blackthorn slice Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 i heard last night brooks would have been a sheff wed player by now if he never got injured.anybody heard this?hope its not true as i think he,s been 1 of are best players in this dire season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 i heard last night brooks would have been a sheff wed player by now if he never got injured.anybody heard this?hope its not true as i think he,s been 1 of are best players in this dire season. Why can't it be true?! I think him and Wilkshire are off- either in Jan or End of season regardless. Whatever Johnson does this season he will have a rebuilding job on his hands next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolman Block B Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 i heard last night brooks would have been a sheff wed player by now if he never got injured.anybody heard this?hope its not true as i think he,s been 1 of are best players in this dire season. Is true, but got knicked and in trouble + injurys and Sturrock walked away. Was told £350,000 was on the table, but reckon we ought keep him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taz Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 IF that is is true, and he does actually leave, then that's us down in the basement next season.Brooker is still under contract, and that's not about to expire (unlike Wilkshire), and I seriously cannot believe that the board would sanction the move - unless he wanted out of course. Then that money would have to be reinvested in another striker - not part of it - all of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 Brooker is the only decent thing left to support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sprout1883 Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 I thought Brooker was about one of the only players GJ did rate from your squad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chappers Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 Well, the cash would allow GJ to buy the entire Yeovil team! Plus a few sets of kit. I'll be honest, I can believe anything of GJ, he is so desperate to have 'his' players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lita For Congo Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 I heard it but from someone who tells the truth 1 in 5 rumours so didnt belive it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sprout1883 Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 Well, the cash would allow GJ to buy the entire Yeovil team! Plus a few sets of kit. I'll be honest, I can believe anything of GJ, he is so desperate to have 'his' players.Lee Johnson and darren Way are probably top of his hit-list as well as jevons. Wouldn't be suprised if he tried to get Gavin Williams from west Ham either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cider head Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 sheffield wednesday have been interested in him yes in the past, mabe a swap deal for peacok is on the cards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukejones2 Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 IF that is is true, and he does actually leave, then that's us down in the basement next season.Brooker is still under contract, and that's not about to expire (unlike Wilkshire), and I seriously cannot believe that the board would sanction the move - unless he wanted out of course. Then that money would have to be reinvested in another striker - not part of it - all of it. Are you sure Brooks not out? Apparantly he thinks he is! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 IF that is is true, and he does actually leave, then that's us down in the basement next season.Brooker is still under contract, and that's not about to expire (unlike Wilkshire), and I seriously cannot believe that the board would sanction the move - unless he wanted out of course. Then that money would have to be reinvested in another striker - not part of it - all of it.Wiltshire's future must be in the balance as he clearly, and rightly, wants to optimise his chances of breaking into the first 11 of his national team.Brooker, i have every confidence, will be a city player for some time to come. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 Brooker, i have every confidence, will be a city player for some time to come. I don't share your confidence. If Brooker doesn't go in January to fund new signings then he'll be off before next season. He said he came to City looking to play Championship football, and whatever happens we're not going to be able to offer him that for some time. And Championship clubs are reportedly keen on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JudgeRed Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 sheffield wednesday have been interested in him yes in the past, mabe a swap deal for peacok is on the cards I can confirm that aswell. I have been talking to a mate of mine (Scott) who said it's been in the papers in Sheffield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 I don't share your confidence. If Brooker doesn't go in January to fund new signings then he'll be off before next season. He said he came to City looking to play Championship football, and whatever happens we're not going to be able to offer him that for some time. And Championship clubs are reportedly keen on him.crikey oh reilly mate, nothing is sacrosanct is it. i suppose 'for some time to come' you can read another 3 1/2 weeks then. I doubt brooks would command a huge fee though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSR Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 i heard last night brooks would have been a sheff wed player by now if he never got injured.anybody heard this?hope its not true as i think he,s been 1 of are best players in this dire season. um seeing so the transfer opens in jan i doubt it very much..think about what you just said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhatWill Posted December 4, 2005 Report Share Posted December 4, 2005 Sheff Wed aren't going to be able to stump up the £1million+ that Swansea supposedly want for Trundle.Sturrock was impressed with Brooks performances against Wednesday (especially on the last day) so I can see him going there in Jan.All paves the way for Agogo coming this way in my humble opinion! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Brooker is about the only player showing any passion and pride for this club; makes sense to replace him with another sag reject Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest I bleed red 'n' white Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 i heard last night brooks would have been a sheff wed player by now if he never got injured.anybody heard this?hope its not true as i think he,s been 1 of are best players in this dire season. it was hull who wanted him, a few weeks ago and pre season, but he was injured and rep was destroyed a bit, so they got paynter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bucksred Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 sheffield wednesday have been interested in him yes in the past, mabe a swap deal for peacok is on the cards NEVER, even as a jest CH, say that fer fox sake................... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 I can't imagine why we'd sell Brooker. It makes no sense whatsoever.I'd much much rather have Brooker than Agogo.Nibor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zideread Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 I can't imagine why we'd sell Brooker. It makes no sense whatsoever.I'd much much rather have Brooker than Agogo.NiborWe need money, Simple as that, Brooker will be worth a lot less next year in the 4th Division, and his wages are far too high for that div.Expect to see all high high earners removed from this club between now and the start of next season, these will be replaced with quality like Bas savage who are being paid peanuts and won't question what GJ has ever done in football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedTauntonian Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 If we get rid of brooker in january, then i will accept that our season is over, and we'll be haeading for the basement league, talk of getting £350,000 for him, are you for real? i'd want at least double that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swindlered Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Brooker is our best striker and in my opinion one of the best in the league. Without him we don't have a chance. Still quite young and capable of learning more. Would be another sad day if he leaves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 I'd much much rather have Brooker than Agogo.Nibor Brooker's 5x the player Agogo is, so if the going rate for Brooker is 350k., i trust City wouldn't offer more than 70k. for Agogo. Better still, leave him well alone. I look upon the striker signing, whether Brooker goes or not, as a good test of GJ's capabilities to turn things round. I really hope he'll have something much more imaginative lined up than the massively over-hyped Agogo from across the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted December 5, 2005 Report Share Posted December 5, 2005 Brooker's 5x the player Agogo is, so if the going rate for Brooker is 350k., i trust City wouldn't offer more than 70k. for Agogo. Better still, leave him well alone. I look upon the striker signing, whether Brooker goes or not, as a good test of GJ's capabilities to turn things round. I really hope he'll have something much more imaginative lined up than the massively over-hyped Agogo from across the road.Totally agree.I'd love it even more if he could actually figure out how to provide Stewart with some decent quality balls into the box and recall Gillespie and play him off the bench. We wouldn't need a striker then.The midfield is a far bigger concern for me.Nibor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.