Harry Kane

urban genie said:
We are recouping nearly 100M possibly in players sales and also on wages, add that to any forecast budget the club has for transfers in and I am sure it is aware of what it is doing financially.


Whether you, me or anyone else thinks they know what's best, I expect our accountants know better.

Would I want to spend 100M + on a striker? No not really, but if that is what we have to and the club believes it can afford to, then so be it.
Click to expand...

Would you want to spend £120 million on a striker that went on to score 120 goals for us over 3 seasons, or £160 million that went on to score 450 goals for us over 10 seasons?
 
VOOMER said:
Would you want to spend £120 million on a striker that went on to score 120 goals for us over 3 seasons, or £160 million that went on to score 450 goals for us over 10 seasons?
Click to expand...
That isn't the two options on the table.

The option is 120m on Kane or back to someone like Danny Fucking Ings. Haaland is not happening.
 
VOOMER said:
Would you want to spend £120 million on a striker that went on to score 120 goals for us over 3 seasons, or £160 million that went on to score 450 goals for us over 10 seasons?
Click to expand...

Neither of those scenarios are guarenteed so the question is irrelevant.

Unless you were being hypothetical


And even then I doubt it would happen so still irrrelevant
 
VOOMER said:
Would you want to spend £120 million on a striker that went on to score 120 goals for us over 3 seasons, or £160 million that went on to score 450 goals for us over 10 seasons?
Click to expand...

If Harry Kane could score 120 goals in 3 seasons, he would be well worth that 120m, even if that other option shat gold for the next 10 years.
 
simon23 said:
For me, no.2 is irrelevant as is the price.
I feel as good as kane is he wont push us betind where we are....especially against the top top teams (CL esp).
Click to expand...

Our big problem in the CL final was that nobody looked like scoring, signing one of the deadliest strikers of the century gives us a good shot at overcoming that problem.
 
bigdavecox90 said:
My worry is we leave it and leave it and leave it and then panic sign Ings on deadline day.

Please god, no.
Click to expand...

If Kane isn’t available the club will know that already and would have moved on to other targets. Just like when Real approached City for Kun - we told them he wasn’t available at any price and to go away. Spurs have clearly not said that... so we must genuinely believe we can land Kane. The silence regarding Kane suggests effective NDAs are in place.
 
urban genie said:
We are recouping nearly 100M possibly in players sales and also on wages, add that to any forecast budget the club has for transfers in and I am sure it is aware of what it is doing finacially.
Click to expand...
Yeah forget covid losses and the knock on effect of overspending on one target...its a risk to drop so much on one ageing target and it doesnt matter how anyone dresses up the justification.
 
MarsLlama said:
Our big problem in the CL final was that nobody looked like scoring, signing one of the deadliest strikers of the century gives us a good shot at overcoming that problem.
Click to expand...
See I agree in part....we need a central striker. However, for me Kane wouldn't have made any difference....he us the tyoe of player chelsea centre halves would have in their pockets.
He rarely stands out in big games
 
simon23 said:
See I agree in part....we need a central striker. However, for me Kane wouldn't have made any difference....he us the tyoe of player chelsea centre halves would have in their pockets.
He rarely stands out in big games
Click to expand...
Spurs don't have any big games... apart from the North London Derby and he scores for fun in those

I'm not counting the Carabou Cup Final as he was clearly about 25% fit
 
simon23 said:
See I agree in part....we need a central striker. However, for me Kane wouldn't have made any difference....he us the tyoe of player chelsea centre halves would have in their pockets.
He rarely stands out in big games
Click to expand...
Chelsea centre halves had every striking option we had in their pockets last year, would love to know your point;’other than you don’t like or want Kane.
 
mosssideblue said:
What is bollocks are fans thinking they understand the detailed finances of the club and how any spending now might impact.

The club are professionally run and do not spend gung ho, even though some seem to think they might.
Click to expand...
Then why did we not buy a new LB over the last 2 years we have needed one, why did we allow kun to walk, with an early announcement of our intent, only for that to play into the hands of the selling club when it became obvious we didn't have a striker ready and waiting to sign.

We are not run by perfect human beings and they have made errors in judgement before. Not many...but still.

120+ mil for kane IS gung ho given his age and public desire to leave the spuds. I don't think we will pay that i think we'll wait for them to get uncomfortable and have them over a barrel eventually.
 
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