Darren Bent - worth every penny

[Brend'Watkins]

Bent would be no use to Wenger. Wenger likes players who can walk the ball into the goal via 50 tippy tappy passes.  Instinctive forward play such as instant control and shoot at goal would bore the Arsenal faithful rigid.

[Mazrim]

I'm afraid it's just not that simple:-
1.  We bought Heskey 6 months before Bent went to Sunderland - was he available then?
2.  He left Spurs to play regularly, so would he have come to a club with an established partnership like Gabby and Carew?
3.  Would the lack of defensive reinforcements we would presumably not have then bought have seen us leak enough goals to negate Bent's impact?

Why isnt it that simple? What's not simple about taking an opportunity to buy a player we needed?
In answer to your questions.

1- Yes, I believe he was.
2- He would have believed himself good enough to play regardless of those two and he'd have been right.
Certainly more than at Spurs. And we were in a better position than they were at the time.
3- Not really. What are we talking, £10m? So no Beye, dont spend so much on Warnock, spend some of the summer money sooner instead of £4m on Heskey or choose one of Delph or Downing not both and buy Bent. I believe he was far more important at that stage. Carew's form was patchy and he was often injured or despondent and a lot depended on Gabby.
Bent would have made the difference that season to getting that top 4 place or cup win or both.

In any case, I've already articulated as succintly as I can, I think.

You can slice it and dice it however you like but MON had something like £150m (guess) to spend over his tenure and failed to get the striker we needed and in my opinion, failed to get a top 4 finish as a result.
Two complete defences purchased and no prolific striker = big mistake.
Especially when one of the best finishers in the land becomes available for a very reasonable price.

I remember having the piss taken out of me because I kept suggesting buying him or some other striker and people would say, he's not going to buy a top striker. And I'd think, well of course he is. Why wouldnt he? But they were right somehow. MON either thought he had enough or had no idea how to go about signing a top striker, which I find amazing.

The goals dried up, we stuttered, we choked and we fell short of the final hurdle again. Frustrating.

[Concrete John]

 

In any case, I've already articulated as succintly as I can, I think.

You wanted Bent, MON didn't, or did and was unable to get him.  Of that there is no doubt.  Where there is dount is what we would ahve had to sacrifice of our other squad/team building process in order to buy him at the time.  It's OK to say 'well, he bought enough crap players that they would have payed for him', but in reality if we were 100% efficient in our purchases it would be a the first time in the history of football. 

Would I have preferred Bent to Downing in summer 2009?  Yes, but then I'm not capable of building a top 6 side and MON was, so that doesn't mean that I, or you, are right.     

[Mazrim]

I've never tried "building a top 6 side" or, more accurately, a 6th place side as MON managed and no better, but I know buying Bent was the right thing to do. 
Then we might have been a top 4 side or something. He could have done better with what he had to spend. I know it's not easy but I feel comfortable saying that.
But you either accept not buying Bent was a mistake or you dont. There really isnt anything else to say.

[Concrete John]

But you either accept not buying Bent was a mistake or you dont. There really isnt anything else to say.

It was a choice.  If it's the wrong one then it's a mistake, as it looks like it was right now.  But we can't know how we would have been weakened in other areas had we gone for him.

The other thing is that outside the top 4 and Spurs themselves, there must have been 10 clubs or so with the finances to buy him.  Does that mean all 9 managers, other than Spud 'ead, made a mistake in not buying him?   

[pauliewalnuts]

But you either accept not buying Bent was a mistake or you dont. There really isnt anything else to say.

It was a choice.  If it's the wrong one then it's a mistake, as it looks like it was right now.  But we can't know how we would have been weakened in other areas had we gone for him.

The other thing is that outside the top 4 and Spurs themselves, there must have been 10 clubs or so with the finances to buy him.  Does that mean all 9 managers, other than Spud 'ead, made a mistake in not buying him?   

How many of them both had the money to buy him, and could attract him to signing for them?

