Are Spurs finally going to get to keep a team/squad together?

[Enigma_87]

You just said he could force a move to Chelsea or City for £50-60m this Summer, but now he's likely to stay?

If he wanted he can force a move, players do have a lot of power nowadays. If he throws his toys out of the pram what will you do, bench one of your best players?

He's obviously likely to stay because neither City or Chelsea look that good at the moment, the only reason currently will be only the money.

Oh and every big club in England would bite Spurs hand of at £80m for Kane, even £100m, they'd be banging the door down at either price.

I wouldn't get that far. Griezmann's release clause is what 80m EUR? I don't think Kane is rated higher than him either. 80-100m for Kane is insane, no one will pay that much at the moment.

So what if they can treble it and I wouldnt be comparing Kane and Sterling, one is a mature man and the other is a boy.

The very fact you think Spurs would be willing to sell Kane to Chelsea for £50m is simply incredible.

Erm, Sterling is one year older?

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Yeah i dont buy that.
or that bale would have stayed if he didn't go to real.
If hes given the choice between sending him abroad or down the road he'll take abroad, even at a cut price ... but he'll still do a deal at the end of the day (cause he always does)

A bit like Utd you mean when Ronaldo wanted to go, or how they were prepared to sell DDG to Real?

Utd would not have sold Ronaldo to another PL team or been prepared to sell DDG to one, likewise Spurs would not have sold Modric or Bale to another PL team and they won'tbe selling Kane to one either.

 

[caid]

A bit like Utd you mean when Ronaldo wanted to go, or how they were prepared to sell DDG to Real?

Utd would not have sold Ronaldo to another PL team or been prepared to sell DDG to one, likewise Spurs would not have sold Modric or Bale to another PL team and they won'tbe selling Kane to one either.

Neither wanted to move to a PL team so its a bit of a redundant question.
But basically yes - if a player wants to move then they pretty much invariably can and do.

DDG was us getting lucky and i wouldn't bet on our luck holding out.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

If he wanted he can force a move, players do have a lot of power nowadays. If he throws his toys out of the pram what will you do, bench one of your best players?

He's obviously likely to stay because neither City or Chelsea look that good at the moment, the only reason currently will be only the money.


I wouldn't get that far. Griezmann's release clause is what 80m EUR? I don't think Kane is rated higher than him either. 80-100m for Kane is insane, no one will pay that much at the moment.


Erm, Sterling is one year older?

Sterling is actually younger but let's just say you missed the point.

If you think Griezmann is a better bet than Kane then you should fill your boots and if thats his release clause pay it.

You honestly think Utd wouldn't pay £80-100m for a 22 year old English player who has scored 45 PL goals in less than 18 months? They paid over £50m for a player with potential, but you value Martial (who i think is an excellent player) in the same price bracket as Kane?

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Neither wanted to move to a PL team so its a bit of a redundant question.
But basically yes - if a player wants to move then they pretty much invariably can and do.

DDG was us getting lucky and i wouldn't bet on our luck holding out.

So you believe that Utd would have sold Ronaldo with however many years left on his contract to say City or Liverpool if he wanted to go to either?

 

[SirHenryPercy]

I probably sound like a bit of a pratt in this thread but I'm just astounded that some people think we would sell our best players to Chelsea, including Kane for £50m, either i've lost the plot or the world has gone mad, I don't know which it is anymore

 

[caid]

So you believe that Utd would have sold Ronaldo with however many years left on his contract to say City or Liverpool if he wanted to go to either?

If he wanted to force a move then we wouldn't have much choice in the matter.

And its a terrible comparison. Your current situation isn't in the same universe as our situation at the time.
Win the league and european cup, tie poch down to a contract for a decade or two (we'll just pretend he has 20+ trophies built up over the years) and pay him 300k a week and I'll find the idea of him staying at spurs forever more convincing.

 

[Enigma_87]

Sterling is actually younger but let's just say you missed the point.

I got your point, don't worry, Kane is more mature even if they are at the same age.

If you think Griezmann is a better bet than Kane then you should fill your boots and if thats his release clause pay it.

I think he is and has proven himself in the CL as well, but that's another matter, I just used him as an example why no one would want to pay 80-100m for Kane - there are better options for that kind of money.

You honestly think Utd wouldn't pay £80-100m for a 22 year old English player who has scored 45 PL goals in less than 18 months? They paid over £50m for a player with potential, but you value Martial (who i think is an excellent player) in the same price bracket as Kane?

