The possible non-greatness of Cooper Cronk

[GNR4LIFE]

Really is quite pathetic that after the game in which we needed him the most. The game where the guy went to water all his supporters sticking up for him.

Enough is enough with Luke Brooks, he will never ever be our number 1 play maker.

Its the way its been for years, fans accepting mediocrity. Its like a religion to them. Theyve been brainwashed into thinking something exists when there is zero evidence for it. Brooks has never produced a season to ever be called a decent, let alone a first grade half, yet here we are with the mediocrity zealots preaching he is the messiah.

How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you? What separates you from them? Because you stamp your feet and say you don't? Because that doesn't separate you at all. You clearly still watch games, post on the forum, and have an emotional attachment. Someone who truly doesn't accept mediocrity walks away altogether. You haven't, because you accept it, just like the rest of us.

 

[jirskyr]

Simply put, if we had a chance to snag Cronk for those two years at the expense of losing Brooks, I’d have done it in a heartbeat, and I am certainly not one who has it in for Brooks.

Was a no-brainer. I said at the time to write an open cheque for the bloke.
His work ethic and winning mentality alone would have created a better culture here - and that's not even considering his exceptional game management and halfback play.

Except he wouldn't have ever come here to play under JT and our merry band of under achievers. There's a reason why he went to Easts.

And that's part of the thought experiment.

At least with someone like Wayne Bennett, nobody ever thought he'd leave Broncos and now he's done it twice, and he didn't just waltz into long-term smart operations at a new club. At Dragons and Newcastle, at the least, he took on a lot of club baggage - and his reputation has fluctuated accordingly, because he got the result at Dragons, but then failed at Newcastle.

What if Cronk had left Storm and gone to Tigers or Dragons? At the time I was wishing so intently that he would, that he'd test out his ability, his potential greatness, at a team that absolutely needed a halfback like him. It didn't even need to be Tigers. Good halfbacks are scarce enough, but calm, methodical and intelligent halfbacks, who have both a natural feel for the game plus the smarts to develop strategies off-field, are rare as hens teeth.

And how disappointing, he joins the Roosters. I was so hoping Cronk would use his reputation and ability to help get a battler club off the deck, but instead he went straight to cash and glamour, with another stacked roster for him to orchestrate. So disappointing.

And hence my original question, because Cronk could have gone wherever he pleased, but he chose the safe option. At the very least, what I'll say for Tedesco is that he never had sustained success and never played finals footy, so I can at least understand the desire to join a top-tier club. But Cronk had been there, done that. Hasn't really challenged himself in the slightest, taking $1M to play with the game's best players.

Imagine leaving Slater and Smith and Munster behind, walking into Tedesco, Keary and Latrell... it's like swapping white diamonds for pink diamonds, when everyone was hoping you'd do something with the quartz of the code.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Simply put, if we had a chance to snag Cronk for those two years at the expense of losing Brooks, I’d have done it in a heartbeat, and I am certainly not one who has it in for Brooks.

Was a no-brainer. I said at the time to write an open cheque for the bloke.
His work ethic and winning mentality alone would have created a better culture here - and that's not even considering his exceptional game management and halfback play.

Except he wouldn't have ever come here to play under JT and our merry band of under achievers. There's a reason why he went to Easts.

And that's part of the thought experiment.

At least with someone like Wayne Bennett, nobody ever thought he'd leave Broncos and now he's done it twice, and he didn't just waltz into long-term smart operations at a new club. At Dragons and Newcastle, at the least, he took on a lot of club baggage - and his reputation has fluctuated accordingly, because he got the result at Dragons, but then failed at Newcastle.

What if Cronk had left Storm and gone to Tigers or Dragons? At the time I was wishing so intently that he would, that he'd test out his ability, his potential greatness, at a team that absolutely needed a halfback like him. It didn't even need to be Tigers. Good halfbacks are scarce enough, but calm, methodical and intelligent halfbacks, who have both a natural feel for the game plus the smarts to develop strategies off-field, are rare as hens teeth.

