If Ten Hag or Enrique become our manager and want Kane, i’m all for it. Kane would be brilliant for the next 4 years
Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player
- Thread starter LawCharltonBest
- Start date
Sancho I agree to some extent, but can't say I agree with Bruno occupying the same space as Kane.
In my opinion, Bruno's best form came about when he was playing behind Martial - a player who, like Kane, drops into pockets and link play. Bruno played very much like a second sirker, where he was instructed with running in behind - very similar to how Poch used to use Deli Alli.
Actually, we have the personnel to replicate the same template Pochettino used, if he were to move here and bring Kane.
Kane
Rashford (Son) Bruno (Alli) Sancho (Eriksen)
Obviously Rashford is in poor form, but we have a similar player in Elanga, who likes to stretch play.
I'm not sure it will happen, and to be frank, I don't know if I would want it to happen, but there's nothing to suggest this wouldn't work.
He's too old now to start something like what we need. He'll be nearly 30 31 before we even become competitive and he'll be even slower.
Classic United. Blow the entire budget on a striker, neglect the real problem areas and wonder why we’re struggling to get to the top later.
All these media pundits think this is an obvious and simple thing we should do… well go call up Daniel Levy and explain it to him then. I’m sure he’ll understand it and he‘ll come round to your thinking
All these media pundits think this is an obvious and simple thing we should do… well go call up Daniel Levy and explain it to him then. I’m sure he’ll understand it and he‘ll come round to your thinking
Nah..Isn't Dybala free agent at the end of this season?
If United get Kane, it will be a further few years to get back. He's almost 29 with a poor injury record. Blowing a budget on him would be sabotage.
Kane pressing from the front, forget it.
Classic United. Blow the entire budget on a striker, neglect the real problem areas and wonder why we’re struggling to get to the top later.
All these media pundits think this is an obvious and simple thing we should do… well go call up Daniel Levy and explain it to him then. I’m sure he’ll understand it and he‘ll come round to your thinking
There is no indication that we intend to ‘neglect the problem areas’, and there also seems to be a lack of recognition that centre forward is one of the main ‘problem areas’.
Nobody is suggesting that centre forward isn't a problem area, but spending over 100mill on Harry Kane is not the solution
If our team was awesome in pretty much every area of the pitch but upfront, then yes I would possibly pay £100m+ for Kane as a final piece to the jigsaw.
But we’ve also got central midfield issues, full back issues, centre back issues, wide forward issues. Unless we’ve tripped over and found £500m on the floor, I don’t see how it’s sensible to blow the money Spurs would ask for Kane, which would probably be the money we would have to spend for all of next season.
But we’ve also got central midfield issues, full back issues, centre back issues, wide forward issues. Unless we’ve tripped over and found £500m on the floor, I don’t see how it’s sensible to blow the money Spurs would ask for Kane, which would probably be the money we would have to spend for all of next season.
I agree but i'll bet we aren't after Kane.
It's too big a risk for us to take given the areas we need to improve in. It hardly like 2012 where that one key signing could give us the edge over our rivals. We are not winning big titles in the next couple of years. So why sink funds into a player who will be 29 at the start of next season? So that he can help us to trophies when he's 33?
Another commercial interest signing if true. Hopefully it's just the usual empty paper talk based on Poch being an option.
Please, no. Just no.
I guess the idea is to get a centre forward that will actually score a lot of goals. They are expensive. I’d have no issue with us going after Lewandowski shorter term for cheap, but people will complain there too. I don’t think there is any outstanding candidate at a reasonable price with a record of scoring goals. Because life doesn’t work like that. Haaland’s fee isn’t the worst, and he is younger, but the word on the tweets is ‘he would never join United’.
I’m indifferent about the Kane link personally. I’m not saying we must pursue him, but I’m also understanding of the club maybe not wanting to pursue someone who is not very good. There’s no ‘right answer’. Only a right player. We’ve gone down the route of buying Bailly and Lindelöf for 30m each and posters saying ‘instead of buying all these cheaper punts why didn’t we just spend the money on Van Dijk?’
Players will leave, frees are out there, I have no issue in wanting to get the best striker we can in principle, rather than get a Lacazette level who we will simply want to replace in two years on account of him being Lacazette level.
I mean it is difficult, but considering the different players who are leaving, and considering the gaps we already have, we still have CDM and most likely CM as a critical need, my fear is if we blow a lot of our money on Kane, who is 29 and only getting more injury prone, and then underinvest in key critical areas, we'll be back here again in a few seasons wondering why we signed Kane, same old story. I feel like anyone of Jonathan David, Darwin Nunez, Patrik Schick and a few others people have mentioned would do a great job, are they as good as Harry Kane? Of course not, but they are much younger (Schick not by much) and of course they will be much cheaper, leaving us to invest well in the other key areas to
Id welcome Harry Kane at our club with open arms. Great striker and reckon hel age like Lewa. He doesn't rely on any pace or burst of acceleration and he can drop deep as well as be a great target man.
