RUMOUR Luke Brooks to Broncos 2018

Kyall said:
No I agree I think Brooks would be a great pickup tbh. Brooks defensively isn't the best though Hunt was worse, but we have Gillett to help him there.
Brooks was the first choice I said after Hunt signed with saints.
Click to expand...
You really think Brooks is a better defender than Hunt?
 
Unbreakable said:
Time for me to say my piece.

I've been a closet fan of Luke Brooks for several years, not only do I think he's got incredible potential as a player, I just like him as a person, and think he's extremely coachable.

I think he would be the perfect signing for us, it might sound crazy because he's been around for so long, but he's 6 months YOUNGER than Anthony Milford.. He possesses the kicking game, ball playing & game management that Wayne Bennett could completely unleash, he hasn't been used correctly at the Tigers, they've either prioritised Farah as the primary play-maker, or Moses.

I still think our #1 target should be Taylor, but if he gives us the indication that he wants to stay on the GC, I'd be calling up Brooks' management immediately and offering him a 3 or 4 year deal. He's 100% the next best option, and I think he would be an absolutely incredible halves partner for Milford, they're the same age group, and their skill-sets complement each other extremely well.

I'm sure plenty of you will disagree with me, and that's fine, a lot of you disagreed with me when I said I thought the Boyd & Blair additions were great for us. It's without question that Brooks has a long way to go as a complete player, his defence is horrible, he fades in and out of games, he makes mistakes.. All of those things can be fixed, and will be fixed, he's so young.

#BrooksFor18'
Click to expand...

I think you are on the money. We will push for taylor and Brooks will be plan B
 
I think it is going to prove very difficult for clubs to pay top $ for 2 gun halves plus a competent hooker and fullback. Very interesting to see which way clubs go with this. For some a Hooker is very important but for other it isn't. Luke Brooks will command too much IMO. He just hasn't done enough to be worth the $800K plus that he will ask for.
 
Bucking Beads said:
I think it is going to prove very difficult for clubs to pay top $ for 2 gun halves plus a competent hooker and fullback. Very interesting to see which way clubs go with this. For some a Hooker is very important but for other it isn't. Luke Brooks will command too much IMO. He just hasn't done enough to be worth the $800K plus that he will ask for.
Click to expand...

Warriors have Tuivasa-Sheck, Foran, Johnson & Luke, so it's not impossible. I imagine Luke is on more than McCullough, RTS is on similar to Boyd and Johnson will command more than Brooks. We may have to lose the likes of Thaiday & Glenn to accomplish it whilst keeping the rest of our core together, but it's definitely doable.

And I think we could get Brooks for less than $800k also, probably closer to $650-700k, which in the overall scheme of things is great when you compare it to how much the Dragons are paying for the tail-end prime and post-prime of Hunt, we'll be paying for the beginning and middle of Brooks' presumable prime.
 
I don't mind the idea of Brooks, but I just don't know if his defence will hold up.
 
Danoz Direct said:
I don't mind the idea of Brooks, but I just don't know if his defence will hold up.
Click to expand...

As I said, his defence isn't good. But in terms of things that a Halfback can work on, it's a lot easier to teach him how to tackle than it is to teach him how to kick and control a game, which is what we've been trying to do with Hunt.
 
Unbreakable said:
Warriors have Tuivasa-Sheck, Foran, Johnson & Luke, so it's not impossible. I imagine Luke is on more than McCullough, RTS is on similar to Boyd and Johnson will command more than Brooks. We may have to lose the likes of Thaiday & Glenn to accomplish it whilst keeping the rest of our core together, but it's definitely doable.

And I think we could get Brooks for less than $800k also, probably closer to $650-700k, which in the overall scheme of things is great when you compare it to how much the Dragons are paying for the tail-end prime and post-prime of Hunt, we'll be paying for the beginning and middle of Brooks' presumable prime.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't know how the Warriors do it. No doubt it it doable but I think it will be tough. Teams need to spread the Salary Cap $$ around nicely so they can have a good all round team.
 
Unbreakable said:
Time for me to say my piece.

I've been a closet fan of Luke Brooks for several years, not only do I think he's got incredible potential as a player, I just like him as a person, and think he's extremely coachable.

I think he would be the perfect signing for us, it might sound crazy because he's been around for so long, but he's 6 months YOUNGER than Anthony Milford.. He possesses the kicking game, ball playing & game management that Wayne Bennett could completely unleash, he hasn't been used correctly at the Tigers, they've either prioritised Farah as the primary play-maker, or Moses.

