Darren Bent

[LoughboroughLion]

Bent can still harm us even if he's not playing against us though. Is there any point in this deal unless we get another player in this window?

would you rather we kept him, kept paying him wages, and didnt use him?

I completely understand the perspective of him being wasted wages, and if he frees up wages for another signing then I'm all for it. However, if we don't bring anyone in and we finish below Fulham because of Bent's goals we could potentially lose out on more than 80k in prize money. Or am I being too in depth?

[ArteSuave]

Bent can still harm us even if he's not playing against us though. Is there any point in this deal unless we get another player in this window?

would you rather we kept him, kept paying him wages, and didnt use him?

I completely understand the perspective of him being wasted wages, and if he frees up wages for another signing then I'm all for it. However, if we don't bring anyone in and we finish below Fulham because of Bent's goals we could potentially lose out on more than 80k in prize money. Or am I being too in depth?

Not 80k, 80k per week plus £2m fee. That's like£6m.

[LoughboroughLion]

Bent can still harm us even if he's not playing against us though. Is there any point in this deal unless we get another player in this window?

would you rather we kept him, kept paying him wages, and didnt use him?

I completely understand the perspective of him being wasted wages, and if he frees up wages for another signing then I'm all for it. However, if we don't bring anyone in and we finish below Fulham because of Bent's goals we could potentially lose out on more than 80k in prize money. Or am I being too in depth?

Not 80k, 80k per week plus £2m fee. That's like£6m.

Apologies, misread what we were getting. 2m and his wages being paid in full?

[dont_do_it_doug.]

Yes.

[Honest bunch of lads]

Are any of the people in this thread relieved that he won't be playing against Villa next season the same people who considered him surplus to requirements here? I mean if the latter is true why would such a useless player lining up against Villa bother you?

[briny_ear]

 It's good for him and good for us that he is going. No way was he going to get a game under Lambert. Jol sounds as if he will value his skills a bit more so he may get to play more and we rid ourselves of a very expensive reserve.

 

Will be interesting to see how his career goes this season and if his fortunes pick up again. I sort of hope they do because a Premier League with Darren Bent banging in lots of goals is better than one without.

[Condimentalist]

Are any of the people in this thread relieved that he won't be playing against Villa next season the same people who considered him surplus to requirements here? I mean if the latter is true why would such a useless player lining up against Villa bother you?

 

He's definitely not useless. I expect him to score 12-15 next season if he stays fit. He wasn't much use to us on the bench though,

[Honest bunch of lads]

 

Are any of the people in this thread relieved that he won't be playing against Villa next season the same people who considered him surplus to requirements here? I mean if the latter is true why would such a useless player lining up against Villa bother you?

 

He's definitely not useless. I expect him to score 12-15 next season if he stays fit. He wasn't much use to us on the bench though,

 

 

Sorry, I meant to put useless in inverted commas. I personally don't think that.

 

Let's hope we bring in another player before the deadline of Darren Bent's quality, otherwise the bottom line is that the squad is weaker than before Bent left.

[mikeyp102]

Good luck to him.

When we signed him I was elated. Was exactly what that team needed, unfortunately it was two yrs too late. (Imagine him getting through ball from Milner)

He did what was needed of him and what we paid for.

Still think he and Benteke could've forged a good partnership, but then gabby and Weiman took the opportunity handed to them, so I suppose it's all fair gain.

Would've liked to keep him as I have no doubt that he will score goals, but understandably we couldn't keep him as a backup with the wages he was on.

Right player at the wrong time. Luckily can't come back and score the winner past us.

[villa-revolution]

I have maintained all along that a match fit Darren Bent will score goals on a regular basis irrespective of th system being played.

 

He now has a chance to go & prove it.

 

Also, he is still an Aston Villa player & only this time next season will we all be in a better position to judge how the whole thing moves forward.

