Darren Bent Signs for Aston Villa

[Dinho lad]

Something fishy about the way it's happened so quickly like. Not often you see a transfer of that size happen overnight. Sunday he's a Sunderland player, transfer request goes in, and he's gone 48 hours later. Must have been tapped up.

 

They probably knew about it but just wanted him to play on Sunday or something.

[Dinho lad]

It's a shame that Villa has already played their second game against the Mackem's.  I can't wait for next season to see the reaction to Bent in a Villa shirt.

 

I can...... 'cause I wanna see them go down. (But probably won't happen now)

[Cronky]

Clubs are prepared to pay big money for so-called 'goalscorers', and to be fair Bent's stats are good. But it's not as though scoring is all that a striker at that level should be contributing, or that his goals are all the result of his own efforts. It's the overall contribution to a team that counts.

 

With Keane, Owen and now Bent we've seen goalscorers move for big fees only to somehow disappoint their clubs in the end. I'm not saying that Bent is a bad player, but I think this is the pattern.

 

It could be that it's easier for a manager to persuade the board to part with a lot of money if they can point to a good goal tally, but it can end up with a player being over-valued.

[OzzieMandias]

36 fucking pages on the transfer of a Sunderland player; and quite a few of the posters reckon they're obsessed with us. 

[Hanshithispantz]

Nah, it's 36 pages of a Villa transfer coup, man, fuck all to do with Sunderland this.

[Guest Howaythetoon]

Bent will guarantee you goals providing you don't partner him with anyone and set your side up to play to his strengths all of the time. When that doesn't happen the goals will dry up and he will be a passenger as he has been in the last 7 or so games for the mackems. This is a massive gamble by Villa although you can see why they would pay all that money because goals win games and having a goalscorer like Bent will keep you up 9 times out of 10 and they are struggling down at the table right now. I would have written 10 times out of 10 but despite his goals, Charlton still went down a few seasons back so there is hope yet for Villa to suffer the same fate (aye I'm bitter over the way they celebrated our relegation - c***s). He will be to Houllier to what Owen was to him at Liverpool, a finisher of chances, nothing more. Where is their Steven Gerrard the creator though? Bent could flop as easily as he could prosper. Me, I'm not sure. I was working in Birmingham the other day and a Villa fan reckoned they were buying a guaranteed place in the Premier League next season. I don't know about that like, he won't seamlessly fit into that side for a start and he seems to be suffering a dip in form. The money spent, however, should please Villa fans as to their owner/board's ambition and their backing of their manager who despite his record since taking over, is one of the better manager's in the division. It's a shame about the reaction to our relegation from their fans because I love Villa Park and have no real conflict with Villa as a club, a traditionally good club I always considered. I hope they go down and Bent proves a disaster though.

[BlueStar]

It's a shame that Villa has already played their second game against the Mackem's.  I can't wait for next season to see the reaction to Bent in a Villa shirt.

 

Gonna be strange when he makes his 'ex-mackem' appearance against us next season.  "Do... do we boo him?"

[Benwell Lad]

I bet this goes down a storm on RTG

 

Steve Bruce is not the man to criticise Darren Bent

 

19 January ~ Maybe Darren Bent did move for the money. Maybe being Sunderland's highest earner wasn't enough any more. Lest we forget, bigger and better strikers than Bent have kicked up a fuss and handed in transfer requests this season in order to bleed more money from their employers.

 

Although he won't publicly say so (or tweet in his case), Bent is entitled to defend himself against those who have claimed he is a mercenary who only joined Aston Villa for a bumper wage increase. And let's face it, even if he did join Villa for an extra zero on the end of his bank balance, he isn't the first and he certainly won't be the last.

 

Steve Bruce said he felts "let down" by Bent, but he knows a thing or two about going where the grass in greener. His first job as a manager was with Sheffield United, where he stayed for a grand total of one season before quitting due to a "lack of transfer funds". He lasted a similar amount of time at Huddersfield who accused him of "having an ego to feed".

 

Bruce's first stint at Wigan looked promising but he duly quit after just two months in charge to join Crystal Palace, where he stayed for a matter of months before walking out again to join Birmingham City.

 

At Birmingham, Bruce finally showed some loyalty – mainly due to the club's success – and got them promoted to the Premier League before staving off relegation the following campaign. But it wasn't long before his feet were twitching again and when Newcastle (his hometown club) came calling, it looked like Bruce would be off again. Birmingham owner David Sullivan eventually "priced him out of a move" but Bruce's desire was clear.

