Harry Kane

[Spawn]

I wish Sky and Gary Neville would climb back on their ESL high horse for this one. We were drenched in the fluids of their anger and ire back in the spring when the European Super League reared its head, citing competitive unfairness and elitism as the twin monsters of the ESL that nobly needed slaying. And yet here they are, now salivating over this story, gilding it with their toss dribble journalistic gimmicks. Why aren’t you urging fans to boycott the Premier League when City have the financial power to undermine just about any club they like, not to mention laws that are designed to preserve some kind of principle of fairness, you absolute hypocritical fanny sleeves?

I think Sky were all up in arms because they have the broadcast rights to the premier league and have paid a shit load for them. They would have a much less saleable offer for the prem without the ESL clubs.

 

[Hazelton]

I have never rooted against a player as much as I will root against Kane at City. I genuinely hope he flops, gets sold to Fulham or something in a couple of years time and still ends his career without a trophy.

 

[spids]

When Liverpool sold Suarez for £80M they blew it in a fashion very similar to what we did with the Bale money, buying Lallana, Lovren, Markovic, Balotelli and Moreno for more than £100 million.

 

[chas vs dave]

I woke up in a positive mood. If he stays or goes, we have to become a team that isn't over reliant on Kane. That seems like a good opportunity. ?

 

[spurs mental]

I'm sure the idea has been floated but is it possible the club (Levy and co) are behind the delayed return to training, the half arsed message to the fans etc. as they want to sell but know that their value would result in a fans revolt? I'm not talking about Levy calling Harry and saying "take an extra week off" and then acting like we had no idea but we could easily have people in his agent's ear planting seeds.

All this helps them appear to be the victims like us fans and puts them in a position where even if they sell for £100m they can justify it as necessary to keep harmony in the club and prevent a key asset losing further value.

No

 

[dontcallme]

Kane is the best goalscorer in the league, and possibly the world

City create infinite chances per game. Not only that but with the tricky and skilful players they have he'll get plenty of penalties too. Remember last season they missed about 5 or 6 at least. Put the ball on a plate for someone as clever as Kane with his movement and his ability and he will score, comfortably, a goal a game. I'd suggest he'll break Salahs record of 31 goals in a season quite comfortably.

I get the theory and it sounds correct. But statistically there is no evidence of a striker moving to a top side within the Prem and scoring more goals.

Lukaku scored more for Everton than Utd.
Crouch more for Portsmouth and Southampton than Spurs and Liverpool.
Van Persie more for Arsenal than Utd.
Defoe more for Sunderland and Portsmouth than Spurs.

I had a look through and the only recent example of a player scoring more for a top side in the Prem was Berbatov scoring more for Utd than Spurs.

We'll have to wait and see of course but there's very little to suggest Kane will be scoring excessively more for a better side.

 

[eddiev14]

I just do not see how Levy can consider selling him now for multiple reasons:

1. If we cave in as soon as a player 'plays up' it will happen again in the future. Every time a rival wants one of our players they will just say - miss training and they'll cave in. Levy needs to take a tough stance on this, especially as ....
2. He has three more years under contract, and his market value will still be high next summer - especially if European clubs sort out their finances.
3. Levy's tough stance with Modric worked to Spurs advantage. Levy also saw that a world class player - once the window has closed - will still perform at a high level until the following summer.
4. He is too hard to replace now - the season starts in a week's time.
5. We are rebuilding our defence - this is the priority, and if we keep Kane and Son up top - they are both world class and the best forward partnership in the league - then we have a good shot at qualifying for the CL.

The only reasons to sell him are:

If we need the money (ITK says we do not)
We get a crazy offer that lands in the 'everyone has their price' zone (ITK suggests City are reluctant to go above 50% of what that would be).
We think Kane will destabilise the team - if he stays - surely once the window closes Kane will realise it is a world cup year and he just has to get on with it.

I still think the best way forward is to offer Kane a new contract. 5 years. Pay increase (heavily incentivised) and importantly (or he would not consider it) a release clause that decreases over time (as he gets older) and is only valid in the month of July (to give us time to get a replacement:

1st July - 31st July 2022 = £120M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £100M (foreign clubs).
1st July - 31st July 2023 = £100M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £80M (foreign clubs).
1st July - 31st July 2024 = £80M (PL clubs, exc. Chelsea or Arsenal), £60M (foreign clubs)

Worst case is he leave for £120M on 1st July next summer to Man City, which would be great business for a 29 year old).

This is 100% where I’m at with this.

 

[bigpalacios]

I got a bit more from my neighbour this morning, still slightly vague as she isnt actually into football and couldnt give two shits about transfers but her husband is a City fan so she told him this....

Pep stayed in London last night with the 'transfer guy' and the players sat with Bernando Silva on the plane were discussing his departure.

 

[SSC]

£130m + £20m in achievable add ons + Silva = £200m in my head.

I think Silva in the current market is worth £50m. If he was playing week in week out, he's easily worth that.

This isn't info, purely speculation on my part.

But that is a deal I would do as we could then bring in Vlahovic for say £50m and another striker whilst also having money to buy another top quality CB whilst also solving our creative problem.

