Signings, Suggestions & Rumours Discussion

[aturkey]

Some of you seem to know more about player talent than all the ex players who now work on Fox Sports and Channel 9 who unanimously say Luke Brooks is a quality player and will be a big loss.
I’m optimistic we can get someone like Braydon Trindall, but if we don’t get a decent quality 7 we are in far bigger trouble than many of you would like to admit.

Why? We have Brooks and have come last and are sitting second last now. I don't see him being a permanent part of our 6 and 7 being something which will win us... more games? I don't understand what team you've been watching for 11 years.

 

[aturkey]

Some of you seem to know more about player talent than all the ex players who now work on Fox Sports and Channel 9 who unanimously say Luke Brooks is a quality player and will be a big loss.
I’m optimistic we can get someone like Braydon Trindall, but if we don’t get a decent quality 7 we are in far bigger trouble than many of you would like to admit.

Even when we have Brooks we have no decent quality 7's in the club... I don't understand

 

[Bob]

I thought Fulton was bringing manly players here…

Traffic seems to be going the other way.

 

[Bob]

Absolute potshot, but does anyone think with Brooks to manly we might get Brad Arthurcoming our way? He signed on with manly until 2024 a couple of months ago but they now have

DCE, Brooks, Schuster, Arthur, Cooper Johns, Fainu & Humphreys to cover the halves

4th and 5th pick is a lot lower in the totem pole than I would imagine.

I’d take both Brad Arthur and Cooper John’s over Wakeham.

Hunt, Pearce or even Townsend seems like a miracle now.

 

[Mighty_Tiger]

Neither will play first grade this week. Regardless

Didn’t say first grade

 

[Roar_Power]

He signed on with manly until 2024 a couple of months ago but they now have

DCE, Brooks, Schuster, Arthur, Cooper Johns, Fainu & Humphreys to cover the halves

And we only have Camroux signed next year. Happy days....

 

[Harvey]

Absolute potshot, but does anyone think with Brooks to manly we might get Brad Arthurcoming our way? He signed on with manly until 2024 a couple of months ago but they now have

DCE, Brooks, Schuster, Arthur, Cooper Johns, Fainu & Humphreys to cover the halves

4th and 5th pick is a lot lower in the totem pole than I would imagine.

I’d take both Brad Arthur and Cooper John’s over Wakeham.

Hunt, Pearce or even Townsend seems like a miracle now.

I think we will have a halves combo of Wakeham, Cooper John’s, Cogger and whatever other discarded rubbish we can pick through at the end of the year

 

[Eternal Tiger]

Buzz "Good on the Wests Tigers for only offering Brooks 550k, they've finally stopped over paying players"

Also Buzz
"Manly have signed Brooks for 700k, thats great business by Manly"
🤷‍♂️

 

[Todd Packer]

Absolute potshot, but does anyone think with Brooks to manly we might get Brad Arthurcoming our way? He signed on with manly until 2024 a couple of months ago but they now have

DCE, Brooks, Schuster, Arthur, Cooper Johns, Fainu & Humphreys to cover the halves

4th and 5th pick is a lot lower in the totem pole than I would imagine.

I’d take both Brad Arthur and Cooper John’s over Wakeham.

Hunt, Pearce or even Townsend seems like a miracle now.

Radical idea. Brad's hitting 50 this year but 50 is the new 30 they say so I'm in!

Welcome to the Tigers Brad!

 

[Harvey]

Radical idea. Brad's hitting 50 this year but 50 is the new 30 they say so I'm in!

Welcome to the Tigers Brad!

Good to weaken the opposition. Sign Bellamy or Trent Robinson as a ball playing lock

 

[tigermate]

I am happy luke is gone

Bc Sheens wouldn’t play him in the position he is

A running 5/8

And yes he will to go Manly and kick on and probably shine outside DCE

And everyone will say we should never should’ve let him leave

But they are wrong

Bc by letting him go (by not giving him a decent offer that made him feel valued) - we finally don’t allow sheens and benji to play brooks as a half back

Sheens could’ve kept Jacko at 7 and Luke at 6

Which would’ve worked better than luke at 7

But sheens dug his heels in without even coaching him last year and said luke is a 7 and I can’t wait “to get my hands on him”

Well we lost the first 7 games and are now last

I applaud the club for being brave bc finally sheens and benji are forced to find an actual half back

But it’s their own fault

If we had signed brooks they would not be looking for a 7 for the next 3 years!!!

Now we have a chance of finding one if not now or next year but for 2025.

And to me that’s better than having brooks as a 7 for the next 3 years.

Which is sad but it’s their fault…

If you want to blame anyone Blame those idiots…

Look at what they did …

Let Jacko leave bc you don’t want him at 7, and put all your eggs in luke at 7 saying “he’s our halfback”, having seen for the last 10 yrs he’s not a half back but a running 6…

and then after 7 games of losing say we are looking for a controlling 7, having not even secured luke for another year, knowing he was off contract now, despite letting Jacko leave, and then realizing he’s not a 7, but are too stubborn to admit you were wrong… and ended up with NOTHING!