I hear both sides. But we’ll also get nowhere if Nunez, Schick and co are a bit shit, which is a higher possibility than with Kane. We’ll buy one of them for 60m, and look for another in 2 years, with Neville and his band of idiots asking why we didn’t just buy Kane when he left Spurs two years ago.
I don’t think there’s a right or wrong approach personally. But I do think people should perhaps stop the line of thought that if we signed Kane, we’d only sign Kane, or if we signed him, we will deliberately fill the rest of the squad with players that the club don’t actually rate. I don’t think we’ve ever really operated like that, so I’m personally not worried on that front.
People have used this line of thinking for countless footballers over the years and 99% of them declined just like regular players. Even players who don’t rely on pace still lose that burst/bit of sharpness as they grow older which is essential. Look at for example Coutinho who didn’t rely on pace, but now that he’s lost that little bit of acceleration is half the footballer. Kane will in all likelihood (there are always exceptions) start to decline within a few years just like most footballers when they hit 31ish.
Why do you all care about how much it costs…?
If the Glazers had a track record of unearthing cheap gems then fair enough… but, they really don’t.
Kane’s the best CF in the PL, I find it surreal that you all are saying ‘nah’ like it’s your money!
Ye sure, for £50m. Otherwise, no thank you.
I'd rather see Martial and Ronaldo walking about up front and invest in other areas of the squad.
I'd rather see Martial and Ronaldo walking about up front and invest in other areas of the squad.
We do need a striker, but I don’t think we have to worry about the club blowing the budget in Kane. He won’t come here, spurs are probably better set for next season than us, not exactly the step he’s looking for.
Yeah, this. Football in the PL is a young man's game, especially for forwards. If you look at the history of elite forwards (both strikers and wide forwards) who spent big chunks of their 20s in the PL, nearly every single one of them experienced a significant decline somewhere between the ages of 29-31, in terms of effectiveness, availability to play, or both. Even the ones who aged the best like Shearer really weren't nearly the player they were in their mid 20s.
Because what do you think will happen if we spunk over 100mill on Kane? The Glazers will spunk another 100-200 on a couple of midfielders, a defender and a possible right winger that we desperately need? Previous evidence suggests they will not. It isn't about whether its our money or not, if you can guarantee we'll still spend in the areas we need them then nobody will object to Harry Kane, but you seem to be willfully ignoring our previous 10 odd years of transfer activity where by we tend to sign galacticos and wonder why it doesn't work, or we chronically underfund specific areas but overspend on a player like Sancho (nothing against Sancho I love him and glad we signed him but we clearly neglected midfield due to a lack of funds)
If we spend £100m on Kane it'll prove we've learned nothing
As he'll most likely cost north of £100m I hope we don't sign him. If we actually had a competitive squad he could have a RvP effect for a couple of seasons, but given the state of our squad I hope we invest in players with long-term perspective.
Im not sure he will cost that much - but most probably he will want to go somewhere with CL football so I dont see any reason he would join us at any price in the summer
Kane is the most overrated English player I've ever seen in the past 5 years and that does say something
To quote Steve Harvey on this: Hell nawl!.
Let him go to City or whatever. We don't need another 100 mil player on 400K a week.
Let him go to City or whatever. We don't need another 100 mil player on 400K a week.
Would give an amazing 3-4 years of performances but I’d probably throw the 100 odd mill at Felix
we shouldn't be throwing 100m on no one simply because there's too many positions to fix. Its time United go back to the basics. We need young players who have the hunger to prove themselves on the pitch. We should stop buying players who are searching their final big salary cheque
I can't decide what makes less sense, your grammar or your opinion.
Can’t see us signing Kane if Ronaldo is still here at the club. Ronaldo would still expect to play every game when he’s fit
Kane is brilliant, mate. There are lots of overrated English players but Kane isn’t one of them. But i can respect your opinion
Surely at this point, from Kane's perspective this move would be a side step? It's not like either club has much of a chance to win anything next season plus they have the better manager in Conte.
If we signed him and we won the league. No one would give a feck
Rashford by a distance
He has consistently scored 20 plus goals ?
He is not far from beating Rooney's international record?
Are you saying Rooney was over rated?
He's nearly done physically.
For the money he'd cost in the fee and wages it would be a total waste.
For the money he'd cost in the fee and wages it would be a total waste.