Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

[ForeverRed1]

I think ten hag wants to be different. Go for the title with experienced players then build a young team bit by bit.

you need a mix of both. We know nothing, for all we know we’re lining up kane and sesko. Kane and hojlund. We have 0 idea and just because we’re looking at kane doesn’t mean we don’t have other targets. People believing this 100mil kitty in the summer. We didn’t sign anyone in jan because the money is being placed on summer transfers. Relax, we will sign players. Relax, ETH has players he wants for a reason, he isn’t picking them randomly out of a hat.

We have a goal difference of 11 (lowest in top 6) If ETH wants to add kanes 31 combined goal and assists to that, then fine. Aslong as we have long term plans too.. he’s not a bad signing at all. Infact he is a very good one.

 

[Bebestation]

Hence bringing in Casa,Eriksen last summer to compliment Varane & Bruno. He now looks like wanting to add Rabiot & Kane to that list as well.

Shaw, Rashford, Martinez are prime players aswell, wouldnt build a young team around them as our experienced. Eriksens assist to casemiros goal last game shows this reliability.

 

[Bebestation]

you need a mix of both. We know nothing, for all we know we’re lining up kane and sesko. Kane and hojlund. We have 0 idea and just because we’re looking at kane doesn’t mean we don’t have other targets. People believing this 100mil kitty in the summer. We didn’t sign anyone in jan because the money is being placed on summer transfers. Relax, we will sign players. Relax, ETH has players he wants for a reason, he isn’t picking them randomly out of a hat.

We have a goal difference of 11 (lowest in top 6) If ETH wants to add kanes 31 combined goal and assists to that, then fine. Aslong as we have long term plans too.. he’s not a bad signing at all. Infact he is a very good one.

Its been 1 season but we have 2 youngsters we are all excited for in Amad & Garanacho that we didnt expect. Suddenly Antony & sancho both look a waste of money at 160 mil even if there both youngsters. How would you feel us to buy Kane- the 2nd best striker in the pl - using that reliability and experience to see how Ferguson develops in the next 2 years & then snatch him up?

Build the strong core of a tree first then lets the seeds grow.

 

[davidmichael]

We have Vitek, Laird, Dalot, Jurado, Kambwala, Bennett, Alvaro, Malacia, Zidane, Savage, Mejbri, Mainoo, Pellestri, Diallo, Garnacho, Antony, Shoretire, McNeil and Hugill at the club whilst Rashford, Fernandes, Martinez and Shaw are all at their peak yet we don’t want more experience ?

Outside of Varane, Casemiro and Eriksen who is 30 or over in the club ? We can’t just sign a load of players in their early to mid 20’s and rely on a couple of experienced players, if we can get Kane for £70-£75 million it’s a no brainer.

 

[Zed 101]

We have Vitek, Laird, Dalot, Jurado, Kambwala, Bennett, Alvaro, Malacia, Zidane, Savage, Mejbri, Mainoo, Pellestri, Diallo, Garnacho, Antony, Shoretire, McNeil and Hugill at the club whilst Rashford, Fernandes, Martinez and Shaw are all at their peak yet we don’t want more experience ?

Outside of Varane, Casemiro and Eriksen who is 30 or over in the club ? We can’t just sign a load of players in their early to mid 20’s and rely on a couple of experienced players, if we can get Kane for £70-£75 million it’s a no brainer.

I agree at your price point but I do not think Levi will let him go at that price even with only 1 year left

 

[trevor newnham]

Osimhen or Ferguson and Kane but I doubt if we'd get 2 of those together

 

[fps]

Always been the case but it's only just hit me that Martial is only two years younger than Kane. Another "young" player we've kept at the club far too long.

 

[fps]

We have Vitek, Laird, Dalot, Jurado, Kambwala, Bennett, Alvaro, Malacia, Zidane, Savage, Mejbri, Mainoo, Pellestri, Diallo, Garnacho, Antony, Shoretire, McNeil and Hugill at the club whilst Rashford, Fernandes, Martinez and Shaw are all at their peak yet we don’t want more experience ?

