Darren Bent joins Fulham on loan (Reply #486)

[Ron Manager]

I don't think a fee of £6m rising to £8m is bad at all. Ignoring how much we paid for him (as we all know how inflated it was due our precocious position)

Do we?

Quite. Darren Bent was  the second top English born scorer at the top level after Rooney. Worth every penny of £18mil or 24mil depending on what the club paid.

[gervilla]

I don't think a fee of £6m rising to £8m is bad at all. Ignoring how much we paid for him (as we all know how inflated it was due our precocious position)

Do we?

Quite. Darren Bent was  the second top English born scorer at the top level after Rooney. Worth every penny of £18mil or 24mil depending on what the club paid.

Aye.
It was money well spent,however much it was.

[PeterWithesShin]

He has repaid his transfer fee, something the media are far too stupid to ever realise. I'm glad we signed him, or we may have been playing Yeovil today.

[Toronto Villa]

He has repaid his transfer fee, something the media are far too stupid to ever realise. I'm glad we signed him, or we may have been playing Yeovil today.

It boils my piss that the Bent fee is the only fee that the media continues to get wrong and continues to overlook the impact of that investment. He repaid the fee almost immediately as you point out given that we have remained a PL club. Not only will we not be making a loss on him, we'll be bringing in £6m or so for his tranfer fee plus saving another £6m in wages. Is it really that difficult to understand that he's served his purpose, and served it well?

[dave.woodhall]

And it wasn't £24 million.

[Damo70]

Wasn't the 24 million a maximum figure based on him scoring fifty goals a season whilst helping us win the PL and CL? As reported at the time by the same media outlets who now just lazily and dramatically label him our £24 million pound signing.

[dave.woodhall]

Wasn't the 24 million a maximum figure based on him scoring fifty goals a season whilst helping us win the PL and CL? As reported at the time by the same media outlets who now just lazily and dramatically label him our £24 million pound signing.

It was the maximum add-ons, which would almost certainly have included trophies and European qualification. I still say the press had it in for us because they were ready to run with "HOULLIER SACKED" and had to change their stories.

[PeterWithesShin]

I think part of is we're only little Villa, so an easy safe target to dig at. I also think we stole the jam out of a lot folks doughnuts when we signed him for that amount and he hit the ground running, considering what was paid by the super big n glamorous clubs for Torres and Carroll. Plus we were meant to be skint at the time, so how dare we spend £18+m on a player.

[Percy McCarthy]

All the above is true, but the media will never say so now. In a few years time they'll wise up to what's happening now and will be fawning all over us, albeit in an incredibly patronising manner. So fuck 'em.

[Yossarian]

All the above is true, but the media will never say so now. In a few years time they'll wise up to what's happening now and will be fawning all over us, albeit in an incredibly patronising manner. So fuck 'em.

Thanks to this bright new digital age I can quite easily avoid the patronising ramblings in the media. What I will struggle to avoid will be the watercooler idiots who will regurgitate said ramblings word for word to me and try to pass it off as their own thoughts.

[eamonn]

I think part of is we're only little Villa, so an easy safe target to dig at. I also think we stole the jam out of a lot folks doughnuts when we signed him for that amount and he hit the ground running, considering what was paid by the super big n glamorous clubs for Torres and Carroll. Plus we were meant to be skint at the time, so how dare we spend £18+m on a player.

Or the tiresome "Why didn't you just give that money to O'Neill? He wouldn't have left and would have spent it far better?". To which the only response could be "No! You just...you just don't get it, do you?"

[rob_bridge]

I think part of is we're only little Villa, so an easy safe target to dig at. I also think we stole the jam out of a lot folks doughnuts when we signed him for that amount and he hit the ground running, considering what was paid by the super big n glamorous clubs for Torres and Carroll. Plus we were meant to be skint at the time, so how dare we spend £18+m on a player.

Or the tiresome "Why didn't you just give that money to O'Neill? He wouldn't have left and would have spent it far better?". To which the only response could be "No! You just...you just don't get it, do you?"

No he had more than enough to spend in his time especially in 2008 close season. Too many of his signings were not value for money especially on the wages side

[Percy McCarthy]

All the above is true, but the media will never say so now. In a few years time they'll wise up to what's happening now and will be fawning all over us, albeit in an incredibly patronising manner. So fuck 'em.

Thanks to this bright new digital age I can quite easily avoid the patronising ramblings in the media. What I will struggle to avoid will be the watercooler idiots who will regurgitate said ramblings word for word to me and try to pass it off as their own thoughts.

Ain't that the truth.

 "I've heard (meaning our brother read it the paper and then told me) that Benteke's 'price tag' is 20 mill blah blah blah Spurs preparing a bid blah blah blah Liverpool waiting in the wings blah blah blah".

I wouldn't mind the transfer window if I only discussed it with people on here who generally understand transfers. But the water-cooler idiots you refer to make it almost unbearable.

[pauliewalnuts]

All the above is true, but the media will never say so now. In a few years time they'll wise up to what's happening now and will be fawning all over us, albeit in an incredibly patronising manner. So fuck 'em.

Thanks to this bright new digital age I can quite easily avoid the patronising ramblings in the media. What I will struggle to avoid will be the watercooler idiots who will regurgitate said ramblings word for word to me and try to pass it off as their own thoughts.

Ain't that the truth.

 "I've heard (meaning our brother read it the paper and then told me) that Benteke's 'price tag' is 20 mill blah blah blah Spurs preparing a bid blah blah blah Liverpool waiting in the wings blah blah blah".

I wouldn't mind the transfer window if I only discussed it with people on here who generally understand transfers. But the water-cooler idiots you refer to make it almost unbearable.

Agreed.

Regarding the traditional media, though, one positive of having spent the best part of three seasons fighting relegation, and therefore losing a lot, was I found myself wanting to avoid all forms of football coverage in the media.

That meant the Sports sections of the Sunday papers (I rarely buy a daily these days), MOTD, SSN, that utterly horrible Sunday Supplement thing on Sky, the lot.

I think it made me a much happier person as a result. For example, even just not wasting an hour or two watching those smug insight-free dinosaurs on MOTD regurgitating cliches about us made my weekends far more bearable after a bad result.

[LeeB]

All the above is true, but the media will never say so now. In a few years time they'll wise up to what's happening now and will be fawning all over us, albeit in an incredibly patronising manner. So fuck 'em.

Thanks to this bright new digital age I can quite easily avoid the patronising ramblings in the media. What I will struggle to avoid will be the watercooler idiots who will regurgitate said ramblings word for word to me and try to pass it off as their own thoughts.

I've got round this problem by losing my job.