Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

So people that don't want him because of the price would prefer we spend 130m on Osimhen instead?

I also don't believe the club will be interested in Kane if he's going to cost more than 80m
Well, it's not just a price issue. It's a combination of price and having to spend the money again in three or four years.

There's no chance that Levy will let him go to a PL rival for less than £80m, so a rough estimate of the cost over an eight year period would be as follows.

Going for Osimhen = £130m plus £250k/w wages (200k/w first four years, 300k/w last four years) = £130m + 12.5m*8 = £230m

Going for Kane = £80m plus £300k/w wages = 80+15+15+15+15 = £140m. Plus we'd probably have to sign a replacement for him in four years, let's say that's another £60m (most likely more) plus £200k/w wages taking us up to another 60+10+10+10+10 = 100m. The striker's position would therefore cost us slightly more over an eight year period, not to mention that Kane's replacement might flop and might be more expensive than £60m if we're going for an established top striker.

If EtH rates Kane and Osimhen similarly, it makes more sense economically and squad-building wise to have the same striker over an eight year period than having multiple strikers who may need the team around them to do different things.
 
This too.

In fact, I think they will go further by blaming any sort of failure on his part on us. And I do not see his spectacular success being a sure thing by any means. It will be a constant case of how we have failed Harry and how much he deserves better, especially since ‘he’s scored goals all his life’ so if he doesn’t here, it’s because our players or our manager are shit.

It’s very hard to see how he can fail though. He’s the perfect CF for our set up.

If he arrives and starts missing the target repeatedly then I doubt anyone will be blaming the rest of the team. If he arrives and we play McT/Fred for some reason and never get the ball to him, then that will be on the manager/rest of the team.
 
Well, it's not just a price issue. It's a combination of price and having to spend the money again in three or four years.

There's no chance that Levy will let him go to a PL rival for less than £80m, so a rough estimate of the cost over an eight year period would be as follows.

Going for Osimhen = £130m plus £250k/w wages (200k/w first four years, 300k/w last four years) = £130m + 12.5m*8 = £230m

Going for Kane = £80m plus £300k/w wages = 80+15+15+15+15 = £140m. Plus we'd probably have to sign a replacement for him in four years, let's say that's another £60m (most likely more) plus £200k/w wages taking us up to another 60+10+10+10+10 = 100m. The striker's position would therefore cost us slightly more over an eight year period, not to mention that Kane's replacement might flop and might be more expensive than £60m if we're going for an established top striker.

If EtH rates Kane and Osimhen similarly, it makes more sense economically and squad-building wise to have the same striker over an eight year period than having multiple strikers who may need the team around them to do different things.
I'd take that Kane deal. Its not like we can't get another striker when he starts to decline. I just see him as much more of a guarantee than Osimhen and suits us more. He's also Eth's number one choice.
 
It’s very hard to see how he can fail though. He’s the perfect CF for our set up.

If he arrives and starts missing the target repeatedly then I doubt anyone will be blaming the rest of the team. If he arrives and we play McT/Fred for some reason and never get the ball to him, then that will be on the manager/rest of the team.

Well naturally it would be hard for you to see him failing if you’ve described him as the ‘perfect striker for our set up’.

As for me, I’m less convinced of his perfection, and in any case, have seen enough footy to know that he could fail anyway. You say we could play McFred and ‘never get the ball to him’, that still wouldn’t necessarily absolve him. Firstly, he has his own McFred in North London anyway. But secondly, what is he doing to ensure he gets the ball? Maybe our players like to play certain types of passes that he himself doesn’t have the pace for? It’s never always that simple.

Anyway the main point is he will need to perform for himself and take responsibility for his own performances just like any other player.
 
I was against this and for Osimhen but seeing how we've been playing, flashing balls across the box/6 yard line, Bruno's ability in the DLP and crosses in general, plus he's played with Eriksen before and PL proven I think he'd fit perfectly for us.

We need someone that'll make the runs to the near post and be able to score from crosses and corners, something Kane excells at.

If we can get that privk Levy to sell for 80m then I wouldn't be against it.
 
So people that don't want him because of the price would prefer we spend 130m on Osimhen instead?