Outside of Varane, Casemiro and Eriksen who is 30 or over in the club ? We can’t just sign a load of players in their early to mid 20’s and rely on a couple of experienced players, if we can get Kane for £70-£75 million it’s a no brainer.

Buy Kane and we're CL semi-final contenders and contenders for top 2 in the PL.

 

[groovyalbert]

Although I'd rather look elsewhere, to suggest that Kane doesn't immediately take us to the next level is bizarre.

The more I think about it, the less issue I have with this signing given the current options out there. He's been outstanding this season with everything that's going on around him and the club. He also looks to have gotten over his injury issues.

Even at 100m he'd do more for us in terms of immediate impact than spending that amount across multiple attacking options. Especially given our recent record spending in that department.

 

[NZT-One]

I think some people who are underestimating the goalkeeper problem don't realise that every managers have different way of playing. If we hire Mourinho, we don't need new keeper to improve our goals because Mourinho's way of playing don't rely on the principal of playing from the back to create chances. We are hiring ETH who has this principal of playing from the back that lead us in creating chances. Hence why if we don't fix our build up play or our way to play from the back then ETH will be forced to play long and ask his striker to win header of those long ball just like the Mourinho way. We have seen lot of moaning from people who criticised ETH for playing Weghorst but ETH is forced to play Weghorst because we are currently struggling to play from the back against high press.

My feeling as well. And it isn't just down to the GK as well. One injury to Eriksen or Casemiro and ETH has to adapt the gameplan because our options have no comparable skillsets as of yet. Its a house of cards.

That is actually not a bad idea and I completely agree he's not the final piece of the jigsaw.

However he has proven himself over many years and if he does have the guts to finally leave Spurs I am for it.

I think it's a bit harsh that some posters are prepared to doubt Erik if he's the first choice target too.

Would the Kane no goers feel differently IF we were looking to bring in a cheap young prospect too. My guess is probably not but thought I will ask the question anyway.

Can only re-iterate: the "Kane no goers" don't seem to be too much against the player itself. His qualities aren't denied. It is more the fact, that he will cost so much, that other parts of the squad won't be looked at. For me personally, the same would apply if United were about to splash 100 million on Kolo Muani. It most like would also hamper other acquisitions and therefor be problematic. The advantage such a young player has would be that there will be at least some sort of resale-value, in case it doesn't click.

you need a mix of both. We know nothing, for all we know we’re lining up kane and sesko. Kane and hojlund. We have 0 idea and just because we’re looking at kane doesn’t mean we don’t have other targets. People believing this 100mil kitty in the summer. We didn’t sign anyone in jan because the money is being placed on summer transfers. Relax, we will sign players. Relax, ETH has players he wants for a reason, he isn’t picking them randomly out of a hat.

We have a goal difference of 11 (lowest in top 6) If ETH wants to add kanes 31 combined goal and assists to that, then fine. Aslong as we have long term plans too.. he’s not a bad signing at all. Infact he is a very good one.

And this is how history is newly made... The reason we didn't buy anyone in January but just as much be that we threw so much money at Antony. Heck this transfer might even be the reason that our kitty is reduced this summer. We don't know, you are right. But lets not act as if blind optimism is the only way to go. Getting Kane would be absolutely in line with the transfer strategy of the recent United dealings. A strategy that cost a bomb and didn't have any outcome at all. If people want to be optimistic, hats off. I just don't see the reasoning behind it. Kane is out there for his last big paycheck, gave his best years to Spurs yet he still will be welcomed here with open arms.

And to the second part and Kane bringing his goals and assists with him. Didn't really work with Sancho didn't it?

