The reason we ask, is because surely the only reason for seeking to sell Michael Dawson is a financial one, not a footballing one.
In case you have missed the developments over the past few days, let us sum them up for you: Michael Dawson is not included in Tottenham's team against Newcastle, with Gallas and Kaboul selected. Even new signing Vertonghen was on the bench.
He will be expected to replace Gallas, but it appears Dawson is fourth choice at least, with young prospect Steven Caulker also in the mix.
It has since been reported that Dawson has been told he can leave the club, and QPR last night were said to have had a £7.5 million bid accepted for him.
Are Tottenham making an error of judgement if they let him leave? From a football point of view we would say yes.
If one of their five centre-backs should be cast aside, it should clearly be the 34-year-old on a short term contract who started just 15 games last season, William Gallas.
Michael Dawson, Tottenham's player of the year in 2009-10, is six years younger at 28, and despite injury problems he still featured in 24 Premier League matches last season.
Clearly Gallas has a limited shelf life so it makes more sense to let him go rather than Dawson. Yet the only 'pro' to the deal is that Spurs would receive £7.5 million for him.
Who is pulling the strings here, is Daniel Levy trying to maximise Spurs' profits, or has Villas-Boas simply made his choice?
If the former, then it isn't a great financial decision in the long-term, because when Gallas does retire, Spurs will need to buy a replacement.
If the latter, then we can only speculate he has a replacement lined up. West Brom's Jonas Olsson perhaps?
What do you think of Spurs decision re: Dawson?
image: © Ronnie Macdonald