I also don't believe the club will be interested in Kane if he's going to cost more than 80m
Yes, quite frankly. If we could leverage some kind of deal with add ons, installments etc I'd rather pay 130 million for Osimhen than 80-100 on an aging Harry Kane. There's not a huge difference when it comes down to it because Harry may cost even more in terms of wages. He's one of the biggest names in football, Osimhen only reaches that level when he's a success at his next club.

It would leave us in a pickle because I think that would already be an overspend against our budget, which is probably not likely to be big. I think we'd have to make a number of good sales to try and get one or two more through the door.
 
https://www.skysports.com/football/...t-this-summer-amid-manchester-united-interest

Harry Kane: Tottenham striker would need to drive exit this summer amid Manchester United interest
Harry Kane will enter final year of Spurs contract at end of season and talks over extending at the club are currently on ice; Man Utd boss Erik ten Hag wants a forward recruited as early as possible and his ideal scenario is to have new signings in place for the bulk of pre-season
 
It could be slightly easier to do a deal for Kane if Spurs are interested in some of the players we're looking to move on. They need a GK so Henderson is an option for them, Maguire would be a decent signing if they continue with a back 3, maybe Martial too if they forget to do the medical.
 
https://www.skysports.com/football/...t-this-summer-amid-manchester-united-interest

Harry Kane: Tottenham striker would need to drive exit this summer amid Manchester United interest
Harry Kane will enter final year of Spurs contract at end of season and talks over extending at the club are currently on ice; Man Utd boss Erik ten Hag wants a forward recruited as early as possible and his ideal scenario is to have new signings in place for the bulk of pre-season

I appreciate him wanting to get a deal done quickly but if he's interested in either Kane or Osimhen that seems quite unlikely.
 
I was against this and for Osimhen but seeing how we've been playing, flashing balls across the box/6 yard line, Bruno's ability in the DLP and crosses in general, plus he's played with Eriksen before and PL proven I think he'd fit perfectly for us.

We need someone that'll make the runs to the near post and be able to score from crosses and corners, something Kane excells at.

If we can get that privk Levy to sell for 80m then I wouldn't be against it.

I think you will be quite disappointed to find Kane trying to compete with Bruno further back than consistently trying to get on the end of crosses.

From what you seem to favour, Osimhen is by far your guy.
 
I was against this and for Osimhen but seeing how we've been playing, flashing balls across the box/6 yard line, Bruno's ability in the DLP and crosses in general, plus he's played with Eriksen before and PL proven I think he'd fit perfectly for us.

We need someone that'll make the runs to the near post and be able to score from crosses and corners, something Kane excells at.

If we can get that privk Levy to sell for 80m then I wouldn't be against it.

If you said "what we really need is someone who is able to drop deep and create for others while also scoring goals", then I'd understand switching to Kane. But what you describe is what a box predator like Osimhen brings.
 
If we'd have had Kane instead of Weghorst this season.. would we have done better?

Its an absolute no brainer.
 
If we'd have had Kane instead of Weghorst this season.. would we have done better?

Its an absolute no brainer.

Yes, we would have done better and I'm with you on this being a no-brainer, but how much better would have done with Kane than we have with Weggy is possibly hard to say. I'm pretty sure Kane would have put away a few of the missed chances against Sevilla in the first leg and with that, we'd be through. But I'm not sure that being through in this marathon competition called the Europa League would have been great news for us as the squad is clearly tiring and Sevilla actually did us a favor by knocking us out.

Ok, so how about the PL? I doubt we'd be in the hunt for the PL trophy but we'd probably be 3-6 points clear of Newcastle. So there's that.

Having a fit and hungry Kane for the FA Cup final would have made it an interesting match, but as it stands right now the experts are convinced that City will destroy us.
 
If we'd have had Kane instead of Weghorst this season.. would we have done better?