That is typical WT Sheens at his worst

I like some of Tim Sheens but picking a controlling half has always been his issue at Wests Tigers for some reason …

For example - Sheens spouts things like - “all the spine contribute equally” and “7 or 6 they’re just numbers on a Jersey” …

Well, after 2005, we never recovered after Scott prince left bc he didn’t buy a controlling half back until we got Robert lui and made the finals in that run of 2010-11…

Sheens doesn’t know how to pick a 7.

Bc he in that tinkering brain of his it’s his biggest short coming

He tries to be too clever

He tries to make the Hooker the most important piece - like he did with Robbie and like he tried with Api… which is ok but you still need a controlling 7

And I can fathom how he can’t see it

But it is what it is

Now Sheens can’t play Brooks at 7 and I’m Fcking glad about it - but also sad that he didn’t play him at 6 bc I think we could’ve excelled.

Once he let Jacko go at 7, and chose brooks to wear 7, he could never put a 6 on his back without looking like he stuffed up!

Now you watch Sheens and benji kick stones if we can’t buy anyone and brooks plays well at Manly

The club will be wrong and they’ll play the blame game

But it’s their blame!

There’s a scene in Moneyball with Brad Pitt where he trades their best player bc the coach won’t pick him in the position Pitt wants… well that just happened to Benji and Sheens…

They created the problem guys

That’s the truth

And you know what’s more messed up (now that I think about it) … Justin and Lee put sheens there… so they’re both at fault… one created the monster and the other is the monster … who’s to blame for the monster? (That’s a question for everyone)…. I was talking to an ex CEO and GM from another club last week and I asked them - “would any other team replace their coach with our coaching setup of Sheens and Benji - and they said no. And I agree. The problem with our club is the mgmt and the coaches. They are equally to blame.

 

[tony soprano]

There is no doubt Luke has stolen a living from this club masquerading as a halfback.
Not all his fault, the club is far more responsible.
He has had a go most of the time (it’s not true to say he always did), but his inability to transform junior success to first grade has been laid bare for all to see.
He has played a major role in our decade of incompetence and for that I say good riddance and thanks for nothing.

Having said all that, he is a good guy and I’m glad he’s found somewhere to keep earning for his young family. Those who have been shouting that no one wants him have been proven wrong and how…huge deal for him. Congrats.

Now for more important matters, who the hell is going to replace him? We are seriously, seriously in the shit now, having lost our third NRL level halfback in a year with only a reserve grader hired to replace them so far.
Bloody incompetence…

He's just about the $$$

 

[tony soprano]

Absolute potshot, but does anyone think with Brooks to manly we might get Brad Arthurcoming our way? He signed on with manly until 2024 a couple of months ago but they now have

DCE, Brooks, Schuster, Arthur, Cooper Johns, Fainu & Humphreys to cover the halves

4th and 5th pick is a lot lower in the totem pole than I would imagine.

I’d take both Brad Arthur and Cooper John’s over Wakeham.

Hunt, Pearce or even Townsend seems like a miracle now.

I'd take the coach that's about it

 

[pawsandclaws1]

I am happy luke is gone

Bc Sheens wouldn’t play him in the position he is

A running 5/8

And yes he will to go Manly and kick on and probably shine outside DCE

And everyone will say we should never should’ve let him leave

But they are wrong

Bc by letting him go (by not giving him a decent offer that made him feel valued) - we finally don’t allow sheens and benji to play brooks as a half back

Sheens could’ve kept Jacko at 7 and Luke at 6

Which would’ve worked better than luke at 7

But sheens dug his heels in without even coaching him last year and said luke is a 7 and I can’t wait “to get my hands on him”

Well we lost the first 7 games and are now last

I applaud the club for being brave bc finally sheens and benji are forced to find an actual half back

But it’s their own fault

If we had signed brooks they would not be looking for a 7 for the next 3 years!!!

Now we have a chance of finding one if not now or next year but for 2025.

And to me that’s better than having brooks as a 7 for the next 3 years.

Which is sad but it’s their fault…

If you want to blame anyone Blame those idiots…

Look at what they did …

Let Jacko leave bc you don’t want him at 7, and put all your eggs in luke at 7 saying “he’s our halfback”, having seen for the last 10 yrs he’s not a half back but a running 6…

and then after 7 games of losing say we are looking for a controlling 7, having not even secured luke for another year, knowing he was off contract now, despite letting Jacko leave, and then realizing he’s not a 7, but are too stubborn to admit you were wrong… and ended up with NOTHING!

That is typical WT Sheens at his worst

I like some of Tim Sheens but picking a controlling half has always been his issue at Wests Tigers for some reason …

For example - Sheens spouts things like - “all the spine contribute equally” and “7 or 6 they’re just numbers on a Jersey” …

Well, after 2005, we never recovered after Scott prince left bc he didn’t buy a controlling half back until we got Robert lui and made the finals in that run of 2010-11…

Sheens doesn’t know how to pick a 7.

