Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Manchester City ready to pay €150m to sign Harry Kane from Tottenham







beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,310
£110m.

i dont understand why they think he's worth that, even accounting for the bonkers state of player transfer fees. is Kane really the best forward you can sign for £110m?
 




Badger Boy

Mr Badger
Jan 28, 2016
3,655
£110m.

i dont understand why they think he's worth that, even accounting for the bonkers state of player transfer fees. is Kane really the best forward you can sign for £110m?

Yes. Of course he is. Kane in that team guarantees the title and would challenge PSG for the Champions League. His character off the pitch is worth just as much as his performances and ability on it. He is worth every penny.
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
10,679
£110m.

i dont understand why they think he's worth that, even accounting for the bonkers state of player transfer fees. is Kane really the best forward you can sign for £110m?

More importantly, is FFP over now then?
 








nickbrighton

Well-known member
Feb 19, 2016
1,920
Yes. Of course he is. Kane in that team guarantees the title and would challenge PSG for the Champions League. His character off the pitch is worth just as much as his performances and ability on it. He is worth every penny.

But does it really?
Yes he is a great striker, but how many more goals would he score than City would have got anyway-its not like they are lacking firepower is it? And even if he does score a hatful more than whoever he replaces, it just means they win by more goals not that they win more games-or not many

I'm now(and have been for a while) convinced that the big clubs are now buying players not necessarily because they need them, but to stop them going elsewhere.

Say City spend a total of £210 000 000 just on Grealish and Kane, how much more do they have to win, and how many extra shirts do they have to sell to even break even?

I don't think they are £210million of good, and certainly wont improve city by that amount
 




dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
52,459
Burgess Hill
But does it really?
Yes he is a great striker, but how many more goals would he score than City would have got anyway-its not like they are lacking firepower is it? And even if he does score a hatful more than whoever he replaces, it just means they win by more goals not that they win more games-or not many

I'm now(and have been for a while) convinced that the big clubs are now buying players not necessarily because they need them, but to stop them going elsewhere.

Say City spend a total of £210 000 000 just on Grealish and Kane, how much more do they have to win, and how many extra shirts do they have to sell to even break even?

I don't think they are £210million of good, and certainly wont improve city by that amount

The owners don’t genuinely give two ***** about breaking even, they just want to win everything. Whatever the number, it’s basically pocket change.
 


BBassic

I changed this.
Jul 28, 2011
12,318
But does it really?
Yes he is a great striker, but how many more goals would he score than City would have got anyway-its not like they are lacking firepower is it? And even if he does score a hatful more than whoever he replaces, it just means they win by more goals not that they win more games-or not many

I'm now(and have been for a while) convinced that the big clubs are now buying players not necessarily because they need them, but to stop them going elsewhere.

Say City spend a total of £210 000 000 just on Grealish and Kane, how much more do they have to win, and how many extra shirts do they have to sell to even break even?

I don't think they are £210million of good, and certainly wont improve city by that amount

Kane has averaged 23 goals a season since 2014. He would get City close to 100 goals a season probably. Plus that'd be taking 23 goals away from Spurs.

It's a no brainer for a team with the money that City have available.
 


Superphil

Dismember
Jul 7, 2003
25,419
In a pile of football shirts
I'm now(and have been for a while) convinced that the big clubs are now buying players not necessarily because they need them, but to stop them going elsewhere.

Say City spend a total of £210 000 000 just on Grealish and Kane, how much more do they have to win, and how many extra shirts do they have to sell to even break even?

I don't think they are £210million of good, and certainly wont improve city by that amount

They and others have been trying to buy all the talent to ensure that they can't be challenged,
 




LamieRobertson

Not awoke
Feb 3, 2008
46,696
SHOREHAM BY SEA
Chelsea confirm signing Lukaku for £97.5m so is Kane at £110m so outrageous?

Football has gone a bit mad though….but no change there
 




Badger Boy

Mr Badger
Jan 28, 2016
3,655
But does it really?
Yes he is a great striker, but how many more goals would he score than City would have got anyway-its not like they are lacking firepower is it? And even if he does score a hatful more than whoever he replaces, it just means they win by more goals not that they win more games-or not many

I'm now(and have been for a while) convinced that the big clubs are now buying players not necessarily because they need them, but to stop them going elsewhere.

Say City spend a total of £210 000 000 just on Grealish and Kane, how much more do they have to win, and how many extra shirts do they have to sell to even break even?

I don't think they are £210million of good, and certainly wont improve city by that amount

I think you're totally, totally wrong. Harry Kane would improve almost any team but he would certainly improve City's team. He's a fantastic footballer, the fee is obviously madness and hard for anyone to defend. But of course he's worth the investment for them and if they sweep the domestic trophies again and even pick up the Champions League then they'll consider that a good return. As others have mentioned, they don't really have a business model. They spend, spend, spend and to hell with the consequences.
 






Happy Exile

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Apr 19, 2018
1,866
This rates a single player at a higher value than the entire Burnley squad. Kane and Grealish together as worth more than both Norwich and Burnley squads combined. If this goes ahead and City get beaten by anyone, but especially by those outside the top 6, it'll be a cause for all supporters to celebrate.
 


Silverhatch

Well-known member
Feb 23, 2009
4,312
Preston Park
This rates a single player at a higher value than the entire Burnley squad. Kane and Grealish together as worth more than both Norwich and Burnley squads combined. If this goes ahead and City get beaten by anyone, but especially by those outside the top 6, it'll be a cause for all supporters to celebrate.

We beat 'em with half our team missing. No ****ing problem.
 


Swansman

Pro-peace
May 13, 2019
22,320
Sweden
Dont think he will score as many league goals as in Tottenham. Pretty difficult to play CF against teams that defend low with 11 players. Should be really nice for their CL adventures though.
 




studio150

Well-known member
Jul 30, 2011
29,619
On the Border
The worry for any team looking to sign a striker, is the transfer inflation that will follow if Kane is sold for £110m. So no problem for us......
 


daveinprague

New member
Oct 1, 2009
12,572
Prague, Czech Republic
I'm old enough to remember being shocked when Trevor Francis was sold for a million. These figures are mind boggling. One player can't be worth more than it cost to build the Amex. It's crazy.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here