Thenumber1blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 19 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 5,904
Agree, probably got 2 years left in him, looks a bit bulky at the momentFor a 28 year old, utter madness but it aint my money
Agree, probably got 2 years left in him, looks a bit bulky at the momentFor a 28 year old, utter madness but it aint my money
I don't think it will be forgotten, it will be raised at every possible moment. That isn't the point though. Kane is a very good player and would undoubtedly do well for us but I consider it a ridiculous sum to pay. You would of course be justified in asking what I would be prepared to pay, and I honestly don't know, but the figures being quoted are far in advance of anything we have paid before and it just doesn't feel as though Kane is the player to spend that sort of sum on.
City haven't needed to go above a certain limit previously because we got ten years service out of players like Vinny, Sergio and Silva.
All three of those players ten years younger would be all £100m in today's market.
maybe or maybe not, some of us were saying the same about Leroy until he got his injury, now look at him at Bayern, unrecognizable..He will be top drawer until he is 33 5 good years
Are you saying that athletes are one injury from never being the same player???maybe or maybe not, some of us were saying the same about Leroy until he got his injury, now look at him at Bayern, unrecognizable..
UrghThey'll shake hands at 130 IMO.
Urgh
Would it not be more £115mill with achievable add ons up to £130 mill ?They'll shake hands at 130 IMO.
And look how they turned outSame age and about the same price as Hazard and Griezmann when they moved.