You talk as if all players at these clubs are in that money, they aren't, and many are overpaid to their standard.
I really think Spurs will be fine, we have other big draws.
Harry Kane MBE | Performances
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
You talk as if all players at these clubs are in that money, they aren't, and many are overpaid to their standard.
I really think Spurs will be fine, we have other big draws.
Thats definitely worth a punt, he'll likely do it if he can keep this up unless Madrid come calling...
Well what is the difference in United and City? Is it just because of Levy having sour grapes over Berbatov?
When Lloris leave then Kane should be the new Spurs captain. He's such a good player, never expected it when he was at Norwich.
Sour grapes is one version, the behaviour of the player and the club is the other version, but yep that's what it boils down to.
Kane wouldn't be any other player though, he'd be a top earner. Can you name one of the top players in world football that is on a salary that Spurs could afford?
There are only two draws for players: guaranteed trophies and salary. Spurs can't offer either for the next decade.
There are more than two draws, London is a draw Manchester isn't, especially if you are born, bred and grown up in and around London.
Nope Spurs can't offer the top players in the world the required salaries. However we are paying enough to the likes of Kane, Alderweireld, Lloris and Alli who are amongst the best players in the league.
Who in the PL has guaranteed trophies?
It's 62 in 99 Apps on Wikipedia, where does the 59 in 100 come from? Just chatting to a mate and he felt the need to correct me.
Edit: Nevermind, he made 3 PL appearances for Norwich without scoring during a loan spell.
Edit: Nevermind, he made 3 PL appearances for Norwich without scoring during a loan spell.
Arsenal.
(Fourth then losing to Bayern/ Barca in the round of 16 is a trophy, right??)
He had 3 PL games, all cameos Ibthink at Norwich.
It's 62 in a 102 overall and 62 in 99 for Spurs.
Edit: Just seen your edit.
Arsenal.
(Fourth then losing to Bayern/ Barca in the round of 16 is a trophy, right??)
Forgot about that!
You'd have to give me an example of a top class player choosing a lower salary in London over a higher salary in Manchester as I suspect that's never happened. Considering the vast majority of great players bought into the Premier League (or who had the choice to play in any city in the world) over the last 20 years have gone to Manchester I'd disagree (Pogba, Aguero, Toure, Silva, Ibrahimovich, De Bruyne, Veron, Van Persie, Rooney, Ferdinand etc).
In terms of the bolded four I can't recall any of them being offered a substantial salary increase by another club. It's easy to accept a Spurs salary when no other offer is on the table.
Disagree. Don't think those guys are better. Although, I think Dybala will eventually be the best of the three.
Not Icardi which is why separated the examples into 2. Dybala is better already and has a much higher ceiling as well.
You seem to not know what we don't know which seems perfectly logical.
One thing I can assure you of is that not many people born in and around London (like Kane was) aspire to live in and around Manchester. In that respect cities are a bit like football clubs, some are aspirational and attract the cleverest, most talented and wealthiest people from all walks of life and from all over the world, and others don't, meaning Kane is probably very happy in London.
So in the past few offseasons no one has wanted Kane, Lloris, Alderweireld, Alli, etc.?
How about this offseason? Everyone is going to pass up on a young english player who scores 20+ every year? When CBs are in such high demand none of them would bid massive amounts for Alderweireld or Vertonghen? They'd rather pay the 50+ for a Stones or Otamendi? Really?
Yourselves, City, Chelsea, etc. would jump at the chance to sign Kane and given money is no object to those clubs then the answer seems to be clear.
So why has neither Manchester club bought any of our roster players?
Are you seriously suggesting neither club could massively use any of them?
This.
Going from having strikers like Zlatan, Van Persie, Rooney, Van Nistelrooy to Harry Kane (for a world record fee) would be massively underwhelming. Good player, will never really be a true superstar. There will always be 4-5 much better strikers out there throughout his career.
I'd prefer we get one of them. If it was any other position, I wouldn't be so snobbish, but a striker for Manchester United is a pretty big deal.
He'd make a decent replacement for Ibrahimović in 2 years.
Contracts mean very little. Player power - see very recent examples of Costa and Payet. If United flexed their financial muscles, Kane may/may-not get his head turned by the biggest club in England. Time will tell.
One thing I do know is Kane will be keen to win trophies so both Spurs and Pochettino will need to step up to satisfy him, as their past records speak for themselves.
Contracts mean very little. Player power - see very recent examples of Costa and Payet. If United flexed their financial muscles, Kane may/may-not get his head turned by the biggest club in England. Time will tell.
One thing I do know is Kane will be keen to win trophies so both Spurs and Pochettino will need to step up to satisfy him, as their past records speak for themselves.
So since no one has explained this to me, why have no clubs with huge financials wanted to buy Kane? English 23 year old perennial 20+ goal scoring golden boot winning forwards are of no interest to anyone?
Which team actually needs him?
Bar Liverpool (who probably couldn't afford him anyway), every other top premier league team has a top striker who is at least around the same level of Kane. Barca and Madrid don't need him which basically leaves PSG... Let's give it a couple of years when the likes of Zlatan etc. need replacing.
