Harry Kane

Tottenham have enquired about Vlahovic. He’s a 50 to 60 million striker
 
BlueMoonAcrossThePond said:
I couldn't agree with you more on every single point you've made Lavinda.
===
As for the potential to sign Kane - I'm lukewarm at best.

Kane's destiny is controlled by Levy - a notoriously difficult individual to bargain with.

As much as we want Kane - and Kane wants us - reality is, that Levy is in the mix - and thus, the entire prospect of us signing Kane on reasonable terms is, at best, speculative - if not outright unwarranted.

Meanwhile - Haaland - potentially the world's best footballer is possibly on offer.

Why aren't we all in for Haaland with Kane as one of many possible alternatives - as opposed to us seeming to be all in for Kane? I'd much, much, much rather end up with Haaland than Kane.

Yes I get that Kane wants to play for us above all other clubs - but this shouldn't compel us to seek Kane at the cost of possibly signing the next word's best player - at striker - at an age so young that he's got a decade plus of greatness ahead of him.
Click to expand...
One deciding point on the Kane/Haaland issue for me would be that we could sign Kane for five years and sell him after three for a similar fee to that which Bayern are going to get for Lewandowski. It wouldn't be a bad return, assuming that Kane maintains his goalscoring/assisting levels. Three decent years and a reasonable fee would be fine. Five decent years and a free transfer would still be OK for City.

Haaland on the other hand, has the potential to attract a profit / world record fee after 3 years, which I would reckon is about as long as Raiola would want him to stay at City before he finds his next big pay day. There's no way Haaland's next club is going to keep him for a decade. I suspect that those days are gone. Players will keep moving on at regular intervals, and I would imagine that Real Madrid will be Haaland's destination at some point in his career.

Unless Txiki pulls another one out of the hat, I am inclined to believe that Kane is our main target, and that we will sign him, and possibly a back-up striker. Thanks to Haaland's dad, Raiola and his fees, wage demands etc, Haaland is likely to be out of the equasion this window. It will be very interesting to see how he develops, especially if he does sign for a PL club.

Haaland looks a great player, but I've seen plenty of false dawns. Kane has proved himself to be the real deal, and as such looks the better option of the two for City on a 5-year deal, in my opinion.

Time will tell....
 
I don't know whether it's just the familiarity of seeing Kane in a Spurs shirt but it won't half look odd to see him wearing a City kit?
 
Lavinda Past said:
One deciding point on the Kane/Haaland issue for me would be that we could sign Kane for five years and sell him after three for a similar fee to that which Bayern are going to get for Lewandowski. It wouldn't be a bad return, assuming that Kane maintains his goalscoring/assisting levels. Three decent years and a reasonable fee would be fine. Five decent years and a free transfer would still be OK for City.

Haaland on the other hand, has the potential to attract a profit / world record fee after 3 years, which I would reckon is about as long as Raiola would want him to stay at City before he finds his next big pay day. There's no way Haaland's next club is going to keep him for a decade. I suspect that those days are gone. Players will keep moving on at regular intervals, and I would imagine that Real Madrid will be Haaland's destination at some point in his career.

Unless Txiki pulls another one out of the hat, I am inclined to believe that Kane is our main target, and that we will sign him, and possibly a back-up striker. Thanks to Haaland's dad, Raiola and his fees, wage demands etc, Haaland is likely to be out of the equasion this window. It will be very interesting to see how he develops, especially if he does sign for a PL club.

Haaland looks a great player, but I've seen plenty of false dawns. Kane has proved himself to be the real deal, and as such looks the better option of the two for City on a 5-year deal, in my opinion.

Time will tell....
Click to expand...
Raiola will have a clause in Haalands contract that Chelsea or anyone will have to suck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top