Darren Bent

[ozzjim]

Thing is once the wage bill is under control, I don't think transfer fees will be too much of an issue, covering the costs of the wages etc will be though.

[pauliewalnuts]

Thing is once the wage bill is under control, I don't think transfer fees will be too much of an issue, covering the costs of the wages etc will be though.

I'm not convinced of that, ozz.

The message has been that the club must be self supporting - living on what we produce. If wages go down to 75% of turnover, or whatever, that still doesn't leave a massive amount for transfers.

There's certainly not anything to suggest we're going to embark on a new round of big spending, anyway.

I get the impression Lerner really respects what Moyes has done at Everton, and the way Everton are run - spending next to nothing and over-achieving, and that is what he wants us to become.

The problem is, there's no guarantee we can recreate that, and Everton are increasingly into hock with the bank just to stand still.

Then there's the question of just how much Everton fans are enjoying it at the moment. The answer to which is "not a lot".

[5ft811st2 Durham]

QPR's reason for sacking Warnock was so that they could replace him with a manager better able to attract the kind of player that their huge budget is able to afford.

The new man is obviously going to be Hughes and I would expecty a sizeable bid for Bent to follow shortly after his appointment.

What happens next will be very interesting.

[Rick_avfc]

QPR's reason for sacking Warnock was so that they could replace him with a manager better able to attract the kind of player that their huge budget is able to afford.

The new man is obviously going to be Hughes and I would expecty a sizeable bid for Bent to follow shortly after his appointment.

What happens next will be very interesting.

I can definitely see something like this happening especially as Kenny has said that he is NOT after Bent.  That only leaves QPR who are looking at premiership survival and looking to purchase a number of players this window.  I was one of those fans that was adamant that Bent would not be leaving this window but I have now changed my mind and feel he will be leaving soon.  My only concern with this is whether Eck will be given money to purchase a replacement or reinforcements

[Ad@m]

There are much better players out there than Bent so if we sell him in the summer then I really wont be bothered as long as his fee is substantial enough to replace him with someone better plus funds for additional players

Can you run that one by me again.  There are better players out there than Bent + sell him for a fee so that we can replace him with some one better + funds for additional players

McLeish would have to be Merlin the f****** magician to make that happen!!!

No problem OMVF...for the fee that we could get for Bent (lets say £30m for arguments sake), we could get an all round better forward for £15m that contributes to the team as well as score goals, plus a couple of decent £7.5m players in defence or midfield. Is that easy enough to understand?

The numbers stack up.

Now, how do that striker's £60,000 wages and the other two players £45,000 wages (each) compare to Bent's circa £70,000 wages and how does that help us reduce the wage bill?

The numbers don't stack up at all.

If there's a player better than Bent who could be bought for £15m then why would anyone buy Bent for £30m. 

It's nonsense.

[KRS]

So you're telling me that you couldnt find a better player than Bent for half the cost? Liverpool paid £35m for Carroll, Chelsea paid £50m for Torres, Spurs paid £7.5m Van der Vaart. I know which player is better out of those 3 and there are very good players out there that can be signed for significantly less if you look outside of the Premier League.

[dave.woodhall]

Who?

[KRS]

Unfortunately it isnt my job to scout players across the globe, but if it was then I'm sure I could provide you with a strong list of suitable players.

[dave.woodhall]

Or most probably not, because it's easy to say something should be done, but not so easy to do it. It's like saying we should sell a player for an astronomical figure far in excess of his worth then buy another for peanuts, or that we should move for some promising youngster every club in the country is watching.

[Ad@m]

So you're telling me that you couldnt find a better player than Bent for half the cost?

Not at all.

I'm saying that if this player better than Bent is available for £15m as you said, why would anyone buy Bent for £30m?

[KRS]

Why did Chelsea pay £50m for Torres?
Why did Liverpool pay £35m for Carroll?
Why did we pay £24m for Bent?

I dont know the answers to those questions either, but like I said, if you look outside of the PL then you discover other options that other clubs may not be aware of. Look at Hernandez at Man Utd and Demba Ba signing for West Ham as examples. Why did we sign Bent when we could have bought either of those for less than half the cost?

[Hoppo]

Anyone know why Redknapp is allowed to make it known abot Demba Ba release fee?

[Ryu]

Bent's relative dry spell this season has been down to a combination of his bad form and our lack of creativity. I think over the last month or so our chance creation has been much better, even though there's been a couple of really shit performances thrown in.  Once he gets one I'm sure he'll be back to his old self so I'm very surprised to see people writing him off. Imagine if every club sold their striker because he didn't score for 5 games?  Every forward would have played for every club in the league

[Concrete John]

Anyone know why Redknapp is allowed to make it known abot Demba Ba release fee?

Because he's a loveable cockney rouge.

[Chris Smith]

Anyone know why Redknapp is allowed to make it known abot Demba Ba release fee?

Because he's a loveable cockney rouge.

Is that a euphemism for gaping asshole?