Kane is another overrated British talent, he's not even remotely as good as Benzema.
Benzema or Kane? Genuine question.
- Thread starter Andy_Cole
- Start date
Sorry, but that is no way similar. Hazard has performed at the highest level for 3 seasons now in the PL and before that in Ligue 1. Whle Kane has had one great season. Not to mention the fact, that Benzema could be cheaper while being the better player.
Can't disagree with anything there. Didn't even think about the longevity (proven for more than a season) bit when I posted that.
Was literally just thinking more about the age vs quality bit.
It'll sound daft, but I just don't like Benzema. Probably his attitude. Going against all reason but I've voted Kane.
........But he can feck to other English clubs Chelsea, Citeh. If the EPL is so unique, how come foreign players are the most successful here? It's all a sentimental concept with no advantage whatsoever.
Kane needs to prove himself again next season to show he's the real deal in my opinion, at this moment id take Benzema.
Kane's not leaving Spurs.
Benzema will never join United, in the current Madrid team he's actually the perfect striker to have alongside Ronaldo because he's not a hugely egotistical knob...he plays the sideshow role well at club level. So unless they stupidly decide to bin him, it's not happening.
But back to the point, if both were an option you'd have Benzema over Kane all day long wouldn't you? After one season, Kane has to go do it again so we know he's the real deal, whereas we know Benzema guarantees 25 goals a season and is equipped to play at the highest level.
But back to the point, if both were an option you'd have Benzema over Kane all day long wouldn't you? After one season, Kane has to go do it again so we know he's the real deal, whereas we know Benzema guarantees 25 goals a season and is equipped to play at the highest level.
What a thread
Neither. Kane needs a season and a half to prove consistency and Benzema has given the impression he has and never will want to play for this club.
Voted Benzema but no chance he is coming. Wouldnt be upset if we got Kane but thats unlikely without some Levy transfer c*ntery
If both were willing to join United and fees etc were all agreed... then i'd pick Kane. He's the better long term invest despite it being a bit of a risk given he's only got 1 seasons worth of form. He's also English and i'm a romantic at heart and would prefer to see Rooneys position in the squad long term take over by an English player.
Agree with this, especially for the price. Although Kane's loan spells where when he was 17-19 and he did pretty well in them, so the fact he has performed even better at 21 is a plus point IMO. It shows he has been improving further.
I'd opt for Benzema now because we're at the point where we need to get back to the top. Kane would be too expensive now, he's someone we'd have to look at again in 2-3 seasons.
I think you've hit the nail on the head there. If Di Maria has taught us anything, it's that world class players are useless unless they are happy to be there and keen to put the effort in.
Karim Benzema is easily the type of player who could stop showing up on the pitch if he isn't happy with the club and living in Manchester.
He's much more of a risk than Kane who is young and for whom the hunger is still there to go on and try to be an even better player than he is.
Yeah United British born players cant stop going to Chelsea and Citeh
The two of them would be my top two strikers for this summer. However like others have said, I think it is a year too early for Kane to make his big move, so for this summer I would go for Benzema.
Kane may never become great, Benz is.. Ridiculous if anyone chose Kans
Benzema is proven at the highest level of European football. Harry Kane has had one good season with a team that finished 5th.
Rooney.
Obviously benzema. Consistent top level goalscorer has been for years now. Also he has more about his game than Kane.
Kane has had 1 good year there's absolutely nothing that suggests he could replicate it.
Funny thing is because he's an english player they'll probably cost the same.
Kane has had 1 good year there's absolutely nothing that suggests he could replicate it.
Funny thing is because he's an english player they'll probably cost the same.
Not is Benzema leaving Madrid. This thread is very realistic isn't it.
Kane would actually cost a fair bit more than Benzema but his nationality is not the reason why.
And what suggests he can't replicate it? Or come close?
What is it then?
it's common knowledge that "top" English players are £10-15 million or more than they should be.
kane should be no more than £20 million yet he'll more than likely sell for £30-35 mill
Sterling is prob worth £20 million yet someone like city will spend £40 million on him
Shaw was £28ish million yet he's worth half that.
Lallana £25 million again probably worth more like £12-15 million
English players are always overpriced I'd much prefer a proven consistent top level goalscorer (Benzema) over someone that's had 1 good year in a team that finished 5th like Kane.
Nothing does but why would you spend £30 million on a player that's had 1 good season? its just not logical. He at least needs to get a couple of seasons under him where he scores a similar amount.
This is the most ridiculous statement in this thread so far.
Dybala cost Juve £23m and he only scored 13 league goals. Kane would still be worth more than £20m if he wasn't English.
Benzema is the better player, but I'd rather take Kane if offered.
It is not really that English players do not cost so much because of their nationality they cost so much because they play for English clubs. England has the richest league in the World so to entice an English club to sell you are going to have to pay over the odds.
Why?
