Rumoured Targets 3

[alexwilliams_66692007]

He must have decided last weekend that he wants to join us as he's done his calf and is out for the rest of the season.

 

[Old dog]

Brooks at his best, some years ago, would be great but beggars can’t be choosers, we need a half back and the options are limited. We have Clune who is ok but not quite, we could re-sign Crosslands or we could punt on Brooks. I’m for giving Brookes a deal, sign him for one year with incentive to sign further if form warrants it.
No matter what keep looking and developing we need quality depth if we are to rise from the depth we are in

 

[Knight Tales]

If we decide to pursue a fullback and KP was to shift to 6 would we be more ok with Brooks moving here?

 

[SamSepi0l]

If we decide to pursue a fullback and KP was to shift to 6 would we be more ok with Brooks moving here?

No

 

[Loose Cannon]

Hate the idea of Luke Brooks even being considered.

Knowing us, we’ll probably end up with him next year;
a) with Tigers contributing nothing of their idiotic 1million+ deal,
b) PO’s for 24/25/26.
c) and us paying some sort of transfer fee despite no precedence in the domestic game.

 

[TooheysNew]

The question just needs to be "do we win more games with brooks or without".

There is piss all available (across the board, not just at half) this year, so we will need to go into market big at the end of next year.

If we are a more attractive club (winning games, improving players) with brooks at half, rather than clune, I'm all for it. He isn't my first choice, but he's currently the only choice, and he will sign for a realistic amount on the cap because the tigers will have to pick up a chunk.

You're all acting like we've got a better option. If we run out the same halves next year as we did at the start of this year, we will be getting the same results all season, and nobody will even look at coming here. Why would they?

 

[Jono078]

The question just needs to be "do we win more games with brooks or without".

There is piss all available (across the board, not just at half) this year, so we will need to go into market big at the end of next year.

If we are a more attractive club (winning games, improving players) with brooks at half, rather than clune, I'm all for it. He isn't my first choice, but he's currently the only choice, and he will sign for a realistic amount on the cap because the tigers will have to pick up a chunk.

You're all acting like we've got a better option. If we run out the same halves next year as we did at the start of this year, we will be getting the same results all season, and nobody will even look at coming here. Why would they?

I agree.

My big concern is we give Brooks Pearce-type money and it's a 3-year deal. Because that would set our recruiting back rather than the potential forward we're looking at for 2024.

Then again there's a chance he comes here next year and we're happy he's here for an additional 2.

Nothing would surprise me. I just hope the club makes a good deal and not a regrettable one.

 

[Frederick]

I agree.

My big concern is we give Brooks Pearce-type money and it's a 3-year deal. Because that would set our recruiting back rather than the potential forward we're looking at for 2024.

Then again there's a chance he comes here next year and we're happy he's here for an additional 2.

Nothing would surprise me. I just hope the club makes a good deal and not a regrettable one.

Toohey said that Brooks would be taking a significant pay cut to come here. With Parr in charge I'd say the days of throwing stupid money at stupid players is long over

 

[PhilGould]

Toohey’s News

- Knights tried to bring in Peter Parr in 2015 & 2018 but the “timing wasn’t right”. Toohey describes Parr’s role as ‘head the entire footy operations, reporting directly to Gardner, and take a lead role in the hiring and firing of footy staff’. Parr says he won’t be a yes man for Gardner.
- Luke Brooks apparently still wants out and Toohey thinks he will be a Knight, though he will have to take a significant pay cut.
- Officials have no idea where the story about Best moving to the wing came from, and say it hasn’t even been discussed.
- Knights still have to fill 1 spot in the top 30 by August 1. Toohey guesses Mat Croker will be upgraded into that spot.
- Dylan Phythian is out for the season and will likely stick with local league next season.

 

[Jono078]

Toohey said that Brooks would be taking a significant pay cut to come here. With Parr in charge I'd say the days of throwing stupid money at stupid players is long over

Certainly hope so but I imagine we have to offer Brooks something decent or he'd just go to the Super League.

Here's hoping we end up with the best bargain buy next year. That's best case scenario!

 

[Yosh]

In my opinion: Milf>Hastings>Brooks>Clune>Crossland/Clifford

We let the Milf go, Hastings doesn't seem to be in the picture so Brooks is the next best option. There are bunch of folks on here who say 'no' to everyone but don't provide suggestions or solutions.

Nobody here 'wants' to be Brooks as our 7 but he looks like the only option left.

 

[Zoidberg]

Last 3 halfbacks we’ve signed (will sign?) and their age when joining.
Brent Hodkinson 27 years old
Mitch Pearce 29 years old
Luke Brookes 28 years old (this Dec)

We keep going for halfbacks who should be in the midst of their prime and it hasn’t worked out.
Will Brookes be any different?

 

[SamSepi0l]

Anything more than a one year deal for Brooks is a bad move.
I can't see Brooks accepting a one year deal and as such I don't want him.
I think Brooks is obviously better than Clune but I don't think he is good enough to generate enough extra wins to make the club "more attractive". Going from Clune to Brooks isn't going from 6 wins to 12. It's going from 6 to maybe 7? 8?

This year went down the drain the second we gave up our 7 for nothing and our 9 broke down at the same time.
Next year is going to be a little better provided Brailey plays the majority with isn't a crazy assumption.
Stack the team with weapons that make it attractive for a 7, not by clogging up a halfback spot on the roster for 2-3 years with someone who at this point isn't anything more than a warm body.

 

[Jono078]

One thing I'll say about Brooks is you could argue he's not had the best support spine players in terms of ability, experience and leadership.

At least here he will have Ponga and Brailey and rep level front rowers. It could work out for him.

I feel like I'm trying to convince myself a lot but at the end of the day yeah I want Brooks over Clune and not-March Jake Clifford.

 

[Burwood]

We can sign Brookes, but we’re still severely lacking leaders next season. We need 2 players to fill that role, and I don’t really care what position they play in.

 

[Jono078]

We can sign Brookes, but we’re still severely lacking leaders next season. We need 2 players to fill that role, and I don’t really care what position they play in.

Are there any?

Depth of talent is a huge issue across the NRL.

We really just need some of our now seasoned campaigners to just step up into the role. Ponga, Brailey, Saifiti x 2 and Klemmer. That should be more than enough to get the team on your back and follow you into the trenches.

 

[PhilGould]

The grass isn't always greener, Brooks is no more likely to win you a game than Clifford. Both can look decent if the players around them are dominating, and both crumble the moment there's any pressure on them. Neither are halves that get the most out of the players around them or are creative enough playmakers. Brooks will be 28 next year and has shown no signs of improving in those areas.

Can only hope Parr gets into town and fires whoever it is that thinks Brooks is the answer. Will be a truly depressing few years if we sign him.

 

[General Knight]

If the money was right and we had a capable coach I would be ok with Brooks.

 

[TooheysNew]

The grass isn't always greener, Brooks is no more likely to win you a game than Clifford. Both can look decent if the players around them are dominating, and both crumble the moment there's any pressure on them. Neither are halves that get the most out of the players around them or are creative enough playmakers. Brooks will be 28 next year and has shown no signs of improving in those areas.

Can only hope Parr gets into town and fires whoever it is that thinks Brooks is the answer. Will be a truly depressing few years if we sign him.

The same Clifford who can't even make our first grade side?

Yeah, mad.

 

[SamSepi0l]

The same Brooks who is getting run out of one of the few clubs going worse than us?

Yeah, mad.