This is based on incentives, so it's not comparable per say. De Bruyne, Sterling, Di Maria etc who went for that kind of money I think are comparable.

 

[caid]

I probably sound like a bit of a pratt in this thread but I'm just astounded that some people think we would sell our best players to Chelsea, including Kane for £50m, either i've lost the plot or the world has gone mad, I don't know which it is anymore

Is it chelsea specifically?

 

[SirHenryPercy]

If he wanted to force a move then we wouldn't have much choice in the matter.

And its a terrible comparison. Your current situation isn't in the same universe as our situation at the time.
Win the league and european cup, tie poch down to a contract for a decade or two (we'll just pretend he has 20+ trophies built up over the years) and pay him 300k a week and I'll find the idea of him staying at spurs forever more convincing.

If he's under contract of course you have a choice, the time we fell into this trap was with Berbatov but he was causing major problems at the club, however on reflection I think Levy realised he made a mistake and wouldnt do it again.

 

[caid]

If he's under contract of course you have a choice, the time we fell into this trap was with Berbatov but he was causing major problems at the club, however on reflection I think Levy realised he made a mistake and wouldnt do it again.

Personally i think the mistake was dragging it out and letting it get toxic.
I think you can force a player to hang around another year (like ronaldo) but generally speaking i think your best off just letting them go.
If one club does go in for him then a dozen others will follow anyway so i expect you'll have your pick of who to let him go to anyway.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Is it chelsea specifically?

Well the Chelsea part just compounds it, if Levy sold Kane to Chelsea he would literally have to leave the country. The £50m valuation and placing him in the same bracket as Raheem Sterling, I can't even believe I'm writing that but yep Raheem Sterling just blows my mind. He has scored 45 PL goals in under 18 months and he's in the same bracket as Raheem Sterling, I'm going to go and sit down in a very dark room with a very large scotch

 

[caid]

Well the Chelsea part just compounds it, if Levy sold Kane to Chelsea he would literally have to leave the country. The £50m valuation and placing him in the same bracket as Raheem Sterling, I can't even believe I'm writing that but yep Raheem Sterling just blows my mind. He has scored 45 PL goals in under 18 months and he's in the same bracket as Raheem Sterling, I'm going to go and sit down in a very dark room with a very large scotch

Uuuuuummmmm scotch.
You'll get more than 50m for him

 

[Enigma_87]

If he's under contract of course you have a choice, the time we fell into this trap was with Berbatov but he was causing major problems at the club, however on reflection I think Levy realised he made a mistake and wouldnt do it again.

That's the problem with players nowadays. Regardless of how good the player is and what is his true value, if he wants to go that value will drop. Sure you can bench him for a season but then what? He'll still want to go and you'll be year less into his contract while paying him 70k per week doing feck all.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Uuuuuummmmm scotch.
You'll get more than 50m for him

I'm pretty sure you know if Levy fell out of a tree, banged his head and mumbled "I'll sell Kane to either Utd or City for £100m", they'd be a Red Bull air race from Manchester down to London just in case he come back to his senses.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

That's the problem with players nowadays. Regardless of how good the player is and what is his true value, if he wants to go that value will drop. Sure you can bench him for a season but then what? He'll still want to go and you'll be year less into his contract while paying him 70k per week doing feck all.

Ronaldo's value didn't drop and nor did Modric's. Kane has 4 years left on his current deal, his value won't drop for 3 years.

Anyway he's currently in discussions with the club over an extension, so let's just wait and see how that goes.

 

[Beachryan]

Well the Chelsea part just compounds it, if Levy sold Kane to Chelsea he would literally have to leave the country. The £50m valuation and placing him in the same bracket as Raheem Sterling, I can't even believe I'm writing that but yep Raheem Sterling just blows my mind. He has scored 45 PL goals in under 18 months and he's in the same bracket as Raheem Sterling, I'm going to go and sit down in a very dark room with a very large scotch

Not wanting to push this too far, but what bracket do you consider Kane in then? If not De Bruyne/Suarez type money?

Obviously City overpaid on Sterling, but that's like using our Bebe transfer to value other Sunday league no names.

Kane shouldn't leave because he doesn't want to, but I can't imagine he'd command a world record fee, I mean, he's never going to be as good as Ronaldo/Suarez/Neymar etc. Personally I don't think he's as good a pure striker as Lewandowski or as useful to a team as Muller. I'd put him in the top 20 world players for sure, but not top 10.

