Darren Bent joins Fulham on loan (Reply #486)

[oldtimernow]

Pfft. You can use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true.

Facts, schmacts.

[/Homer]

Illiad or Odyssey?

[Percy McCarthy]

You have to be pretty special to command big money when you near the 30 mark these days.

6mill might seem cheap but it's not like we are overrun with offers. I don't think his situation is depressing the price too much. He was hardly a regular at Spurs when they sold him.

Would hope for a bit more, but you've convinced me.

[Mazrim]

A fact is only a fact when followed by End of. It's the modern day equivalent of arley barley.

[Jeff Green]

Back on topic....Bent for £6m is astonishing value for the right team.  Suppose that's what happens when a player is benched for the season, obviously not challenging the decision to do so...

Villa have managed to compress four and a half years' amortisation into two.

Not good.

[tim]

Expecting any more than £6m for an out of favour player is daft. Only got ourselves to blame by not playing him more often but when someone is pushed to the side in such an obvious fashion, there's no way of then claiming he's worth more. He's worth more than £6m to a team willing to use him, but not to us it seems. Shame, but there you go... 

[supertom]

We didn't pay a value fee for Bent. We were desperate for him in Jan 11. Sunderland were comfortable an with no desire to sell. The only reason we got him was because we paid a ridiculous fee of up to 24. I'd guess it was 18 plus a few other add ons, of which we've probably paid a few. I figure we had to pay some extra upon our survival that year for starters.

His goals kept us up that year, and indeed the goals he scored in the first half of the following season played a big part in keeping us up. Given what we stood to lose from relegation he's proved good value IMO.

At this stage we've made it clear he's dead weight now. We have a player with questionnable injury record, approaching 30 who won't even make our 25 man squad. So we're probably luck if we get 6 million to be honest. We've made it abundantly clear we don't want his wages on our books. If Darren Bent came out and said he's willing to drop his wages to 30k a week, we'd have clubs willing to pay us a 10 mill fee, but that's not gonna happen. Our fee has to be low in order that someone else takes on a player who'll earn 80k a week.

[dave.woodhall]

We didn't pay a value fee for Bent. We were desperate for him in Jan 11. Sunderland were comfortable an with no desire to sell. The only reason we got him was because we paid a ridiculous fee of up to 24. I'd guess it was 18 plus a few other add ons, of which we've probably paid a few. I figure we had to pay some extra upon our survival that year for starters.

His goals kept us up that year, and indeed the goals he scored in the first half of the following season played a big part in keeping us up. Given what we stood to lose from relegation he's proved good value IMO.

At this stage we've made it clear he's dead weight now. We have a player with questionnable injury record, approaching 30 who won't even make our 25 man squad. So we're probably luck if we get 6 million to be honest. We've made it abundantly clear we don't want his wages on our books. If Darren Bent came out and said he's willing to drop his wages to 30k a week, we'd have clubs willing to pay us a 10 mill fee, but that's not gonna happen. Our fee has to be low in order that someone else takes on a player who'll earn 80k a week.

How can £18 million for the best English goalscorer be ridiculous coming as it did in a month when Andy Carroll went for £35 million and Fernando Torres for fifty?

[rob_bridge]

We didn't pay a value fee for Bent. We were desperate for him in Jan 11. Sunderland were comfortable an with no desire to sell. The only reason we got him was because we paid a ridiculous fee of up to 24. I'd guess it was 18 plus a few other add ons, of which we've probably paid a few. I figure we had to pay some extra upon our survival that year for starters.

His goals kept us up that year, and indeed the goals he scored in the first half of the following season played a big part in keeping us up. Given what we stood to lose from relegation he's proved good value IMO.

At this stage we've made it clear he's dead weight now. We have a player with questionnable injury record, approaching 30 who won't even make our 25 man squad. So we're probably luck if we get 6 million to be honest. We've made it abundantly clear we don't want his wages on our books. If Darren Bent came out and said he's willing to drop his wages to 30k a week, we'd have clubs willing to pay us a 10 mill fee, but that's not gonna happen. Our fee has to be low in order that someone else takes on a player who'll earn 80k a week.

