Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

He is definitely another player which divides opinion in this fanbase. Probably getting those leeches out is only thing we are united on (excuse the pun)
 
croadyman said:
He is definitely another player which divides opinion in this fanbase. Probably getting those leeches out is only thing we are united on (excuse the pun)
Click to expand...
We arent going to sign him, only because levy wont let him go. He'll hold him to his contract till next summer then lose him on a free. Levy has already said he regrets selling kyle walker to city and wouldnt do business with a top 6 club again for one of his players.

Osihmein aint going to happen at £150mil, not when we need a elite striker, elite CM, a CB, a RB and some competition for de gea.
 
Got a feeling Chelsea will try and get him now they have Poch. Will he want to upset Spurs fans joining their second biggest rivals though? Also won't have CL football.

Coming to Utd seems like the best outcome for Kane and Spurs out of the two choices.
 
Mainoldo said:
Kyle Walker.
Click to expand...
Yeah that was long time ago in 2017 which was 6 years ago. A full back for 50m in 2017 market. Levy will demand more than double of that for Kane in today's market I think.

It's very rare though, sold only 1 player to his fellow top 6 team in the past 6 years.
 
Kag said:
Anybody who doesn’t want Kane is a halfwit.

Enjoy another five years in obscurity, boys.
Click to expand...

We have a lot of foreign based fans on here who happen to think all English players are either rubbish or overrated.

It's actually baffling how poor some of their knowledge is. Kane would immediately become our best player.
 
Wilt said:
In other words (according to you) Utd may as well forget about challenging City ….just continue being second rate at best?
Click to expand...
No, that it called the strawman fallacy. We won't challenge for them in the short term, and a quick fix rushed attempt will set us back years.
 
Wing Attack Plan R said:
RvP gift-wrapped the premier league title for his team. Kane bottled a CL final, among other things.
Click to expand...
It was a weak PL season and Carrick was voted best player by the players. Kane has scored a lot more goals, for a worse team, and has a better overall game.
 
SirReginald said:
City will sign Kane as back up to Haaland with all the money they’ll get from winning the PL and CL.

Can definitely see United signing Ohsimen if you can sort out the ownership. Otherwise it might be a pretty hard summer for you guys. Can’t see the Glazers going big if they’re legitimately trying to sell the club.
Click to expand...
City have never spent that kind of money.
 
Demaw said:
Hate to say this but City don't go near these types of players at 30, and not at 100 million. This could be a Sanchez again and all of a sudden, we say he is getting old. If we paid 100 million four years ago, definitely. This will be another silly recruiting error FOR long term. Paying a 34 year old striker in 4 years time 250-300k a week. No way!! This ship has passed.
Click to expand...
What is the lottery number?How can you be so sure about something 4 in years into the future?

City tried to sign Kane 2 summers ago. Had Levy allowed, you think City had offered Kane 2 year contract? It's not like he has declined. Had City not signed Haaland, they could very well go back to get him. Not saying Kanemis Benzema, but Benzema won his Balon d'Or at 34 year of age.

City tried to get Sanchez. Messi tried to leave Barcelona to Man City was very much a thing in summer 2020 too.
 
Isotope said:
Kinda forgot, why did Fergie get rid of RVN or Berba again?
Click to expand...
RVN had a beef with Ronaldo, who is the future that SAF then immediately built the team around.

Berbatov flopped. He never really fit the way we played especially when we became more counter attack.
 
ti vu said:
RVN had a beef with Ronaldo, who is the future that SAF then immediately built the team around.

Berbatov flopped. He never really fit the way we played especially when we became more counter attack.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I thought because those two became slower (RVN because of injury) thus slowing down our attack.
 
Isotope said:
Thanks.

I thought because those two became slower (RVN because of injury) thus slowing down our attack.
Click to expand...
Injury and the change in attacking approach partially had a influence. However, RVN was still too good to ditch where Ole was not the same after coming back (out for most of previous season) and Smith had a leg break and had became permacrock by then. Saha was injury prone. We didn't have a good back up. Once Saha became a permacrock during the season; we had to loan Henrik Larson for couple months. Smith, Ole, Larsson couldn't be compared to RVN at this time.

No way RvN was that physical shot that we bite Real Madrid hand off to take him away. He could have been very useful if he were to stay that season. We only signed one player (Carrick) in the summer. It's not like we needed to raise fund. It had to do more with dressing room politic, and long term
 
Last edited:
Cracking player and would be transformative for a couple of years.

