Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

Big problem is still Levy, keeping Kane another year will be very tempting for him unless he gets a silly offer.

If United go down this route of thinking we could sign Harry Kane this summer we really need to get some agreement together with the player and club signed early. We simply can't afford a stupid saga over the summer and not getting him in the end or watching him move to Bayern for half the fee we'd be quoted for. That of course depends on what ETH wants, if he sees Felix as a long term prospect then no bother but if ETH would prefer Kane we should try to sound this out and quickly move on to getting another top player in and not risk losing out. I suspect Levy will cling onto Kane.
 
Levy valued him at 200mils. Even in his last year contract I think Levy will still want 100mils from us, Utd tax and all. For BM, it will be only 40mils.

Added to the fact that Kane is approaching 30 and no resale value. He is also not in his prime anymore and showing signs of injury prone.

We should go for younger striker for long term.
 
CM10 said:
2 years ago he would've cost the earth. Spurs were trying to get £150m out of City for him then.

There are only 2 or 3 other viable striker options for us in the summer and most of them come with question marks too. I don't think we're in a position to be turning our noses up at a player like Kane.
Click to expand...
Then it's way better to go for the option that won't ask for £300k in wages and will be 30 years old.

There's many options, not just the 3 we're continually linked to. It only takes one or two seasons before a new player comes onto the scene and everyone is scrambling for them. I don't know why we're not heavily scouting South America, Brazil and Argentina consistently pump out fantastic players, who plays in their U23 and U21 teams?

Kane is a Woodward signing and thankfully those days are done.
 
Yakuza_devils said:
Levy valued him at 200mils. Even in his last year contract I think Levy will still want 100mils from us, Utd tax and all. For BM, it will be only 40mils.

Added to the fact that Kane is approaching 30 and no resale value. He is also not in his prime anymore and showing signs of injury prone.

We should go for younger striker for long term.
Click to expand...
I'm avidly against the purchase of Kane for footballing and budget reasons, but talking about resale value when United buy a player is about as small time as it gets and not something we should ever concern ourselves with. We should be asking is he good enough to go on to be great for the club, not how much we can flog him to Madrid for in 2 seasons.
 
crossy1686 said:
I'm avidly against the purchase of Kane for footballing and budget reasons, but talking about resale value when United buy a player is about as small time as it gets and not something we should ever concern ourselves with. We should be asking is he good enough to go on to be great for the club, not how much we can flog him to Madrid for in 2 seasons.
Click to expand...

:lol: well spotted mate
 
crossy1686 said:
I'm avidly against the purchase of Kane for footballing and budget reasons, but talking about resale value when United buy a player is about as small time as it gets and not something we should ever concern ourselves with. We should be asking is he good enough to go on to be great for the club, not how much we can flog him to Madrid for in 2 seasons.
Click to expand...

Hmm... We are not City and our revenues are not what it used to be. Apparently, we don't have much money left to spend even though we desperately need a striker in Jan.

One of the main reason that we are in dire financial state is because we bought players at very high prices and usually failed to recoup much.

Even Real Madrid is operating in a sensible way now. Signing young up and coming players, yearly contract renewal for player over 30 and etc.
 
He's worth having around for at least a season if we build a squad capable of a title win this summer.
 
Yakuza_devils said:
Hmm... We are not City and our revenues are not what it used to be. Apparently, we don't have much money left to spend even though we desperately need a striker in Jan.

One of the main reason that we are in dire financial state is because we bought players at very high prices and usually failed to recoup much.

Even Real Madrid is operating in a sensible way now. Signing young up and coming players, yearly contract renewal for player over 30 and etc.
Click to expand...
Because when a player fails at United, their resale value is nothing. What other big club is going to take a player that's on big wages, and proven that they can't cut it at this level?

Madrid are signing youngsters because they're cheaper, not because they're hoping to sell them on in the future. They're also hamstrung by FFP rules enforced by La Liga after building a new stadium. That's the reason they couldn't offer what United were on the contract renewals for Varane and Casemiro.
 
crossy1686 said:
Because when a player fails at United, their resale value is nothing. What other big club is going to take a player that's on big wages, and proven that they can't cut it at this level?

Madrid are signing youngsters because they're cheaper, not because they're hoping to sell them on in the future. They're also hamstrung by FFP rules enforced by La Liga after building a new stadium. That's the reason they couldn't offer what United were on the contract renewals for Varane and Casemiro.
Click to expand...

