Harry Kane

Not only was it a bit of an unnecessary signing, unless we can move someone on then it's also hindering us in our pursuit of a striker as now there's not enough space in the squad.
It’s not really though, is it? That’s simply how you’ve chosen to view it.

The other point of view is the fact Bernardo has wanted to leave for one, possibly two seasons. If he doesn’t leave this summer then it’ll be next. We as a club have identified Grealish as the legs in midfield who can bridge the gap between deep and further up the pitch with his drives.

Would he have been attainable next season? No.

Will Bernardo be with us after next summer? Probably not.

Therefore you move whilst you can. By the time Grealish leaves this club there’s going to be an abundance of posts we can sit back and laugh at on here.

As for Kane, money isn’t the problem. Even if we didn’t sign Grealish I doubt we’d have put £160m on the table because it doesn’t seem to match our own valuation.
 
It would work because it’s got fuck all to do with them and they would fully understand it. It’s why clubs try and renew with at least 2 and preferably 3 years left of a players contract as when they get to 1 they know what they can get elsewhere leaving on a free. I’m not quite sure what you’re struggling with here.

If you think for one second Sterling’s agent is not reminding the club what Raheem would get as a signing on fee and wage if he left on a free then you would need to give your head a wobble.

It’s entirely economics for all of them. KDB now has absolutely no say in what any other **** earns as KEB played all his cards when he signed a new 4 year deal in April that takes him to 34 and makes him the highest paid player at the club by a fair distance.

Sterling doesn't have an agent.

Other than that I agree with you. These guys know the game. Running down a contract leaves you exposed financially and you get a reward for that risk.

Other people are happy to sit back and tie down their future for less money.
 
I’ve got some news this morning from my mate who works within the horse racing industry he isn’t a football fan but passes on bits of info he hears about to our group of mates about all different clubs.
He was working for one particular owner yesterday and was around a chat regarding Kane and apparently it is well known between agents and clubs that the deal is agreed. Spurs are trying to get players in but do it without getting fleeced and in most cases trying to get them on the cheap under market value using the pandemic as a reason. They are struggling to do this as the selling clubs are aware of what is going on and this is where the delay is.
Apparently Kane did not want to play at the weekend but compromised to help with the facade that the deal is not done.
He is pushing really hard to get to us ASAP he originally refused to go back to Spurs but that got Levy’s back up we spoke to him and asked him to be patient and try to not rock the boat.
If Spurs cannot get the players they want for the price they want the deal will only get done on or around deadline day.
Any details on what we've agreed to pay/add ons etc?
 
It’s not really though, is it? That’s simply how you’ve chosen to view it.

The other point of view is the fact Bernardo has wanted to leave for one, possibly two seasons. If he doesn’t leave this summer then it’ll be next. We as a club have identified Grealish as the legs in midfield who can bridge the gap between deep and further up the pitch with his drives.

Would he have been attainable next season? No.

Will Bernardo be with us after next summer? Probably not.

Therefore you move whilst you can. By the time Grealish leaves this club there’s going to be an abundance of posts we can sit back and laugh at on here.

As for Kane, money isn’t the problem. Even if we didn’t sign Grealish I doubt we’d have put £160m on the table because it doesn’t seem to match our own valuation.
Yeah thought it was pretty obvious why we bought Grealish!
 
Clemmie Moodie must be pissing her sides with her 'exclusive' a few weeks ago. A real get my name in the news story if ever there was on

It was probably Clemmie getting the story wrong, probably along the lines of if City bid 160m they'll do a deal. She's probably got the wrong end of the stick
I think it's Charlie shouting his mouth off about the "gentleman's" agreement, she picked up that and reported it, can't see that she did wrong.

As I have said with this situation, agreements are worthless , other than ones put in writing in his contract.

Kane and his reps are the ones who have messed up, not sure what the issue is with us or Spurs, Levy is doing his job and the same with Tixki , it's called negotiation.
 
It would work because it’s got fuck all to do with them and they would fully understand it. It’s why clubs try and renew with at least 2 and preferably 3 years left of a players contract as when they get to 1 they know what they can get elsewhere leaving on a free. I’m not quite sure what you’re struggling with here.

If you think for one second Sterling’s agent is not reminding the club what Raheem would get as a signing on fee and wage if he left on a free then you would need to give your head a wobble.

It’s entirely economics for all of them. KDB now has absolutely no say in what any other **** earns as KDB played all his cards when he signed a new 4 year deal in April that takes him to 34 and makes him the highest paid player at the club by a fair distance.
Aren't you now arguing both sides?

You're telling me to give my head a wobble, when you're repeating exactly the point I made in my previous reply.

"I agree that De Bruyne would "understand", but I bet he'd also be happy to argue that he could have let his contract run down and got a similar deal. Sterling is probably a better comparison, because he's about to make the decision about wages/contract and letting his own contract run down."
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top