Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

If Spurs were 6th looking well short of top 4 and United comfortably second or third I'd see the optimism in recent pages.

We're two points above Spurs with a game in hand. I'm confident we'll make top 4 but it's still close, we have Case banned for 4 games, we could face more silly ref calls and fatigue.

Spurs can get top 4, they did last season. Kane would probably stay if they do and I can see him staying if they get Poch or Tuchel and it's very possible Levy just refuses.

I'm pleased the club will look for a quick deal if we're in a position to sign him and Spurs end the season poorly. I said this a while back we can't get embroiled in a saga then miss out. We need assurances from the player is willing and Spurs will allow a sale so we can get this wrapped up otherwise we have to move on.
 
balaks said:
Ok well let's say we get 100 million for Kane in the summer. How do we replace him? You won't get as good a player as Kane even if you spent the full 100 million quid you got for his sale (at least not one that would want to play for Spurs). Does it not make more sense to keep Kane at the club for as long as possible even if you don't get money for him if he leaves the following summer? Surely that benefits the club a lot more than one big pay out for an irreplaceable player.
Click to expand...

You won't, but you might get 2 good players that want to be at the club and who might stay for a longer period.

Anyway, it's a tough question for the board if he doesn't want to renew. You can gamble on him changing his mind in summer '24 and re-signing. But he might just go free at Real or something. And if Spurs don't achieve anything with him next season (like a top 4 finish) that's a £100m wasted.
 
balaks said:
Kane will have no say in it while he is under contract.
Click to expand...

Of course he will. Levy will have to get Kane to agree to any move. Levy won’t want to lose out on £60-£70m. Kane will want to leave this summer if possible. They will come to an arrangement to make that happen.
 
Doracle said:
Of course he will. Levy will have to get Kane to agree to any move. Levy won’t want to lose out on £60-£70m. Kane will want to leave this summer if possible. They will come to an arrangement to make that happen.
Click to expand...
Like they did last time you mean? :lol:
 
balaks said:
Like they did last time you mean? :lol:
Click to expand...

You realise that there is massive difference in the circumstances right? In one year, Kane walks for nothing. The power all now lies with him. Levy will be crawling to Kane to beg him to leave this summer if they get a bid of £60m or more.
 
balaks said:
Why does this leave Levy in a tough situation? He has absolutely no desire to sell Kane for a penny less than he thinks he is worth. If that means Kane leaves next summer for free then so be it.
Click to expand...
This is the kind of thing that's easy to say as a football fan, but these are huge amounts of money we're talking about here. If Levy was to turn down £70m odd for Kane in the summer for the sake of one season, that's not necessarily the best decision for the football club if Kane does run his contract down.

If Daniel Levy thinks Harry Kane will run his contract down, it is his responsibility to extract maximum value from Kane this summer. The caveat being if he sets Kane's valuation too high, it could scupper the deal entirely. It's a game of chicken. Levy needs to hope that Kane is prepared to renew, and United need to be prepared to move for Osimhen instead if Spurs set the price too high.
 
balaks said:
Ok well let's say we get 100 million for Kane in the summer. How do we replace him? You won't get as good a player as Kane even if you spent the full 100 million quid you got for his sale (at least not one that would want to play for Spurs). Does it not make more sense to keep Kane at the club for as long as possible even if you don't get money for him if he leaves the following summer? Surely that benefits the club a lot more than one big pay out for an irreplaceable player. He almost guarantees 30 goals/assists every season. The chances of being able to bring in a player capable of achieving a similar level is very slim even if we got a big fee for Kane.
Click to expand...
You’re just kicking the can down the road. At least you’re armed with a fee to find a replacement this summer.
Let’s be honest. What difference would this season have been if you sold Kane last summer? A restructuring of your attacking output may exactly be what you need anyway.
I’m not saying you bend over for every transfer request but this stubbornness in doubling fees for English clubs is the stupidest stance of any top club in England.
You already did this to Kane and got two extra seasons out of him. You’ve already did well in that sense, this seems to be really pushing it.
 
Doracle said:
You realise that there is massive difference in the circumstances right? In one year, Kane walks for nothing. The power all now lies with him. Levy will be crawling to Kane to beg him to leave this summer if they get a bid of £60m or more.
Click to expand...
Spurs might have a little bit of power but it more or less relies on them bullying Kane into thinking his only way of getting the Premier League goalscoring record is through staying with them.

