Darren Bent

[villa for life]

honestly....are we any better than the footballers themselves? People throw all manner of abuse at the likes of Barry, Milner, Downing and those other players who look for pastures new, yet look at our own fans. Where's the moral high ground in casting aside players like Bent? So, he doesn't perform for a certain timespan (although his goals to game ratio is still up there), and we start debating whether he should be sold or not.

Can you blame the players for having no loyalty when the fans don't either?

[john e]

I would Keep him or would swap him for Carroll,

and yes I know I'm the only one on here who thinks this would be a good idea

Even leaving aside the folly of swapping one of the most proven English goalscorers in recent years for a kid with a drink problem who has managed 0.5 of a decent premier league season, can you imagine how we'd play if we had Carroll up front?

The temptation to endlessly hoof it at his head would be irresistible.

like i say, i know i'm on me own here, i'm not trying to be controversial, i just like Carrol and think he will make a good centre forward someday.
 i also think he's a better all round footballer than Bent and could fit into different systems unlike Bent who is limited, having said that i also said i would keep Bent so i'm not against him, i just think Carrol would be a better prospect

[ozzjim]

I think it all comes down to how Eck sees us playing in 12- 18 months time. If that is with the current formation, then as unpopular as it would be he will take a big bid for Bent, as it works better with Gabby up top, means we don't have to accommodate Gabby out of position for Bent to play, and probably create more opportunity to get the midfield forward. The down side is that there will be plenty of days where you will be saying, if only we had got Bent in there, he would have knocked that home.

The key for me though is how it is re-invested. If we sell him and have a very clear policy, with a clear plan of who we want, youngish players that have been scouted, and have good prospects but are already ready to play, maybe like the kid being mentioned from Barnsley, or the lad at Huddersfield, then fair enough, try a different direction as at least there would be a visible plan.

[Toronto Villa]

I'm speaking out of both sides of my mouth here but let's face it, if a stupid bid of say 30m came in for Bent we'd be nuts not to consider it. My concern is how much of that gets spent, and on who? If we suddenly sell Bent then every following purchase inquiry is significantly inflated. We'd need to buy first then sell him.

If selling Bent makes sense for the club they should do it, just as Spurs did with players to improve themselves overall. I just don't have the faith to know it will be invested wisely.

[garyfouroaks]

I see there are rumours of a loan move for Robbie Keane.

 That would give us a front two of Bent and Keane....................................................

[rutski]

cannot believe we are discussing selling the crown jewels??

all that we should be discussing is trying to find the right formation to bring out the best of a goal machine! these goal machines are not ten a penny and whilst it is obvious that he aint no good at chasing centre halves around for 90 minutes he is damn good at sticking it in the onion bag when in the box. we havent had one of them for 30 years.
get the guy doing what he is good at. he will come good again!

[ktvillan]

I think it all comes down to how Eck sees us playing in 12- 18 months time. If that is with the current formation, then as unpopular as it would be he will take a big bid for Bent, as it works better with Gabby up top, means we don't have to accommodate Gabby out of position for Bent to play, and probably create more opportunity to get the midfield forward. The down side is that there will be plenty of days where you will be saying, if only we had got Bent in there, he would have knocked that home.

The key for me though is how it is re-invested. If we sell him and have a very clear policy, with a clear plan of who we want, youngish players that have been scouted, and have good prospects but are already ready to play, maybe like the kid being mentioned from Barnsley, or the lad at Huddersfield, then fair enough, try a different direction as at least there would be a visible plan.

Why do we have to "accommodate Gabby"?  Because he's a fans favourite and works hard for the team?  Much as I have a lot of time for Gabby, an on form Albrighton is a better option out wide, and Bent is better at sticking Albrighton type deliveries in the onion bag.  Thus for me there is an argument for saying Gabby should be back up to both, and not an automatic choice.

I'd argue that we recently had one of those days you refer to - against Arsenal where Albrighton and N'zogbia put quite a few balls into the box that were tailor made for Bent, but Gabby didn't get on the end of any of them.

[Concrete John]

To my mind Bent and Gabby are our two best, most influential and valuable players.  Any formation needs to be aligned to getting them both playing and playing well, hence 4-4-2 for me.

[martin o`who??]

The simple fact is Bent is a luxury Villa can`t afford, he`s not getting any service and when he doesnt we`re effectively playing with 10 men, we knew what sort of player he was when we bought him, so we can`t have any complaints, our 3 best performances have been, tellingly with Darren Bent out of the side, it`s not his fault we sold his main supply lines to Man u and Liverpool, If he`s got any sense, he`ll go because, honestly, can anybody see it getting any better??.

[Damo70]

Keep him, play him up front with Gabby and play Albrighton and N'Zogbia to supply them.

[TheSandman]

To my mind Bent and Gabby are our two best, most influential and valuable players.  Any formation needs to be aligned to getting them both playing and playing well, hence 4-4-2 for me.

I'd agree with that. The problem is what kind of midfield we need to play to get the best out of those two without running the risk of being overrun. We need to shield our back four (it's no coincidence that we've largely looked better for Clark shielding the back four and providing an out-ball for them) but we also need to get the ball to Bent, Gabbs and the wideboys to get the best out of them (but would a Bannan or an Ireland playing alongside Clark be too weak a midfield?).

[Shrek]

All we need is a Luka Modric and a Scott Parker, then We can play them both.

Sorted.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

Keep him, play him up front with Gabby and play Albrighton and N'Zogbia to supply them.

And drop Stephen Ireland?

[Dante Lavelli]

Come on folks, as far as I am aware the following line up, which to me looks pretty good, has had ONE GAME to work.  In that particular game we gave the lead away after 4 minutes to a team that has one of the best defences in the league (they're not "name" players but I think they have more clean sheets than anyone, well most teams).

I think this front 5 could work really well given a bit of time (and luck).

........................BENT..........................
...GABBY........IRELAND........NZOGBIA...
............CLARK..........PETROV..............

It's got craft, graft and pace, with able deputies for most positions in Albrighton, Bannan, Gardner and Delph.

[Toronto Villa]

Come on folks, as far as I am aware the following line up, which to me looks pretty good, has had ONE GAME to work.  In that particular game we gave the lead away after 4 minutes to a team that has one of the best defences in the league (they're not "name" players but I think they have more clean sheets than anyone, well most teams).

I think this front 5 could work really well given a bit of time (and luck).

........................BENT..........................
...GABBY........IRELAND........NZOGBIA...
............CLARK..........PETROV..............

It's got craft, graft and pace, with able deputies for most positions in Albrighton, Bannan, Gardner and Delph.

N'Zogbia has proven all season he is ineffective playing on the right. He is much better on the left. Gabby on the right isn't as effective as he is on the left. Them's yer problems.