Defoe. Do you WANT him to go?

[tartanspur100]

NO

 

[MattyP]

Do I wanr Defoe to go, in an ideal world no but if he don't sign the contract I'd rather have some money come in for a replacement.

Do I want his stripey hairdo to go. Yes. Levy, give him a tenner a week pay rise so he can get the last bit of his hair cut. Jeez, to think he was gonna spunk £1.7m on a holiday home but can't afford to get a finished haircut.

Cue jokes about JD and bad finishing..........

 

[addlestonespur]

No, he may not be first choice or second for that matter but he's probably the best we can bring on to stir things up with twenty to go. Sven, Jol, McClaren and now Ramos don't seem to like starting him too often from the word go, couldn't blame him for wanting to leave for more first team action, with the likes of Villa Pompey Citeh and co improving he may just go soon

 

[paulwill]

Im with don1..... No cos hes a yido!

 

[N10toN17]

No, but he needs to sign the contract pronto, we have numerous problems in the squad but up front isn't one of them.

 

[Jack2]

I don't necessarily want him to go, but if he does, I won't miss him much. Not a big loss IMO if he goes.

 

[snake1]

No, not unless he's replaced with someone better than him, which won't happen, so no. But, as other have said, he needs to sign a new contract, otherwise he'll be sold anyway.

 

[SpurSince57]

Are we that profit-obsessed? (Well, I can think of someone who is, but are we, as supporters?)

If he doesn't sign a new contract, fine. Let him run it down. If he chips in with 20 or so goals over the next 18 months we'll have got a good return for our initial outlay and the wages we've forked out. We are going to be pushed to find a better number three/four when £6m buys you rubbish (Kamara) or quality with major fitness problems (Mido); sure, you can luck in at the bargain end as Sparky seems to have done with de la Cruz or Coppell did with Doyle, but chances are we'll shell out a fair chunk of whatever we get for JD and get someone who's not as good. And if JD isn't as good as some of his fan club would have us believe, he's still an effective goalscorer who's shown he can knock them in consistently, if maybe not as often as we'd like.

And, contrary to the claims of the JDFC, he's shown he can come on as an impact sub. Our very own OGS?

 

[snake1]

I actually agree with you, SS. Although there'd be no shortage of takers, we don't need to sell him. As you say, we could easily let him run his contract down, no biggie. But, you and I both know our board are tight ****s, and will sell Defoe for £10m+ unless he commits himself to another contract with the club.

 

[SpurSince57]

Contracts work both ways. He has to agree to go. There's a rumour that we signed Bent because we were confident we'd flog JD to the Spammers, and then it turned out he didn't want to know (and can you blame him?).

It really is difficult to see where he could go at the moment and be guaranteed to be better off in terms of playing time.

 

[rez9000]

In today's football atmosphere, letting a player like Defoe go for nothing is not good sense. I bemoan the hyper-commercialisation of football, but that doesn't mean we should fly in the face of it by losing out on a potentially large transfer fee.

OK, he could contribute 20 odd goals in the next 18 months, but you would expect that from any striker that we choose to bring in. Let's say we could get £10 million for him (just as an example). We have the choice of getting 20 goals with no cost, or 20 goals while losing the £10 million we spend replacing him. The logic in that situation is clear.

 

[davros]

He was captain against Sunderland so I guess the plan is for him to stay. I think Rez and SS57 have it right - we are very unlikely to get a better striker for the 10 million bananas Defoe is likely to fetch. If he's pretty reliable for 20+ goals over the next 18 months, why shell out more cash for someone to hopefully do the same? If he signs a new contract then even better.

 

[SpurSince57]

In today's football atmosphere, letting a player like Defoe go for nothing is not good sense. I bemoan the hyper-commercialisation of football, but that doesn't mean we should fly in the face of it by losing out on a potentially large transfer fee.

OK, he could contribute 20 odd goals in the next 18 months, but you would expect that from any striker that we choose to bring in. Let's say we could get £10 million for him (just as an example). We have the choice of getting 20 goals with no cost, or 20 goals while losing the £10 million we spend replacing him. The logic in that situation is clear.

Well you would, but there's no guarantee he would score them. Look at Kuyt, over whom most of SC were slavering two years ago. He's scored just three goals this season, the same as Bent, and from far more games. We can be certain (well, as certain as we can be of anything) that Defoe will deliver the goods. There's dubious logic in cashing in on him now and possibly blowing most or all of the dosh we get on a turkey.

And he's also got to agree to any move, remember.

 

[Kurtzen]

ok it's a false economy, but....taking £10 million and writing it off on wages for a central midfielder over two seasons might, just might, have a more beneficial impact.

Something about putting the dosh where it's needed.....an entirely novel concept to the hierachy?

:wink:

 

[SpurSince57]

A novel concept indeed.

 

[TheBigMatch]

No. We need him. He's number 2 to Keano but with over 60 odd games a season, he should be happy with 25. Sign Defoe please.

 

[kremlyn]

Sorry JD but if you haven't put pen to paper by the summer I'd like you to go. He has a lot that I like: great shot, good runner but most importantly he is a really good squad member, getting on with everyone despite his disatisfaction. However, I don't think JD has developed a stitch since we signed him: can't pass, doesn't pass, hasn't really gelled with any of his strike partners despite their qaulity, ALWAYS getting caught offside.

It's wierd that someone who is obviously such a good team mate is such a poor team player.

Ta-ta