And how disappointing, he joins the Roosters. I was so hoping Cronk would use his reputation and ability to help get a battler club off the deck, but instead he went straight to cash and glamour, with another stacked roster for him to orchestrate. So disappointing.

And hence my original question, because Cronk could have gone wherever he pleased, but he chose the safe option. At the very least, what I'll say for Tedesco is that he never had sustained success and never played finals footy, so I can at least understand the desire to join a top-tier club. But Cronk had been there, done that. Hasn't really challenged himself in the slightest, taking $1M to play with the game's best players.

Imagine leaving Slater and Smith and Munster behind, walking into Tedesco, Keary and Latrell... it's like swapping white diamonds for pink diamonds, when everyone was hoping you'd do something with the quartz of the code.

He's performed at every level of the game. He could have been a star at Wests, Newcastle or Gold Coast. He could have carried us to the finals, he could have attracted other stars to whichever battler club he signed with.

And in response to your comment about Tedesco, I'd challenge that with Cronk had been a key component in building a dynasty at another club and earned the right to finish his career the way he wants, Tedesco had a club who stuck by him and was willing to do anything to keep him, he'd achieved nothing at Wests and he parachuted into a club surrounded by stars to guarantee him that success instead of working for it.

It's a moot point, we'll never know, except that he has an amazing club and representative career which speaks for itself. It would suggest to me that he would have lifted any club he went to. I mean after all, Roosters had a star studded roster for years prior to Cronk arriving, and they bag a premiership soon as he lobs up.

 

[fair dinkum]

There are some here with little idea lumping the TEAMS finishing positions previously and this year on ONE Player.

Agenda = anyone agreeing with this garbage :- " Brooks has never produced a season to ever be called a decent, let alone a first grade half".

Agenda = anyone not agreeing with this correct statement " Brooks has never produced a season to ever be called a decent, let alone a first grade half".

The continual acceptance of rubbish, only at the Tigers.

 

[fair dinkum]

Really is quite pathetic that after the game in which we needed him the most. The game where the guy went to water all his supporters sticking up for him.

Enough is enough with Luke Brooks, he will never ever be our number 1 play maker.

Its the way its been for years, fans accepting mediocrity. Its like a religion to them. Theyve been brainwashed into thinking something exists when there is zero evidence for it. Brooks has never produced a season to ever be called a decent, let alone a first grade half, yet here we are with the mediocrity zealots preaching he is the messiah.

How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you? What separates you from them? Because you stamp your feet and say you don't? Because that doesn't separate you at all. You clearly still watch games, post on the forum, and have an emotional attachment. Someone who truly doesn't accept mediocrity walks away altogether. You haven't, because you accept it, just like the rest of us.

"How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you?"
"What separates you from them?"

I can differentiate between fact and fiction. Should give it a try sometime.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Really is quite pathetic that after the game in which we needed him the most. The game where the guy went to water all his supporters sticking up for him.

Enough is enough with Luke Brooks, he will never ever be our number 1 play maker.

Its the way its been for years, fans accepting mediocrity. Its like a religion to them. Theyve been brainwashed into thinking something exists when there is zero evidence for it. Brooks has never produced a season to ever be called a decent, let alone a first grade half, yet here we are with the mediocrity zealots preaching he is the messiah.

How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you? What separates you from them? Because you stamp your feet and say you don't? Because that doesn't separate you at all. You clearly still watch games, post on the forum, and have an emotional attachment. Someone who truly doesn't accept mediocrity walks away altogether. You haven't, because you accept it, just like the rest of us.

"How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you?"
"What separates you from them?"

I can differentiate between fact and fiction. Should give it a try sometime.

That still doesn’t free you of not accepting mediocrity cos like I said you are still here...

 

[jirskyr]

It’s a moot point, we’ll never know, except that he has an amazing club and representative career which speaks for itself. It would suggest to me that he would have lifted any club he went to. I mean after all, Roosters had a star studded roster for years prior to Cronk arriving, and they bag a premiership soon as he lobs up.