 

[GlastonSpur]

My bad.. I meant stunning in the form of young players who are bargains but an improvement on what you have in certain positions.

If the core team sticks together but the likes of United splash big, Chelsea splash big, Liverpool go in hard with Klopp at the helm and Arsenal miraculously sign some good players in problem positions.. that is an almighty challenge even for a side like Spurs.

You have had it easy this season and that shouldn't diminish how awesome Spurs have been.. but if you rest on your laurels thinking this side is good enough next year, you could be in for a rude awakening.

I think both full back areas, another top winger and backup to Kane are needed. Players who were brilliant this year may struggle for consistency next year or not look as standout in a more competitive league.

I'm not saying you are certain to struggle next year but I think you should be really focused on recruiting improvements in key areas and really pushing the quality of the squad even higher.

Backup to Kane, yes. But I don't see any full backs out there who would be both better than Rose and Walker and affordable in terms of fee and wages. Rose and Walker are under-rated on here, but IMO they fit Pochettino's system perfectly because they provide the pacy width lacking with Eriksen and Lamela, who both in any case tend to come inside and play more centrally. And when either bombs forward they know that Dier will drop back to form a back three. To play the role that Rose and Walker do you need to be both very fit and very fast - and both are. And despite their wing-back role, I don't see them making many mistakes defensively. And for FB backup we have Trippier and Davies, who both generally done well when called upon.

Aside from backup to Kane, the other main signing we IMO need is a DM backup/cover/competition for Dier. A top winger? Well, I wouldn't say no - but like who?

 

[Enigma_87]

Ronaldo's value didn't drop and nor did Modric's. Kane has 4 years left on his current deal, his value won't drop for 3 years.

Anyway he's currently in discussions with the club over an extension, so let's just wait and see how that goes.

50-60 was just an example for players of similar "status" went for recently. A better example is Suarez at 65m to Barcelona. I don't think Kane will reach Suarez level to be honest and yet that transfer value is not far off what I've said initially.

As for Modric I'm sure it did. He went for 30m to Madrid which frankly is a steal.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Not wanting to push this too far, but what bracket do you consider Kane in then? If not De Bruyne/Suarez type money?

Obviously City overpaid on Sterling, but that's like using our Bebe transfer to value other Sunday league no names.

Kane shouldn't leave because he doesn't want to, but I can't imagine he'd command a world record fee, I mean, he's never going to be as good as Ronaldo/Suarez/Neymar etc. Personally I don't think he's as good a pure striker as Lewandowski or as useful to a team as Muller. I'd put him in the top 20 world players for sure, but not top 10.

It's not what he's worth to somebody else, it's what he's worth to us. Neymar is an amazing player but would he give more to us than Kane currently does ( you have to understand what I mean by this as I'm not saying Kane is the better player)?

There aren't many players out there who would be more valuable to us in our team than Kane is, furthermore we couldnt afford to buy a player who would be more valuable to our team than he is, that makes him priceless to us.

 

[RobinLFC]

As for Modric I'm sure it did. He went for 30m to Madrid which frankly is a steal.

Think that was down to the fact that he desperately wanted to leave Tottenham for Real at that point. Tottenham turned a €40m bid from PSG down because Modric didn't want to go there.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Backup to Kane, yes. But I don't see any full backs out there who would be both better than Rose and Walker and affordable in terms of fee and wages. Rose and Walker are under-rated on here, but IMO they fit Pochettino's system perfectly because they provide the pacy width lacking with Eriksen and Lamela, who both in any case tend to come inside and play more centrally. And when either bombs forward they know that Dier will drop back to form a back three. To play the role that Rose and Walker do you need to be both very fit and very fast - and both are. And despite their wing-back role, I don't see them making many mistakes defensively. And for FB backup we have Trippier and Davies, who both generally done well when called upon.

Aside from backup to Kane, the other main signing we IMO need is a DM backup/cover/competition for Dier. A top winger? Well, I wouldn't say no - but like who?

Totaly agree about Walker and Rose, their energy and pace with a constant willingness to get forward is key to how we play.

Re the CF, we need to sign a very good one in my opinion, we are always just a Kane injury away from a major problem.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

50-60 was just an example for players of similar "status" went for recently. A better example is Suarez at 65m to Barcelona. I don't think Kane will reach Suarez level to be honest and yet that transfer value is not far off what I've said initially.

As for Modric I'm sure it did. He went for 30m to Madrid which frankly is a steal.

If we sell Kane for £50-60m i'm going to see if I can raise the money myself from an investment company, he can come and train in my garden until I sell him for the profit.