If they priced him out of a move to United this summer and we moved for another striker, he wouldn't have many other options in England. It would be a shitty thing to do and it could just as easily backfire if Kane grows a backbone and forces an exit anyway, but we've already seen him sign a stupid contract with Spurs once before.
 
balaks said:
Ok well let's say we get 100 million for Kane in the summer. How do we replace him? You won't get as good a player as Kane even if you spent the full 100 million quid you got for his sale (at least not one that would want to play for Spurs). Does it not make more sense to keep Kane at the club for as long as possible even if you don't get money for him if he leaves the following summer? Surely that benefits the club a lot more than one big pay out for an irreplaceable player. He almost guarantees 30 goals/assists every season. The chances of being able to bring in a player capable of achieving a similar level is very slim even if we got a big fee for Kane.
Click to expand...
If you're having difficulty replacing him this season for £100m, how on earth would you plan to replace him for nothing next season? There's no eventuality where Kane leaving for free is the best outcome for Spurs.
 
CM10 said:
Spurs might have a little bit of power but it more or less relies on them bullying Kane into thinking his only way of getting the Premier League goalscoring record is through staying with them.

If they priced him out of a move to United this summer and we moved for another striker, he wouldn't have many other options in England. It would be a shitty thing to do and it could just as easily backfire if Kane grows a backbone and forces an exit anyway, but we've already seen him sign a stupid contract with Spurs once before.
Click to expand...

He will just sit tight for a season if they try that. Add another 20 or so goals next season and then move for free to his choice of clubs in 2024.
 
cyberman said:
You’re just kicking the can down the road. At least you’re armed with a fee to find a replacement this summer.
Let’s be honest. What difference would this season have been if you sold Kane last summer? A restructuring of your attacking output may exactly be what you need anyway.
I’m not saying you bend over for every transfer request but this stubbornness in doubling fees for English clubs is the stupidest stance of any top club in England.
You already did this to Kane and got two extra seasons out of him. You’ve already did well in that sense, this seems to be really pushing it.
Click to expand...
We would be sitting mid-table at best with no chance of top 4 without Kane this season.
 
I see Kane leaving, just depends whether or not it’s this year or next. What would spurs fans find more palatable? The fact he forced a move but it earned them a lot of cash to reinvest in the squad, or he got his head down and did his job, but left on a free at the end of it? I don’t see him wanting to burn his legacy at spurs, but I still see him at United either way.
 
i reckon kane will renew with spurs if they get 4th anyway, so these conversations might well be pointless. but if they don't qualify for the CL then spurs are going to be disappointed at the offers received for kane this summer. 50-60m is plenty for kane, and united should fire in a lowball offer valid for 7 days only, and move on quickly if its not accepted. i don't have any appetite for the de jong-style nonsense of last summer.
 
Last edited:
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
If Kane is our first choice (I’d probably prefer Osimhen) we should give Spurs a “take it or leave it “ offer at the start of the transfer window, or even before, with the proviso that if they accept, the deal gets done in a week. This offer should be a “Best and Final Offer” of whatever we think he’s worth, the max we’re willing to pay, say £120m. If they refuse the offer then forget Kane and move on to other targets.
Click to expand...
:eek:

That's lunacy
 
MegadrivePerson said:
£120 million for a 30 year old with 12 months left on his contract!

£40/50 million is fair. If Spurs don't accept we can get him for free a year later.
Click to expand...
£120m is obviously way too much. However £40-50m is obviously too little.

Unless Levy truly is an idiot, he'd sell at somewhere between £60 and £80m. He'd probably hold out for the higher end of that range, but if he pushes too hard for it he may find himself losing Kane for free in 12 months.
 
scottser said:
i reckon kane will renew with spurs if they get 4th anyway, so these conversations might well be pointless. but if they don't qualify for the CL then spurs are going to be disappointed at the offers received for kane this summer. 50-60m is plenty for kane, and united should fire in a lowball offer valid for 7 days only, and move on quickly if its not accepted. i don't have any appetite for the de jong-style nonsense of last summer.
Click to expand...

I don't understand this logic at all?

