Harry Kane | "I will be staying at Tottenham this summer and will be 100% focused on helping the team achieve success."
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
I wouldn't be surprised if City ended up signing him.
There is one glaring weakness in their team: striker. They have no other area in the team that needs signings, so they can spend their entire transfer budget on him.
He has the passing ability that Guardiola likes. He is hardworking, and will drop deep. He will help defend. To be honest, he is perfect for Manchester City.
There is one glaring weakness in their team: striker. They have no other area in the team that needs signings, so they can spend their entire transfer budget on him.
He has the passing ability that Guardiola likes. He is hardworking, and will drop deep. He will help defend. To be honest, he is perfect for Manchester City.
If Ian Cheeseman says it , it must be true
I would presume Spurs want 100m and players, so that the total value would be around 150m, which is the reported figure. Also, 120m figure has been reported, so it must be 120m upfront with no other players involved. City is probably going for the 100m deal. United should come up with 120m and get Kane.
I can see Kane decling very quickly once he hits his early 30's like Rooney did.
He's a fantastic player but I hope we stay away. For the amount of money stated you would want 10 years out of a player. Surprised City are after him over Haaland, however I read somewhere that they don't like doing business with Riola so that might be the reason.
He's a fantastic player but I hope we stay away. For the amount of money stated you would want 10 years out of a player. Surprised City are after him over Haaland, however I read somewhere that they don't like doing business with Riola so that might be the reason.
Yeah Glazers don't pay gigantic transfers for players with no resale value. Can't see him coming here.
Why? He’s nothing like Rooney. He is a lot more like Shearer but hasn’t suffered such bad injuries. Shearer scored 121 of his 260 premier league goals after Kane’s current age. Two other relatively similar (but inferior) players Les Ferdinand and Teddy Sheringham scored 113 and 111. It would be a surprise if we didn’t get 7 years and 120+ league goals out of him in my view.
I get what you're saying, however football in the 90's and early 2000's was completely different to the levels of intensity played today. The players are running much further now with greater physical demands on the body than 20/30 years ago.
Kane has already played a lot of intense matches (like Rooney did at the same age) especially when playing under Pochettino, and I think in the next 3 years, the number of games under his belt will catch up with him. That doesn't mean he'll stop scoring goals. I just think when you factor in his £100-150m transfer fee and his potential £350-£400K a week salary there are better alternatives, like 20 year old Haaland. If we are prepared to deal with his agent (big if!), then Haaland could average 35-40 goals a season for 10 years, and even then he'll still be only 30 years old.
Let's get Sancho, a CDM, and a CB this summer and then focus on replacing Cavani next summer.
Last edited:
Does Kane rely on work rate or pace? if so we should expect him to get worse after 30/31.
No, he isnt particularly quick
Havent seen todays Sunday Times then? Utd seem to be doing alot of ground work for the transfer. They wouldnt be doing that if glazers hadn't approved it.
it’s quite a thorough article.
it obviously makes sense for United to put forward a proposal.
his ankle injuries are definitely a concern, he gets one every year it seems.
Kane is obviously brilliant but for the investment I think we’d be better getting behind cavani this year, signing sancho who will improve our wide issues, then go all out for haaland next summer.
At the very least United should be ensuring that City don’t get a free run at him and have to put pressure on their wage structure.
I ding think Haaland will be available next year, I think there’s a good chance he goes this summer.
Not a chance. It seems blatantly obvious Haaland isn't going anywhere this year.
The collective idea of football fans lamenting over a potential signing because said player won’t be as good at age 31 is so bemusing to me. Firstly, that’s over 3 years away for Kane, which is a long time in football. We’d be signing Harry Kane so he can score a shitload of goals and try and win us some trophies now. We don’t care whether he can still run at his VO2 max in 5 years time.
And more importantly, Harry Kane is a top five striker in world football. Literally, the other four best strikers are very much over the age of 30.