Its an absolute no brainer.
this is just a ridiculously bad take here. Of course having kane vs an absolute scrub of a player like Wout would be better. But no brainer? What about if Levy pulls a Levy and demands 100 plus for kane? What if he is a complete ass and says nothing short of 150 for kane? Still a no brainer? What about if EtH wants more pace from his long term CF than from kane? Or demands more pressing from the front. Kane likes to drop deep and i dont see him doing much defensive work whenever i catch Spurs games. There is easily an argument to be had for finding a 50 million or so CF that is a little less known but has all the attributes EtH would want in a CF and being able to bring in more targets than splurging most of the budget on a Kane
 
If as expected Pochettino goes to Chelsea, surely Kane would be tempted to join him either next or the following season (on a free).
 
It could be slightly easier to do a deal for Kane if Spurs are interested in some of the players we're looking to move on. They need a GK so Henderson is an option for them, Maguire would be a decent signing if they continue with a back 3, maybe Martial too if they forget to do the medical.

Maguire + 40-50m is not a bad deal IMO
We would get rid of Maguire and be getting another player at same age but better quality and also with immediate need in the team.
 
If as expected Pochettino goes to Chelsea, surely Kane would be tempted to join him either next or the following season (on a free).

agree this will be a decisive factor - gets to stay at home, play for his pal. Chelsea will offer them Sterling and Lukaku.
 
Yes, we would have done better and I'm with you on this being a no-brainer, but how much better would have done with Kane than we have with Weggy is possibly hard to say. I'm pretty sure Kane would have put away a few of the missed chances against Sevilla in the first leg and with that, we'd be through. But I'm not sure that being through in this marathon competition called the Europa League would have been great news for us as the squad is clearly tiring and Sevilla actually did us a favor by knocking us out.

Ok, so how about the PL? I doubt we'd be in the hunt for the PL trophy but we'd probably be 3-6 points clear of Newcastle. So there's that.

Having a fit and hungry Kane for the FA Cup final would have made it an interesting match, but as it stands right now the experts are convinced that City will destroy us.

Hold on. You think that having Kane rather than Weghorst would have us a maximum of 6 points better off?? I personally think he’d add at least 12 points from where we are currently.

Note Kane’s goals have added 22 points for Spurs this year. Weghorst and Martial’s goals for us have added 0 points.
 
Surely Levy is even less likely to sell to another London club than he is to us?? No way he strengthens his neighbours, is there?
I’m not sure, think Levy hates both Utd and Chelsea equally, but they’re both the most likely to bid the highest.

Imagine Levy would like a bidding war between Utd and Chelsea, however if Kane goes on a free the following season there’s nowt Levy can do about it.
 
Hold on. You think that having Kane rather than Weghorst would have us a maximum of 6 points better off?? I personally think he’d add at least 12 points from where we are currently.

Note Kane’s goals have added 22 points for Spurs this year. Weghorst and Martial’s goals for us have added 0 points.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that Kane and Weghorst are roughly equally proficient goal scorers. Such an insinuation would be madness of the highest order.

I was responding to the hypothetical question that if we had brought in Kane during the January window whether our record of wins and losses would be all that much different than it is. I'm going off memory only but I don't believe that since January 1 we've lost many games narrowly where a single goal by Kane would have scraped an equalizer or the match winner. There was the 2-2 draw with Leeds and the 1-1 draw with Palace and of course Arsenal beats us 3-2. But let's say that Kane would have scored in each of those games...would we really be in first or second place as a result? I don't think so.

We definitely would have won the games we did win by more comfortable margins and there's of course real value in that, but winning by 4-0 rather than 2-0 yields the same three points.

But let's go back to the matches in the PL since January where we dropped points. Even assuming Kane scored in every one of those games, which is not unreasonable, I'm not seeing enough points clawed back from those matches to have put us at the top of the league by now. That's the point I was trying to make. There's obviously no comparison between the undisputed world class of Harry Kane and the limited positive contributions that Martial and Weghorst have given us since January.
 
Yes, quite frankly. If we could leverage some kind of deal with add ons, installments etc I'd rather pay 130 million for Osimhen than 80-100 on an aging Harry Kane. There's not a huge difference when it comes down to it because Harry may cost even more in terms of wages. He's one of the biggest names in football, Osimhen only reaches that level when he's a success at his next club.

It would leave us in a pickle because I think that would already be an overspend against our budget, which is probably not likely to be big. I think we'd have to make a number of good sales to try and get one or two more through the door.