See, I can't see sustained success at Storm and then Roosters as evidence that he would have lifted ANY club. He didn't establish at Melbourne until 2006 - he started only 1 match in 2004 and 9 matches in 2005; there were 23 appearances off the bench. Storm made the finals 4/6 years before he debuted and won a premiership; they were already successful before he started.

And long bow that he joined Roosters and they won a premiership "as soon as he lobs up". They also won it as soon as Tedesco lobbed up. In fact they won it the first year Momirovski lobbed. And prior to him arriving, they won the premiership 5 years prior, finished MP 3 of the 5 years, finished 2nd another season.

I'm not specifically criticising the bloke, I am just trying to consider his career in the context of the great sides he played in. There are some tremendous players that didn't have anything like the success of Cronk simply because they played in average sides. Ken Irvine comes to mind, being considered one of the all-time best wingers but not enjoying a premiership in 13 seasons at the Bears, but he joins a star-studded Manly team in 1971 and wins 2 premierships the following 2 years.

 

[fair dinkum]

Really is quite pathetic that after the game in which we needed him the most. The game where the guy went to water all his supporters sticking up for him.

Enough is enough with Luke Brooks, he will never ever be our number 1 play maker.

Its the way its been for years, fans accepting mediocrity. Its like a religion to them. Theyve been brainwashed into thinking something exists when there is zero evidence for it. Brooks has never produced a season to ever be called a decent, let alone a first grade half, yet here we are with the mediocrity zealots preaching he is the messiah.

How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you? What separates you from them? Because you stamp your feet and say you don't? Because that doesn't separate you at all. You clearly still watch games, post on the forum, and have an emotional attachment. Someone who truly doesn't accept mediocrity walks away altogether. You haven't, because you accept it, just like the rest of us.

"How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you?"
"What separates you from them?"

I can differentiate between fact and fiction. Should give it a try sometime.

That still doesn’t free you of not accepting mediocrity cos like I said you are still here...

Im not part of the Brooks defensive fan club and I am calling for him to play a first grade quality game once and a while or go play 2nd string half back for Camden in Group 6. ill be sure to take note of every time you defend the bloke for not being mediocre and call you out on it. Thats how i dont accept mediocrity, how about you?

 

[GNR4LIFE]

Really is quite pathetic that after the game in which we needed him the most. The game where the guy went to water all his supporters sticking up for him.

Enough is enough with Luke Brooks, he will never ever be our number 1 play maker.

Its the way its been for years, fans accepting mediocrity. Its like a religion to them. Theyve been brainwashed into thinking something exists when there is zero evidence for it. Brooks has never produced a season to ever be called a decent, let alone a first grade half, yet here we are with the mediocrity zealots preaching he is the messiah.

How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you? What separates you from them? Because you stamp your feet and say you don't? Because that doesn't separate you at all. You clearly still watch games, post on the forum, and have an emotional attachment. Someone who truly doesn't accept mediocrity walks away altogether. You haven't, because you accept it, just like the rest of us.

"How are the zealots who accept mediocrity any different to you?"
"What separates you from them?"

I can differentiate between fact and fiction. Should give it a try sometime.

That still doesn’t free you of not accepting mediocrity cos like I said you are still here...

Im not part of the Brooks defensive fan club and I am calling for him to play a first grade quality game once and a while or go play 2nd string half back for Camden in Group 6. ill be sure to take note of every time you defend the bloke for not being mediocre and call you out on it. Thats how i dont accept mediocrity, how about you?

I walk away and find something else to do, instead of putting myself through misery. As do most people. That’s what not accepting it is.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

It’s a moot point, we’ll never know, except that he has an amazing club and representative career which speaks for itself. It would suggest to me that he would have lifted any club he went to. I mean after all, Roosters had a star studded roster for years prior to Cronk arriving, and they bag a premiership soon as he lobs up.

See, I can't see sustained success at Storm and then Roosters as evidence that he would have lifted ANY club. He didn't establish at Melbourne until 2006 - he started only 1 match in 2004 and 9 matches in 2005; there were 23 appearances off the bench. Storm made the finals 4/6 years before he debuted and won a premiership; they were already successful before he started.

And long bow that he joined Roosters and they won a premiership "as soon as he lobs up". They also won it as soon as Tedesco lobbed up. In fact they won it the first year Momirovski lobbed. And prior to him arriving, they won the premiership 5 years prior, finished MP 3 of the 5 years, finished 2nd another season.

I'm not specifically criticising the bloke, I am just trying to consider his career in the context of the great sides he played in. There are some tremendous players that didn't have anything like the success of Cronk simply because they played in average sides. Ken Irvine comes to mind, being considered one of the all-time best wingers but not enjoying a premiership in 13 seasons at the Bears, but he joins a star-studded Manly team in 1971 and wins 2 premierships the following 2 years.

He was already established when they went on to dominate during the cap breach years.

Fair point on Tedesco etc. My point is that Easts have never been short of star players and they lacked the final touch to be able to clinch the silverware. Having a QLD and Australian representative halfback certainly helped the cause.

If we start looking at his career in the context that he was only as good as the players around him, then we may as well abolish the immortals concept as they were only ever as good as the team around them. Joey wasn't short of decent players around him at Newcastle in '97 and '01 (taking into account the split comp also in '97 where much of the talent was in the SuperLeague,) and many regard him as one of, if not the, greatest half to play the game. So do we look at his career in the same context? Was he only good because he had Tahu, BK, Mad Dog, Peden, Chief, Boozy, Buderus, Albert, Gidley, Matt Johns, Butts, O'Davis & Craigie around him?

In those terms, you can make that argument for any player.

 

[innsaneink]

Simply put, if we had a chance to snag Cronk for those two years at the expense of losing Brooks, I’d have done it in a heartbeat, and I am certainly not one who has it in for Brooks.

Was a no-brainer. I said at the time to write an open cheque for the bloke.
His work ethic and winning mentality alone would have created a better culture here - and that's not even considering his exceptional game management and halfback play.

Except he wouldn't have ever come here to play under JT and our merry band of under achievers. There's a reason why he went to Easts.

The reason is, like great coaches... Great players have options and can choose a new club likely to win a comp rather than one that's missed finals for a decade... People forget it takes two to tango

 

[Jock Koss]

@innsaneink absolutely, ink , or you could be a very lonely alpha sometimes ...

 

[2041]

I wanted to pose a question - is Cooper Cronk a great footballer, or has he been blessed with stacked rosters his entire career?

The thought occurred to me in another thread about Luke Brooks, who I felt was busy without being decisive against the Bulldogs. Personally I thought if he was given more support, more would have come of his efforts, and later in the game he seemed to be running an awful lot, to good effect, simply because either the DH service was poor or because his backline was not running onto the ball.

And I wonderd what kind of career Luke Brooks might have if he was playing for the Storm and Roosters, not Tigers. If he was receiving passes from Cam Smith, throwing balls to Munster or Slater or Inglis or Folau or Keary or Latrell or Tedesco (well we had a reasonable look at the latter).

Cooper Cronk has never played in a bad side. He's never had less than 3-4 future Hall Of Fame players in any team. He's a very capable organiser, tough, good defender, good support, good in clutch players, but also - he can afford to focus on these because he doesn't have to do everything himself. Because when he passes, his team-mates make things happen, run good lines, bust tackles, set up line breaks themselves.

So how good really is Cooper Cronk and what do you guess his career might have been like if he played for Titans or Tigers?

I'm fascinated by this type of question and the fact that so many of the responses are of such low calibre shows how poorly we understand the concepts you're talking about. "Brooks must be terrible because the Tigers don't finish in the top eight". Presumably Thurston must have been a sub-first-grade standard player in 2008-10 because the Cowboys finished 15th, 12th and 15th (last in the non Storm zero points department).

