Summer 2021 transfer thread.

[3 Stacks]

Just now, aRdja said:

No one would be saying that if he was 24. Fact is he’s 28 and quite injury prone.

Yes.

[Megadrive Man]

I think this could end up being like Zaha at Palace. The player desperate to go, but the club refusing to sell below their asking price. If United were in for him, I don't think they would have convinced Cavani to sign a new contract.  It will come down to how much City or Chelsea are prepared to offer Spurs. 

[Anubis]

We'll know soon enough if City announce some jarg sponsorship deal.

[Ne Moe Imya]

1 hour ago, Jockey said:

I agree. But I think if you spend £150m ish- then you want more than 2 or 3 seasons. I know money isn't an issue for them but even I can't see them having both! 

There is NO WAY Spurs are getting anywhere near 150m.

 

I'd be surprised if they get over 100m, actually. He will be on huge wages and have zero resale value in 3 years. The media are just making up figures if they think he'll go for that much. No one bar Haaland and Mbappe are going for over 100m this summer - far too many clubs with huge losses, and more world class players available for sale than usual.

 

If Levy thinks he can get 150m then this is going to be a saga that rumbles on all summer and hopefully ends with Kane publicly saying he wants to move before coming back to WHL (or whatever their new ground is called) with his tail between his legs. And United hold out for so long to get him that we get Sancho while they're waiting for Levy to reduce his price, meaning they have to settle for someone older and overpriced (Icardi for 80m?) on deadline day.

[Tony Moanero]

[Barrington Womble]

10 hours ago, Jockey said:

I think Kane has United signing written all over him. I think City would prefer to wait until Haaland became avaliable. I can see Lingard and another being used as a makeweight  if I was Spurs I'd try and get De Gea - an upgrade on Lorris.

 

Not sure Chelsea is a viable option. But they would be one of very few who can afford him. 

I'd love to see Levy's face when De Gea tells him he wants his 350k per week! I don't think spurs wage bill is a great deal different to Everton's. 

[chrisbonnie]

People can say what they want, 

 

But if we paid even 100 million for Kane, you could nearly certainly etch our names on that premier league trophy for next season. 

 

The chap is a superb player and legit goal machine

[No2]

13 minutes ago, chrisbonnie said:

People can say what they want, 

 

But if we paid even 100 million for Kane, you could nearly certainly etch our names on that premier league trophy for next season. 

 

The chap is a superb player and legit goal machine

That is true but a player with ankles and costs such as his are for the stupid and infinitely rich.

[SlugTrail]

Just now, No2 said:

That is true but a player with ankles and costs such as his are for the stupid and infinitely rich.

Step forward man utd.

[Scott_M]

46 minutes ago, chrisbonnie said:

People can say what they want, 

 

But if we paid even 100 million for Kane, you could nearly certainly etch our names on that premier league trophy for next season. 

 

The chap is a superb player and legit goal machine

 

I was going to quote a few posters I disagreed with but decided to increase my productivity by just quoting one I did agree with.

 

Whether people think he's a cheat (which he is) or a slobbering goon (which he definitely is), the guy is a great, great player & goal scorer. 

 

As the stats show, he gets a few injuries but I'd hardly say he's massively injury prone. 

 

With all the assists he's added to his game now, he'd be absolutely brilliant for us. 

 

[Scott_M]

32 minutes ago, No2 said:

That is true but a player with ankles and costs such as his are for the stupid and infinitely rich.

 

How much would you want to see us pay to win the title again?

 

It won't happen but I'd would love us to sign him. 

 

Still, signing Kane along with Mbappe & Sancho this summer might be a stretch.

 

[Scott_M]

FWIW worth, I only see a deal for him if players are make weights in the deal.

 

I don't see us being interested and even if we were, I doubt we'd have nearly enough to make up the shortfall. Shaq? Ox? 

 

I don't see Man City wanting to get rid of anybody substantial. Sterling maybe?

 

The mancs certainly seem like the most attractive option. Deadwood like Martial, Lindgard, Van De Beek, Dan James, Mata Bailly & Jones look every inch Spurs players.

[M_B]

Kane has got 3 years left on his contract. Can't see him leaving this summer unless someone offers well over 100.

[aRdja]

8 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

FWIW worth, I only see a deal for him if players are make weights in the deal.

 

I don't see us being interested and even if we were, I doubt we'd have nearly enough to make up the shortfall. Shaq? Ox? 

 

I don't see Man City wanting to get rid of anybody substantial. Sterling maybe?

 

The mancs certainly seem like the most attractive option. Deadwood like Martial, Lindgard, Van De Beek, Dan James, Mata Bailly & Jones look every inch Spurs players.

City could easily afford £150m for Kane IMO.

[sir roger]

Depends to an extent also on who Spurs bring in as manager and what ambition they show , as Kane could change his mind.

[No2]

35 minutes ago, Scott_M said:

 

How much would you want to see us pay to win the title again?

 

It won't happen but I'd would love us to sign him. 

 

Still, signing Kane along with Mbappe & Sancho this summer might be a stretch.

