I'm sure this is meant to mean something, but quite what escapes me.
Harry Kane
- Thread starter orangeboom999
- Start date
- Status
I'm sure this is meant to mean something, but quite what escapes me.
Ba was never a regular scorer to begin with. Neither did he join chelsea to be a starter.
I'm all for throwing £40m at him, he's young and English so even if he ends up being average we'll always get £20-25m back on him at least.
I rate him, I honestly think he's the real deal and in an age where Sterling is £50m just imagine if Kane was always performing like last season? Money hilariously well spent.
I rate him, I honestly think he's the real deal and in an age where Sterling is £50m just imagine if Kane was always performing like last season? Money hilariously well spent.
You sure about that?
Not sure what Kane you watched last season but I watched a completely different one from you!
Report below which gives a break down of most of his goals, Scored goals with both feet and head and a mix of goals from inside and outside the box.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/harry-kane-numbers-stats-prove-5408012
His goal against Chelsea where he ran at them showed power, pace, skill and excellent finishing and he most definitely was considered a match winner in that with a brace and two assists in a 5-3 win. I personally liked his goal against Liverpool as well, lovely turn for such a big lad and a composed finish as well.
He also could be considered a match winner or at least saving points in the following:
- Villa 2-1, scored later winner
- Scored equalising goals against Hull & Swansea after going a goal behind on both occasions
- Scores a brace against West Brom for a win.
- Scores another brace against Arsenal after going down a goal
- Rescued a point with a late goal against West Ham
- Hit a hatrick against Leicester (obvious match winner)
- And finally on the last day of the season he scored the only goal in a 1-0 win
That's 21 points right there including the Chelsea match I mentioned at the start.
Spurs would of been mid table or lower if not for Kane's goals last season, fact.
Hernandez scored quite a few late goals for us to get us points. That does not equate to much now, does it? I was talking about the kind of individual goals which Bale scored continuously that season. Sure Kane has done that on a couple of occasions but I saw a fair bit of him myself and he scores varieties of goals but not like the ones Bale did that one season with individual solo efforts. 25+ goals a season is very good for a striker, not breath taking like people here are making it out to be. 25+ goals for a winger/wide forward is more valuable but Kane is a proper #9.
Common mate. You cant say stuff like 25 goals is decent for a striker but 25 goals for a winger is better.
Especially when you consider bale the winger scored 31 goals centrally. Also when you consider that there are 2 types of wingers, suppliers like young, di maria & gaitan and then theres forwards such as depay, ronaldo & robben.
Yes there are a lot of players either way and that is why the caution on my side to not spunk crazy money on a player who could go either way.
As for us not being the top destination for players, we were pretty much always behind Real even at our peak while Barca have also superceded us now. Bayern too could claim to be a better destination. Some hold advantages like better location but that was always the case and we cannot do anything about it. We can still attract the best players if we can pay the money, which I think we can.
But that is the case. For a midfielder or a winger to score 25+ goals is more attractive than for a #9, which Kane is.
That we play far more youth/academy products (according to your definition) than Spurs or indeed anyone else - two whole teams worth in fact. Even when we don't use your definition it still holds true.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/premier-league-academies-man-united-4775732
You've had a mare in this thread Glaston. But you're used to it by now I'm sure.
Last edited:
I'll check the numbers when I'm back at a computer, but you know already that other than Kane, the above argument is nonsense.
So we're back to your original point (and happily back on thread)... what you are ultimately saying is: Spurs have got Kane. One single exceptional youth product.
And add I've already said, I'm very happy for you, enjoy him while you can.
He'll come to us eventually if he wants to make sthing out of his career.
If van Gaal wants a 20 goals per season striker Kane needs to be considered no doubt. But knowing Levy and the domestic player bonus you pay in the PL this would be one fecking expensive transfer. I doubt they would even consider selling him for anything less than £60M. But the truth is in todays market, as a club that earns as much as we do, you have to pay these sums to get the top talents. 5 years ago it would have been £40M, ten years ago it would have been £20M-£25M but that's how the market always has been prices go up fast.
Also add to this that we are probably not the only top team interested in him which won't make him any cheaper.
Also add to this that we are probably not the only top team interested in him which won't make him any cheaper.
Kane isn't anywhere near £60m. That'd be like £35m for Carroll.