And more importantly, Harry Kane is a top five striker in world football. Literally, the other four best strikers are very much over the age of 30.
they’ve stated he won’t be going anywhere this year, where as sancho can. the smart play is get sancho now and haaland next. let city get kane (but bump up the price) and then have a free run at haaland next year.
greenwood might even evolve enough to not warrant haaland anyway, if Amad flourishes like we hope we might be looking fine.
wouldn’t be so sure. A £100m bid will be tempting to Dortmund, and next summer there will be a dozen clubs who can afford his release clause - so whoever gets to that sort of figure knocks out the competition.
there’s no way anyone can be as definitive as your post is.
potentially we can’t be sure. People at football clubs don’t tell the truth.
we certainly won’t get a free run at him next year, a dozen clubs can afford his release clause - which is why it’s tempting for someone to step in this summer when there will be far less competition - but obviously that comes at a premium.
would love to get Sancho this summer for £80m, then Haaland for his release clause next year. But getting one of Kane/Haaland is a priority - and a bird in the hand…
It doesn't make sense for Dortmund to sell this year though. They would make more money sure, but they are the club who let Lewandowski leave on a free rather than sell for a few million. Similarly he is worth more for them playing this year, getting them to finish in top 4 again.
Yeah for other teams it's better to pay a premium this summer to get a freer run at him...
Exactly.
Kane is guaranteed goals for 5+ years. Not like he is dependent on pace. With his passing/assists he will be useful for a long time.
For us, we have too many areas to fix to spunk 100m+ on one player.
With a name like that he should’ve been Spurs correspondent. He would even have his own room
That’s not his real name, he just used to wear a cheese slice on his head because it was good for his spots.
It is us or City. If Kane goes to City we have ZERO chance of winning the league next year.
World class CFs don’t come around often and we are one of only two viable options. Not only does it massively strengthen our hand, City will struggle without bringing in a CF this summer. They really aren’t that great (they were 8th at Christmas!) and have benefitted massively from weak competition both in England and Europe this season.
If we have any serious considerations for winning a league title any time soon we HAVE to sign Kane.
We can still get a CB and a cheap option at right back. If we can re-sign Pogba, and make do with Greenwood, James, Amad at RW this squad can compete with City.
World class CFs don’t come around often and we are one of only two viable options. Not only does it massively strengthen our hand, City will struggle without bringing in a CF this summer. They really aren’t that great (they were 8th at Christmas!) and have benefitted massively from weak competition both in England and Europe this season.
If we have any serious considerations for winning a league title any time soon we HAVE to sign Kane.
We can still get a CB and a cheap option at right back. If we can re-sign Pogba, and make do with Greenwood, James, Amad at RW this squad can compete with City.
Snipers dream ?
Such a nice lad though
Even if we offered same fee and wages as City he will definitely not come to Utd. He wants to play for an incredible manager in a phenomenal team that is set up to win the big pots now. He doesn't want to be part of an infinite rebuild at this stage of his career.
Who the feck is Ian?
Bobs mate.
What the feck is a Bob?
And this is largely the same group of people who've seen the impact Cavani and Zlatan have had while lamenting us not signing them earlier.
Obviously it would never happen as rashford would see spurs as beneath him but if it was possible, would anyone here swap rashford for kane?
No no and again no. It would be mad for us to ever consider such a deal.
Is the correct answer.
If he is leaving for trophies and not money, then he should choose City 100%. By the way, City could offer(at least match) the most money to him, too. So it is a no brainer for me. The only question is whether City's priority is him or Haaland/Felix.
If City don't want him, he could go to Barcelona/Real. So we are like the 4th choice for him I guess.
If City don't want him, he could go to Barcelona/Real. So we are like the 4th choice for him I guess.
What makes you think Real would rather splash their cash on him instead of Mbappe? And Barcelona is so broke they have to settle with targets like Aguero and Memphis Depay.
Mortimer
We're 4th choice even though Kane has said he doesn't want to go abroad? Makes sense.