Harry Kane

[Tugay One Cup]

Oh for fuck's sake. Better get the blue cones out.

 

[RandomJ]

Could you imagine the sheer amount of boiled piss if we spent £200 million on a single player?

 

[RayCTID]

Could you imagine the sheer amount of boiled piss if we spent £200 million on a single player?

Yep its not going to be Kane

 

[I'm Blue]

City would never spend £200 million on a single player who is 27 years old (and injury prone)

I fucking hope not!

 

[himalayan_blues]

100 million with 20 million add ons will be good business for the 3 parties involved.

 

[Dax777]

Meh! He is older than his age in Football years. He's a 27 year old with the body of a 31 year-old. Stay the fuck away from this guy

 

[OB1]

Explain, why its laughable

LOL

 

[eastlandsblue]

I get your reasoning but Mbappé is already world class with so much room to grow while Kane is closing in on 30 and getting worryingly injury prone.
The risk of Mbappé doing a Sané would be worth it IMO, especially when you have the small chance of Mbappé leading the line for a decade or more.

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

 

[blue ranger]

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.

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

 

[rabby]

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

If he stuck around for 3 years and we sold him on for a probable profit it would be fantastic business,but as others have said ain't gonna happen

 

[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.