What's interesting is that we basically have no useful evidence to back up our own impressions - which shows how the NRL is still in the dark ages when it comes to data analytics (possibly just what's publicly available, but I strongly suspect there are still plenty of teams that sign players based on, more or less, guesswork).

We can all tell when a player has extravagant athletic gifts - a Taumalolo, Ponga or Tedesco, say - but otherwise it comes down entirely to our impressions, biases and personal preferences. Plenty of Souths fans think Adam Reynolds is holding them back (and did so even when they won a premiership). We of course have the Brooks haters. From what I've seen, Roosters fans both dislike Friend. No doubt there were some Dragons fans who thought signing Ben Hunt was a good idea. I'm sure it's the same at every club.

Personally I wouldn't claim to understand the game well enough to answer the original question. What I do know is that confirmation bias is a powerful weapon. Cronk can do virtually nothing and yet be lauded for "leading the team round the park" if the Roosters win (he looked borderline disinterested when we played the Roosters a few weeks back, frankly). Brooks was disappointing for his first two seasons and he's played in a succession of bad Tigers sides so nothing he ever does will redeem him for some fans. That doesn't mean Cronk is a bad player or Brooks is the next immortal, it just means we tend to see what we expect to see.

 

[Jock Koss]

@2041 talk about beating around the bush, buddy, did you just have that thought then or already had it typed out and couldn’t figure who to respond to ! Seems a very Blasé response and something that doesn’t engender any real understanding of what is not even the crux of the question - where you have focused on replying- that any, or many (in your words) are responding to about the caliber of player we can attract, whether they lift us out of the cellar, and whether they have the same success here... imo this is all totally irrelevant even in the hypothetical sense because I don’t see there being any competing factors at this stage of their respective careers that differentiate Cronk & Brooks, except that one is 100% proven at the top level and the other isn’t. It comes down to cash , convenience and top quality coaching/nothing else (note: Moses’ improvement under Brad Arthur)... Moses isn’t a halfbacks bootlace but currently his side and club off the field are doing more to support him and showcase the better aspects of his game.

It’s that simple, if we keep Madge and in the next 5 years win at least one premiership ... then you’d have my permission to even ‘try’ comparing Luke Brooks to C. Cronk.

I see what u tried to do there but there’s really no need to deflect on a forum. Back to the OP; Cronk would’ve helped us out (not of his own choice) and made us competitive week in, week out, but we’d still have not had a premiership opportunity yet IN MY opinion - and so, as history shows with both of them - he would’ve pulled a Teddy and left for the Chooks either way.

 

[jirskyr]

In those terms, you can make that argument for any player.

Yes and no. In terms of Johns, the question is - do you think Knights could have won the comp if Joey didn't play for them? Who are the players that teams cannot do without? Who are the players that dominate, not just compete, at all levels? Those are the Immortals.

When it comes to Cronk, I think all his teams could manage without him. There's no doubt he's a very good footballer and especially in the area of game management / team organisation, apart from Thurston, he probably hasn't had an equal for a decade. He is a real clutch player in terms of finding the right pass or kick. But he was never cutting teams apart, never a real weapon with the football or a specific headache for opponents to nullify. Rather, he has always been a high-level gritty footballer, competing on every play with a cool head and minimal mistakes.

Thurston, on the other hand, propelled what became a reasonable Cowboys outfit to the finals; when he joined from Canterbury they had a horrendous record. And then based on Thurston's excellence, Cowboys were able to flesh-out their roster, because players were keen to sign on with him. That adds to Thurston's legacy in my opinion.

The same cannot be said about Cronk; at both Storm and Roosters he came into what was already a very successful operation, with a prominent roster. His debut match for the Storm in 2004, their side was: Slater, Geyer, Bell, MacDougall, Dustin Cooper, Hill, Orford, Kearns, Cam Smith, Kearney, Kidwell, Dallas Johnson, Hoffman, Howe, Danny Williams, Reynoldson, Cronk. Slater and Smith had already played a full season; 4 of the players had played in the 1999 premiership.