Fail at Utd or not, it's a simple logic. Younger player will have better resale value. Madrid is not hamstrung by La Liga FFP, they are in much better state than Barca and yet they are now operating in a much more sensible way. Their strategy now is buy younger talents because it's cheaper AND even if they don't make it there they can still recoup some of the losses. They don't buy 30 years old anymore and have no qualms to sell them if their salary demand was too high. Their strategy proves to be very successful.
 
croadyman said:
Would you pick him even over Osimhen/Vlahovic if either became available. I feel so torn on this because feel those two could become monsters under Erik's coaching but then Kane is proven.
Click to expand...

I don't like what I've seen of Osimhen and seen even less of Vlahovic so it's Kane for me purely based on that
 
croadyman said:
Would you pick him even over Osimhen/Vlahovic if either became available. I feel so torn on this because feel those two could become monsters under Erik's coaching but then Kane is proven.
Click to expand...
1000 times yes
 
crossy1686 said:
Then it's way better to go for the option that won't ask for £300k in wages and will be 30 years old.

There's many options, not just the 3 we're continually linked to. It only takes one or two seasons before a new player comes onto the scene and everyone is scrambling for them. I don't know why we're not heavily scouting South America, Brazil and Argentina consistently pump out fantastic players, who plays in their U23 and U21 teams?

Kane is a Woodward signing and thankfully those days are done.
Click to expand...
Who would your preferred option be, out of interest? I'm not against going for a younger striker but most of those require time and patience. If we want a 20 goal a season striker now, there aren't many who fit that bill. Moukoko is one who I like but don't think he'd be able to come in straight away and handle that pressure of being the main goalscorer.

Osimhen looks decent but has never managed 20 league goals in a season so far and would cost over £100m. Vlahovic could be an option but not exactly a guarantee either.
 
CM10 said:
Who would your preferred option be, out of interest? I'm not against going for a younger striker but most of those require time and patience. If we want a 20 goal a season striker now, there aren't many who fit that bill. Moukoko is one who I like but don't think he'd be able to come in straight away and handle that pressure of being the main goalscorer.

Osimhen looks decent but has never managed 20 league goals in a season so far and would cost over £100m. Vlahovic could be an option but not exactly a guarantee either.
Click to expand...
I don't have anyone in mind to be honest. I think the names we're linked to are too expensive and they haven't impressed me, I also don't watch enough foreign football to know how good some of these lads are, but I know for a fact they're not worth £100m or more.

I don't think we should be focusing on a 20 goal a season striker, we should be finding the next 5-10 goal a season striker aged under 23 and developing him. What we really need is Rashford to grab 20, Martial to get over 10, Sancho to get over 10 and Antony to get over 10. Then we can focus on getting Garnacho to that level and bring in some kid who can also hit that or maybe beyond. Anyone of those mentioned players could hit 20 or more in a good season under the right development and coaching also.

That's where we need to be, not signing 30 year olds on daft money. I'd steer clear of the lads you mentioned as well, Napoli take the piss and Juventus wouldn't sell a world class forward for a laugh.

P.S. Also, if we sign Kane and we struggle next season Ten Hag is cooked. If he can develop Garnacho as fast as Greenwood developed and find another kid to bring in, he'll be given much more leeway and time.
 
crossy1686 said:
I don't have anyone in mind to be honest. I think the names we're linked to are too expensive and they haven't impressed me, I also don't watch enough foreign football to know how good some of these lads are, but I know for a fact they're not worth £100m or more.

I don't think we should be focusing on a 20 goal a season striker, we should be finding the next 5-10 goal a season striker aged under 23 and developing him. What we really need is Rashford to grab 20, Martial to get over 10, Sancho to get over 10 and Antony to get over 10. Then we can focus on getting Garnacho to that level and bring in some kid who can also hit that or maybe beyond. Anyone of those mentioned players could hit 20 or more in a good season under the right development and coaching also.

That's where we need to be, not signing 30 year olds on daft money. I'd steer clear of the lads you mentioned as well, Napoli take the piss and Juventus wouldn't sell a world class forward for a laugh.

P.S. Also, if we sign Kane and we struggle next season Ten Hag is cooked. If he can develop Garnacho as fast as Greenwood developed and find another kid to bring in, he'll be given much more leeway and time.
Click to expand...
Not sure a 5-10 goal a season striker does anything for us really. That's Memphis Depay numbers and the likes we're being linked with currently. If we sign a striker in the summer, it has to be someone who can actually make a material difference to how we play and the number of goals we score.

Unfortunately I don't think you can count on Rashford to get 20 league goals every season either. He's playing great at the moment but his best goalscoring return in the league so far was 17 in 2019/20 season. If he matches that he's doing well.