 

Bruce eventually left the Blues due to Carson Yeung taking over the club, and he joined Wigan for a second time. Naturally once Sunderland offered him the chance to ply his trade further up the league, Bruce upped and left. The fact that Bruce is a Geordie obviously didn't influence his decision when Sunderland presented him with a bigger and better contract.

 

Now obviously Bent has joined an out-of-form team in Villa, but he hasn't walked out on a club in the manner that Bruce has so many times before. Sunderland will receive up to £24 million for the striker, a profit of £14m on what they bought him for. Just don't show Bruce where the money is, or Sunderland may have seen the last of him too. James Dielhenn

 

http://www.wsc.co.uk/content/view/6390/38/

 

Bruce has been well and truly shafted, but as a man of little integrity himself, he deserves no better.

[johnnypd]

Bent will guarantee you goals providing you don't partner him with anyone and set your side up to play to his strengths all of the time. When that doesn't happen the goals will dry up and he will be a passenger as he has been in the last 7 or so games for the mackems. This is a massive gamble by Villa although you can see why they would pay all that money because goals win games and having a goalscorer like Bent will keep you up 9 times out of 10 and they are struggling down at the table right now. I would have written 10 times out of 10 but despite his goals, Charlton still went down a few seasons back so there is hope yet for Villa to suffer the same fate (aye I'm bitter over the way they celebrated our relegation - c***s). He will be to Houllier to what Owen was to him at Liverpool, a finisher of chances, nothing more. Where is their Steven Gerrard the creator though? Bent could flop as easily as he could prosper. Me, I'm not sure. I was working in Birmingham the other day and a Villa fan reckoned they were buying a guaranteed place in the Premier League next season. I don't know about that like, he won't seamlessly fit into that side for a start and he seems to be suffering a dip in form. The money spent, however, should please Villa fans as to their owner/board's ambition and their backing of their manager who despite his record since taking over, is one of the better manager's in the division. It's a shame about the reaction to our relegation from their fans because I love Villa Park and have no real conflict with Villa as a club, a traditionally good club I always considered. I hope they go down and Bent proves a disaster though.

 

A bit like the appointment of Houllier, Bent doesn't seem like a particularly astute long-term signing, for the reasons you posted, however i would back him to keep them up this season.

 

Look at their strikers this year man, they've been utterly pathetic. Heskey - dogshit, Delfuenso - too young/hasn't shown enough yet, Carew - a joke of a footballer who couldn't care less, Agbonlahor - still without a goal, lost all spark and shunted out wide. A forward line like that has relegation written all over it, imo.

 

Now for the long term the money could be spent more wisely but for the short to medium term they need to guarantee goals and Bent does that. They could spend that £16m bringing a striker in from abroad and that striker could take 6 months to adjust or flop altogether - whereas Bent has demonstrated form in this league.

 

I reckon looking longer term, ie 3 years or so, they will probably peddle Bent for a lower price after realising how one-dimensional he is. They have a bunch of very talented youngsters coming through and if he can provide a focus up front for the team until the time that they mature he will have paid for his transfer fee.

[BlueStar]

For £18 million it does smack of a bit of a panic signing, for the same price or less they could have got a player who would probably come good and be an excellent long term prospect, but they've shelled out for the safe option of a tried and tested 26-year-old who will score you goals, simply because they can't risk someone not coming out the blocks straight away.

[Incognito]

For £18 million it does smack of a bit of a panic signing, for the same price or less they could have got a player who would probably come good and be an excellent long term prospect, but they've shelled out for the safe option of a tried and tested 26-year-old who will score you goals, simply because they can't risk someone not coming out the blocks straight away.

 

Who's to say Bent will come out firing immediately at Villa,as some have already posted,he needs the playing system built around him.It may take time to gel together,and time is one commodity that Villa don't have.

 

I'll wager he has a relegation release clause in his contract also.

[Ritchie]

Would be funny if Villa still got relegated after all of this.

[cp40]

Would be funny if Villa still got relegated after all of this.

 

 

more so if we then got bent on a relegation clause.

[Thespence]

Funny listening to Quinn go on about Villa but the FACT is it was this knacker in December (AKA the month before the window opens) that let Villa know they could get Bent if they offered 'ridiculous' money.

 

'But circumstances some times dictate you have to do things another way and I have to be totally open and honest with people.

'If a ridiculous offer does come in for Jordan, or any of our players, I have to weigh up losing the player, to the money we will get, and how we can spend it. It is a tough one.

 

'I am always mindful of the fact Bob Murray held on to Kevin, we were relegated and sold him 15 months later for £1.5 million. That £16 million would have meant the club stayed in the Premier League

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1337458/Sunderland-chief-Niall-Quinn-insists-hed-sell-starlet-Jordan-Henderson-ridiculous-money.html

[jdckelly]

what a classy lot sunderland fans are

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/3361423/Darren-Bents-death-threats.html

[Guest Heneage]

The last one's hardly a death threat.