Cronk will undoubtedly become a Hall Of Fame player and almost certainly not an Immortal. I think he is probably the weakest of the top-tier footballers that made their careers at Melbourne - behind Smith, Slater, Inglis, Folau. I'd even say Munster, at this stage in his career, is a superior footballer to any time in Cronk's career. I think Keary, Latrell and Tedesco outshine Cronk at the Roosters now.

 

[jirskyr]

@2041 talk about beating around the bush, buddy, did you just have that thought then or already had it typed out and couldn’t figure who to respond to ! Seems a very Blasé response and something that doesn’t engender any real understanding of what is not even the crux of the question

Totally do not agree. @2041 does understand the question, and I know he/she does, because I am the one that posed the question.

Your post, on the other hand, doesn't make a lot of sense to me, though I've tried to read it a few times. I never really asked how Tigers would have fared if we had Cronk instead of Brooks, though it came up in discussion. I also didn't specifically ask to compare Brooks to Cronk, because of course in many respects you cannot compare them yet. What I asked is "what makes Cooper Cronk a great footballer and how much of that is dependent on the rosters he played in?". Brooks, by way of contrast, has not played in top rosters and I wonder what impact that has on his career/reputation. Not comparing Brooks to Cronk, rather comparing reputations and success of players based on the haves- and have-nots at club level.

 

[krayola]

There's no doubt he's benefitted from being around those players and in general, good systems. Anyone would. You get access to that extra 5% everyday that adds up to a great deal more resources in the long term. Think of the opportunies that come with those teams. Their victories attract more people to the club and better competition which breeds better performance. If he'd been with us he'd have been good but not great; it's why a lot of our good players, if they can leave, choose to. It's why Benji is a legend for everything he's given to us. He surely would have received bigger offers to go elsewhere.

Cronk has definitely had to work for it, all truly great people do. But kudos to him for getting chosen by the Storm and then making the most of it. It's given him this role at the Roosters and then led to him getting a TV role.

 

[Jock Koss]

@jirskyr hence me confirming that his/her response is off-base, because it does not address your question. Which part of what you ‘read’ in my wording is yet to hit you? Just wondering, Jirskyr!

The post stands and never once did I compare Brooks and Cronk - simply saying that any response mentioning a comparison is off the mark, is totally wrong - whether it has been raised in OP or not. Definitely on topic, struggling to see what doesn’t make sense about “Cronk is 100% proven at the top level” & “would’ve made us more competitive week in, week out” but we wouldn’t have had a premiership window on his abilities alone, future immortal or not. Does this answer your ‘question’ succinctly ???

 

[Jock Koss]

@jirskyr Keary???? Are you kidding😂

Latrell Mitchell, no where near just yet, unless you are talking about specifically flamboyance and finesse and the ability to cock up things because of his ego...

So, really I’m giving you benefit of the doubt in posting a legitimate reply to your previous post. What an unintelligent piece of writing back from you to me ^ also. I hope you will understand this time or I really fear for whoever you go to games with or what get up to in your spare time/for work. No offence meant btw... just a crazy silly topic to expect literal and concrete answers to, I never said he didn’t attempt to answer your question - rather that it was a “beat around the bush”... don’t bother reading two lines and replying in future mate!

 

[Jock Koss]

@2041 talk about beating around the bush, buddy, did you just have that thought then or already had it typed out and couldn’t figure who to respond to ! Seems a very Blasé response and something that doesn’t engender any real understanding of what is not even the crux of the question

Totally do not agree. @2041 does understand the question, and I know he/she does...

So, you think you know? For certain, that Cronk is as good as YOU say he is and not on the opinions/stats from the most important figures in the game as well the two most respected coaches and the most dominant Queensland side in history!?? Wow, I mean I am a blues fan but I’d love to have such blissful unawareness to truly tho k he couldn’t have bettered our club. You have confirmed your own bias, as 2041 said.