 

[Enigma_87]

Think that was down to the fact that he desperately wanted to leave Tottenham for Real at that point. Tottenham turned a €40m bid from PSG down because Modric didn't want to go there.

exactly. I'm sure a season before they could've got more from Chelsea as well.

If we sell Kane for £50-60m i'm going to see if I can raise the money myself from an investment company, he can come and train in my garden until I sell him for the profit.

I'm sure many of us thought the same when we bought AdM, yet we sold him at a loss.

Regardless of the era we live in, 50-60m is still a gamble.

 

[Beachryan]

It's not what he's worth to somebody else, it's what he's worth to us. Neymar is an amazing player but would he give more to us than Kane currently does ( you have to understand what I mean by this as I'm not saying Kane is the better player)?

There aren't many players out there who would be more valuable to us in our team than Kane is, furthermore we couldnt afford to buy a player who would be more valuable to our team than he is, that makes him priceless to us.

You realise that's kind of the opposite of how transfers work right? His value will be determined by the paying party. Ie, he will only ever be sold by the value the party purchasing him agree too. If Spurs can convince that party of 100m, then it's still the purchasing party who is accepting the value. Anyway.

As I said, he won't leave because he doesn't want to. The price you're ascribing to him starts with the assumption that he has no desire to leave and Spurs have no desire to sell. In which case, he won't be sold, hence it's not really a useful metric to consider.

His transfer fee would only be a reality if there was a sale - and if that was the case, I don't believe he'd break the world record, nor should he.

Put another way, your logic is akin to estimating Ronaldo's transfer value to Barcelona. It would require ridiculous sums to cross the hated divide, he's the best in the world, would give Barca the edge so and so forth. 200m! But it doesn't matter because that's not going to happen.

 

[Oneunited26]

We all know the usual drill for Spurs: top player emerges; top player is sold to bigger club. Rinse repeat.

Carrick, Modric, Berbatov and Bale all taken, but this seems like Spurs' chance to establish themselves as perennial challenger for a top 4 place, at least.

It's pretty obvious that it will take an astronomical amount of money to prise Kane away, and I'm not sure how many clubs would be barmy enough to even inquire or whether Kane would even leave.

Ali, Dier, Alderweireld, Vertonghen and the like all owe Pochettino a lot and aren't going to leave if paid accordingly (with Pochettino staying). Spurs, if they wish to become a genuine CL club, will have to loosen the purse strings and pay their players the going rate, which they've no reason not to do.

It seems like, for once, Spurs are going to keep a team together and organically progress as a unit. It's fantastic for the league as a whole and really pushes a host of teams to up their game or lose out on CL status and the money it brings.

I think there is a cycle currently, the top clubs like united are a complete mess. You look at spurs located in London central that is a big attraction for players. Spurs are building a bigger stadium, have a manager who is not deluded and in his prime and he is young, the setup behind the scenes are far ahead of the current united board out of touch with reality, they will have CL football. Clubs like united seem to be becoming a shell of their former selves, trying to rely on the golden era under Ferguson, and the past 3 years at united has been a joke, if united were in Game Of Thrones I would call them stark house, a once great house from the north with special history and traditions, are nothing but the past that are not a house to be feared, but been beaten. Spurs are looking good, smart in the transfer market play great attacking football, any spurs player would be mad to leave currently

 

[SirHenryPercy]

You realise that's kind of the opposite of how transfers work right? His value will be determined by the paying party. Ie, he will only ever be sold by the value the party purchasing him agree too. If Spurs can convince that party of 100m, then it's still the purchasing party who is accepting the value. Anyway.

As I said, he won't leave because he doesn't want to. The price you're ascribing to him starts with the assumption that he has no desire to leave and Spurs have no desire to sell. In which case, he won't be sold, hence it's not really a useful metric to consider.

His transfer fee would only be a reality if there was a sale - and if that was the case, I don't believe he'd break the world record, nor should he.

Put another way, your logic is akin to estimating Ronaldo's transfer value to Barcelona. It would require ridiculous sums to cross the hated divide, he's the best in the world, would give Barca the edge so and so forth. 200m! But it doesn't matter because that's not going to happen.

I realise that's exactly how transfers work hence my point, his value to us is far and beyond what anybody would pay for him.