 

If he cost 120m and guaranteed the title for the next 2 years then everyone would be all over that, including the owners and the manager. The problem with him is he comes with ankles hanging together by threads. That is a fact, it's like knowingly buying a car that has been in 3 bad accidents, it looks great but the risk isn't worth it*.

 

* unless you're rich enough for it to go wrong without any long term impact. Step forward oil money. Even Man Utd will be badly affected if this goes wrong for them.

[Barrington Womble]

1 hour ago, chrisbonnie said:

People can say what they want, 

 

But if we paid even 100 million for Kane, you could nearly certainly etch our names on that premier league trophy for next season. 

 

The chap is a superb player and legit goal machine

I think there's no doubting his ability to score goals and his aptitude to sit in deep would make him a perfect firmino replacement. But those ankles guarantee nothing. Anyone with those types of injuries at some point just drop off a cliff. I don't think anyone will complain if we signed Kane, but he feels very much like Torres to Chelsea for me. 

 

I don't think anyone will complain if we sign Kane, but considering how little money we commit to transfers, it would be a surprise to see us do it and I can understand if people would worry it would be kane and nobody for a summer or two. 

[Harry Squatter]

He will probably end up staying for another season. Might be the kick up the arse for the board to get a decent manager. 

[chrisbonnie]

36 minutes ago, No2 said:

If he cost 120m and guaranteed the title for the next 2 years then everyone would be all over that, including the owners and the manager. The problem with him is he comes with ankles hanging together by threads. That is a fact, it's like knowingly buying a car that has been in 3 bad accidents, it looks great but the risk isn't worth it*.

 

* unless you're rich enough for it to go wrong without any long term impact. Step forward oil money. Even Man Utd will be badly affected if this goes wrong for them.

 

Wasn't there similar talk when utd signed another "injury prone" forward from a different north London team. 

 

2 seasons later, with a champions league trophy and a league title added to their collection, van persie was lauded as a utd great....... 

 

The price is only ever remembered or mentioned if the transfer doesn't succeed, Kane will succeed with any of the other top 4 teams in England. That's a fact

[clangers]

I just don't see City really going for Kane, the mancs will be all over it. Bottom line is City are operating at a higher level than the mancs given the (obscene) depth of their spending and recent success. I would imagine City's first choice is Haaland?

 

As others have posted dodgy ankles and injury record and approaching that age (27 now). Engurland's captain and no 9 is a perfect fit for the mancs.

 

Levy will undoubtedly drag this out to extract every last penny even to the detriment of his own team and new manager.

 

Given Spurs debts about £50 of the transfer fee will be invested in the squad.

 

 

[magicrat]

30 minutes ago, chrisbonnie said:

 

Wasn't there similar talk when utd signed another "injury prone" forward from a different north London team. 

 

2 seasons later, with a champions league trophy and a league title added to their collection, van persie was lauded as a utd great....... 

 

The price is only ever remembered or mentioned if the transfer doesn't succeed, Kane will succeed with any of the other top 4 teams in England. That's a fact

 I agree . Kane still manages to pretty much come top of the scoring stats every season in a worse team and some recurrent injuries, I would be more than happy if we signed him but Utd will get him almost certainly

[El Rojo]

Looking forward to Gary Neville and Jamie Carragher's joint plea for a Liverpool/United protest against the Glazers running the club into the ground when they buy Harry Kane. 

 

Kane to them, Haaland to City, I reckon. 

 

If we were to go big, I think Sancho would be our limit, but we won't do that without selling either. 

[JohnnyH]

It doesn't matter a shite if Man Utd (where Kane will no doubt end up) pay £100m or £150m for him if he does well, which he would as he's a phenomenal goal scorer.  We saw it with people bleating about what we were paying for VVD and Becker only for them to go very quiet very quickly when they realised how good they were.

 

Kane at Utd would make them title challengers.  He's that good.  Man Utd are a team who rely on good players as their manager wouldn't know a tactic from a tictac. "Just get the ball to Kane in the box" is an easy one and one that'd work with the quality they have.

 

Also, Man Utd are the devils club and never seem to get bad injuries*

 

*If someone posts showing key Man Utd players with bad injuries I will ignore it as it doesn't suit my narrative

[No2]

40 minutes ago, chrisbonnie said:

 

Wasn't there similar talk when utd signed another "injury prone" forward from a different north London team. 

 

2 seasons later, with a champions league trophy and a league title added to their collection, van persie was lauded as a utd great....... 

 

The price is only ever remembered or mentioned if the transfer doesn't succeed, Kane will succeed with any of the other top 4 teams in England. That's a fact

Van Persie is a great shout. He's probably exactly what the buyer is getting here only 6 times the price.

 

Van Persie had one good season, they won the league and he scored 26 goals. The following seasons he scored 12 and 10 goals and was sold for £3m. 

 

If money wasn't an object everyone on here would take Kane whether they admit it or not. He's brilliant but he's a crock, Daniel Levy will be delighted with this news but also shitting it he breaks down again before he's sold.

[El Dangerous]

Have The Echo ran the story that ex pro touts Kane for Liverpool that inevitably ends with the caveat that a move seems unlikely?