So what about Alli, Alderweireld, the fullbacks? No one like...say Man City could use them eh?
He's just been of no interest to the only teams which could realistically afford him.
But if he was of any interest he'd go right?
So no one is interested at all? Not this next summer either I'm suspecting?
Because with that many years left in his contract it'd be dumb to splurge on him, especially when most of them are still in good shape striker wise (Utd the exception).
City has Aguero, Chelsea has Costa, Real still functions well with Benzema/Morata, Barca is stacked, Bayern has Lewandowski. None is nearing the end of their career yet.
Utd last year was held by the balls by Rooney, and already splurged £36m (rising to £50m) on a young forward.
Personally I don't rate your fullbacks. They playing the best in the league but I don't think they're worth spending a huge amount.
Alli is still learning, we may see someone make a move in about three years.
Alderweireld, I reckon he'll be gone in the summer.
Why would those teams wait to buy someone like Alli?
Everyone splurges 50+ every year on less proven projects like Martial, Stones, etc.
Because they have adequate personnel in his position? The 3 teams who can afford him in this league, Chelsea City Utd, which one must do with him as no.10 or BoB midfielder at the extortionate price Levy will demand?
Of course he has been and is, barring injury he's going to hit 20+ PL goals for the third straight season and at the moment is listed as favourite to win the GB again.
I'm not going to make concrete predictions because I think that's a fool's game in football.
However, I don't think it's a stretch to suggest it's going to be very difficult to buy a player from us if you're a domestic rival.
We told Modric and Chelsea to feck off when they tried to collude together and suggest that Modric would only want to stay in London and only want to play for Chelsea. One summer strike and one full season of exceptional performances later, Modric and his representatives suddenly discovered that playing for real and living in Madrid may not be so bad. Strange that. And we sold him for less than Chelsea offered.
Same with bale and man utds interest.
It's incorrect to make comments like would levy sell kane for 60 million to real rather than 120 million to Chelsea. As if he would be worth double to one club vs another.
And let me tell you. If West Ham decide they're not going to sell Payet, he can sit in the stands all he wants until February. But if he's still there then, he will come back and play. Because a player is not going to sit there for 4 months not playing at all.
Player power is strong. And it will usually win out. But it doesn't mean that it will win out when they want and on their own terms.
If kane ever decides to go on strike, I'm fairly confident that he won't be moving in that window and ultimately will probably end up moving to a different team than whichever one tapped him up.
However, I don't think it's a stretch to suggest it's going to be very difficult to buy a player from us if you're a domestic rival.
We told Modric and Chelsea to feck off when they tried to collude together and suggest that Modric would only want to stay in London and only want to play for Chelsea. One summer strike and one full season of exceptional performances later, Modric and his representatives suddenly discovered that playing for real and living in Madrid may not be so bad. Strange that. And we sold him for less than Chelsea offered.
Same with bale and man utds interest.
It's incorrect to make comments like would levy sell kane for 60 million to real rather than 120 million to Chelsea. As if he would be worth double to one club vs another.
And let me tell you. If West Ham decide they're not going to sell Payet, he can sit in the stands all he wants until February. But if he's still there then, he will come back and play. Because a player is not going to sit there for 4 months not playing at all.
Player power is strong. And it will usually win out. But it doesn't mean that it will win out when they want and on their own terms.
If kane ever decides to go on strike, I'm fairly confident that he won't be moving in that window and ultimately will probably end up moving to a different team than whichever one tapped him up.
"of no interest" is not accurate to be fair. "Of no current interest at the price he would cost" is closer to the truth.
Agreed, and not just the price but the next to zero chance of getting him anyway.
Also, lloris was the player I thought most likely to leave this summer and with his new contract, this is unlikely now.
Alderweirald has a contact till 2019, with an option that we have to extend to 2020 and we're negotiating a new contract with him too. He's the last one not on a long term contract.
I think this squad (ie it's big players) will see in the new stadium. There will probably be movement after that.
And kanes record is incredible and he's well on course to break 20+ goals three seasons in a row (as a 23 year old). People turning their noses up at that is hilarious.
Alderweirald has a contact till 2019, with an option that we have to extend to 2020 and we're negotiating a new contract with him too. He's the last one not on a long term contract.
I think this squad (ie it's big players) will see in the new stadium. There will probably be movement after that.
And kanes record is incredible and he's well on course to break 20+ goals three seasons in a row (as a 23 year old). People turning their noses up at that is hilarious.
Also depends on whether you can get in the top 4 year in year out. Consecutive seasons out of the CL again and their arse would start twitching.
Same for Utd, no?
Lamela is the only other guy that we need to get on a new deal.
Interesting bet - is it still available anywhere?
Same for every club with realistic chance for top 4, but us, Arsenal and Chelsea and City have a bit more leeway due to finances/reputation.
Would leeway extend to 3 seasons out of 4?
Well that's moving the goalposts a bit now isn't it?
One has suggested Alderweireld will be off. We're sitting in 2nd and look very good currently, why make a prediction like that if CL was important?