 

[Doracle]

My feeling as well. And it isn't just down to the GK as well. One injury to Eriksen or Casemiro and ETH has to adapt the gameplan because our options have no comparable skillsets as of yet. Its a house of cards.


Can only re-iterate: the "Kane no goers" don't seem to be too much against the player itself. His qualities aren't denied. It is more the fact, that he will cost so much, that other parts of the squad won't be looked at. For me personally, the same would apply if United were about to splash 100 million on Kolo Muani. It most like would also hamper other acquisitions and therefor be problematic. The advantage such a young player has would be that there will be at least some sort of resale-value, in case it doesn't click.


And this is how history is newly made... The reason we didn't buy anyone in January but just as much be that we threw so much money at Antony. Heck this transfer might even be the reason that our kitty is reduced this summer. We don't know, you are right. But lets not act as if blind optimism is the only way to go. Getting Kane would be absolutely in line with the transfer strategy of the recent United dealings. A strategy that cost a bomb and didn't have any outcome at all. If people want to be optimistic, hats off. I just don't see the reasoning behind it. Kane is out there for his last big paycheck, gave his best years to Spurs yet he still will be welcomed here with open arms.

And to the second part and Kane bringing his goals and assists with him. Didn't really work with Sancho didn't it?

He’s not out there for his last pay check. He is 29 for gods sake, not 35. He is chasing trophies and the league scoring record and he’s going to have all the incentive in the world to maximise the last 5 seasons or so of his peak.

Fixing our most problematic position with the best option we can possibly get is not the strategy we’ve adopted at all over the last few years. We took forever to get a decent midfielder and we’ve only got a proper right winger (even if the jury is out on whether he is good enough) this season. Signing Kane now is the right move at the right time.

 

[Pirlo'sBeard]

It's a no-brainer.

I'm not overly worried about his age. He's not a player who relies on physical attributes like pace and his injury record is good. He's a guaranteed success unlike Osimhen.

We should sign him and another young prospect.

 

[Siorac]

Buy Kane and we're CL semi-final contenders and contenders for top 2 in the PL.

These confident assertions are always more than a little strange.

We're talking about a player whose team finished top 2 in the Premier League once. The one time said team made it to the Champions League semi-finals he was injured.

Yes, Kane is an excellent striker. But there is no way he is guaranteed to be 'transformative' or whatever it is that people say. There are no guarantees, just like there weren't any with Lukaku, or Sánchez, or Ronaldo.

 

[cyberman]

These confident assertions are always more than a little strange.

We're talking about a player whose team finished top 2 in the Premier League once. The one time said team made it to the Champions League semi-finals he was injured.

Yes, Kane is an excellent striker. But there is no way he is guaranteed to be 'transformative' or whatever it is that people say. There are no guarantees, just like there weren't any with Lukaku, or Sánchez, or Ronaldo.

First year Lukaku would have us title contender this season. They’re better than literally having no striker up top.

 

[Rolaholic]

 

[Revan]

you need a mix of both. We know nothing, for all we know we’re lining up kane and sesko. Kane and hojlund. We have 0 idea and just because we’re looking at kane doesn’t mean we don’t have other targets. People believing this 100mil kitty in the summer. We didn’t sign anyone in jan because the money is being placed on summer transfers. Relax, we will sign players. Relax, ETH has players he wants for a reason, he isn’t picking them randomly out of a hat.

We have a goal difference of 11 (lowest in top 6) If ETH wants to add kanes 31 combined goal and assists to that, then fine. Aslong as we have long term plans too.. he’s not a bad signing at all. Infact he is a very good one.

And because we have just 50m in bank account, while being almost 970M in debt (including the debt to other teams for previous transfers).

 

[L1nk]

That is actually not a bad idea and I completely agree he's not the final piece of the jigsaw.

However he has proven himself over many years and if he does have the guts to finally leave Spurs I am for it.

I think it's a bit harsh that some posters are prepared to doubt Erik if he's the first choice target too.

Would the Kane no goers feel differently IF we were looking to bring in a cheap young prospect too. My guess is probably not but thought I will ask the question anyway.

Would absolutely feel different if we brought in a young talent yes, but if we're spunking virtually our entire budget on Kane I can understand why people aren't happy about it, because i'm certainly not

 

[The White Pele]

Is there any chance we sign him for less than £100m? If he refuses to sign a new deal then surely Levy would not risk losing him on a free?

There’s also a very limited pool of clubs that would be interested in him and that Kane would consider. Probably only us and Bayern if we’re being honest and I don’t see Bayern spending that much money on somebody of Kane’s age. Kane would probably prefer to stay in England too so Levy may be left with just one option. If Kane fancies the move and holds a firm stance it could make things a little easier.

Levy is a tough negotiator but finances also play a big part in his decision making and planning for life after Kane without receiving a fee and without CL money is not an outcome he will want.

 

[VP89]

Hope that can just be accepted without any nonsense and tied down early

 

[red.knight]

Kane is good player but he's not worth £100 million given he's a senior citizen in football term. For that price you need to be buying players who have their peak ahead of them. City buy the majority of their players in their early twenties why are we buying old players for huge fees? City had Sergio Aguero at age of 23 and he served them for a decade and now they have signed Haaland and Julian Alvarez at age 21 and 22 who will serve them for more than a decade. United during the last decade meanwhile signed RVP, Cavanni, Zlatan, Falcao, Sanchez, Ronaldo and now Kane. This isn’t how a successful club is run. We’ve spent many years buying quick fix players and its not worked, we need long-term plan. What worries me is that we might miss out on a better long-term striker like Osimhen.

Nothing wrong with Kane the player but he will have zero resale value and will need to be replaced by another expensive striker in 3 years whereas Haaland could provide 12 years of service or could be sold for £200m. Can you not see that United strategy is a failure? I say study the successful clubs and learn from them rather than continue to make mistake after mistake. If Kane will cost around £20m or £30m then fine but if United pay £100m for a 30 year old with 12 months left on his contract, then we are a real shambles.

 

[JB7]

Kane is good player but he's not worth £100 million given he's a senior citizen in football term. For that price you need to be buying players who have their peak ahead of them. City buy the majority of their players in their early twenties why are we buying old players for huge fees? City had Sergio Aguero at age of 23 and he served them for a decade and now they have signed Haaland and Julian Alvarez at age 21 and 22 who will serve them for more than a decade. United during the last decade meanwhile signed RVP, Cavanni, Zlatan, Falcao, Sanchez, Ronaldo and now Kane. This isn’t how a successful club is run. We’ve spent many years buying quick fix players and its not worked, we need long-term plan. What worries me is that we might miss out on a better long-term striker like Osimhen.

Nothing wrong with Kane the player but he will have zero resale value and will need to be replaced by another expensive striker in 3 years whereas Haaland could provide 12 years of service or could be sold for £200m. Can you not see that United strategy is a failure? I say study the successful clubs and learn from them rather than continue to make mistake after mistake. If Kane will cost around £20m or £30m then fine but if United pay £100m for a 30 year old with 12 months left on his contract, then we are a real shambles.

Stopped reading there. Utter nonsense. If he's a senior citizen what are Benzema and Lewandowski, dead?

Just to add some information, Kane turns 30 at the beginning of next season. For context, Benzema turned 30 midway through the 17/18 season, from 18/19 to today he has scored 170 goals. Lewandowski turned 30 at the beginning of the 18/19 season, as such I'll include it, from the 18/19 season to today he has scored 248 goals.

 

[red.knight]

Stopped reading there. Utter nonsense. If he's a senior citizen what are Benzema and Lewandowski, dead?

