Joleon Lescott

[ToxtethBlue]

I feel ive made my postion quite clear all thru this thread, for me, the fee wouldnt be worth the risk. We would have to replace him, im sorry but I cant see how thats possible. Theres only so many rabbits Moyes can pull out of that hat.

What if the replacement is Koldrup MK2? What do we do then?

Life's just like a box of Chocolates, you don't know what your gonna get. Who knows?

I'd trust Moyes to get a good defender for 10 million or under. Defenders are his speciality, he knows where to look.

Rodwell’s always an option as are Yobo and Jagielka after a few months.

As I said, no one wants to do it but sometimes you've got to take that risk or gamble. Especially in our situation, 20 million is alot of money for a centre back.

 

[Azzbot]

I'd love us to sign Hangeland. I seriously think he could do a great job in our defence.

 

[lordyefc]

I feel ive made my postion quite clear all thru this thread, for me, the fee wouldnt be worth the risk.

OK, so your position is that we should stick with what we have, because it's a risk trying to improve the squad through selling a player, and we might slip from our current position as a result. i.e. given a choice between no decent signings or losing Lescott, you choose the former.

That's a perfectly valid point of view - not one I agree with, but still a reasonable one. However, I will just point out that earlier in this thread you were accusing your fellow blues of lacking ambition. Now, given the choice between sticking with what we have or at least attempting to improve the squad, you are calling the latter "too risky". I don't think you can claim the ambition high road there.

 

[lordyefc]

I'd love us to sign Hangeland. I seriously think he could do a great job in our defence.

Even if he were a good long term option (one good season doesn't prove it), this would be the worst time to sign him. The media are in love with the guy, his profile's gone way overboard. His fee would be hugely inflated as a result.

 

[Goat]

OK, so your position is that we should stick with what we have, because it's a risk trying to improve the squad through selling a player, and we might slip from our current position as a result. i.e. given a choice between no decent signings or losing Lescott, you choose the former.

That's a perfectly valid point of view - not one I agree with, but still a reasonable one. However, I will just point out that earlier in this thread you were accusing your fellow blues of lacking ambition. Now, given the choice between sticking with what we have or at least attempting to improve the squad, you are calling the latter "too risky". I don't think you can claim the ambition high road there.

I dont really take any high ground to be honest, I just put things out there. Its my point of view, I dont wish to "convert" people to my way of thinking, merely just try to push thru my message.

Like a Preacher, im just spreading the message.

 

[Azzbot]

Even if he were a good long term option (one good season doesn't prove it), this would be the worst time to sign him. The media are in love with the guy, his profile's gone way overboard. His fee would be hugely inflated as a result.

Jagielka.

True. Oh well.

 

[NeoNaoNeo]

OK, so your position is that we should stick with what we have, because it's a risk trying to improve the squad through selling a player, and we might slip from our current position as a result. i.e. given a choice between no decent signings or losing Lescott, you choose the former.

That's a perfectly valid point of view - not one I agree with, but still a reasonable one. However, I will just point out that earlier in this thread you were accusing your fellow blues of lacking ambition. Now, given the choice between sticking with what we have or at least attempting to improve the squad, you are calling the latter "too risky". I don't think you can claim the ambition high road there.

Goat I'm afraid this lad pulled down your pants and gave you a right public spanking.

 

[Rook]

Even if he were a good long term option (one good season doesn't prove it), this would be the worst time to sign him. The media are in love with the guy, his profile's gone way overboard. His fee would be hugely inflated as a result.

I like Hageland but he's worth probably 15M and wouldn't trade him for Lescott and 5M. I think Hogdson's defensive system also helps out his game and may not be the player he is on say Arsenal.

Hageland is a better pure defender than Lescott but not by much. Lescott is also alot more versatile than Hageland and is also a better goal scorer on set plays which account for about a 1/3 of our goals.

Lescott should only be given up for a player who create for us in the final 1/3.

 

[Azzbot]

It's hangeland you nonse.

Only jokin

We would get Hangeland for less than £15m

 

[Brownie]

**** Hangeland.

 

[Blue in Brazil]

keep him, were trying to build a side and he's a top player

 

[CR7]

Jagielka.

True. Oh well.

Jagielka has had 2 good seasons with Everton, if you weren't watching?

You bemuse me.

 

[Blue Wiz]

OK, so your position is that we should stick with what we have, because it's a risk trying to improve the squad through selling a player, and we might slip from our current position as a result. i.e. given a choice between no decent signings or losing Lescott, you choose the former.

That's a perfectly valid point of view - not one I agree with, but still a reasonable one. However, I will just point out that earlier in this thread you were accusing your fellow blues of lacking ambition. Now, given the choice between sticking with what we have or at least attempting to improve the squad, you are calling the latter "too risky". I don't think you can claim the ambition high road there.

This can easily be turned the other way as well, bu switching a few words...

"OK, so your position is that we should sell what good we have, because it's a risk keeping the squad since we might slip from our current position as a result. i.e. given a choice between no decent signings or losing Lescott, you choose the later.

That's a perfectly valid point of view - not one I agree with, but still a reasonable one. Now, given the choice between sticking with what we have or at least attempting to improve the squad by selling one of our best players to buy an unproven player, you are calling the former "too risky"....

It's all in the way you put it. b)

I personally can't see the logic in selling a great player that we need since our other choises in that position is gone for 2/3 of the season (Jags injured and Yobo for ANC), just to sign a player you have seen on tv in another league that plays a totally different style than the PL. But that's me, I can see how you think and if we had another great CD I might even reason just as you do. But for me.. the risk is too great since we might loose our stability in the defence and therefore slump down in the league as a result.

 

[Nebbiolo]

Goat I'm afraid this lad pulled down your pants and gave you a right public spanking.

That he did, mate. He not only spanked the Goat, he sent him scurrying away in embarrassment. Goat just didn't have the ability to deal with Lordy. Goat talked the talk for a while, but was found to be profoundly lacking when called on to walk the walk. Sad to see a fellow Blue humiliated, but it was coming. The lad just isn't up to it.

 

[Goat]

He didnt, I was just the bigger man and walked away, wasnt worth getting into really, hes got his view and ive got mine. He lacks ambition and im swimming in it, nothing more to add to be fair.