[Billy Walker]

I cringe every time a Villa player has a good game as he automatically becomes a transfer target for the mega rich clubs. Even last night on MOTD the talk was that Bent would be a good signing for Arsenal. It is a fact his goals have saved us from relegation but we need to look after him in the future and show improvement as well as commitment and ambition.

Are Arsenal a mega rich club?  I'm not so sure.  I think what was said on MOTD was meant in an "opportunity missed" for Arsenal kind of way.  There's no way in a million years they could afford him.  I think he's on a four year contract at Villa and to us now he is worth at least double what we shelled out for him. 

[Concrete John]

But you either accept not buying Bent was a mistake or you dont. There really isnt anything else to say.

It was a choice.  If it's the wrong one then it's a mistake, as it looks like it was right now.  But we can't know how we would have been weakened in other areas had we gone for him.

The other thing is that outside the top 4 and Spurs themselves, there must have been 10 clubs or so with the finances to buy him.  Does that mean all 9 managers, other than Spud 'ead, made a mistake in not buying him?   

How many of them both had the money to buy him, and could attract him to signing for them?

Bearing in mind who he eventually went to, I'd say quite a few!

[Risso]

I remember having the piss taken out of me because I

am a short arse.

[not3bad]

But you either accept not buying Bent was a mistake or you dont. There really isnt anything else to say.

It was a choice.  If it's the wrong one then it's a mistake, as it looks like it was right now.  But we can't know how we would have been weakened in other areas had we gone for him.

The other thing is that outside the top 4 and Spurs themselves, there must have been 10 clubs or so with the finances to buy him.  Does that mean all 9 managers, other than Spud 'ead, made a mistake in not buying him?   

Surely the most appropriate answer to this question is "who cares?"  We're talking about what was best for Aston Villa, not anyone else.

[Mazrim]

He went to Sunderland because that was his best option. It shouldn't have been.
Not by any stretch of the imagination.

[Somniloquism]

Bent would be no use to Wenger. Wenger likes players who can walk the ball into the goal via 50 tippy tappy passes.  Instinctive forward play such as instant control and shoot at goal would bore the Arsenal faithful rigid.

If he is trying to be a poor mans Barca then he should realise that Villa is an instinctive finisher who makes runs off the last defender for Xavi. Iniesta or Messi to find. Darren Bent would have been ideal for that. Instead he decided Bendtner, an injured Van persie or a morrocan who can't play in the cold were better bets. His loss, our gain.

[Dante Lavelli]

Bent would be no use to Wenger. Wenger likes players who can walk the ball into the goal via 50 tippy tappy passes.  Instinctive forward play such as instant control and shoot at goal would bore the Arsenal faithful rigid.

If he is trying to be a poor mans Barca then he should realise that Villa is an instinctive finisher who makes runs off the last defender for Xavi. Iniesta or Messi to find. Darren Bent would have been ideal for that. Instead he decided Bendtner, an injured Van persie or a morrocan who can't play in the cold were better bets. His loss, our gain.

Not sure I agree with that, for me Villa When playing for barca) starts on the left of an attacking three.  They had that with Eto but - if it is possible to criticise Barca - I think they lack that sort of player now.  On the flip side, one of their strengths (and uniqueness) is that the opposition centre back must find it really hard to find anyone to mark.  Messi, playing in the centre is continually dropping deep with Iniesta and Xavi running beyond him.

Apologies for taking this off topic.

[hawkeye]

I remember Maz banging on about Bent and disagreeing with him, eventually I came round.
My concern with Bent was that he is not a very good foootballer, but crikey does his instinct for goal make up for it. Maz was right MON was wrong

[Dante Lavelli]

Some stats from Opta Joe on twitter

1. Since August 2005, Darren Bent has scored 90 Premier League goals. Only Wayne Rooney (91) has more. Productive.

2. The three 2011 winter signings to score 7+  PL goals are D Bent, D Sturridge & D Ba. Congrats to the hundreds who got this one. Answer.

3. Without Darren Bent's goals this season Aston Villa would be second bottom with 36 points, three points from safety. Bargain.

4. Darren Bent has scored eight PL goals from just 17 shots on target since joining Aston Villa. Value.