How about if Osimhen cost 150m, would you agree?
 
Surely Levy is even less likely to sell to another London club than he is to us?? No way he strengthens his neighbours, is there?

I don't think you realize how much power a player has with 1 year left on his contract. City might fancy him if he cost free next year. ANd he'll be guaranteed scoring tons of goals there. He has great options. Why would he settle for any that he doesn't fancy off?

The ball is not in Levy's hand now. Unless his dumb agent strikes again.
 
Last edited:
Don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that Kane and Weghorst are roughly equally proficient goal scorers. Such an insinuation would be madness of the highest order.

I was responding to the hypothetical question that if we had brought in Kane during the January window whether our record of wins and losses would be all that much different than it is. I'm going off memory only but I don't believe that since January 1 we've lost many games narrowly where a single goal by Kane would have scraped an equalizer or the match winner. There was the 2-2 draw with Leeds and the 1-1 draw with Palace and of course Arsenal beats us 3-2. But let's say that Kane would have scored in each of those games...would we really be in first or second place as a result? I don't think so.

We definitely would have won the games we did win by more comfortable margins and there's of course real value in that, but winning by 4-0 rather than 2-0 yields the same three points.

But let's go back to the matches in the PL since January where we dropped points. Even assuming Kane scored in every one of those games, which is not unreasonable, I'm not seeing enough points clawed back from those matches to have put us at the top of the league by now. That's the point I was trying to make. There's obviously no comparison between the undisputed world class of Harry Kane and the limited positive contributions that Martial and Weghorst have given us since January.
What you said is like describing Kane as Weghorst with goal. You completely disregard the possibility of different outcome of result from having better performance.

Games like Leeds home, Liverpool and Newcastle, Weghorst were especially bad. The issue is not only about not scoring, but also about him failing tactically. In these three games, ETH tried weird formation to shoehorn Weghorst into the team with negative effect. Against Leeds at home, it was Rashford on the right, where Rashford up top would easily deal serious blow to Leeds high defensive line and they don't know how to defend different. I took 0-2 before Weghorst was taken off and Rashford was moved up top. Against Liverpool, Bruno was moved to the left and couldn't influence the game. Weghorst played as no 10 which he offered nothing before coming off after Liverpool went up 3-0 which pretty got the game in bag. Against Newcastle, McTominay with his scoring form for Scotland was put in no 10 position in hope that he may score. Sabitzer with Bruno playing deep was outfought, while McTominay and Weghorst posed no threat to Newcastle defense.

If we have Kane and set up with Kane up top, Rashford on the left to exploit TAA defensive zone, Bruno in his natural position, we might have played better overall, and likely scored before Liverpool could get their way and killed the game. There is every chance we didn't lose by that scoreline. Even getting a point, or a victory if Kane was clinical in place of Rashford that game. He didn't need tap in chance to score as we see how he navigate to score goal from opening further up the pitch in Tottenham Newcastle game. Newcastle got the second goal when ETH got desperate and made questionable change at the back which allowed them opening to kill the game. If we have a proper CF, and someone who is known to be a playmaker too, we may have prevented that situation, to get at least one point.

Then we have game like Crystal Palace away, Southampton at home where Weghorst receive chance where someone like Kane might have scored. Sancho would have been subbed off after Casemiro sent off instead of leaving a non performing player on because there was a worse player in Weghorst needed to leave for McTominay. It's not only about scoring. It's also the level of control when you pose a bigger threat to opposition. Playing Weghorst most of the time have the opposite effect on us.

2 point extra here and 1 extra point there, if you add up, we have 8 extra point (2 from Leeds, 2 from Crystal Palace, 2 from Southampton, 1 from Newcastle, 1 from Liverpool. And I am not counting the Arsenal potential one extra point), we're back to 3 point behind Man City!!! May not be enough for us to win the title in the end, but that margin is enough to put us a title challenge which is higher than anything we had been post SAF. Further fine tuning and improve result the whole season and we're talking about winning the title.
 
Last edited:
Yeah Kane would have changed our play completely.