Just to add some information, Kane turns 30 at the beginning of next season. For context, Benzema turned 30 midway through the 17/18 season, from 18/19 to today he has scored 170 goals. Lewandowski turned 30 at the beginning of the 18/19 season, as such I'll include it, from the 18/19 season to today he has scored 248 goals.

But Lewandowski and Benzema didn’t cost £100m. I have already said I will take Kane if he’s available for £30m. You would not pay the same price for a new car as car with 390K on the Odometer.

 

[bosnian_red]

But Lewandowski and Benzema didn’t cost £100m. I have already said I will take Kane if he’s available for £30m. You would not pay the same price for a new car as car with 390K on the Odometer.

TBF if he ages like Benzema, Ibra, Ronaldo, Lewandowski, even Dzeko who has something like 150 goals since turning 30, then absolutely is worth a big fee and he'll have a good 4-5 years at the top level. No idea if he will age like that and he's on a free next year though, and given Kane won't win us the title next season, may as well just buy smarter where we still get top 4 and then get Kane on a free if we still want him.

 

[red.knight]

Just to add some information, Kane turns 30 at the beginning of next season. For context, Benzema turned 30 midway through the 17/18 season, from 18/19 to today he has scored 170 goals. Lewandowski turned 30 at the beginning of the 18/19 season, as such I'll include it, from the 18/19 season to today he has scored 248 goals.

No Harry Kane turns 30 in July. I know Harry Kane is a great player. My issue is with the price tag. We can get him for free in January as he then can buy his own contract. Make £30m offer to Levi. He would have no choice but to let him go. If Levy insisted on the £100m price tag, don't do the deal. Paying £100m for a 30 year old with 12 months left on his contract is insanity.

 

[JB7]

But Lewandowski and Benzema didn’t cost £100m. I have already said I will take Kane if he’s available for £30m. You would not pay the same price for a new car as car with 390K on the Odometer.

Lewandowski cost £50m last summer a month before he turned 34. Ronaldo moved clubs at 33 for £100m. Benzema has been considered unsellable by the biggest club in the world otherwise he'd have moved for a ridiculous fee too. Clubs pay big money for players who bring a guarantee of goals.

No Harry Kane turns 30 in July. I know Harry Kane is a great player. My issue is with the price tag. We can get him for free in January as he then can buy his own contract. Make £30m offer to Levi. He would have no choice but to let him go. If Levy insisted on the £100m price tag, don't do the deal. Paying £100m for a 30 year old with 12 months left on his contract is insanity.

Is July not the beginning of next season? Why are we playing pre-season friendlies in July if it's not to ready ourselves for the new season?

 

[L1nk]

Stopped reading there. Utter nonsense. If he's a senior citizen what are Benzema and Lewandowski, dead?

Just to add some information, Kane turns 30 at the beginning of next season. For context, Benzema turned 30 midway through the 17/18 season, from 18/19 to today he has scored 170 goals. Lewandowski turned 30 at the beginning of the 18/19 season, as such I'll include it, from the 18/19 season to today he has scored 248 goals.

they are obviously being way OTT... however the point stands to some degree, Kane will be 30 if and when he joins us - there's a reason nobody has ever spent close to 100million on a footballer of that age (except Ronaldo I believe but it's Ronaldo)

For every Benzema there is also a Gareth Bale, there's every reason to believe Kane could easily peak for at least another 5 years, but there's nothing to say he won't start to degrade within the next 3 as well, it's a chance and a risk for that amount of money, especially for a guy with 1 year left on his contract.

It feels like a very short term signing, blowing your entire budget on one player when we have gaps elsewhere we need to fill

 

[Adisa]

100m on a bloke with a year left on his deal doesn't sit right with me.

 

[CM]

In terms of compatibility for United, Kane is the striker who I feel makes most sense for us to pursue. There's just something that feels fundamentally wrong about paying £100m for a player who will be 30 this summer and entering the final year of his contract.