Kane wants to actually win trophies, not just make up the numbers. Do Spurs look anywhere near being a Premier League/Champions League winning team?
 
balaks said:
We would be sitting mid-table at best with no chance of top 4 without Kane this season.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure about that. Who knows what other attacker you would have bought and you aren’t far off mid table points wise as it is.
It’s not a great standard chasing top 4 this year
 
Sparky Rhiwabon said:
If Kane is our first choice (I’d probably prefer Osimhen) we should give Spurs a “take it or leave it “ offer at the start of the transfer window, or even before, with the proviso that if they accept, the deal gets done in a week. This offer should be a “Best and Final Offer” of whatever we think he’s worth, the max we’re willing to pay, say £120m. If they refuse the offer then forget Kane and move on to other targets.
Click to expand...

Wasn't 120m the figure City wouldn't pay last summer?

I know we're not exactly kingpin negotiators, but to pay anywhere near the same amount would be utterly ridiculous
 
cyberman said:
I’m not sure about that. Who knows what other attacker you would have bought and you aren’t far off mid table points wise as it is.
It’s not a great standard chasing top 4 this year
Click to expand...
Kane is sitting on 20 league goals in 27 appearances - name me one attacker who we could have realistically bought who could come close to matching that output. As a team we have only managed 49 goals and he has scored 20 of them!
 
MegadrivePerson said:
I don't understand this logic at all?

Kane wants to actually win trophies, not just make up the numbers. Do Spurs look anywhere near being a Premier League/Champions League winning team?
Click to expand...

The logic is presumably that the only "guarantee" of a trophy is probably at Man City, and even this season they look well off their usual.
They won't be interested, so who might be? Us and Chelsea.

Could he go to Chelsea? It'd probably ruin his Tottenham fan support, and they don't look particularly likely to challenge in the short term either.
United are clearly on the up, but again, no guarantees.

So hanging about where he already is for an even fatter contract probably would end up being the smart move.
 
MegadrivePerson said:
I don't understand this logic at all?

Kane wants to actually win trophies, not just make up the numbers. Do Spurs look anywhere near being a Premier League/Champions League winning team?
Click to expand...
And which regular trophy-winning team is going to buy him? Not City, not Arsenal, not Liverpool, not Chelsea. Yeah, he could go abroad but he probably won't. He wants the PL top scorer record, so realistically he either stays put or comes to us. If we don't qualify for CL and Spurs do, he might well stay there.
 
MegadrivePerson said:
If Kane wanted to stay he would have signed a new contract by now. He will have plenty of options on a free next summer, who wouldn't want to sign him?

Spurs are a team that need major surgery. Keeping him fir an extra 12 months out of stubbornness would be a brain dead act by Levy.
Click to expand...

Spurs are not in a good position now but may be in a different place in 12 months. If Pochettino returns, they acquire a few good players and are competing next year, the outlook may be completely different.

I do agree it's most likely the wrong move to keep him but Levy despises United and thinks of us as their key rivals. He didn't event want to sell him to City because he perceived them to be rivals, even though they are not competing for anything.
 
balaks said:
Ok well let's say we get 100 million for Kane in the summer. How do we replace him? You won't get as good a player as Kane even if you spent the full 100 million quid you got for his sale (at least not one that would want to play for Spurs). Does it not make more sense to keep Kane at the club for as long as possible even if you don't get money for him if he leaves the following summer? Surely that benefits the club a lot more than one big pay out for an irreplaceable player. He almost guarantees 30 goals/assists every season. The chances of being able to bring in a player capable of achieving a similar level is very slim even if we got a big fee for Kane.
Click to expand...

Look no further than the Bale sale to Madrid. The funds were spunked away on garbage and Spurs were worse off for the sale.

The price has to be right (greater than 80 at least), and a credible plan for re-investment of those funds needs to be in place. Otherwise Spurs are better off keeping Kane till his contract expires.
 
adexkola said:
Look no further than the Bale sale to Madrid. The funds were spunked away on garbage and Spurs were worse off for the sale.

The price has to be right (greater than 80 at least), and a credible plan for re-investment of those funds needs to be in place. Otherwise Spurs are better off keeping Kane till his contract expires.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's a good point and you can be sure that Levy learnt from that experience - most of that cash was wasted.
 
adexkola said:
Look no further than the Bale sale to Madrid. The funds were spunked away on garbage and Spurs were worse off for the sale.

