We've signed Bent at long last

Founding Father Joined : 05 Jun 2007 Posts : 3522

Tottenham are set to complete a deal to sign England striker Darren Bent from Charlton, BBC Sport understands.

The 23-year-old turned down a move to West Ham last week after the Hammers had agreed a £17m fee with Championship side Charlton for his services.

Bent will instead move to Spurs, even though their valuation of the player is some way short of the Addicks' after they had a £13m bid turned down.

The two clubs are believed to have reached a compromise on Wednesday.

Liverpool were also interested in Bent, but they have instead turned their attentions to Atletico Madrid's Spanish striker Fernando Torres.

If Bent had decided to join West Ham he would have rejoined manager Alan Curbishley, who spent £2.75m to bring the striker to Charlton from Ipswich two years ago.

Bent turned down a move to Upton Park in the hope of Spurs or Liverpool making a move for him.

When Spurs capture their man, they may allow Jermain Defoe to leave White Hart Lane, with Manchester United and Aston Villa linked with the 24-year-old.

Edgar Davids Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 2576

That's all good except the bit about Defoe leaving - hopefully that bit is wrong.

Edgar Davids Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 3552

You know my thoughts on the Bent v Defoe debate. There's more to Bent's game than Defoe.

You also get more assists from Bent.

You get the impression with Defoe when he gets the ball his first thought isn't how he can link up with his strike partner and play a bit role in a great team move, rather a case of stick his head down and whack it!!!

A lot of neutrals said 18m for Carrick was ridiculous. 12 months on and opinion has changed.

Defoe will get +25 goals at United. No doubt. However, he won't sign a new deal so he leaves us with little choice. Secondly, Defoe wasn't dropped after a couple of games - he was given a fair run in 05'07 and 06'07 yet his workrate was lousy. Good player ? Yes. Would I like Bent and Defoe in the squad ? Yes. Do I want Defoe to go for nowt ? No. Is Bent a better player than Defoe ? Yes !

This is a man who turned down an extra 30k per week to join a team despite no assurances he will be in the starting line-up. Sounds as though he is committed to the cause.

Founding Father Age : 39 Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 357

Personally think it's a ridiculous amount of money, however, if we have a poor season and Berba is off............don't know, I'm confused by this one. Better get me pipe and slippers on like GDG said.

Subject: Re: We've signed Bent at long last Fri Jun 29 2007, 10:16

Glad he's on board but not happy with the price, still think for that money we should have secured a decent LW.
Can't really see Defoe staying now and that will be a blow imho, will not look forward to playing against him.
Still time will tell on this one.
In Jol We Trust :bmj:

Founding Father Joined : 05 Jun 2007 Posts : 3522

I agree about Defoe. For us it simply isn't working - he is not happy being on the bench and to be honest, he is better than that. If he went to a Portsmouth or a Blackburn he would, as you say Spur'don, bang in 25+ but I think that if he went to Man U he would be a Saha type figure up there. Defoe has promised a lot, and often delivered, but last season, despite some wonder goals, he lacked confidence. Plus, the ammount of times he gets caught offside is ridiculous. keane and the Berb (assuming he stays) are our first two and Defoe realises that he is our third striker and that is not good enough for a player of his quality. If Bent comes in, same level of skill, wants to play for us (love the fact he will take less money to do so) and understands the Keane Berb situation then it can only be good. If it costs 16M so be it, we can afford it.

Edgar Davids Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 2596

I'm still not convinced at all about the price for Bent (if its 12 mil+). Far, far too much for a striker that is not going to be first choice (if we consider that RK and DB will be the starters).

I'm still not convinced we should have made a striker such a high priority, when we had no problem scoring last season and for the sum mentioned, we could surely buy an excellent (e.g. Robben) left sided midfielder and still have change left over to shore up midfield. 17 million = Bent or Sneijder and Robben? (ok maybe slightlymore for these two but can't be that much more) I know who I'd take.

Founding Father Joined : 05 Jun 2007 Posts : 3522

I agree that strikers are not our priority but IF we are going to fork out in that direction then Bent is worthy replacement for Defoe. We still have to see who we get for the left side of midfield but we have billions of midfield players and I would rather focus on our rickerty defence.

Edgar Davids Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 2596

Well I'm assuming Kaboul is a done-deal at this point. So we've two new additions to defence in Bale and Kabby, so we're (probably?) ok there? Maybe. If Dervitte gets over his injury and continues his progression I don't see why he can't be slowly moved into the first team squad.

In midfield we need quality players to shore up midfield, yes we've got a lot, but the majority of them are complete deadwood (See Ghaly, Hossam, and Murphy, Danny in particular).

Gary Stevens Joined : 07 Jun 2007 Posts : 1015

Either defoe signs or from a business sense we have to sell him now - he should be in 8-10m range - so net difference is around 6m... not ridiculous with the amount of money being injected via tv monies to upgrade. If this is the intention of the club they obviously rate the impact of bent a lot higher than defoe.

However - to be a top four club and chasing success in 3 cup competitions - four top quality strikers are needed in the squad, maybe there is still a chance defoe will stay... but not without signing a new contract

Founding Father Joined : 05 Jun 2007 Posts : 3522

Thinking about it like that, it makes even more sense. If we can claw back 8-10 then Bent at 6M is good business.

Edgar Davids Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 3552

Signing a top quality striker is a priority because Defoe refusal to sign a new contract has made it one. Spurs could probably enter the new season with Keane/Berb/Defoe + another cover since Mido is on his way out. However, Defoe is forcing our hand so yes, it is necessary to sign another striker.

However, had West Ham not got involved we'd probably have secured him for less, but lets judge whether 17m is too much at the end of the summer transfer activity. Secondly, I come back to my earlier question, what other realistic options exist other than Bent ? Unless players have get out clauses, clubs in the PL are unlikely to sell.

Gary Stevens Age : 37 Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 1266

In another thread theres something about the 16m being in installments and being linked to personal and team performances. That in mind, coupled with his age and the probable inflation of the transfer market, its probably not as bad a business as it initially looks.

I've changed my tune - last week I was moaning how overpriced he was.

Edgar Davids Joined : 08 Jun 2007 Posts : 2316

It's a good signing, without question. He's got a 1in2 goals/game ratio fr two seasons (proving its not a fluke) and has been the top-scoring Englishman (ahead of Rooney, Defoe, Smith, Crouch and the other capped English forwards, who all play for much better teams than Charlton).

The money is ridiculous, but if it makes the difference to our overall style of play and a few points extra (8 needed) to take on Liverpool and L'Arse, then it pays for itself!

Edgar Davids Joined : 06 Jun 2007 Posts : 2576

Have a look at the vid I've dropped in the YouTube forum, some good goals in there. Great running off the ball into space and behind the defenders, very strong in the air - he'll go far will this lad.