I don't think any other top team is interested. Maybe City, that's all. Real Madrid and Barcelona wouldn't have him anywhere near their teams and at Bayern Lewandowski shits all over him.
Right, firstly it was you that changed the rules by trying to slip in the likes of Rose, Walker and Bentaleb. All I ask is a bit of consistency.
I'm going to go with players who have come through the youth academy, signing for the club no older than 16. Seems a pretty fair definition to ensure only genuine youth products, no? If not, please clearly define your alternative. And we'll just look at league matches.
So, last season we had:
Januzaj 18
McNair 16
Evans 14
Wilson 13
Fletcher 11
Blackett 11
Welbeck 2
Cleverley 1
Lingard 1
Keane 1
Thorpe 1
Pereira 1
Total: 90 - and yes, that is a bit low by our standards. The season before, I make it a total of 118.
Spurs had:
Mason 31
Townsend 17
Kane 34
Total: 82 - and that, by any standards, was an exceptionally high number for Spurs. The season before this trio played 35 between them - not sure if you had any others in 2013/14?
I mean, come on. I know you have a certain reputation for utter denial of any provable argument, but this is ridiculous. Spurs have finally stumbled upon a couple of decent youth players and they still don't have anywhere near as many, playing as many games as United do during a relatively lean patch!
Glaston getting bullish about homegrown when it held no importance to you back when you were fielding a team with barely any youngsters. Always moving the goal posts.I don't understand what you are trying to show, at the moment United have more youth players than Tottenham, they play less games because they are younger than yours, only Bentaleb and Kane are under 24.
If United bid £60 million for him today, it would be turned down. It's Daniel Levy. It's a local lad who's just made his breakthrough. Despite any huge fee, Levy would see it as a sign of weakness - selling a young player the minute he looks good.
Levy makes clubs wait, even if they bid good money initially.
This is such a non-starter.
Also, we are a much better team with much higher goals so we can't get away with playing someone like Townsend.
@Sir A1ex , look at Townsend' and Mason' age.
Levy is stupid, I agree. £60m would be more than twice what he's realistically worth after one good season in Premier League at the age of 22, there's absolutely no way any club should pay this much for him but he'd still turn it down because of his bullish, almost Glaston-like, attitude, much to the pleasure of Spurs fans who don't realize that selling Kane for £60m would actually be good business for the club - unless they spunked it all on next Soldado.
I should have said PL top-team. Granted City and Chelsea have both better strikers than we do but if Kane really would be available I can't see any of them not at least looking into buying him.
Naturally Kane isn't worth £60m but it's what Spurs are going to ask for him. He is English, young and already one of the best Goalscorers in the league. Add to that, that Levy is a hard ass when it comes to negotiating transfer fees and I doubt he would go for less than that.
Oh, and that's the other big difference in the dynamic.
At United, only the very best have a chance of staying, while those who are Premier League quality but not right at the top are inevitably sold (Welbeck, Cleverley, Rafael etc)
At Spurs those who are Premier League quality but not right at the top nail down a place in your team (Mason, Townsend, Bentaleb), while the very best are inevitably sold (Kane, Bale).
Given that at any club, only a small proportion of youth players who get first team action will turn out to be amongst the very best, it's natural that the majority of ours will ultimately be sold, while more of yours get a chance to remain. Or they would, if you produced more than, like, three of them, which is a bit of a low number to be statistically relevant.
Chelsea will never go anywhere near £40m for someone like Kane and I don't think City will either. None of the foreign clubs will even notice that he's available. If he's priced at £60m then it's only us who can sign him, i.e. be stupid enough to pay this much for him because Woody wants a marquee signing.
What about them?
That's right, which makes is point even more baffling, United last season gave more chances to youth products and did it with younger and less experienced players.
Yeah like I said they wouldn't even listen to anything less than 60M. If you wanted to get him now I think it would take Bale level money to get him so it's not really the time to go for him. Add to that, that the new TV-deal has pushed so much money into the PL that the prizes will only continue to rise like crazy. Especially if you want to buy a player within your own league.
Glaston is comparing the playing time of 24 years old players with under 20 players.
Since he mentioned Rose, he played 65 games for the Spurs at 25 years old and Januzaj played 45 games at 20.