I still think our #1 target should be Taylor, but if he gives us the indication that he wants to stay on the GC, I'd be calling up Brooks' management immediately and offering him a 3 or 4 year deal. He's 100% the next best option, and I think he would be an absolutely incredible halves partner for Milford, they're the same age group, and their skill-sets complement each other extremely well.

I'm sure plenty of you will disagree with me, and that's fine, a lot of you disagreed with me when I said I thought the Boyd & Blair additions were great for us. It's without question that Brooks has a long way to go as a complete player, his defence is horrible, he fades in and out of games, he makes mistakes.. All of those things can be fixed, and will be fixed, he's so young.

#BrooksFor18'
Click to expand...

For once I have to say you pretty much nailed it and I agree with you. Not only that Taylor should be the first port of call but that Brooks would be a very very solid plan B.
 
Bucking Beads said:
I think it is going to prove very difficult for clubs to pay top $ for 2 gun halves plus a competent hooker and fullback. Very interesting to see which way clubs go with this. For some a Hooker is very important but for other it isn't. Luke Brooks will command too much IMO. He just hasn't done enough to be worth the $800K plus that he will ask for.
Click to expand...
Melbourne manage it. Cronk, Slater, Smith, Munster, all on their books this year.
 
Melbourne would also have dispensation for long term loyalty and I'm sure those players would command better third party sponsorship than McCullough and Brooks. Besides, it isn't like Munster has established himself as anything more than a 'good' backline utility. In other words, he's their version of Jordan Kahu.
 
The long service allowance is only 300k total per club, so about 100k each. If Cam Smith, Slater and Cronk are not million dollar players or very close to it, then I don't believe it. They are also in Melbourne, in theory we have a far greater third party market for our big names like Milford, Boyd, etc.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl...k=d9b2b70991688fc63d3e9be5c00b3503-1487135869

Munster is also supposedly on a 2m 3 year deal.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...k=d9b2b70991688fc63d3e9be5c00b3503-1487135940

Slater 900k

http://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl...l/news-story/8d139d2b2cae91c43c25092c7aa8d21a

Cronk 850k

Smith can name his price.
 
Brooks would be a great signing. The first person I thought to replace Hunt with was Brooks.
What would our chances be of signing him?
Also when does WCC team get announced?
 
broncospwn said:
The long service allowance is only 300k total per club, so about 100k each. If Cam Smith, Slater and Cronk are not million dollar players or very close to it, then I don't believe it. They are also in Melbourne, in theory we have a far greater third party market for our big names like Milford, Boyd, etc.

http://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl...k=d9b2b70991688fc63d3e9be5c00b3503-1487135869

Munster is also supposedly on a 2m 3 year deal.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/sport...k=d9b2b70991688fc63d3e9be5c00b3503-1487135940

Slater 900k

http://www.foxsports.com.au/nrl/nrl...l/news-story/8d139d2b2cae91c43c25092c7aa8d21a

Cronk 850k

Smith can name his price.
Click to expand...

But they don't explain the nature of any of those deals. It may be possible that Munster's deal maybe $2 Million total, but it isn't like he'd be receiving $666K each season. For all we know, the deal could be backdated, so that's it timed with Slater's impending retirement.

Those articles don't take into account marquee player allowance, third party deals, incentives or anything of that nature either. Remember how Lockyer was supposedly a $250K player at the Broncos? I'm sure there's something similar going on with Melbourne and most clubs do the exact same thing.

Melbourne benefit from developing their own, while Brisbane struggle since they've had to import (or in the case of Boyd buy back) players from other clubs. It's a little apples and oranges and the only team that seems to be getting away with it (albeit poorly) is the Warriors who have the entire New Zealand spine now.
 
Last year Hunt missed 85 and Brooks missed 73 and Hunt had Gillett as back up.
 
Kyall said:
Last year Hunt missed 85 and Brooks missed 73 and Hunt had Gillett as back up.
Click to expand...

Where did you get those stats?

Brooks only missed 1 less tackle according to NRL.com

But then he also didn't make anywhere near as many tackles as Hunt.

Brooks.

271 tackles
98 missed
36%

Hunt.

582 tackles
99 missed
17%
 
Why are people so concerned about defense in a half? Yes, some are better than others (sometimes at hiding), but that is not what they are there for!
Besides, as UB said, teaching someone to improve his tackling, is not as hard as teaching the fine aspects of conducting a team and kicking a footy
 
New Posts

Unread

Active Now

No members online now.
Total: 14 (members: 0, guests: 14)
Top