Harry Kane

[birchwoodgingerste]

So a 100m and a Mars Bar ?

And £1 change

 

[I'm Blue]

Kane in, Sterling out, does not mean Sterling needs replacing… we have Foden, Jesus, Bernardo, Mahrez! If Sterling were to be sold, he doesn’t need replacing - we have enough in the squad to cope! (Id hope we get in Grealish, but that isn’t necessary to replace Sterling.)

He may not have been great as of late but he’s still a pivotal part of the squad.
Even when not at his best he’s creating space for others cos he’s a threat and his movement drags defenders about.
He’d need replacing (if sold or swapped), but even ‘if’ we didn’t replace him he still has a big value, more than “wages off the books”.

 

[i8rags]

100m plus player(s)......fcuking hell

Eh, it’s 100 mill, cash or a combination of cash and player/s. Either way a guaranteed 100 m

 

[bluemoon32]

Eh, it’s 100 mill, cash or a combination of cash and player/s. Either way a guaranteed 100 m

Hope youre right mate, its being reported as otherwise

 

[Lavinda Past]

Not really the same, there was a lot more sentiment and respect there and they were also operating at a relatively high level. It didn't seem they wanted to go anywhere and we certainly wasn't going to be kicking out legends of our team because we thought they were past it, we just let things end respectfully with end of contract. We didn't need to sell Zaba or Silva to bring in Walker or Bernardo, other teams might have to but we don't which is why we are so successful.

If you want the best you have to pay them, no?

Absolutely... the problem is that if it doesn't work out, then you're stuck with Mangala, Mendy, Bony etc, on wages that other clubs can't or won't pay.

If you want the best, you go for Mbappe or Haaland (who both want to be at Real Madrid) or Messi (who wants to be at Barcelona)

If he comes to City, I think he'll do OK, but to be honest, I don't see Harry Kane as the £100m 'marquee' type of player that we should be going for. At the end of the day, I suspect that if he wasn't English, we wouldn't be going for him at much more than £50/60m

 

[Blue Coop]

Absolutely... the problem is that if it doesn't work out, then you're stuck with Mangala, Mendy, Bony etc, on wages that other clubs can't or won't pay.

If you want the best, you go for Mbappe or Haaland (who both want to be at Real Madrid) or Messi (who wants to be at Barcelona)

If he comes to City, I think he'll do OK, but to be honest, I don't see Harry Kane as the £100m 'marquee' type of player that we should be going for. At the end of the day, I suspect that if he wasn't English, we wouldn't be going for him at much more than £50/60m

PL apps 242
Goals 166 (top scorer most recently)
Assists 38 (top assister most recently)

He’s a £100m striker all day long.

 

[Father Paul]

Sterling is worth £50m-£60m minimum.
I’d be expecting more like £70m+
So that’s still £150m-£160m minimum.
Not sure why people think throwing a player in somehow brings the cost down.

If we pay 150 million plus for Kane we deserve everything that is coming to us. The guy is on a downward spiral and is worth 85 maximum.

 

[Gumzy97]

 

[manimanc]

What's it got to do with this foghorn rag twat?

 

[ancoats]

£100 million is far to much for kane because of the injury hit the player can be
maybe a basic transfer fee of £50 million then the rest on targets, like playing time lets say 30 games a season adds £5 million and after the 5 years or so pay spurs a bonus fee

so if kane plays for city for 6 seasons and plays over 30 games each season then city pay spurs another £30 million

 

[citizen_maine]

£100 million is far to much for kane because of the injury hit the player can be
maybe a basic transfer fee of £50 million then the rest on targets, like playing time lets say 30 games a season adds £5 million and after the 5 years or so pay spurs a bonus fee

so if kane plays for city for 6 seasons and plays over 30 games each season then city pay spurs another £30 million

Christ, half the forum don't think he'll last 2-3 seasons and you're offering him 6!

 

[Bluemanc100]

PL apps 242
Goals 166 (top scorer most recently)
Assists 38 (top assister most recently)

He’s a £100m striker all day long.

