The cost of replacing a player like Bent

[gards2]

i.e 20 goal a season striker.....Exactly it's not easy is it. It's easier if your Chelsea or Arsenal i'll give you that. Got 40m?

I think Bent will get 20 for Villa if he stays fit and it's fair to say he'll still score even he gets little or no service from midfield.

People moaning about not replacing Bent like so i'll put it this way. How DO you solve a problem like Maria?

[jesus juice]

Why didn't we sell him for 40 million then?

We could just buy a young lad and let him work his way up to it....oh wait.

[chr1s1973]

So it was a shit deal, Villa weren't bidding over the odds for him and we should have sorted it out and made sure he stayed?

I agree whole heartedly, I've been saying since he left it was poor management.

[Windypants]

Originally Posted by gards2

i.e 20 goal a season striker.....Exactly it's not easy is it. It's easier if your Chelsea or Arsenal i'll give you that. Got 40m?

I think Bent will get 20 for Villa if he stays fit and it's fair to say he'll still score even he gets little or no service from midfield.

People moaning about not replacing Bent like so i'll put it this way. How DO you solve a problem like Maria?

As far as I'm aware, bent isn't taking Villa's penalties. Unless this changes, he's not going to get near 20 goals. Last year, without penalties, how many did Bent score, 13? 14? He only got 4 or 5 for us from open play in 2010-11.

Last year, how many did Gyan get, 13? 14?

If Gyan takes penalties, he won't be far off 20. There you go, problem solved.

[Perryqhill]

What should have happened is we re-invested the money in areas we were already lacking - a striker, midfield, wingers etc, players who would also chip in with goals rather than one player so we were less dependable on one player.

It now appears that maybe we didn't have as much as we thought we did to spend and we let our top target go. So what we've done instead is sign two strikers who are no where near ready for the Premiership, a very average central midfielder who has a good long shot on him, a donkey and a right winger who has good technical ability but is slow and inconsistent having already added Sess, as good as he looks, but we've done so so far without really playing any of them in a way which will get us goals and make us a better team than when Bent was here.

I would imagine those lot will be lucky to get much more than 10 Premiership goals this season between them if at all.

[chr1s1973]

Originally Posted by Perryqhill

What should have happened is we re-invested the money in areas we were already lacking - a striker, midfield, wingers etc, players who would also chip in with goals rather than one player so we were less dependable on one player.

It now appears that maybe we didn't have as much as we thought we did to spend and we let our top target go. So what we've done instead is sign two strikers who are no where near ready for the Premiership, a very average central midfielder who has a good long shot on him, a donkey and a right winger who has good technical ability but is slow and inconsistent having already added Sess, as good as he looks, but we've done so so far without really playing any of them in a way which will get us goals and make us a better team than when Bent was here.

I would imagine those lot will be lucky to get much more than 10 Premiership goals this season between them if at all.

It's puzzling that, despite selling Steed and Henderson; we seem to have 3 right midfielders at the club and still no left ones.

[Perryqhill]

Originally Posted by Windypants

As far as I'm aware, bent isn't taking Villa's penalties. Unless this changes, he's not going to get near 20 goals. Last year, without penalties, how many did Bent score, 13? 14? He only got 4 or 5 for us from open play in 2010-11.

Last year, how many did Gyan get, 13? 14?

If Gyan takes penalties, he won't be far off 20. There you go, problem solved.

He scored one penalty for them last season. Besides he's scored 10 league goals in 18 league games for Villa, if he keeps that up he'll crack 20 over a season.

[Agnew's Head]

Originally Posted by Perryqhill

What should have happened is we re-invested the money in areas we were already lacking - a striker, midfield, wingers etc, players who would also chip in with goals rather than one player so we were less dependable on one player.

It now appears that maybe we didn't have as much as we thought we did to spend and we let our top target go. So what we've done instead is sign two strikers who are no where near ready for the Premiership, a very average central midfielder who has a good long shot on him, a donkey and a right winger who has good technical ability but is slow and inconsistent having already added Sess, as good as he looks, but we've done so so far without really playing any of them in a way which will get us goals and make us a better team than when Bent was here.

I would imagine those lot will be lucky to get much more than 10 Premiership goals this season between them if at all.

We have invested the money elsewhere...

Striker - Ji and Wickham... i'v a feeling there'll be one more too.
Midfield - Sessegnon, Vaughan, Gardener
Wingers - Larsson

More to come too i reckon and that's witout mentioning Brown and O'Shea

[Stevie Freestein II]

If Bent wanted more cash we could have spent the £8M Wickham cash on that.

The only problem being is that some of the other players would then want higher wages.

It's too much to ask both Wickham and JDW to make much of an immediate impact.

Bent wanted to go, we still have problems getting good players to come to us, were not exactly a "fashionable" club.