We shouldn't even attempt to sign him this season we would end up paying way to much for him and it might turn out that it wasn't worth it. The problem is we need a striker who can score 20+ league goals a season now. I'm willing to give Rooney the benefit of a doubt and wait another season but if he fails to produce the numbers again this season we need to look for an alternative.
Oh I'm just looking at whether players are youth products or not, not how old they are.
If we bring that into account, then it's natural that Spurs' home-growns will be playing when they are older. They need to spend a few years failing to prove themselves on loan, and establish that no decent club wants them before they can settle for life in the Spurs first team. Same sort of age as we'd be saying thanks, but bye to equivalent players and sending them off to further their careers at a club like Spurs.
Harsh but true, the thing is we give more opportunities than Spurs but during a shorter period of time and at a younger age.At what university did ya'll study accountancy?
The simple fact is that the players coming through obviously haven't been good enough to be regulars in a side which wants to be challenging for titles and that is obviously regrettable. The fact is McNair, Blacket and Wilson had chances last year, Januzaj last year and the year before. Evans is a youth team player who has played a lot of games for the club, as was Danny Welbeck.
It would be nice to bring players through on a conveyor belt who can make the first team and play at the required levels but the reality is those players come along rarely because of the level required. Its obviously harder for a player to break into a team when Carrick, Schweinsteiger, Schendierlin, or Herrera are in front of him than if the player in front is Moussa Dembele or Paulinho. That's just the way it is. If they are good enough they get a chance. Perreria is a player who might get that chance this year.
As it stands the club wants to be, and infact needs to be succesful both on and off the pitch. It's nice when youth team players make the grade but there's no prize for it and frankly I'd rather not see the club do what Arsneal have done over the years - not bringing in players in positions required and relying on younger players who frankly havent been good enough to win titles.
Put simply, I have no problem with the club spending money where required to address deficient areas of the squad and make it difficult for these young players to make it trhough. Rather that than substandard players in the squad.
Fair play to Spurs if these kids make the grade. But you can be sure of one thing - if they don't, and the club isnt moving forward short term they'll be tossed aside as quick as you like so its easy to be smug about this now. Your club hasnt got a lot of choice but to bring these kids through as it stands because having largely wasted the Bale money, without a new ground the financial muscle isnt there to compete for the best player it seems. Nothing wrong with that and fair play, but I dont see how it allows Spurs fans to take the moral high ground. If they had the money they'd be spending it to get into the top 4.
I don't agree with that at all. In a better side, with better players you have more of the ball and are likely to get more chances. "Levels" is irrelevant because Ba was playing, and scoring against the same sides every other forward in the league was.
This is obviously true.
What changes is the level you've got to hit to hold a place in the team. Ba hit a bit of a flat patch, didn't adjust well and his chance was gone - Chelsea will not hesitate to bin him for somebody better.
I don't want Kane here at all this year. I am completely against signing players based on a single season in which they performed well above expectations set for them. Austin scored nearly as many goals as him last season and looked a good player too.
More of the ball and better players also means deeper, more intense defending from the opposition. Some players who find joy in a leaser team (with more space) will struggle when they are suddenly tasked with creating space where there is none.
Teams go to play QPR aiming to impose themselves. They typical go to Old Trafford focusing on stopping United from playing.
Takes a cpmpletely different skillset from a striker.
Definitely true. There are players around who can look world class for one season and than go on to never reach those heights again. So we agree signing him this season would be foolish as we would have to massively overpay for a player who hasn't even shown he can sustain this level of performances. So let's hope Rooney can find his form again for this season and maintain it for the longest part of it.
But with a better team, the opposition play tighter, is less adventurous and you have less time and space on the ball.
Kane wasn't even first choice for Spurs till Nov last season.(He did score a load of goals in the Europa league in the first few months of course). So you could argue he hasn't even performed over a whole PL season yet.
Another issue I have with Kane is that he wasn't really expected to deliver to this extent last season. While it might be seen as good that he managed to significantly exceed all expectations, this could have just been a purple patch of a player under little pressure. His loan spells at Norwich and Leicester when he was 20 were distinctly average and the season before last he got 4 goals in 19 games tor Spurs which is fine but far from spectacular. His record last season was great and perhaps he has finally got experience and confidence to deliver at this level but I'd need 2 more seasons from him on the same level before we could call him a £40m player. Defoe once got 22 in a season for Spurs.
- Status