Kane would be more expensive because:
1. He has 5 years remaining on his contract which gives Spurs leverage
2. He's 21, whereas Benzema is 27
3a. Spurs want to keep him and have an annoyingly good record of extracting big fees out of buyers.
3b. Benzema would only be available if Madrid want to sell him and in that case the buying club would have the leverage.
4. Benzema would be on higher wages, so in terms of total outlay a buying club could pay a higher transfer fee for Kane than Benzema - further leverage for Levy.
I think being English would add a little more to his price tag due to the home-grown quota but is far less of a factor than the above reasons.
It's expensive to for PL clubs to buy players from other PL clubs usually especially when the buyers are a top side other sides know that they have the financial power. We spent nearly 30m on Fellaini, nearly 40m on Mata, 16m on Valencia, 24m for a 30-year old Van Persie with 1 year left on his contract. From abroad we also spent large fees on Nani and Anderson at the time. City bought Bony for 30m, 20m for Santa Cruz, Liverpool spent 20m on Lovren, Chelsea spent 50m for a crocked Torres. From abroad we've also seen overpriced fees, 35m for Fernandinho, 35m for Mangala, 45m for Tevez. I could go on but you get the point.
There are also examples of English players going for reasonable prices when other, more important factors are involved.
If Kane was German or French or Italian or whatever, he would cost the same.
Last edited:
Where do I start?
Man. Utd paid more than that for Rojo and a lot more than that for Fellaini. Hell, they paid £30m for Shaw.
Kane has just scored 31 goals, 21 in the league, despite not starting in the league until a good chunk of the season had elapsed. On top of this he has scored 9 goals in his last 12 international appearances and has just been voted Young Player of the Year. He's two-footed, scores every type of goal, puts in 100% effort every game, is a model professional and dedicated to getting better and better.
His all-round game is excellent (he doesn't just score goals), with no real weaknesses. He has reasonable pace, holds the ball up well, good passer of the ball, is strong, tenacious, good at dribbling and composed.
And apart from anything else he has just signed a very long contract at a club that he doesn't want to leave, which doesn't need money, whose chairman doesn't wish to sell and is known to be a tough negotiator to the point of recently getting a world record fee.
And you say, in the face of all this, in a league that's awash with money, that Kane "should be no more than £20 million" ??? The mind boggles.
Kane no where near proven enough to be mentioned with Benzema.
I picked benzema, but he clearly does not want to come here, since the days of SAF.
I don't think we need Kane, especially if it means Rooney in the cam/cm, but let the chips fall where they may...I trust in lvg's plan.
I don't think we need Kane, especially if it means Rooney in the cam/cm, but let the chips fall where they may...I trust in lvg's plan.
I actually agree with a lot of this. Especially the last part.
Even if Kane would replicate it he's still not as good as Benzema. Don't think he'll ever be as good.
Another thing on the Kane price discussion.
Kane has a 5 year contract at Spurs on 35k a week. Over the next 5 years he will cost them about 9m.
For Spurs to buy a suitable replacement let's look at a currently available example (Benteke) and one of Spurs' previous signings (Soldado). Fortuitously for the sake of comparison, Benteke would cost a similar fee to Soldado (25-30m) and would presumably earn similar wages (around 100k a week).
The total outlay of such a signing would be 50m+ assuming an equivalant 5 year contract. Therefore Spurs would likely need to sell Kane for 40m just to cover the cost of the replacement, and obviously Spurs would much rather keep Kane than take a risk of another striker who could flop as Soldado has done.
Anyone who thinks Kane would be available for less than silly money is dreaming. It's not because he's English, it's simple finance.
Kane has a 5 year contract at Spurs on 35k a week. Over the next 5 years he will cost them about 9m.
For Spurs to buy a suitable replacement let's look at a currently available example (Benteke) and one of Spurs' previous signings (Soldado). Fortuitously for the sake of comparison, Benteke would cost a similar fee to Soldado (25-30m) and would presumably earn similar wages (around 100k a week).
The total outlay of such a signing would be 50m+ assuming an equivalant 5 year contract. Therefore Spurs would likely need to sell Kane for 40m just to cover the cost of the replacement, and obviously Spurs would much rather keep Kane than take a risk of another striker who could flop as Soldado has done.
Anyone who thinks Kane would be available for less than silly money is dreaming. It's not because he's English, it's simple finance.
Benzema is more proven because he's 5 years older. Should we have turned Ronaldo down because he was unproven? Also what's the point of buying a near 28 year old striker when we already have Rooney?
Ronaldo was an 18 year old superstar in the making. It was obvious.
Kane could quite easily be the next Kevin Phillips or James Beattie. He'd never really shown signs of being a 30 goal striker until this season. I hope he isn't a one season wonder as there are so few quality strikers in the Premier League.
Benzema has consistent numbers year on year so you know exactly what you're getting (not that we're ever getting that).
Not really, I remember watching a reputable Italian TV football show back then. Most of the critics (including Arrigo Sacchi) were amazed that United had spent 12m on a tall lanky 18 year old who could only dribble