Demitri_C Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 i would rather keep bent than sell him for 2m, i suspect lambo is the same. 6m and i will be happy to sell i dont believe we paid the 6m in clauses to sunderland so really we paid 18m for him which would be a 12m loss on a 29 year old if it happens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Pete Colley said last night only Fulham have bid and we rejected it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakid007 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I'd think we should keep him. His wages aren't ideal but he is a proven goal scorer and there will b game when he could be invaluable Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pez1974 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Get rid. Quickly. Not on the cheap, but £5m - £6m is fair enough considering his age, wages and value at our club. And I am certain he will be gone in the next 10 days (not ITK), but any buying club will need to get him match fit. Keeping him away from the first team squad may actually help in this regard, as any buying club will know he isn't 100% match fit, so will need to give him a few weeks to get up to full speed. As a result, this transfer is boiling up now rather than at the end of August. I truly believe that once we get a bit of money for him, and shift his wages, we will see at least one more transfer in. If we can shift either Ireland/Given (because they earn are paid so much), or the other Bomb Squad members, that will free up another spot or two. I don't believe it's the transfers fees that are the problem, it's the wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Honest bunch of lads Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I would like to keep him, if you want any kind of top level success you need more than 11 quality players. Look at how many strikers the top clubs have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vandaq Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I think that ship has sailed... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoony Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 We could have thought about keeping him if Lambert hadn't treated him like crap from day 1 of his reign. The only criticism I have of Lambert's work so far I might add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted August 1, 2013 Moderator Share Posted August 1, 2013 We need to not spend the £8m on sitting him down for two years - that's more important than the fee in my opinion, we need to try to get what we can get, but come the end of the window we'll be better off letting him go for nothing than paying his wages. A £2m fee might not be what he's worth, but it gives us £10m to play with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa-revolution Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 We could have thought about keeping him if Lambert hadn't treated him like crap from day 1 of his reign. The only criticism I have of Lambert's work so far I might add. Not Lamberts problem if he doesn't suit his style. Some people prefer a Bentley to a Rolls Royce or in this instance a Benteke. Lambert would deserve criticism had he not come up with a successful alternative. The fact that he did means he becomes even more praiseworthy IMO. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArteSuave Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 We could have thought about keeping him if Lambert hadn't treated him like crap from day 1 of his reign. The only criticism I have of Lambert's work so far I might add. Making him captain was treating him like crap? Obviously something happened between Lambert giving him the armband and Bent being sidelined. The theory about Bent's refusal to play any position other than central striker is the most likely in my mind but it's up for debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
praisedmambo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 (edited) We could have thought about keeping him if Lambert hadn't treated him like crap from day 1 of his reign. The only criticism I have of Lambert's work so far I might add. Day 1? It was about day 40 when he made him captain. Then Benteke happened. Edited August 1, 2013 by praisedmambo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Feidhlim Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 (edited) We could have thought about keeping him if Lambert hadn't treated him like crap from day 1 of his reign. The only criticism I have of Lambert's work so far I might add. He gave Bent the captaincy originally... Something happened to piss off Lambert so I wouldn't be criticising him, personally. Edit: ArtSuave beat me to it with the exact same response Edited August 1, 2013 by Feidhlim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roadoftrinity Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 We could have thought about keeping him if Lambert hadn't treated him like crap from day 1 of his reign. The only criticism I have of Lambert's work so far I might add. Making him captain was treating him like crap? Obviously something happened between Lambert giving him the armband and Bent being sidelined. The theory about Bent's refusal to play any position other than central striker is the most likely in my mind but it's up for debate. Maybe Bent did something un-football related that Lambert didn't feel was befiting of a captain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 or Bent just wasnt good enough to get into the team so shouldnt be captain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_avfc Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 or Bent just wasnt good enough to get into the team so shouldnt be captain Definitely this. We play 1 centre forward. Benteke is better than bent. Therefore bent can't make the team. Can we afford to pay bent what we are as a backup striker? I'd say probably not. Bent is a good goal scorer but has been replaced by a better all round player who offers a lot more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billybofalbion Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Can you imagine how fustrating the Bomb Squad would be if Lambert had to shift them before he could buy anyone! I'm so pleased with the club that they got in and did their business early. Now all our speculation revolves around getting rid of regrettable players. Anyone else in is a nice bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oaks Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 The problem with having a "bomb squad" is that clubs think you just want rid (which I guess we do) and will bid way lower than their market value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyAnty Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/aug/01/darren-bent-fulham-newcastle-remy Looks like Bents move is close. 5 mill is not great but better than sitting in the youth setup taking up 2 good wages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 With the wages he's on I'd bite their hands off for £5m. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jayEm Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 (edited) He gave us a good couple of seasons and probably kept us from dropping into the Championship, but he's no longer of any real use to us so £5m from Fulham sounds great. I wish him the best. Edited August 1, 2013 by jayEm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts