He's nailed on for Chelsea. With the pool of players they have, and Poch likely coming in.
Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player
- Thread starter LawCharltonBest
- Start date
Yeah, that's the risk. And he can't afford to make the wrong call at this stage of his career.
If we pay anywhere near the asking price despite holding all the cards, it'll be proof that we haven't upgraded the negotiations team at all.
Agreed. And I'm still convinced he would be our ideal striker. Think he would link up well with Antony.
Contract is until 2024. Surely going somewhere either this summer or free transfer then ?
Isak shows good strikers are out there if you go looking. Going for a declining Kane for huge money would be a mistake.
100 million for a 30 year old with 18 months left on his contract? No, thank you. We have had enough of expensive, aging strikers recently. We needed him 3-4 years ago but not now. A hell of a lot of football in those legs. We need younger strikers such as Osimhen, Mbappe and Ramos. Kane can stay at Spurs unless Levy wants to do a direct swap with Maguire.
That game reminded me of when Atletico Madrid lost 0-6 at home to Barca in May 2007:
Atlético de Madrid - Barcelona (0-6) - League - 20/05/2007 | FC Barcelona Players
I always remember the camera panning on Torres after a few of those goals and he later said that was the match that convinced him he had to leave his boyhood club for good of his career.
Kane has to cut the umblical cord now...there is no reason at all to stay at Spurs.
Atlético de Madrid - Barcelona (0-6) - League - 20/05/2007 | FC Barcelona Players
I always remember the camera panning on Torres after a few of those goals and he later said that was the match that convinced him he had to leave his boyhood club for good of his career.
Kane has to cut the umblical cord now...there is no reason at all to stay at Spurs.
He isn’t re-signing with Spurs, why do people even keep suggesting that? He’d clearly leave tonight if he could.
Absolutely essential our recruitment team don’t mess this up.
Yeah, Liverpool obviously wouldn’t take Kane on a free. I think Jamie is on the wind up.
But Harry Kane is just 5 years younger than Gonzalo Higuain. Gonzalo Higuain scored 36 in 35 games at 29 y/o, then 24 in 38 at 30 y/o, 16 in 35 at 31 y/o. After that he didn’t score double digits again before he went to the MLS.
Harry Kane would also come with a — massive — wage. If we pay 60m for Kane and give him say a 3+1 deal at 350k a week — his yearly cost vs the FFP would be 37.5m. That is very very very high.
Pretty odd to single out one random player to compare him with. Why not.. Lewandowski or Benzema if the barometer you're using is 5 years older, 2 players he's been consistently compared with in recent times, if not unfairly or not. Risk comes with anyone, at any age, Kane's just not gonna have much sell on value, but no one United buy really does. Buying club, and that's fine.
Have to go all out for him.
If people think there'd be a good deal on Kane they're not on the same planet.
£100m and 350K a week is what you're looking at, even now. Neither party will play ball with sensible negotiations.
£100m and 350K a week is what you're looking at, even now. Neither party will play ball with sensible negotiations.
Nah, I don’t think you see the full picture, around 35-40m got to be the max, and I doubt the club would go much higher.
First of all, I don’t think Lewa or Benzema are good comparisons. Much easier rides in Bundesliga/La Liga. Meanwhile, Zlatan always took a lot punishment and carried a heavy duty for his team — and he lasted to what 40 before he started to tackle off. So you never know.
So why did I use Higuain as an example? For the simple reason that I don’t think anyone know for certain how much Harry Kane has left in the tank. I am definitely not guaranteeing that he will tackle off in the coming two years like Higuain did. Nor would I at all be surprised if he did. I mean, Harry Kane is big body and he plays a physical style.
If we sign Kane for “just” 60m, give him 350k per year, and give him a 3+1 contract — the yearly cost is what 30% more than CFC is paying for Enzo. In that case, you just must be certain that you get more than 1-2 seasons from the player.
If we pay 30m for Kane, the yearly cost becomes 27.5m per which a little more than what Antony cost us per year. Maybe you can go up a bit to 35m. 40m? But that got the be the limit unless you have a med team that can come in and guarantee that Kane has 5 year left in the tank.
Great post. Absurd that some posters are saying "just pay whatever they want". As if that mentality isn't what got us into this mess in the first place.
Baring in mind the club is paying at least £30m per year for Casemiro on FFP. I don't see why you're finding it insane they'd go higher for the biggest game changing requirement ETH needs right now. I mean, the clubs almost certain to be losing the wages part in De Gea anyway... and I can't be bothered to look up who's deals are actually dropping off and what not to compensate the deals this summer, but I wouldn't be remotely surprised at them paying well above what you think they should for Kane, and him being worth it in the short term enough to justify the excess years at the backend of it, if he tails off. But I don't see 30 as the big father time it used to be like a lot still do.
Fair point, but to be honest, I do think it’s important to underline that that contract/signing in itself is very very risky long term (nobody is a bigger fan of Case than me, but…). In addition — Raphael Varane is really costly. In 25/26, if we sign Kane for 90m, the cost for Varane, Casemiro and Harry Kane could take up 1/3 of our total squad cost and I wouldn’t be certain of anyone of them still regularly playing at a high level. I just don’t get why the club would take that risk.
What striker won't come with a big wage? I'm not convinced Kane will demand an excessive one, anyway. If he was that obsessed with massive wages, he would have left Tottenham years ago.
People are just pulling these wage demands out of their backsides. He gets paid £200k a week at Tottenham. Why would it suddenly jump to £350k? We aren't even going to be paying that as a base wage to any player anymore.
And Levy will do his upmost to drag it out until the end of the summer. We can’t wait around playing that game.
Absolutely.
For me, go in with a sensible bid to Spurs and a sensible contract for Kane. Be up front that this is the offer, we won’t be negotiating so take this or we walk. If they say no then no skin off our nose, we go elsewhere.
There’s other options. Kane would be a good get for us, but he isn’t the only answer or necessarily the perfect answer. Don’t waste time getting dragged into their swamp the entire summer to end up panic buying someone else in late August.
How so?
I've a feeling Kane will push hard to get out of Spurs this summer so the price won't be near £100m
£35-40m is a ridiculous price - regardless of whether he's turning 30 and has 1 year left on his deal. He is one of the best CF's in the world, an elite player, would practically guarantee 20+ goals a season, create for the likes of Rashford and Fernandes, bring leadership, a big dressing room boost, be great for the brand.
The question about how long he has left in overblown IMO. He may be turning 30 soon but he's incredibly disciplined and keeps himself in excellent shape all year round, and for all the talk of him having dodgy ankles and being injury prone, he hasn't missed a PL game because of injury in the past 2 seasons. Never relied on pace or athleticism either.
Fact is United need a top striker - it seems to come down to him or Osimhen; do you think he's going to be any less expensive? Who/what is your suggested alternative if paying £35-40m against the books each year for a world-class striker is too expensive?
I think it has gone from one extreme to the other.
65-70m is fair value to him. If Levy does his usual nonsense of wanting 100m, we are better off not wasting time, but we are not getting him for 35m. We paid 24m for RVP in a similar situation a decade back, transfer fee inflation is at least 2.5x since which gets us to 60m and Kane is less injury prone than RVP.
Kane will almost certainly well play through a 4 year contract, he will only be 30 at the start of next season. 35m/year in amortized costs is fair for that.
Osimhen relies on his physicality and has more risk of failing in England. He will cost 100m + 80m over a 6 year contract, which is also in that 35m/year range.
65-70m is fair value to him. If Levy does his usual nonsense of wanting 100m, we are better off not wasting time, but we are not getting him for 35m. We paid 24m for RVP in a similar situation a decade back, transfer fee inflation is at least 2.5x since which gets us to 60m and Kane is less injury prone than RVP.
Kane will almost certainly well play through a 4 year contract, he will only be 30 at the start of next season. 35m/year in amortized costs is fair for that.
Osimhen relies on his physicality and has more risk of failing in England. He will cost 100m + 80m over a 6 year contract, which is also in that 35m/year range.
If United spunk £100m on Kane with £350k p/w wages... then they clearly haven't learnt from the Alexis disaster.
They won't sell him to what they perceive a domestic rival for 65-70m. Not a chance.
If we want him they will make us pay. Be a lot closer to 100m than 65 and could be the reason we look elsewhere instead.
If we want him they will make us pay. Be a lot closer to 100m than 65 and could be the reason we look elsewhere instead.
Kane is still ticking over with a goal a game for a really shite side to be fair.
One man a team doth not make. Especially when that team is spursy.The consistent losing?
Just seemed an odd comment when he has succeeded and broken record individually in spite of being English and playing for Spurs.
The one thing I wouldn’t question about him is his mentality.
It’s a difficult one as he’s a little on the older side for what we’d want, would cost way too much and it would be a huge Summer long saga signing him. However, he definitely would bang in goals.
While the bits before are iffy, I do think the most likely outcome in all of this is that he ends up staying at Spurs
Alexis was doing pretty good for arse before we bought him too if I remember correct
No, he was on poor form. We signed him because we hoped we could get him back to the prior season form.
Obviously, that was not the case.
We aren't paying players £350k a week, anymore, so that will not happen. Kane gets £200k a week at Tottenham.
We will pay him £200k with performance-related bonuses is the most likely outcome.
Nah he was totally checked out in the season he left. He was stinking up quite the fuss too, and Arsenal weren't that bad a side either.
Ahh maybe my memory is failing me these days.
I think at this point it would be a benefit for Spurs if he went, as well as for himself. He dominates their team in the same way Shearer did for Newcastle and it's clear they need a massive restructure of their club and a new era. Sell him while he's still valuable.
Why would Kane agree to move on similar wage, with 1 yr left on his contract? Might as well us not bother with that kind of offer. We pay new kids on the block 200-350k already.
I almost guarantee that (if they're not in FFP trouble), Chelsea will spend 100m to get Kane this Summer. And Kane will definitely get paid more than 200k plus bonuses.
Last edited: