 

[jadtiger]

So far today we have seen…..

Brooks is not a first grade halfback and Moses 'can play'

That will do me.

Sounds like a bad load of gear is being sold on the streets.

Hehe now you know why it is called the "silly" season