 

[RooneyLegend]

Spurs have a great opportunity here to advance to the big boys ranks. If they don't win the title this season I can see them winning it next season. Truth is, they are in a ver good position. All the big clubs are in crisis mode, floundering around to rebuild in an era where it isn't easy as attainable world class players are difficult to find. They also have the advantage of a manager who knows how to get the best out of young players and this era is very strong in that regard. The young players around are extremely talented but lack coaches who not only can get the best out of them, but coaches who will trust them to get the job done.

They shouldn't rest on the laurels and should still beef up their squad some more if they are going to keep moving forward. Players like Dier in midfield is a recipe for disaster in Europe and Lamela despite his improvements still isn't at the level needed to make an impression on the bigger clubs in European football. Alli, Dembele and Kane are players in that front 6 that are of that level. 3 more like that and they'd be somewhat of a revolution in English football. Success in English football can make a club grow exponentially in quick time given the sort of attention the EPL gets. They keep this up for 4 seasons and they'd be matching Arsenal in stature. Commercial companies will be all over them throwing money to be associated with the latest success story.

Don't think they'll be losing any of their key players. They can probably afford to get them on bigger deals and none of the big clubs in the prem look all that attractive as potential destinations. Arsenal is stagnant, doubt city will be in for them as they don't seem to be pep players apart from the Centre backs, we are going to be in the Europa, Chelsea are nowhere, and Pool aren't that much of a bigger club at this point. Doubt the mega sides will be looking at any of them either. They haven't become superstars yet and the only way that would happen overnight is if they dominate the euros which probably wont happen.

 

[africanspur]

Neither wanted to move to a PL team so its a bit of a redundant question.
But basically yes - if a player wants to move then they pretty much invariably can and do.

DDG was us getting lucky and i wouldn't bet on our luck holding out.

It doesn't mean that they will be allowed to move. Modric effectively went on strike over the summer to go to Chelsea. Levy told both him and Chelsea to do one and ignored his silly comments that he only wanted to move to a London team.

Unsurprisingly, when Madrid came in for him the season after, Modric was able to get over his love of London and was just about able to convince himself that Madrid is an alright place to live and that Real probably aren't such a bad team to play for.

 

[africanspur]

If he wanted he can force a move, players do have a lot of power nowadays. If he throws his toys out of the pram what will you do, bench one of your best players?

He's obviously likely to stay because neither City or Chelsea look that good at the moment, the only reason currently will be only the money.


I wouldn't get that far. Griezmann's release clause is what 80m EUR? I don't think Kane is rated higher than him either. 80-100m for Kane is insane, no one will pay that much at the moment.


Erm, Sterling is one year older?

I think what the last few seasons have shown is that actually clubs have a lot more power than previously.

Few clubs have a financial impact to sell and players pretty quickly come to the realisation that after the window closes, they'd better get down and play.

I can't think of a case in recent seasons where a player has been refused a move and then hasn't properly knuckled down afterwards, other than Berahino, who has proven himself an ass of the highest order and even he has eventually come to his senses.

I wouldn't really second guess what kind of fees Levy would eventually force out of a club forcing us to sell. Let's think back to Bale for example, who just a season or two before his world record transfer was being cast on here as a player that had already reached his peak and wasn't as good as Nani for example, who still had a much higher ceiling.

If/when Kane eventually leaves, it won't be for a low sum that's for sure.

 

[africanspur]

As for this team, I'm very hopeful we can keep them together.

I think the spine of the team; lloris, the two centrebacks, Dier and Dembele, Alli, Eriksen and Kane will all be here next season and hopefully into the season after that, though it's very difficult to predict these kinds of things.

What is important now though is that u feel a huge part of what the team is doing isn't down to individual players but a whole system. Before even when we've had good teams, it's often been a few good individuals and one excellent player. Bale, Berbatov, Modric, going back to Klinsmann, Lineker, Ginola, Gazza etc etc

Now we have an actual team with a lot of very good players and a manager that has us playing in a set system and a recruitment policy that makes sense.

I'm generally quite a realistic (read pessimist, I'm still always looking over the shoulder and have palpitations about the thought of Liverpool and City winning the European cups) but I feel there's a lot to be optimistic about at the moment.

This is the best actual team we've had since the 80s.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

If you think Griezmann is a better bet than Kane then you should fill your boots and if thats his release clause pay it.

You honestly think Utd wouldn't pay £80-100m for a 22 year old English player who has scored 45 PL goals in less than 18 months? They paid over £50m for a player with potential, but you value Martial (who i think is an excellent player) in the same price bracket as Kane?