Think the age profile is wrong.

Of course that could change if we ended up with State Owners
 
@ti vu Yeah. RVN still had a couple of good seasons with Madrid (and Madrid wouldn't buy United outcast either).

Not that it affects anything, but I'm still undecided whether getting Kane is good for the team or just a short-term solution patch (and potentially creating future problem). Will 100% behind him if that's EtH wants, though.
 
Was opposed to signing him but if we can get him and a younger striker, that would be great.
 
Some Chelsea supporting mates are adamant he wants to stay in London for personal reasons, family I guess, they said they would be certs to sign him only for the FFP issues, Poch joining has only made them more certain of it.
 
padzilla said:
Some Chelsea supporting mates are adamant he wants to stay in London for personal reasons, family I guess, they said they would be certs to sign him only for the FFP issues, Poch joining has only made them more certain of it.
Click to expand...
No way Levy sanctions that move after the season they've had. They'd sooner sell to us for a lower fee.
 
padzilla said:
Some Chelsea supporting mates are adamant he wants to stay in London for personal reasons, family I guess, they said they would be certs to sign him only for the FFP issues, Poch joining has only made them more certain of it.
Click to expand...
He was desperate to join City a couple of years back so I doubt this is much of an issue. He’d still have a Spurs legacy if he joined us, it’d be destroyed if he went to Chelsea.
 
I bet he regrets not pushing enough for that Man City move in 2021. City were seriously in for him back then.

2023 Where will he go now?

City dont need him.

For an almost guaranteed league title win I can only see PSG or Bayern....going on reports though he doesnt seem to favour a move abroad?
 
Kane will definitely tell Levy to go f@ck himself this time... whether we get him is another story. It's true that City don't need him, no way he'll go to Arsenal. So if it's correct that he wants to say in the PL, I guess it's us, Newcastle or Chelsea. I'd say Chelsea will be favourites but I wouldn't be surprised if he ended up in europe
 
I am against this signing. If we were a tram ready to win titles and this was the final piece of the puzzle (like RVP in 2012) then sure. He is one of the best.

But sadly, we are not. And by the time we will be (hopefully in 2 years), he won’t be that good. He has already declined physically, that I think it is pretty obvious. To make things worse, by that time, Casemiro and Varane would also be past it, and instead of challenging, we would need a rebuilt. The cycle continues.

I would much rather spend money in buying a striker who while might not be as good as him, will be on his peak 2 years from now.
 
Even if we have the money , a lot will depend on Kane if he wants the move. He will have to force Levy's hand. Levy has already said he isn't selling Kane to us.
 
Dominos said:
Would Haaland and Osimhen be bad signings for our attack because they're not "established experience"? It's about quality, not age, there's no benefit to being 30+. Kane would offer something to us because he's a good player, not because he's about to hit 30. He'd have been a better signing when he was 24 despite not being as experienced.
Click to expand...
Haaland isn't available and Osimhen is likely going to cost more. My point is a player with Kanes fitness record and longevity (he doesn't rely on pace or explosive play to make his impact) is well worth the fee.
Dominos said:
The point is, some players over 30 drop a level, some drop several levels. We only have to look at Matic, Sanchez, Rooney, RVP in our recent history who dropped off a cliff at a relatively young age. Sometimes you get lucky and they last a bit longer, but it's not predictable who will last and when their time will come.
Click to expand...
Lewa, Benzema, Ibra are a few examples of players carrying on well into their 30s.
Dominos said:
You don't want to simultaneously fill your first team with a lot of 30+ players because great teams are mostly built of players in their physical prime, and they're in danger of declining simultaneously, leaving you with a major rebuild.

You could argue Liverpool have just suffered a bit from age profile of certain parts of their squad this season where they've gone from title contenders to top 4 contenders.
Click to expand...
We aren't though. As I said we need one CM for this summer, Kane can come and make an impact over a few seasons, and we have a young midfield and young wingers.
From my scenario there are around 3 transfers and only one is 30. The others would be at 27 or below.
That is balance. In the next seasons we can progressively plan for replacing the likes of Bruno and Casemiro but I don't buy the logic of not buying Kane because of ageing players.
If anything that forward line is begging for more experience and consistency, and there is no better guaruntee for that than Harry Kane.
 