If we struggle next season Ten Hag will likely get some heat regardless of who we sign. Obviously any signing we do make has to be with the manager's approval but you can't say no to a proven goalscorer on that basis. If Spurs take the piss with their valuation we will look elsewhere but I don't really see where else we find the player to take on that goalscoring burden.
 
Berbasbullet said:
Kane would have to push it, he wants Shearers record, has to fight for it.
Click to expand...

I mean all he can really do to push us over Bayern is refuse a move and say he'll leave on a free in 2024 if they don't sell him to a Prem team.

Also I doubt he wants Shearer's record more than he wants to win an actual trophy, though a 12th Bundesliga in a row isn't much of a title. But he'd have a shot at the CL. Probably as good a shot to win the CL with them as he would to win the Prem or CL with us, in all honesty, even with things looking rosy here at the moment, just because City and now Arsenal look strong and Chelsea are spending like mad and Liverpool will probably get a midfield at some point.

So yeah, my guess is he ends up at Bayern.
 
Replace Martial with Kane and we'd score way more goals. It'd be a no brainer to sign him if at all possible
 
The way Kane has developed his game, the link play and the goals he'll bring, he is surely the near perfect fit.

Dropping deeper at times and playing balls in to the likes of Rashford, Garnacho, Anthony and Sancho.

He'll also get 15-20 goals as welll as all those assists / goal involvements.
 
Imagine being a Spurs fan if we do land him with Maguire going the other way…
 
crossy1686 said:
I'm avidly against the purchase of Kane for footballing and budget reasons, but talking about resale value when United buy a player is about as small time as it gets and not something we should ever concern ourselves with. We should be asking is he good enough to go on to be great for the club, not how much we can flog him to Madrid for in 2 seasons.
Click to expand...

Great Post
 
Btw..I would like us to go for him, if he becomes available, and the costs aren't ridiculous
 
I'm not sure if he's a fit for us anymore to be perfectly honest. He's not the target-man, running off the shoulders of defences striker he used to be. He likes to drop and play more centrally as he's gotten older - essentially coming into the spaces Bruno and Eriksen like to operate in. I would have thought ETH would be more keen for a striker who can hold up the ball, bully defenders and prove a good target in the box. For the daft amount we'd have to fork out, I don't think Kane would solve the issues.
 
groovyalbert said:
I'm not sure if he's a fit for us anymore to be perfectly honest. He's not the target-man, running off the shoulders of defences striker he used to be. He likes to drop and play more centrally as he's gotten older - essentially coming into the spaces Bruno and Eriksen like to operate in. I would have thought ETH would be more keen for a striker who can hold up the ball, bully defenders and prove a good target in the box. For the daft amount we'd have to fork out, I don't think Kane would solve the issues.
Click to expand...

Only way it can work would be Erik essentially telling him to just stay in the box but how comfortable would be with not coming to get the ball though when he's used to that
 
croadyman said:
What would you consider a fair cost
Click to expand...
This is a good question.

A year left on the contract of a 30 year old striker from a rival team (bit similar to the RvP pursuit) you'd think it should be a knockdown fee, but Spurs are very reluctant sellers.

If Newcastle secure a CL place, they will shoot the price right up IMO. They'll want him to be their new Shearer #9 figure and probably be willing to pay the earth
 
LawCharltonBest said:
This is a good question.

A year left on the contract of a 30 year old striker from a rival team (bit similar to the RvP pursuit) you'd think it should be a knockdown fee, but Spurs are very reluctant sellers.

If Newcastle secure a CL place, they will shoot the price right up IMO. They'll want him to be their new Shearer #9 figure and probably be willing to pay the earth
Click to expand...

Yeah Newcastle are the wildcards here
 
groovyalbert said:
I'm not sure if he's a fit for us anymore to be perfectly honest. He's not the target-man, running off the shoulders of defences striker he used to be. He likes to drop and play more centrally as he's gotten older - essentially coming into the spaces Bruno and Eriksen like to operate in. I would have thought ETH would be more keen for a striker who can hold up the ball, bully defenders and prove a good target in the box. For the daft amount we'd have to fork out, I don't think Kane would solve the issues.
Click to expand...
How much of Kane coming deep is because he wants to play that way, and how much of it is because of the poor service he gets at Spurs? Being supplied by Eriksen, Bruno, Rashford, Antony, etc., he may be very willing to be a target man bagging 40 goals a aseason???
 
Erik the Red said:
How much of Kane coming deep is because he wants to play that way, and how much of it is because of the poor service he gets at Spurs? Being supplied by Eriksen, Bruno, Rashford, Antony, etc., he may be very willing to be a target man bagging 40 goals a aseason???
Click to expand...