Yes, I'd rather have Martial if given a choice between the two. He has the raw potential to be in an even higher bracket IMO. Whether he gets there remains to be seen. Kane is obviously better ATM.

And Griezmann is probably the best player around right now who isn't at an elite/super rich club. He's a no-brainer for us either way.

I have no issue with us spending big on Kane, but the problem with doing that is how how much improvement we require in other attacking positions.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

Yes, I'd rather have Martial if given a choice between the two. He has the raw potential to be in an even higher bracket IMO. Whether he gets there remains to be seen. Kane is obviously better ATM.

And Griezmann is probably the best player around right now who isn't at an elite/super rich club. He's a no-brainer for us either way.

I have no issue with us spending big on Kane, but the problem with doing that is how how much improvement we require in other attacking positions.

Griezmann would doubtless be an excellent signing and one you can doubtless make happen.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Griezmann would doubtless be an excellent signing and one you can doubtless make happen.

I have doubts over us making this obvious signing happen, though.

 

[SirHenryPercy]

I have doubts over us making this obvious signing happen, though.

You would need to work hard to persuade him, Atletico is a great club and their fans are incredible so I can't see Griezmann knocking the door down to leave, and I also believe they aren't shy these days on paying well.

 

[rcoobc]

Ronaldo's value didn't drop and nor did Modric's. Kane has 4 years left on his current deal, his value won't drop for 3 years.

Well, in that period we went from players like Ronaldo being worth 100m to players like Bale worth 100m, and now to players like Kane worth that much (although English tax). Although it's unlikely, but there is a chance that like-for-like players value could actually decrease in the next 5 years.

 

[africanspur]

Well, in that period we went from players like Ronaldo being worth 100m to players like Bale worth 100m, and now to players like Kane worth that much (although English tax). Although it's unlikely, but there is a chance that like-for-like players value could actually decrease in the next 5 years.

You think that the prices will decrease and with the new TV deal as well?

Barring a financial crash, I don't see that happening at all.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

You would need to work hard to persuade him, Atletico is a great club and their fans are incredible so I can't see Griezmann knocking the door down to leave, and I also believe they aren't shy these days on paying well.

It wouldn't be easy given how good they are, and how good a manager they have, I agree. Simeone is probably the best in the world right now. But United would pay more, the PL would be new test for him, and apparently he's a United fan as well. Given we keep hearing how United is desperate for "marquee" signings, Griezmann is a complete no-brainer for us to go balls out for. He's technicall superb, scores plenty of goals and is one of the most intelligent attackers you'll find.

 

[rcoobc]

You think that the prices will decrease and with the new TV deal as well?

Barring a financial crash, I don't see that happening at all.

Honestly? I think it's possible that we've nearly hit the peak. Part of the players valuation will be based on what his future valuation will be, and if it's looking like it will decrease in the long term, it will decrease in the short term to course correct.

But my guesstimate would be based on the following:

1) English clubs are currently over valued. Medium sized English clubs are competing with European giants for players because of one thing; they are in the Premier League. But we all know that there is nothing really special about the Prem, it's just marketed that way. This years Leicester story is incredible, but it's really the first of it's kind since god knows when. - It could be that the Prem will start to fall in value over the next 10 years. Maybe BT Sport struggled to recoup it's funds. Maybe the foreign markets get a bit tired and move on to the next big thing.

2) The Champions League is in a delicate balance. Unlike with the Prem, the Champions League is only really on at pretty much the same time every other week: 7:45 PM British time, on a weekday. That's too early for America, and too late for Asia. We've all heard the reports that the clubs want to overhaul the Champions League, but there is as much chance they will screw it up rather than improve it.

3) Footballers are where they should be in the highest paid athletes. To the club, wages and transfer fees are two sides of the same coin; hence why they are amortised for Financial Fair Play. I personally would expect the list to be dominated by sportsman who play individual sports; the worlds best golfers, tennis players, boxers, formula 1. In that regard, it seems like Footballers are earning pretty much what they should earn. If that is the case, then players transfer fees are probably where they should be too.

Of course, maybe I am wrong. But there has to be a slowdown sometime... right?

 

[Striker10]

Leicester City are top of the Premiership. Think about that. They are above Man United, Man City, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool etc. It's an unusual season and they are on the crest of a wave. They are in a good moment. I wouldn't worry about Kane. Kane does what he did at youth level. Other players it remains to be seen. So will they win the league? Will that inspire them to push on further? In the short term it will hep them - but it also depends on their manager. A manager long term can offer stability.