Exactly. This would be very similar to Liverpool paying £35m for Carroll based on five months of good performances. Kane looks like he has significantly more to his game but I'd rather wait and see how he progresses, especially as the player himself is in no rush to move to a top club.
Harry Kane
- Thread starter orangeboom999
- Start date
- Status
Exactly. This would be very similar to Liverpool paying £35m for Carroll based on five months of good performances. Kane looks like he has significantly more to his game but I'd rather wait and see how he progresses, especially as the player himself is in no rush to move to a top club.
Your post is ridiculous beyond words.
Many of the United players you've listed didn't come from your academy and many are no longer even registered with club. From the entire list I can't see a single academy graduate that plays for your first XI ... and I imagine that Harry Kane alone will clock up more league minutes this season than all of your academy graduates combined.
Moreover, the Mirror article cites several players who have now left your club; and more importantly does not (very conveniently) mention for how long and in what context each player made an appearance for the first team: there's a world of difference between playing for 60 mins in the league cup against MK Dons (for example) and being a regular part of the starting XI in the league
Kane has just turned 22, Bentaleb is 20. Moreover, what counts is playing time as measured in minutes, not merely appearances.
I already said that these two were the only young players.
You're stretching a point to breaking there. It might have a small effect - but the benefit of having very good players around you is massive.
Diego Costa (as an example) scores goals because a) he's a decent forward and can take chances when they come his way; and b) becuase he's got Eden Hazard, Willian, Fabregas and others supplying the ammunition. I'm willing to bet he wouldnt have scored as many goals for QPR with Phillips, Barton and whoever else behind him. Not least becuase he'd have spent most of his time defending.
It is no coincidence that most players up and around the top scorers charts around Europe play for the best teams.
Last edited:
The minutes afforded to the player is dependant on the stage of their development. The stage at which a player is deemed to be ready for the first team varies between clubs. While players certainly benefit from experience, and become better for it, there is a certain level required of a player in order to become a first team regular. Certain players peak earlier than others, in which case they are more likely to gain more minutes at a younger age compared to their peers. Harry Kane falls into this category, as he is further along in his development compared to players of his age. Other players peak later and go on to have successful careers despite a slower start. Players that peak earlier than others are not guaranteed to have more successful careers. There are many examples of players whose development plateaued after following initial good performances in the first team (Micah Richards).
This doesn't mean that Kane will go down that path. Atleast I don't think he will. All this means that you can only really pass judgement on youth systems over a certain period of time. Just because a club signs senior players doesn't mean they've abandoned their youth; perhaps the coaching staff feel they just need more time. The age of one academy player at another club successfully graduating to first team regular doesn't really come into the equation really. A lot of fans hope and believe that the likes of Januzaj, Pereira, Blackett, and McNair will become first team players over the next few years, lessening the club's dependence on senior player imports.
Glaston, you lost your calculator again. Kane's actually 36 and Bentaleb is 29. Januzaj is 15 and has played 500 times for United.
Our new nr. 9.
So when you sell Kane, you're not going to do what you did with the Bale money, and spunk it all on £20-30m players this time?
Will you put money on that?
Guys stop derailing the thread with a stupid debate with glaston.
Just enjoy watching our new striker
Just enjoy watching our new striker
well well well. Romero/Johnstone in goal and Blind at CB? Wonder If Kane is excited about his chances of scoring in this game?
Is there any other kind of debate with Glaston?
Seriously stop it
The thread is a transfer related thread
If you want to debate youth team setups take it to the FF
The thread is a transfer related thread
If you want to debate youth team setups take it to the FF
Last edited:
But I want to know whether once we confirm his signing, we can claim him as one of our youth products. It seems that the answer, surprisingly, is yes.
You're making a completely different point here. Costa is extremely unlikely to score as many for QPR, obviously. That's not my point.
My point was that playing for a top team means less space, more attention, more marking. This almost cancels out the benefit of better teammates.
It takes a different skill set to thrive in this role. You arent playing against teams who attack against you and leave extra space. Your runs will need to be smarter.
It's well known that the best strikers require fewer touches in order to score. We're talking the tightest of Champions league matches here. The tightest of marking.
I wouldn't expect Austin to suddenly score 10 extra goals in a United shirt, for example.
You say that the scoring charts are full of players from the best teams. Well obviously. The best teams buy the best strikers, who can make better use of the better service.
We clearly disagree and that's fine.
For me if you take the same player, and remove the variable of individual skill - like Danny Ings, for example, he'd score more goals in 40 games for United or City than he would in 40 games for Burnley in the same league. At United he'd get more chances, his team would have more possession and would have more of the ball in dangerous positions - regardless of how deeply teams defended against United or City.
By your logic it'd be the opposite - because teams apprently won't want to defend against Burnley as intensley as they do against United. By extension, would the bottom teams not then score more goals overall than the top sides?
I suspect the stats would show that the best teams create the most goalscoring chances. The best teams generally always score the most goals as well.
Anyway, this is derailing the thread and will probably get deleted so lets agree to disagree.
If he does it again this season, i can see us smashing the world record fee for him ext summer.
It really depends on the individual. It may become clear that when tasked with getting his touches more precise, getting the ball out his feet quicker, shooting first time, making runs - he's not up to par.