[Guest ToonArmyST]

18m is too high for Bent bid,this player is not worth anywhere near that much money

 

Why not?

Because it is not a class player who is so true, for the money it could lead, for example: Adebayor (the truth is not in the best shape) but for me it is better than Bent

[Guest toonlass]

CaulkinTheTimes George Caulkin

Something for #SAFC fans to consider - club actually worse off this week. 1st instalment of DB cash does not quite cover ££ owed Spurs.

 

 

[Crumpy Gunt]

They've soldJones and Bent and been shafted on both deals. Apparently Jones went for £8m but SAFC had to cover his loyalty bonus' as he didn't ask for the transfer and also make up his wages as he's on much less at Stoke. I reckon they might only have seen £4m out of the original transfer fee.

 

Now Bent gets them £6m up front wich pretty much goes to Spurs in lieue(?) of sell on clause/money owed on transfer originally.

 

You wouldn't put quinn in charge of a sweet shop.

[Guest taps01]

CaulkinTheTimes George Caulkin

Something for #SAFC fans to consider - club actually worse off this week. 1st instalment of DB cash does not quite cover ££ owed Spurs.

 

 

 

That is very Funny.

[Hanshithispantz]

They've soldJones and Bent and been shafted on both deals. Apparently Jones went for £8m but SAFC had to cover his loyalty bonus' as he didn't ask for the transfer and also make up his wages as he's on much less at Stoke. I reckon they might only have seen £4m out of the original transfer fee.

 

Now Bent gets them £6m up front wich pretty much goes to Spurs in lieue(?) of sell on clause/money owed on transfer originally.

 

You wouldn't put quinn in charge of a sweet shop.

If it's rising to over 24 million though (which is what quinn said) then I doubt it realy matters as long as there garenteed to see the money, it's not like there near bankrupsy and need every penny they can get this instant.

[brummie]

They've soldJones and Bent and been shafted on both deals. Apparently Jones went for £8m but SAFC had to cover his loyalty bonus' as he didn't ask for the transfer and also make up his wages as he's on much less at Stoke. I reckon they might only have seen £4m out of the original transfer fee.

 

Now Bent gets them £6m up front wich pretty much goes to Spurs in lieue(?) of sell on clause/money owed on transfer originally.

 

You wouldn't put quinn in charge of a sweet shop.

If it's rising to over 24 million though (which is what quinn said) then I doubt it realy matters as long as there garenteed to see the money, it's not like there near bankrupsy and need every penny they can get this instant.

 

They're only guaranteed to see 24m if targets are reached. Those targets will be things like avoiding the drop (which we will do), qualifying for the CL, him scoring x number of goals etc etc.

 

Basically, all things that we'll be happy to pay for.

 

If you take out the add ons, we've paid 1.5m more for him than Spurs did in 2007, and since leaving them, he's had a consistent 1 in 2 record.

[madras]

They've soldJones and Bent and been shafted on both deals. Apparently Jones went for £8m but SAFC had to cover his loyalty bonus' as he didn't ask for the transfer and also make up his wages as he's on much less at Stoke. I reckon they might only have seen £4m out of the original transfer fee.

 

Now Bent gets them £6m up front wich pretty much goes to Spurs in lieue(?) of sell on clause/money owed on transfer originally.

 

You wouldn't put quinn in charge of a sweet shop.

If it's rising to over 24 million though (which is what quinn said) then I doubt it realy matters as long as there garenteed to see the money, it's not like there near bankrupsy and need every penny they can get this instant.

 

They're only guaranteed to see 24m if targets are reached. Those targets will be things like avoiding the drop (which we will do), qualifying for the CL, him scoring x number of goals etc etc.

 

Basically, all things that we'll be happy to pay for.

 

If you take out the add ons, we've paid 1.5m more for him than Spurs did in 2007, and since leaving them, he's had a consistent 1 in 2 record.

apparently sunderland had to pay spurs 1mill every season of his contract. i wouldn't be surprised if a similar clause is in the new deal.

[Guest taps01]

CaulkinTheTimes George Caulkin

Something for #SAFC fans to consider - club actually worse off this week. 1st instalment of DB cash does not quite cover ££ owed Spurs.

 

 

 

Sunderland fans on twitter claiming Caulkin is lying,  this is brilliant.

[STM]

 

Albrighton      Downing          Young

 

                        Bent

 

Not a bad front four. I suspect their season will be defined by the 7 behind them though.