D
Deleted member 26
Guest
Some clueless twats on this thread.... its embarassing.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Jones was finished and had to go. Bent wasn't a certainty to leave, he could have changed his mind due to any set of circumstances and Bruce definitely didn't have funds from a potential Bent sale to invest in the squad.
What you are suggesting is that you kept Jones to miss out on Gyan to help when Bent left which would have the net impact of Jones as our only fit striker. Somebody whose goalscoring record and effort was in question in the first place.
Da Silva and Riveros looked good in a World Cup squad. There were people salivating at the prospect of those two bringing their form to Sunderland. Angeleri was around the Argentinian squad. These aren't average players, they had a chance on a minimalised outlay. As already mentioned if they turned into Palacios/Valencia type signings your laughing. It didn't work out, we move on.
Collins wasn't good enough, you can't stick with the mentaility that average players stay in the squad because there is nobody else otherwise we wouldn't progress.
Some clueless twats on this thread.... its embarassing.
No, I'm clearly suggesting we could have sold Bent instead of Jones and used that money to buy Gyan. I'm not sure how I can make that any clearer TBH.
And you're right, the players you mentioned aren't average, they're no where near that level.
And I know how you progress, you replace players with better ones. Collins replacements have been worse.
Fuck me suggesting such a thing last year would have had ya lynched on here last year.In terms of cash wasted Bruce has made very few errors.
Angeleri, Riveros and Da Silva - £2m in total, or 1 Darryl Murphy.
To sign players equal to Onouha, Welbeck, Mensah, and Muntari it would have cost approx £15-£20m - money that Bruce quite obviously does not have to spend.
If Bruce is expected to fund all purchases by selling players, as he has been so far, then we will never be able to build a 25 man squad.
In terms of cash wasted Bruce has made very few errors.
Angeleri, Riveros and Da Silva - £2m in total, or 1 Darryl Murphy.
To sign players equal to Onouha, Welbeck, Mensah, and Muntari it would have cost approx £15-£20m - money that Bruce quite obviously does not have to spend.
If Bruce is expected to fund all purchases by selling players, as he has been so far, then we will never be able to build a 25 man squad.
If we had kept Jones and sold Bent in the summer Bruce would have been completely lynched.
And Jones, Gyan and Bent together was never a possibility as we didnt have the Gyan funds without offloading Jones.
We could not have forseen a 24 month layoff for Campbell either.
Because that didn't happen. We wanted Gyan and had the chance to get rid of Jones which had been clear that he was on his way out for months because Bruce had enough of him. There was neither a concrete offer in for Bent nor any clear sign that he was 100% finished with Sunderland. Your scenario does not work.
Fuck me suggesting such a thing last year would have had ya lynched on here last year.
He'd handed in a transfer request because he'd been tapped up from Turkey.
There was the opportunity to make it happen, unless you're telling me Quinn & Bruce were lying.
You reckon? He wasn't lynched in January when he let Bent go without signing a replacement.
It's not just transfer fees that are the issue, how much are all of these players on in wages? What about the costs of the loan deals?
If Bruce is unable to build a squad under these circumstances like you said, we should bring someone in who can because other teams seem to manage it.
He'd handed in a transfer request because he'd been tapped up from Turkey.
There was the opportunity to make it happen, unless you're telling me Quinn & Bruce were lying.
That has to be one of the most ridiculous excuses I've read on here.
Only if the price offered was acceptable (which I suspect it may not have been). Also, we're only able to say that we should have sold Bent with the benefit of hindsight. None of us have any idea whatsoever what was agreed between Bent and SAFC in the aftermath of the summer transfer request.
He'd handed in a transfer request because he'd been tapped up from Turkey.
There was the opportunity to make it happen, unless you're telling me Quinn & Bruce were lying.
At what price? There is no evidence to suggest that there was a bid on the table that would have been considered let alone accepted. It was a suggestion that Bent was trying to engineer it and nothing more.
You reckon? He wasn't lynched in January when he let Bent go without signing a replacement.
It's not just transfer fees that are the issue, how much are all of these players on in wages? What about the costs of the loan deals?
If Bruce is unable to build a squad under these circumstances like you said, we should bring someone in who can because other teams seem to manage it.
Most PL squads, except those who have made significant outlay, have no bigger squads than we do. The only difference is that other teams havent had our injury list. Seriously, which managers are you referring to building 25 man squads without large investment?
I'm only saying it in hindsight now because I didn't know about it at the time.
They made an approach, therefore it was more than him trying to engineer a move.
Even if you were correct (which your not) then that suggests he was even more desperate to move than we thought so even more reason to sell him rather than Jones.
After the season he'd just had, we'd not have had any bother trying to sell him.
So if Bent and SAFC agreed that his contract would be bumped up summer 2011, you would still have sold him? If that little story had come out (as it inevitably would have), what do you think the reaction would have been?
The simple fact is that selling Bent was made easier for SAFC by his performances from October onwards. There was virtually no way that they could have sold him in the summer without a massive fan backlash. Plus they got the January premium price. Bent sold for £18m all in, summer 2010 would have seen riots all over Wearside.
"I had a conversation with [Sunderland chairman] Niall [Quinn], we had this offer which had been in 24 or maybe 48 hours before [Bent was sold], something like that, but it was the first really genuine sort of notice that we had heard of," Bruce said, when asked about the circumstances surrounding the sale. "I think that obviously they [representatives for Bent and Aston Villa] had had conversations, but that's where it started.
"I spoke to Darren and I spoke to his agent on the Sunday evening, and it was fairly obvious that they had made their mind up and wanted to go. And Darren handed in a transfer request dated that night, and that's where it started and that's where it was.
"The disappointing thing for me with Darren was the timing of it. I thought we had averted it last summer, he wanted to go to Turkey last summer and we averted it then. So, it's the timing for me - if I'd known four weeks beforehand, or five weeks beforehand from the agent or Darren that they were unhappy at the club or wanted to move on then I wouldn't be in the position that I am now, with ten days before the window ends, with the injury to Danny Welbeck, that has put us in the situation that we are in.
"So it has given us very little time to try and do anything. So it's the timing of it that's the disappointing thing. All Benty has thought of is himself but I suppose that's football and that's the way it is."
Bruce admitted he was tempted to reject Villa's offer and leave Bent to stew at the Stadium of Light.
"Of course we were, we were tempted," he said. "I think what shocked us all was that the written transfer request with Benty was so brutal, you know, and then in our experience with him what's the point of keeping someone who doesn't want to be here? I have to say the last few weeks we've all been scratching our heads and saying 'Is there something wrong, he doesn't look himself' but no, we didn't see it coming."
-------------------
So in summary
- There was an approach but no confirmed figures. It might be that the figures offerred didn't match what we wanted or that we didn't want to get rid of Bent at that time
- Regardless, Bent wanted to go but was somehow persuaded to stay therefore at that time there was no reason to get rid.
I still don't beleive that your scenario plays out.
At what price? There is no evidence to suggest that there was a bid on the table that would have been considered let alone accepted. It was a suggestion that Bent was trying to engineer it and nothing more.
I believe you're being deliberately obtuse. The fact is we had 2 experienced 1st team forwards. 1 requested a transfer after interest from abroad and the other one didn't. We sold the one that didn't then acted shocked when the other one repeated he wanted to move. Thats an incredibly niave way of doing business.
If we had decided we wanted to keep Bent, we should have made him stay out the season and sold him at a time that suited us better.
so why did we give him a pay rise then?
so why did we give him a pay rise then?