If we can sound him out for next summer on a free and sign a young striker with good potential in the interim, that would be the ideal outcome. Surely we can't afford to just write off a £100m transfer fee for the benefit of one season like it's nothing?

 

[Red in STL]

But Lewandowski and Benzema didn’t cost £100m. I have already said I will take Kane if he’s available for £30m. You would not pay the same price for a new car as car with 390K on the Odometer.

You do if it's a Rolls Royce

 

[red.knight]

Is July not the beginning of next season? Why are we playing pre-season friendlies in July if it's not to ready ourselves for the new season?
[/QUOTE]
My bad. i thought you said at the beginning of next year.

 

[JB7]

In terms of compatibility for United, Kane is the striker who I feel makes most sense for us to pursue. There's just something that feels fundamentally wrong about paying £100m for a player who will be 30 this summer and entering the final year of his contract.

If we can sound him out for next summer on a free and sign a young striker with good potential in the interim, that would be the ideal outcome. Surely we can't afford to just write off a £100m transfer fee for the benefit of one season like it's nothing?

That's not how it works though, it's not a simple case of spending £100m now or nothing next summer. Next summer while there wouldn't be a formal transfer fee, as long as his agent is doing his job properly, there would still be a transfer fee sized signing on bonus (obviously I'm not saying that will be anywhere near £100m but it would still be a huge amount), in addition to considerably higher wages that he'll be in a position to ask for, due to the "saving" on paying a much lower up-front cost than anticipated. These things bring Newcastle, PSG, Chelsea (as unlikely as that is but for negotiation purposes they'd be a tool used you'd imagine), Bayern, Real Madrid etc into play, whereas this summer you may have a relatively free run at him and the difference in cost may be nowhere near as much as you'd expect.

Actually, those players signed to bring a guarantee of trophies. Do you think signing Harry Kane for £100m help us win the league like RVP?

No players bring a "guarantee of trophies". They bring goals, which helps obviously but guarantees nothing.

 

[red.knight]

Lewandowski cost £50m last summer a month before he turned 34. Ronaldo moved clubs at 33 for £100m. Benzema has been considered unsellable by the biggest club in the world otherwise he'd have moved for a ridiculous fee too. Clubs pay big money for players who bring a guarantee of goals.

Is July not the beginning of next season? Why are we playing pre-season friendlies in July if it's not to ready ourselves for the new season?

Actually, those players were signed to bring a guarantee of trophies. Do you think signing Harry Kane for £100m will help us win the league like RVP?
My bad. i thought you said at the beginning of next year.

 

[Doracle]

That's not how it works though, it's not a simple case of spending £100m now or nothing next summer. Next summer while there wouldn't be a formal transfer fee, as long as his agent is doing his job properly, there would still be a transfer fee sized signing on bonus (obviously I'm not saying that will be anywhere near £100m but it would still be a huge amount), in addition to considerably higher wages that he'll be in a position to ask for, due to the "saving" on paying a much lower up-front cost than anticipated. These things bring Newcastle, PSG, Chelsea (as unlikely as that is but for negotiation purposes they'd be a tool used you'd imagine), Bayern, Real Madrid etc into play, whereas this summer you may have a relatively free run at him and the difference in cost may be nowhere near as much as you'd expect.


No players bring a "guarantee of trophies". They bring goals, which helps obviously but guarantees nothing.

Not to mention the fairly substantial risk that we miss out on CL if we go into next season with no proven CF and then can’t attract him anyway, as well as losing that revenue.

 

[Strootman's Finger]

After we give Tottenham 100 mil they'll go out and buy the player we probably we should have bought, and the fans probably would prefer.