Slightly off topic but at some point we would need to buy some HG players right? Anyone decent would come with a premium attached, like we're aiming to do for Kane.

 

[spurs mental]

I get the theory and it sounds correct. But statistically there is no evidence of a striker moving to a top side within the Prem and scoring more goals.

Lukaku scored more for Everton than Utd.
Crouch more for Portsmouth and Southampton than Spurs and Liverpool.
Van Persie more for Arsenal than Utd.
Defoe more for Sunderland and Portsmouth than Spurs.

I had a look through and the only recent example of a player scoring more for a top side in the Prem was Berbatov scoring more for Utd than Spurs.

We'll have to wait and see of course but there's very little to suggest Kane will be scoring excessively more for a better side.

The difference there is Kane is better than all of those players and would be signing for a team stacked with creative players and arguably better than all of those teams mentioned too. Kane scored 21 goals in one of the least creative teams in the league last season.

 

[van_Pommel]

IMO Bernardo Silva is a no brainer for is if he wants to come. Still need 100m cash as well though

 

[dontcallme]

The difference there is Kane is better than all of those players and would be signing for a team stacked with creative players and arguably better than all of those teams mentioned too. Kane scored 21 goals in one of the least creative teams in the league last season.

Statistics don't always matter to the individual so you could be right. Kane has collectively scored 26 less league goals in the last 3 seasons than the 3 previous seasons.

So maybe he will score more at a higher performing team but I wouldn't take it as a given.

 

[JCRD]

Id take Silva plus £100-£120m - thats a £140 - £150m deal... Its not the best deal ever cash wise but it would improve our forward creativity plus gives us cash to bring in pretty much any striker with the exception of a Haaland

 

[IamSpurtacus]

I get the theory and it sounds correct. But statistically there is no evidence of a striker moving to a top side within the Prem and scoring more goals.

Lukaku scored more for Everton than Utd.
Crouch more for Portsmouth and Southampton than Spurs and Liverpool.
Van Persie more for Arsenal than Utd.
Defoe more for Sunderland and Portsmouth than Spurs.

I had a look through and the only recent example of a player scoring more for a top side in the Prem was Berbatov scoring more for Utd than Spurs.

We'll have to wait and see of course but there's very little to suggest Kane will be scoring excessively more for a better side.

A better comparison is Suarez to Barca

At liverpool he scored at 0.61 goals per game (82/133) - at barca his "production" went up to 0.69 goals per game (195/283)- that may seem like a small increase but it's an 13% improvement - pretty significant at the top level fine margins count

He was surrounded by better players in the league's strongest team.

The same will be true for Kane at City. He'll be just as prolific - if not more so

 

[yawa]

I got a bit more from my neighbour this morning, still slightly vague as she isnt actually into football and couldnt give two shits about transfers but her husband is a City fan so she told him this....

Pep stayed in London last night with the 'transfer guy' and the players sat with Bernando Silva on the plane were discussing his departure.

Pep said yesterday there’s 4 players who want to move on. I’d love it to happen but I really can’t see Silva apparently wanting to move to La Liga to change his mind and move to us.

 

[dontcallme]

A better comparison is Suarez to Barca

At liverpool he scored at 0.61 goals per game (82/133) - at barca his "production" went up to 0.68 goals per game (195/283)- that may seem like a small increase but it's an 11% improvement - pretty significant at the top level fine margins count

He was surrounded by better players in the league's strongest team.

The same will be true for Kane at City. He'll be just as prolific - if not more so

Nope. Going from one league to another is a very poor comparison.

 

[dontcallme]

Nope. Going from one league to another is a very poor comparison.

Also if you look at the top scorers in Spain they regularly score more than the top in the Prem so definitely a poor comparison.

 

[ilikeost]

Selling him now would be so irresponsible that I don't even think Levy would do it. If we would have gone out and signed a striker or two like a month ago and had them working with the team the entire pre-season, that would have been one thing. But selling Kane now and only then bring in a new striker a week before the season starts shouldn't even be considered. Hopefully it isn't.

 

[TPdYID]

I get the theory and it sounds correct. But statistically there is no evidence of a striker moving to a top side within the Prem and scoring more goals.

Lukaku scored more for Everton than Utd.
Crouch more for Portsmouth and Southampton than Spurs and Liverpool.
Van Persie more for Arsenal than Utd.
Defoe more for Sunderland and Portsmouth than Spurs.

I had a look through and the only recent example of a player scoring more for a top side in the Prem was Berbatov scoring more for Utd than Spurs.

We'll have to wait and see of course but there's very little to suggest Kane will be scoring excessively more for a better side.

Rooney, Saha, Bellamy, Yorke, Andy Cole, Mane…

 

[goughie1966]

I was at the Community Shield yesterday thanks to a company I work with and one thing that stood out was that City are in desperate need of a front man. They literally couldn’t do anything meaningful once they got into the box. Given all the rumblings coming out in the media today I reckon they’ll go for Kane this week properly.

And yet they have Jesus who can't score goals with the amount of creativity Man City can provide but some of our fans would accept him as part of any Kane deal.