You can see our team have given up on Weghorst, he starts to make a run and no-one is looking to pass to him. Moreover, he doesn't have enough good movement to pull defences apart. Kane would attract the attention of defenders all game, giving Rashford loads more pockets to run into.

I see quite a few people concerned with Kane taking Bruno's space in the hole, but I think Bruno is clever enough to accommodate that and he likes to make forward runs all the time - I can see him and Kane rotating in the hole causing defenders all sorts of problems. Especially if we have a new RB bombing down the line providing more width and thus freeing Antony to cut in more without a man marker
 
Get him this year, replace him with Evan Ferguson after 3-4 years (if he develops well). That would be the ideal scenario imo.
 
https://www.skysports.com/football/...t-this-summer-amid-manchester-united-interest

Harry Kane: Tottenham striker would need to drive exit this summer amid Manchester United interest
Harry Kane will enter final year of Spurs contract at end of season and talks over extending at the club are currently on ice; Man Utd boss Erik ten Hag wants a forward recruited as early as possible and his ideal scenario is to have new signings in place for the bulk of pre-season
Agree with this. Last thing we need is a summer of Kane and Spurs messing us about.
 


The only way it can happen is if Kane tells Levy let me go in July or I just leave for free in 2024.
 
Not sure why anyone would have a question mark over him.

Nothing in football is guaranteed, but Harry Kane hitting 20+ goals and assists is as close as it comes.

Replace ronaldo, martial and weghorst with that and we are a dozen or more points further on in the league.
 


The only way it can happen is if Kane tells Levy let me go in July or I just leave for free in 2024.

I don’t think people are paying attention to Levy’s character.

Calling him out will make him even more obstinate. When backed into a corner, he lashes out and further to that, his ego > club or player.

He’ll make an example of Kane before he’ll fold to criticism and mockery.
 
I don’t think people are paying attention to Levy’s character.

Calling him out will make him even more obstinate. When backed into a corner, he lashes out and further to that, his ego > club or player.

He’ll make an example of Kane before he’ll fold to criticism and mockery.

He will make an example of Kane by looking like an utter fool when Kane leaves for free next summer? His ego won’t be able to take that.

He will get £70m or so for Kane this summer and portray himself as a hard negotiator, putting all the blame on Kane wanting to leave for not getting more. It’s the only way he saves face.
 
I don’t think people are paying attention to Levy’s character.

Calling him out will make him even more obstinate. When backed into a corner, he lashes out and further to that, his ego > club or player.

He’ll make an example of Kane before he’ll fold to criticism and mockery.
Though I believe this to be true I also think he's backed into a corner hes never been in before. A club legend, historic goalscorer falling out with the CEO again, the risk of losing him for free to a London rival and of course 70-80m transfer fee would probably make him accept that the best move is to sell now.
 
Imagine our position and Chelsea’s was reversed. You’d get laughed at on here for suggesting we were more likely to sign him, yet some are convincing himself that Chelsea are favourites :lol:
 
Imagine our position and Chelsea’s was reversed. You’d get laughed at on here for suggesting we were more likely to sign him, yet some are convincing himself that Chelsea are favourites :lol:

Only thing that gives them an edge is the amount they would be willing to spend (hopefully).

The idea of paying north of 70m for a striker who will be 30 next season and seems to have lost a yard seems pretty risky to me.
 
I think secretly what Levy will be hoping for is that he can sell Harry Kane for a good fee, and then if he has to do that to an English club, which I really think would be a last resort, he'll hope Harry's form falls off a cliff so he can package it as making the deal at the right time.

70 million to Man Utd would surprise me. I don't see that happening. That looks more like a deal for Bayern or some other foreign club, I don't think Levy would see that as compensation for him potentially smashing in goals v Spurs for the next number of years.
 
Small sample? I have given 8 games that were of huge importance. Yes I know he is a very good goal scorer, I have not disputed that.

Paying 100m for a Striker who has not shown it in important moments at the age of 30 is not really ideal is it?

People talk about Spurs and England but there is a reason why WC players win trophies and score in big moments when it matters, because they are world class.
Kane was injured before the champion’s league final and came back half fit. If you take that small sample of games you have to look more carefully.