ColvaleGoa said:
Even if we have the money , a lot will depend on Kane if he wants the move. He will have to force Levy's hand. Levy has already said he isn't selling Kane to us.
Click to expand...
Fairly sure Kane will want out.

Levy will start by asking ridiculous money, though will probably sell for around £75m, can’t imagine Levy refusing that kind of money. If Levy doesn’t sell…. £75m + Kane’s wages would be costing around £2,000,000 per game next season (that’s assuming he doesn’t get injured!) …..Levy would choke at the thought.
 
Last edited:
UNITED ACADEMY said:
Yeah that was long time ago in 2017 which was 6 years ago. A full back for 50m in 2017 market. Levy will demand more than double of that for Kane in today's market I think.

It's very rare though, sold only 1 player to his fellow top 6 team in the past 6 years.
Click to expand...

Your right if you leave out context.

You said he doesn’t sell to rivals. Who else did they sell that was making a progressive move where he shifted them abroad instead of England?

Harry Kane he refused to sell for less than £150m to City. Then who? Most players that have left haven’t been targets for top English clubs. You’re referring to Bale and Modric and that was before Kyle Walker. Even Gareth Bale if reports where true would have been sold to us if he didn’t have his heart set on Madrid.
 
Levy is in a weak position and knows they need a big rebuild. He isn’t turning down 80m from us to see him leave for free.
You’ll see a bit more media optics from Levy this summer imo that involves early moves etc
 
Mainoldo said:
Your right if you leave out context.

You said he doesn’t sell to rivals. Who else did they sell that was making a progressive move where he shifted them abroad instead of England?

Harry Kane he refused to sell for less than £150m to City. Then who? Most players that have left haven’t been targets for top English clubs. You’re referring to Bale and Modric and that was before Kyle Walker. Even Gareth Bale if reports where true would have been sold to us if he didn’t have his heart set on Madrid.
Click to expand...
I said Levy won’t sell to PL club, when I said that, I was referring to Kane. We have to put ridiculous amount like more than 100m to convince Levy. Levy has this habit to make things difficult to the PL team buyers.
 
cyberman said:
Levy is in a weak position and knows they need a big rebuild. He isn’t turning down 80m from us to see him leave for free.
You’ll see a bit more media optics from Levy this summer imo that involves early moves etc
Click to expand...
If that’s the case, he would have sell Kane to city in 2021. The guy doesn’t think about rebuild. He just see Kane and Son as his superstar and he wants the manager to build a team around those two.
 
UNITED ACADEMY said:
If that’s the case, he would have sell Kane to city in 2021. The guy doesn’t think about rebuild. He just see Kane and Son as his superstar and he wants the manager to build a team around those two.
Click to expand...
But this is different, now it’s Levy’s neck on the line.
 
ti vu said:
What is the lottery number?How can you be so sure about something 4 in years into the future?

City tried to sign Kane 2 summers ago. Had Levy allowed, you think City had offered Kane 2 year contract? It's not like he has declined. Had City not signed Haaland, they could very well go back to get him. Not saying Kanemis Benzema, but Benzema won his Balon d'Or at 34 year of age.

City tried to get Sanchez. Messi tried to leave Barcelona to Man City was very much a thing in summer 2020 too.
Click to expand...
Trying to suggest that us signing him now is similar to City signing him 2 years ago from the contractual position is really silly. That 2 year period represents 40-50% of his likely deal!

Let's call a spade a spade, they're completely different. They were winning on both sides of the coin compared to what we'd be taking on. Their hypothetical 4 or 5 year contract was covering a couple of years of prime. We don't even need to speculate on this because it has happened and it was forseeable anyway.

Then beyond that they'd only be into his early 30s where the risk is not too bad. By extending an extra two years into the future it does make a significant difference. This should be pretty intuitive. If you take a set of random top flight footballers and assess their performance beyond 32, it will be the case that each year takes on more risk of decline so we are absolutely taking on more risk than they were.

So yes, they're very different. They also weren't being taken for complete mugs in the market. We would be playing the dumb money if we pay Levy like this.
 
If age profile is the way for many not to go for Kane then we should sell most of the 28 to 30s players and buy younger ones so when we buy the younger striker (he most likely going to be erratic for a few years) they will age well together and wish we will be able to challeng in any sort of way with the rest of the crews like Lpool, Chelsea, Arsenal, Newcastle, Spurs, and the top City.

But by then i believe we will be in obscurity and become like Arsenal under wenger that just keep buildimg and losing the top players year after year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.