[P3te]

Bent can still harm us even if he's not playing against us though. Is there any point in this deal unless we get another player in this window?

would you rather we kept him, kept paying him wages, and didnt use him?

I completely understand the perspective of him being wasted wages, and if he frees up wages for another signing then I'm all for it. However, if we don't bring anyone in and we finish below Fulham because of Bent's goals we could potentially lose out on more than 80k in prize money. Or am I being too in depth?

we get 5.3m for this loan with the 2m fee and 3.3m saved wages. Not exactly 80k

[P3te]

Are any of the people in this thread relieved that he won't be playing against Villa next season the same people who considered him surplus to requirements here? I mean if the latter is true why would such a useless player lining up against Villa bother you?

nobody has said he's useless though. He just doesn't work in the system we're building. In delighted we don't have to have him as I'm sure he'll score plenty of goals

[praisedmambo]

 

 

Bent can still harm us even if he's not playing against us though. Is there any point in this deal unless we get another player in this window?

would you rather we kept him, kept paying him wages, and didnt use him?

I completely understand the perspective of him being wasted wages, and if he frees up wages for another signing then I'm all for it. However, if we don't bring anyone in and we finish below Fulham because of Bent's goals we could potentially lose out on more than 80k in prize money. Or am I being too in depth?

 

Or are you using too many 'if's'?

 

Because what 'if' we now get to sign Kiyotake and he wins us loads more points than Fulham and we get even more money in prize money? 

 

Speculation works both ways, eh. And seeing as moving on the bomb squad to make another signing seems to be the plan, as has been massively hinted by the journalists who know stuff I see no reason to cry about this just yet. 

Edited August 16, 2013 by praisedmambo

[praisedmambo]

 

 

Are any of the people in this thread relieved that he won't be playing against Villa next season the same people who considered him surplus to requirements here? I mean if the latter is true why would such a useless player lining up against Villa bother you?

 

He's definitely not useless. I expect him to score 12-15 next season if he stays fit. He wasn't much use to us on the bench though,

 

 

Sorry, I meant to put useless in inverted commas. I personally don't think that.

 

Let's hope we bring in another player before the deadline of Darren Bent's quality, otherwise the bottom line is that the squad is weaker than before Bent left.

 

 

I think technically you could say that if we sold Bannan or Hutton or anyone, as we'd have one less player.  

[bannedfromHandV]

Kind of ideal actually given he can't score against us now this season, only outcome that would have been better would have been a sale to a foreign club

[Ginko]

 

What would the difference be if we didn't buy another player? We wouldn't go bankrupt if we kept Bent so unless we get another player out of his leaving, all we're doing is strengthening a league rival and getting paid a bit of money to do so. We might as well have kept him and then at least if the worst did happen, we'd have Bent as an option. I'm not saying I'm against getting him off the wage bill in the long run, but it's only a loan at the moment so that isn't the case.

 

 

Who's to say we're not going to buy another player though? There are still 3 weeks left of the window.

 

 

Oh I know, I'm not saying we won't, I'm saying that we better otherwise this deal would not make much sense. Here's hoping.

[Bunnski]

 

 

Bent Signs For Fulham

 

Friday 16 August 2013 11:30

 

Fulham Football Club is delighted to announce the signing of Darren Bent from Aston Villa, on a season long loan.

The 29-year-old striker signed for Aston Villa from Sunderland in January 2011. Whilst on Wearside, he scored 36 goals in 63 appearances.

 

He is reunited with Martin Jol, who signed the England international from Charlton Athletic in 2007 whilst manager of Tottenham Hotspur. He has scored four goals in 13 appearances for England, his first for his country in 2010 against Switzerland away in a Euro 2012 Qualifying match.

 

Bent started his senior career at Ipswich Town in 2001 and spent four seasons at Portman Road, scoring 56 goals before moving to Charlton Athletic in 2005.

 

He has scored over 100 Premier League goals since 2005, playing for Charlton Athletic, Tottenham Hotspur, Sunderland and Aston Villa.