Bc he in that tinkering brain of his it’s his biggest short coming

He tries to be too clever

He tries to make the Hooker the most important piece - like he did with Robbie and like he tried with Api… which is ok but you still need a controlling 7

And I can fathom how he can’t see it

But it is what it is

Now Sheens can’t play Brooks at 7 and I’m Fcking glad about it - but also sad that he didn’t play him at 6 bc I think we could’ve excelled.

Once he let Jacko go at 7, and chose brooks to wear 7, he could never put a 6 on his back without looking like he stuffed up!

Now you watch Sheens and benji kick stones if we can’t buy anyone and brooks plays well at Manly

The club will be wrong and they’ll play the blame game

But it’s their blame!

There’s a scene in Moneyball with Brad Pitt where he trades their best player bc the coach won’t pick him in the position Pitt wants… well that just happened to Benji and Sheens…

They created the problem guys

That’s the truth

And you know what’s more messed up (now that I think about it) … Justin and Lee put sheens there… so they’re both at fault… one created the monster and the other is the monster … who’s to blame for the monster? (That’s a question for everyone)…. I was talking to an ex CEO and GM from another club last week and I asked them - “would any other team replace their coach with our coaching setup of Sheens and Benji - and they said no. And I agree. The problem with our club is the mgmt and the coaches. They are equally to blame.

Releasing Hastings was a decision the club got right.

The club was correct in not matching the 4 year deal offered by the Eagles for Brooks.

If we can acquire George Williams and or Welsby the club can still be in a good place. I don't know what their contractual obligations are now.

 

[tigermate]

Releasing Hastings was a decision the club got right.

The club was correct in not matching the 4 year deal offered by the Eagles for Brooks.

If we can acquire George Williams and or Welsby the club can still be in a good place. I don't know what their contractual obligations are.

don't agree on Jacko but agree on the rest.

I'm not saying Jacko is the best 7 in the game -- but he was a better option at 7 than playing Brooks there.

thats the point i was making

if you think playing brooks at 7 over jacko at 7 is a better option than i disagree with you on that.

and if we now get a player worse than Jacko at 7 -- like theyre trying to do with Madden again -- then i will still be right.

your argument is only on point -- if they get a better 7 than Jacko, bc we had him.

Hope they can do it.

cheers

 

[Tiger-ferret]

He's just about the $$$

All players are

 

[pawsandclaws1]

don't agree on Jacko but agree on the rest.

I'm not saying Jacko is the best 7 in the game -- but he was a better option at 7 than playing Brooks there.

thats the point i was making

if you think playing brooks at 7 over jacko at 7 is a better option than i disagree with you on that.

and if we now get a player worse than Jacko at 7 -- like theyre trying to do with Madden again -- then i will still be right.

your argument is only on point -- if they get a better 7 than Jacko, bc we had him.

Hope they can do it.

cheers

The club did not need Hastings and the baggage which came with him.

 

[tigermate]

The club did not need Hastings and the baggage which came with him.

thats a fair point

but they then thought that his "baggage" was worth more than putting up with it and winning more games.

I don't know what the right answer is...

but we are last.

if the point is to win more games than you lose -- than if we win more games with hastings but have to deal with his sh*t... is that better than letting him go and losing more games?

i don't know... but my problem is they didnt have an answer -- and they still didn't play brooks at 6.

after ten years they couldn't see it.

well now they can deal with it...

 

[pawsandclaws1]

thats a fair point

but they then thought that his "baggage" was worth more than putting up with it and winning more games.

I don't know what the right answer is...

but we are last.

if the point is to win more games than you lose -- than if we win more games with hastings but have to deal with his sh*t... is that better than letting him go and losing more games?

i don't know... but my problem is they didnt have an answer -- and they still didn't play brooks at 6.

after ten years they couldn't see it.

well now they can deal with it...

Hastings wanted to go to Newcastle. The club's decision was best for both parties as Hastings received a very good contract and a chance to re-establish his career in Newcastle.

We were always on a poor trajectory this year and perhaps next. That was admitted. The umbilical cord to the past has been cut now with Brooks' departure.

We must have plenty of money to either buy the very best young halves waiting for an opportunity - Walker or Sanders or, buy Williams and Welsby plus a young half or two.

 

[king_sirro]

Latrell killed it at the Roosters at centre winning back to back GFs. He has been ok at Souths but nowhere near as effective. All his rep footy has been at centre.
GI was an absolute weapon as a centre for many years at club level and rep level winning a Clive Churchill, RLIF centre of the year, 2 x Dally M rep player of the year awards, the Wally Lewis Medal, Harry Sunderland Medal, Ron Macauliffe Medal and a Golden Boot playing there.
I’ve seen you say you coach footy before. I pray it’s not kids, they don’t deserve such an unknowledgeable boofhead poisoning their formative years.

I could delve into an analysis as to why Inglis was in the centres at the Storm (Slater fullback) and Latrell centre at the Roosters (Tedesco), but I know it will fall on deaf ears. Instead, since you mention my coaching, I will ask one simple question. When Latrell comes back for souths, would you play him in the centres and keep Taafe at fullback or would you put Latrell back to fullback?