I’d rather the rags spunk £100 large on him

 

[Bluesince88]

Absolutely... the problem is that if it doesn't work out, then you're stuck with Mangala, Mendy, Bony etc, on wages that other clubs can't or won't pay.

If you want the best, you go for Mbappe or Haaland (who both want to be at Real Madrid) or Messi (who wants to be at Barcelona)

If he comes to City, I think he'll do OK, but to be honest, I don't see Harry Kane as the £100m 'marquee' type of player that we should be going for. At the end of the day, I suspect that if he wasn't English, we wouldn't be going for him at much more than £50/60m

Proven goal scorer, top scorer and top assister last year, all whilst being injured and greedy according to some. 166 premier league goals, at Spurs. 2 other time leading goal scorer in the league as well as last season. The weird obsession some have against him because he once put a shit tackle on one of our players actually leaves me speechless at times. He’s the best striker in the league and you’ll look a right tit if he comes because he will score 30 plus goals next season quite comfortably.

 

[Bluesince88]

I’d rather the rags spunk £100 large on him

Then you’d rather a rival team get a guaranteed 30 plus goals next year? Great logic

 

[Champions Again Ole Ole]

Interesting to see how this develops and how much we are prepared to bid before we look elsewhere. Certainly don't want to lose Laporte or Jesus and I am not sure Sterling would go to Spurs. I would offer Ake plus £70m which may be of interest to Spurs.

Personally, I would prefer Haaland, but it looks like Pep wants Kane.

I don't see how Haaland isn't the better choice. Younger, less injury prone, just as good. We can get discount on the sancho sell on clause

 

[samuelyeboah]

"there have been talks leading towards Man City making a formal offer" is such an annoying statement to read because it means fucking nothing. there have been talks leading to talks?

 

[Bluesince88]

I don't see how Haaland isn't the better choice. Younger, less injury prone, just as good. We can get discount on the sancho sell on clause

Never played in the prem, age is irrelevant with an agent that will try move him on in 3/4 years. Just as good is a wild shout comparing 2/3 years with someone who has been consistently prolific all of their career, in the best league in the world whilst playing for a team that isn’t the best.

 

[Lavinda Past]

Proven goal scorer, top scorer and top assister last year, all whilst being injured and greedy according to some. 166 premier league goals, at Spurs. 2 other time leading goal scorer in the league as well as last season. The weird obsession some have against him because he once put a shit tackle on one of our players actually leaves me speechless at times. He’s the best striker in the league and you’ll look a right tit if he comes because he will score 30 plus goals next season quite comfortably.

I don't doubt for one minute that he would do well wherever he goes. He's a very good player.
I just think we could do better.
My main concern around Kane is his ability to fit into Pep's system - I can't see Pep changing much and it would be up to Kane to adapt his game. In my opinion, he lacks the stamina to play 90 minutes in a Pep team.
As I've said, if he comes to City, he'll get my backing. I would just prefer to sign Haaland or Mbappe.

 

[whipper]

I don't see how Haaland isn't the better choice. Younger, less injury prone, just as good. We can get discount on the sancho sell on clause

Maybe, just maybe he doesn't want to come to us. Hence Kane

 

[Bluesince88]

I don't doubt for one minute that he would do well wherever he goes. He's a very good player.
I just think we could do better.
My main concern around Kane is his ability to fit into Pep's system - I can't see Pep changing much and it would be up to Kane to adapt his game. In my opinion, he lacks the stamina to play 90 minutes in a Pep team.
As I've said, if he comes to City, he'll get my backing. I would just prefer to sign Haaland or Mbappe.

Preference over a signing isn’t an issue for me. We all have our own thoughts. It’s the Kane bashing that gets me which is mostly without much foundation. He’s the best striker in the prem, we are dining at the top table on this kind of transfer but I don’t think Mbappe is off and I reckon Haaland won’t leave this summer. After that when saying we can do better then I don’t think we can and Kane is a machine. Kane has adapted his game several times since first coming through, I don’t see an issue with him adjusting again and he will bang them in for fun