Fulham Manager Martin Jol said: “Darren Bent is a striker I have always admired. He has shown in the Barclays Premier League that he is composed and clinical in front of goal but, even if he is not scoring, he is involved in some good link-up play, creating opportunities for his teammates. I’m delighted that he has joined us, he gives us pace up front and I am confident that he will add to our goals scored tally this season.”

 

 

Good luck to him, now... that attacking midfielder...

I have to say that seeing him holding that shirt leaves me bitterly disappointed. I'd also point to the bolded part of Jol's summation. Isn't it incredible that the masses on here have been sharping their knives with the very statement that Jol has contradicted.

 

Only time will tell now whether Lambert has made the right call on this if his departure is for footballing reasons alone?

 

Bitter over what? he is still our player!

[Morpheus]

 

 

 

Bent Signs For Fulham

 

Friday 16 August 2013 11:30

 

Fulham Football Club is delighted to announce the signing of Darren Bent from Aston Villa, on a season long loan.

The 29-year-old striker signed for Aston Villa from Sunderland in January 2011. Whilst on Wearside, he scored 36 goals in 63 appearances.

 

He is reunited with Martin Jol, who signed the England international from Charlton Athletic in 2007 whilst manager of Tottenham Hotspur. He has scored four goals in 13 appearances for England, his first for his country in 2010 against Switzerland away in a Euro 2012 Qualifying match.

 

Bent started his senior career at Ipswich Town in 2001 and spent four seasons at Portman Road, scoring 56 goals before moving to Charlton Athletic in 2005.

 

He has scored over 100 Premier League goals since 2005, playing for Charlton Athletic, Tottenham Hotspur, Sunderland and Aston Villa.

Fulham Manager Martin Jol said: “Darren Bent is a striker I have always admired. He has shown in the Barclays Premier League that he is composed and clinical in front of goal but, even if he is not scoring, he is involved in some good link-up play, creating opportunities for his teammates. I’m delighted that he has joined us, he gives us pace up front and I am confident that he will add to our goals scored tally this season.”

 

 

Good luck to him, now... that attacking midfielder...

I have to say that seeing him holding that shirt leaves me bitterly disappointed. I'd also point to the bolded part of Jol's summation. Isn't it incredible that the masses on here have been sharping their knives with the very statement that Jol has contradicted.

 

Only time will tell now whether Lambert has made the right call on this if his departure is for footballing reasons alone?

 

 

We have 4 strikers at the club, one of them being the best striker outside the top 6. The other 3 don't even earn half as much as Bent and are (much) higher up in Lambert's plans than Bent. Wouldn't it make sense for all parties involved for Bent to move on? You're making something out of nothing for the sake of argument.

 

The fact that i'm disappointed is due to having one of the best goal scorers we've had in a very long time whom the manager couldn't find a way to utilise that goalscoring prowess to benefit the team when we spent so much on the player. I have no doubt that he will prove at Fulham why we agreed to pay him so much in wages as he is simply quality in front of goal and Fulham have got a real bargain which could admittedly benefit us at the end of his loan period but consideration will also have to be given to length of contract remaining.

 

I actually thought it ironic that a very well respected manager such as Jol has complimented Bent on a part of his game which has been viewed by some on here as non existent so you'll pardon me when i give far more credence to the opinion of Jol than someone's opinion on here and am using that opinion of a well respected manager rather than 'making something out of nothing for the sake of argument.'

[Morpheus]

 

If loaning out Bent has freed up some space on the wage bill for players Lambert wants to sign then I don't really see the problem with this? It's not like Bent would get much game time here anyway.

It's just morpheus going loony.

 

Based on what and i'd like an explanation?

[Gompedyret]

I hope Bent becomes a success with Fulham. Villa should be able to top Fulham in any case, and Bent proving to be as lethal as ever will secure a much better deal for us when we sell him.