Interesting conversation above.. Why would players balk at signing with BL in future if they hold Brooks etc to their 2018 contracts? Would you, as a player, think "I'm not signing with Brahma, they actually uphold you to the contract, how weird is that?'.. That's the whole point of a contract is it not?
The mindset above of 'if a player doesn't want to be there, why wouldn't you let him go?' is the exact reason why the contracts aren't worth the piece of paper they are written on. If you aren't going to enforce them, why have them?
I see the point that a change of coach and conditions could also make a contract void, as a coach would be an integral part of a players thoughts on whether they would sign, hence the interesting situation here..
I don't think it should be a blight on Brahma if they were to hold players to contracts, who knows it might even send the message in future to prospective recruits that the club value the contracts put in front of prospective players, but I think they also have to factor in the change in coach to the situation here. Makes for a tough decision for you LTTF, I admire your strong stance but don't envy your position