Whereas he can engineer space for himself when his team (a) aim for him directly, and (b) aren't as tightly marked.
I'm not saying it's the case for all, but some (most, even)
Look back at the goals van Persie was scoing that year, and he wasn't being gifted clear cut chances galore. Same for Suarez and Aguero.
But yeah, let's agree to disagree.
That's the most depressing thing I've read all day.
I like Harry Kane, but the thought that he would probably end up costing more than the likes of Hazard, Sanchez, Aguero, Fabregas or Silva is not a thought I can process in my head.
not to mention Ronaldo and Bale who are the current record holders haha
Besides his youth and goalscoring exploits, the reason for our long-standing interest in Kane can be traced back to something LVG said about Graziano Pelle last season:
"I've said about Robin van Persie that I like strikers who are an attacking point, not only a striker who scores goals. Pelle also scores goals but Van Persie also scores goals. Attacking point is very important. He is also very creative. He is always seeing the third man. Van Persie is also always seeing the third man. Those kind of strikers are the ones I like."
Last season LVG used each of our three strikers in this role with limited success. RVP was the most natural fit for the role (as LVG said himself) because of his touch and strength on the ball, but due to injuries and/or poor form was unable to make a real impression there last season. Rooney has a poor touch under pressure with his back to goal, and I've never really seen him excel in that role at any point in his career. One of the reasons why we never saw the best of Falcao was because we persisted in using him as a target man despite him being drastically unsuited for it. Many remember his poor touches when receiving the ball under pressure and his lack of strength on the ball.
Which brings us to Kane, who is an interesting player because he fits the mould of the striker that LVG likes, now that RVP is gone. In the second half against us at White Hart Lane he showed that he could retain possession to bring others into play, even if he didn't score himself. That's why he'd be a good fit for us in this system.
"I've said about Robin van Persie that I like strikers who are an attacking point, not only a striker who scores goals. Pelle also scores goals but Van Persie also scores goals. Attacking point is very important. He is also very creative. He is always seeing the third man. Van Persie is also always seeing the third man. Those kind of strikers are the ones I like."
Last season LVG used each of our three strikers in this role with limited success. RVP was the most natural fit for the role (as LVG said himself) because of his touch and strength on the ball, but due to injuries and/or poor form was unable to make a real impression there last season. Rooney has a poor touch under pressure with his back to goal, and I've never really seen him excel in that role at any point in his career. One of the reasons why we never saw the best of Falcao was because we persisted in using him as a target man despite him being drastically unsuited for it. Many remember his poor touches when receiving the ball under pressure and his lack of strength on the ball.
Which brings us to Kane, who is an interesting player because he fits the mould of the striker that LVG likes, now that RVP is gone. In the second half against us at White Hart Lane he showed that he could retain possession to bring others into play, even if he didn't score himself. That's why he'd be a good fit for us in this system.
That would be beyond idiotic. £90m+ for a 20-goal striker, I am not sure whether to laugh or cry.
We'll buy him after 4 years on a free.
If you consider that depressing then imagine that if we end up paying for him what @KingMinger22 suggests (over £90m) you could get nearly any combination of 3 players from that list.
Gosh to think that some of our fans would love to see our team scattered with pedro's, agueros and hazards. If winning was the only reason you guys support United then its each to their own, i guess.
I'd find it hard to support a team like united if we went and avoided the likes of kane & stones;no matter the cost considering every year we shout out as being the richest club. Ethics people..
I'd find it hard to support a team like united if we went and avoided the likes of kane & stones;no matter the cost considering every year we shout out as being the richest club. Ethics people..
What's your point really? What's the difference between signing Hazard vs Kane or Stones? I don't see any as long as both improve the team since they are going to cost a fortune to be playing for us.
Kane won't go this summer, the agent Ozcan has said it isn't happening. It doesn't make sense to any party. He'd cost 50m plus, no way Spurs take less than that in this market and teams aren't going to pay that without seeing a similar second season.
He'll probably go next summer, maybe in January if you/Chelsea/City are desperate.
He'll probably go next summer, maybe in January if you/Chelsea/City are desperate.
Abso-f*cking-lutely beyond idiotic..
If he scores 30+ Premier League goals this season then why not?
We should've signed Hazard from Lille.
I think he means signing him now when he's an established player at a top club.
Lvg mentioned 2 players. I guess they will be pedro and cillesen
Good link up play today...
Doubt levy would sell but he does look like he would suit us
Doubt levy would sell but he does look like he would suit us
Easily the better number 10 today. Immaculate hold up play and can run at defenders. Looks a threat.
The pass to Eriksen was absolute quality.
Because it's bonkers...
When he got the ball, he looked lively and tried to make something happen and the pass to Eriksen was class. The midfield behind him is absolute shit though.
He just can't handle Smalling. It's when he's moved away from Smalling/Darmian that he's had some joy. But we're keeping him under control quite easily as long as he's alone up there.
Thats what i said. If we get the guy its more likely because of his play with the ball rather than particularly being a 20+goal striker.
Somebody get him out of Smalling's pocket before he asphyxiates in these temperatures.
Everybody was in everybodys pockets today. Not a single stand out player apart from both sets of defenders.
- Status