Harry Kane

[mosssideblue]

I don't care if he scores 7 million goals domestically or internationally, it doesn't make him a guaranteed success here. At best it limits risk to some degree, it most certainly doesn't and never will provide a guarantee.

Totally agree and have said similarly several times.

 

[mosssideblue]

If I thought Mbappe would stick around for longer than 3 yrs, then I'd have him. But that's unlikely once Pep goes

And what would his resale value be?. Kane has been fantastic for Spuds, there is no guarantees he will transfer that. He may be one bad tackle from retirement with his dodgy ankles.

 

[TonyM]

Id pay them 300m. No. 400m.

 

[flobo]

Kane has been fantastic for Spuds, there is no guarantees he will transfer that.

Yep,Sanchez at the Rags

 

[daztrueblue91]

Why on earth do people keep coming out with this bullshit. No player comes with a guarantee, ever.

Ermm, Phil Jones comes with a cast iron guarantee of being absolute wank.

 

[Gabriel]

Yep,Sanchez at the Rags

Really? I thought that he was fantastic for them. Worth every penny...

 

[chemicalboy99]

 

[Craig]

Yep,Sanchez at the Rags

Prettypoor comparison as Sanchez’s legs had gone for his last 6 months at Arsenal

 

[flobo]

Prettypoor comparison as Sanchez’s legs had gone for his last 6 months at Arsenal

Maybe...I don't think anyone thought he would be that bad for them

 

[ctid1894]

Of course, but surely you must accept the riskis lower with a player that has consistently performed in the premier league. No?

That's clearly in my previous response. However you also increase the risk significantly when a player has the kind of valuation Harry Kane does. He's not and I don't think there is a player available anywhere in the world who would cost the sort of money discussed, who is going to be classed as an acceptable risk. Hence why it won't happen, not anytime soon, we will not pay £100m plus for a player in my opinion within the next 3 years, although I'll be happily proved wrong.