The price has to be right (greater than 80 at least), and a credible plan for re-investment of those funds needs to be in place. Otherwise Spurs are better off keeping Kane till his contract expires.
Click to expand...
How is losing out on, let's say 80m, better?
 
Sarni said:
Spurs are not in a good position now but may be in a different place in 12 months. If Pochettino returns, they acquire a few good players and are competing next year, the outlook may be completely different.

I do agree it's most likely the wrong move to keep him but Levy despises United and thinks of us as their key rivals. He didn't event want to sell him to City because he perceived them to be rivals, even though they are not competing for anything.
Click to expand...

That's putting it mildly!

Spurs need a major major rebuild! Put it this way would any Spurs player bar Kane get in to the United first eleven?

There's a close to zero per cent chance that Spurs will win anything in the next few years. They are so far behind at least five or six Premier League clubs now. Even if they scrape in to the top four they will be overtaken by Chelsea, Liverpool and possibly Newcastle next season.
 
balaks said:
Like they did last time you mean? :lol:
Click to expand...
I think you’re not realising this situation isn’t great for Levy regardless of his stingyness. You’ve not been in a situation before where you’ve a 30yr old Kane with only 1 year left on his contract. Levy’s golden goose ain’t as strong as it used to be.

Levy would be pretty dumb to keep Kane and then let him go for free as opposed to taking any fee north of £70m. Especially if spurs don’t even qualify for UCL.
 
balaks said:
We would be sitting mid-table at best with no chance of top 4 without Kane this season.
Click to expand...
And having Kane for nearly a decade while regarded as one of the best strikers ever in the prem, you’ve not come close to winning anything either. It suggests maybe it’s best to try a new direction.
 
HookedOnAPhelan said:
Don't give in to Levy, tap Kane up for '24 instead.
Click to expand...
I’d rather go for someone else than wait till 2024. Otherwise it means us wasting another season next season on a makeshift striker. Also, the likes of Osimhen (who will probably go this summer anyway), Sesko and Ramos will all be a year older and more experienced. Kane would be 32 in his first game for us if we wait till summer 24.
 
Chief123 said:
I’d rather go for someone else than wait till 2024. Otherwise it means us wasting another season next season on a makeshift striker. Also, the likes of Osimhen (who will probably go this summer anyway), Sesko and Ramos will all be a year older and more experienced. Kane would be 32 in his first game for us if we wait till summer 24.
Click to expand...

He'd be 31.

It's a tough one. Osimhen would be so expensive that we won't be able to afford much else (unless we manage to get a few quid for some of our duds). And we desperately need a new midfielder and goalkeeper, and arguably a right back too. I'm not sold on Sesko or Ramos.
 
HookedOnAPhelan said:
He'd be 31.

It's a tough one. Osimhen would be so expensive that we won't be able to afford much else (unless we manage to get a few quid for some of our duds). And we desperately need a new midfielder and goalkeeper, and arguably a right back too. I'm not sold on Sesko or Ramos.
Click to expand...
My main concern is we need to resolve the striker issue this summer otherwise it’s another season wasted as we won’t challenge for a title with what we have or a makeshift one.

If it is to be Kane, it needs to be this summer otherwise I’d rather we target someone else.
 
Chief123 said:
I’d rather go for someone else than wait till 2024. Otherwise it means us wasting another season next season on a makeshift striker. Also, the likes of Osimhen (who will probably go this summer anyway), Sesko and Ramos will all be a year older and more experienced. Kane would be 32 in his first game for us if we wait till summer 24.
Click to expand...

31 / 32 year old Kane is bad business unless it's on a free but the wages would be ridiculous. Tottenham are 100% not selling him this summer no chance. People are talking like Levy will prioritize the money over a free move which isn't going to happen he's stubbornness alone signifies this. Hopefully the club pursue Osimhen, David or Ramos.
 
Chief123 said:
And having Kane for nearly a decade while regarded as one of the best strikers ever in the prem, you’ve not come close to winning anything either. It suggests maybe it’s best to try a new direction.
Click to expand...
I don’t think he is the problem for them. But he is not the solution either. His prime days will be sooner than later behind him. They need to think for the future. You sell your car when it’s still worth some money.
 
If Kane is smart, he will stay for one more year and leave on free and get good money along with good project for him. If Spurs quote close to 100m not many big clubs will be in queue for him considering his age, wages and transfer fee. However, on free lot of clubs would be interested and he might pick the best one for him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.