Perhaps. I'm not opposed to the idea of getting him, but you just know it's going to be for an insane fee if it were to happen and would hardly offer a longterm solution up front.
 
LawCharltonBest said:
This is a good question.

A year left on the contract of a 30 year old striker from a rival team (bit similar to the RvP pursuit) you'd think it should be a knockdown fee, but Spurs are very reluctant sellers.

If Newcastle secure a CL place, they will shoot the price right up IMO. They'll want him to be their new Shearer #9 figure and probably be willing to pay the earth
Click to expand...
I keep seeing Newcastle being mentioned but they've got Wilson and just spent £60m on Isak. Is that a realistic destination for Kane?
 
CM10 said:
I keep seeing Newcastle being mentioned but they've got Wilson and just spent £60m on Isak. Is that a realistic destination for Kane?
Click to expand...
Yes. Kane is better than both.

Beyond that, they'd have a World Class #9 (their equivalent of our #7) and their best striker since Shearer. Would do their "brand" wonders too and make them immediately more attractive to build a team around Harry Kane.

They also have unlimited funds now, so won't be a problem getting him. FFP doesn't exist to oil clubs.

I think United will get him if we get oil money before the Summer though. United need goals. Kane is goals. Ten Hag has also said that he wants to sign more English players. And Kane at 30 would likely want a more "finished" project
 
LawCharltonBest said:
Yes. Kane is better than both.

Beyond that, they'd have a World Class #9 (their equivalent of our #7) and their best striker since Shearer. Would do their "brand" wonders too and make them immediately more attractive to build a team around Harry Kane.

They also have unlimited funds now, so won't be a problem getting him. FFP doesn't exist to oil clubs.

I think United will get him if we get oil money before the Summer though. United need goals. Kane is goals. Ten Hag has also said that he wants to sign more English players. And Kane at 30 would likely want a more "finished" project
Click to expand...
Maybe, but Newcastle have a few positions where they still have Championship standard footballers playing for them. Maybe they'll decide to feck all of that off in pursuit of a big name but they'd be more sensible to look to replace those players first.
 
CM10 said:
Maybe, but Newcastle have a few positions where they still have Championship standard footballers playing for them. Maybe they'll decide to feck all of that off in pursuit of a big name but they'd be more sensible to look to replace those players first.
Click to expand...
I genuinely think that they can do both, spend £500m this summer and still get away with it.

As soon as city won in court, even though everyone knew they were guilty, it ended FFP. Clubs now know they can do what they want
 
groovyalbert said:
Perhaps. I'm not opposed to the idea of getting him, but you just know it's going to be for an insane fee if it were to happen and would hardly offer a longterm solution up front.
Click to expand...

Yeah me neither but do understand people's concerns about him coming deep to get the ball and how much longer he has at this level. On the other hand he is proven in this league unlike an Osimhen/Vlahovic/Sesko
 
croadyman said:
Yeah me neither but do understand people's concerns about him coming deep to get the ball and how much longer he has at this level. On the other hand he is proven in this league unlike an Osimhen/Vlahovic/Sesko
Click to expand...

Only one I would go for above Kane from that list is Osimhen. The striker market is pretty uninspiring right now, and at a time that old-fashioned number 9s are coming back. Missing out on Haaland was huge.
 
groovyalbert said:
Only one I would go for above Kane from that list is Osimhen. The striker market is pretty uninspiring right now, and at a time that old-fashioned number 9s are coming back. Missing out on Haaland was huge.
Click to expand...

We missed out on Haaland at Molde under Ole in my opinion,then again Jose wasn't a fan of developing young players. I think the chance had gone at Salzburg because wouldn't accept that loan fee situation
 
groovyalbert said:
I'm not sure if he's a fit for us anymore to be perfectly honest. He's not the target-man, running off the shoulders of defences striker he used to be. He likes to drop and play more centrally as he's gotten older - essentially coming into the spaces Bruno and Eriksen like to operate in. I would have thought ETH would be more keen for a striker who can hold up the ball, bully defenders and prove a good target in the box. For the daft amount we'd have to fork out, I don't think Kane would solve the issues.
Click to expand...

This isn’t what we should want our number 9 to be doing. We want a number 9 who can drop deep, interact with Bruno and bring our wide players into the game. Kane is also as good a target man/hold up number 9 as it’s possible to get. He doesn’t need to change his game at all to be the complete answer to our number 9 issue.

Any other player we might be able to sign is a major risk. Kane is as near a certain success as it’s possible to get.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.