How can £18 million for the best English goalscorer be ridiculous coming as it did in a month when Andy Carroll went for £35 million and Fernando Torres for fifty?

Always been a fan of Bent. I thought we had overpaid but not ridiculously so.
Especially as we didn't have much choice as we were in a relegation battle and half the squad were either margainalised/antagonised by management and/or acting like spoilt unprofessional divs and we needed a couple of sparks.

In hindsight £20m was a bargain when compared to the 2 examples you site and without him we may well have ended up relegated in 2010-11 and almost certainly in 2011-12.

I wish him all the best (except when playing v us) especially after the winner in his first game v Cit-eh - it was a very loud Villa Park that day.

[pauliewalnuts]

I'm not a fan of paying big money for players, then flogging them for buttons two years later, but if we lost 12m on Bent, and his major achievement here was keeping us up in that Houllier season, then at least we got something for that 12m.

[Concrete John]

We didn't pay a value fee for Bent. We were desperate for him in Jan 11. Sunderland were comfortable an with no desire to sell. The only reason we got him was because we paid a ridiculous fee of up to 24. I'd guess it was 18 plus a few other add ons, of which we've probably paid a few. I figure we had to pay some extra upon our survival that year for starters.

His goals kept us up that year, and indeed the goals he scored in the first half of the following season played a big part in keeping us up. Given what we stood to lose from relegation he's proved good value IMO.

At this stage we've made it clear he's dead weight now. We have a player with questionnable injury record, approaching 30 who won't even make our 25 man squad. So we're probably luck if we get 6 million to be honest. We've made it abundantly clear we don't want his wages on our books. If Darren Bent came out and said he's willing to drop his wages to 30k a week, we'd have clubs willing to pay us a 10 mill fee, but that's not gonna happen. Our fee has to be low in order that someone else takes on a player who'll earn 80k a week.

How can £18 million for the best English goalscorer be ridiculous coming as it did in a month when Andy Carroll went for £35 million and Fernando Torres for fifty?

Compared to them, it is of course value.  But then if those were inflated fees, as they very much were with Carroll, then perhaps not.

Given the limitations in his all round game, and the fact Sunderalnd were unwilling sellers, then we did pay a premium to get him.  All be it a premium I was happy with us paying at the time.  It's similar with Benteke earlier this summer, where we asked for more than anyone would ever be willing to pay as we didn't want him to go and were in a strong position given his contract.

It seems to me that the actual ability of a player is becoming less relevant in his transfer value and the contract/desire to sell ever more pertinent

[Titus Aduxus]

Only got ourselves to blame by not playing him more often but when someone is pushed to the side in such an obvious fashion, there's no way of then claiming he's worth more.

If we had played him more often last season there's a good chance we'd be attending our first proper game of this season tomorrow.

[OCD]

I'm not a fan of paying big money for players, then flogging them for buttons two years later, but if we lost 12m on Bent, and his major achievement here was keeping us up in that Houllier season, then at least we got something for that 12m.

Cheap compared to the cost of relegation and I don't think McLeish would have got us back up some how.

[Percy McCarthy]

Only got ourselves to blame by not playing him more often but when someone is pushed to the side in such an obvious fashion, there's no way of then claiming he's worth more.

If we had played him more often last season there's a good chance we'd be attending our first proper game of this season tomorrow.

Indeed.

[Ghost of Pongo Waring]

Only got ourselves to blame by not playing him more often but when someone is pushed to the side in such an obvious fashion, there's no way of then claiming he's worth more.

If we had played him more often last season there's a good chance we'd be attending our first proper game of this season tomorrow.

Indeed.

Especially as the majority of games he missed were because of injury.

[gervilla]

We paid a fair price for Bent IMHO and he more than repaid that fee seeing as his goals helped keep up us for two seasons.

SSN say conflicting reports as to whether Fulham have made an increased offer.

He will score plenty for them if their system suits him and the best of luck to him as he had done nothing wrong here.