 

[red.knight]

That's not how it works though, it's not a simple case of spending £100m now or nothing next summer. Next summer while there wouldn't be a formal transfer fee, as long as his agent is doing his job properly, there would still be a transfer fee sized signing on bonus (obviously I'm not saying that will be anywhere near £100m but it would still be a huge amount), in addition to considerably higher wages that he'll be in a position to ask for, due to the "saving" on paying a much lower up-front cost than anticipated. These things bring Newcastle, PSG, Chelsea (as unlikely as that is but for negotiation purposes they'd be a tool used you'd imagine), Bayern, Real Madrid etc into play, whereas this summer you may have a relatively free run at him and the difference in cost may be nowhere near as much as you'd expect.


No players bring a "guarantee of trophies". They bring goals, which helps obviously but guarantees nothing.

He's not worth 100m especially as he's coming into the final year of his Spurs contract. Daylight robbery.

 

[mctrials23]

£100m is nuts for Kane at this age and with 1 year on his contract. We realistically need 2 new strikers as well.

 

[CM]

That's not how it works though, it's not a simple case of spending £100m now or nothing next summer. Next summer while there wouldn't be a formal transfer fee, as long as his agent is doing his job properly, there would still be a transfer fee sized signing on bonus (obviously I'm not saying that will be anywhere near £100m but it would still be a huge amount), in addition to considerably higher wages that he'll be in a position to ask for, due to the "saving" on paying a much lower up-front cost than anticipated. These things bring Newcastle, PSG, Chelsea (as unlikely as that is but for negotiation purposes they'd be a tool used you'd imagine), Bayern, Real Madrid etc into play, whereas this summer you may have a relatively free run at him and the difference in cost may be nowhere near as much as you'd expect.

I'm aware there will be hidden costs with signing on and agent fees, but those will exist anyway even if we sign him this summer. They might not be as significant if we sign him early, but the transfer fee would be the most significant cost by some margin. I just don't see how it's good business sense to pay whatever Spurs ask for him when FFP looks to be a very real concern for us this summer.

It's no guarantee you sign Kane next season if he runs his contract down, but that's the risk you take. I really don't see him moving abroad - he wants Shearer's record. I'd sooner take the gamble on him opting for Newcastle than slapping down £100m on him this summer. The only justification I could see for paying that premium is if he more or less guaranteed us a Premier League or Champions League win next season, and I don't think either of those eventualities are likely.

 

[davidmichael]

I just don’t get the ‘Kane is too old’ or ‘he’s injury prone’ stuff I see on here as he’s 4-5 years younger than Benzema and Lewandowski who are regarded as the best centre forwards in the world other than Kane and I’m pretty sure Kane has been an ever present this season for Spurs in the league ?

Just because it’s being reported that Spurs want £100 million to let Kane go doesn’t mean it will be £100 million and whenever it’s United the media seem to include the wages and agents fees in a deal for us, it’s highly likely looking at the last games of the season on Sunday that Spurs will end up in Europa Conference next season so Spurs will need to invest in the squad to at least attempt a CL place challenge.

At the end of the day Lewis and Levy are businessmen and will look at the reality of their main asset bringing in £70+ million this summer then reinvesting that into the squad or staging a highly unlikely attempt at a top four spot then losing that asset for nothing and having to fork out £70+ million for a replacement, I can also see Kane pushing behind the scenes for a move as he’s given his whole career to them.

As a player Kane makes perfect sense as he is a prolific creator as well as a prolific goal scorer and ETH loves a strong striker that can link play as well as finish moves off, is there a better striker in the world than Kane at that ? Sky Sports News are reporting we’re in for Evan Ferguson for summer of 2024 too so maybe we’re already planning for 3-4 years of Kane as first choice whilst Ferguson learns from him then takes over the first choice role.

 

[Siorac]

Lewandowski cost £50m last summer a month before he turned 34.

He cost €45m, potentially rising to €50m. That's £39m to £43m.

That would be a very good price for Kane, too.

 

[JB7]

He cost €45m, potentially rising to €50m. That's £39m to £43m.

That would be a very good price for Kane, too.

It would be unbelievable given that Kane is 4 years younger. How much would a 30 year old Lewandowski cost in todays market?