Harry Kane | Bayern Munich player

[ForeverRed1]

Unless he is far cheaper than is being quoted why would we even consider buying such an old player with only a year left on his contract?

because he would have the biggest immediate impact. We need him and a potential world class understudy. If kane brings you 30 goals and a younger striker gets you 15, you’re suddenly looking different.

the money will only be spent if it is there and it can be. Simple as that.

 

[Red in STL]

As for Toney, we can’t have it both ways. He’ll be nearly 28 by the time we can use him. Kane will be just 30 if we sign him this summer so, in real terms, that’s only 2 seasons difference. One can’t be “just approaching his peak” and the other too old to sign.

Using the logic here we should only sign 29 year old players, you are right it's nonsense

 

[ROFLUTION]

Looking at it from Kane's POV.

- There will most likely not be any CL for the next 3 years at Spurs. United, Newcastle, Liverpool, Arsenal, City looks to be the future top 4 competitors. On the plus-side then that makes you more fresh to break the premier league goal scoring record.

- Will Spurs give him a big contract again to extend? He's on 200k a week now, he could probably get 250-300k another place like United or Newcastle. His offers might be better elsewhere, but Spurs should be desperate as they might drop off a cliff without him (if they get 80-120 from shipping him off, then that wont be enough to rebuild a whole team).

- Will he reach most scoring striker at Spurs? He's missing 49 goals and he turns 30 in july. That's 2 seasons at a stable side where he's the star man like at Spurs if he does it quickly like this year. He'll reach it no matter what imo. Even if he takes 3 years at United with moderate succes / 13 goals a year, he'll still reach Shearers' record at some point before hanging up his boots.

- Will he be a success at another club? Almost likely in any way yes. If he chooses Newcastle, plenty of crosses and will be the star. If he chooses United, plenty of games and plenty of talent around him.

- Possibility of winning actual trophies elsewhere? Yes. Plenty. Stay at Spurs and you compete for Europa League and domestic cups.

Reason says he should move, but he might be too much of a conservative guy who's afraid of taking the risk of moving. He'd be absolutely adored wherever he moves, so I wouldn't understand why he'd want to stay.

 

[Red in STL]

An interesting point about the possibility of Kane cannibalizing goals that others would score, but I'm not sure of that. Under the present no circumstances let's take a look at our players who are expected to score goals.

Rashford. With respect to Rashy, your point is well taken. He might drop off 5-6 from the current 22 goals he has in all competitions this season.
Martial. Your point is not well taken.
Sancho. Nope.
Antony. Nope.
Wout. Nope.
Garnacho. It seems more likely than not that Garnacho's goal production will increase next season even with Kane.

There's not much in our attack to worry about being cannibalized.

As for speculation as to the goal tally Harry would add, I've been thinking more like 20-25 rather than 25-30. Harry is currently on 29 goals in all comps and there's no reason to believe that he'll collapse next season into a 15 goal scorer as you suggest. But what I do believe is this, that because Harry has excellent holdup play and can find a key pass in the final third that not only will he NOT cannibalize goals from Rashford, Sancho, Antony and Garnacho -- he will substantially improve their production.

Just going off the eyeball test only, but it seems pretty obvious to me that after we let go of Cavani and Ronaldo we've been playing without a striker for almost the entire season. Unless you have medical knowledge of Kane's fitness that he's about to collapse as a footballer, he would be the perfect fit for us.

That said, I have my doubts that Harry would want to join United. But if he is interested, and if we can get him for no more than the 80m that he's reasonably worth right now, we'd be daft to pass up on him...unless there really is something to the Mbappe rumors, which I doubt even more.

I don't think it's just a question of how many goals it's when he scores them as well, he's scored in 75% of PL games this season, if he was able to do that with us it would be transformative in the number of games we win rather than draw or even lose

The problem I have with a younger striker is that by the time whoever it is capable of scoring like Kane obviously can we'll be replacing our other best players because of age, to take advantage of Casemiro, Bruno, Varane we need a top striker now

 

[Kag]

Ah so Ferdinand being a success back in the day is more relevant than all the bad transfers in like the last 5 years? Come on man, you can't be serious. Even if I wouldn't consider that premise to be faulty, the people who successfully brought expensive players in are gone. The people who are bringing in players right now don't deserve anything close to trust. Not saying they will never earn it but right now, there is absolutely no reason to be confident.


He has been really good. But the level he entered was so low that probably even McGinn would have looked like Busquets to us. And I am pretty sure, Real is just as happy with the deal as n us getting 60 million for a guy who has been replaced already by two promising young players in his position.


Nobody is a guarantee. This is crazy talk, seriously man. Just look at the list of biggest premier league flops and you'll see United take most of the top 10. Nobody is a guarantee. The other poster quoted actual Tottenham fans talking about Kanes shortcomings - do you watch him week in and week out? Do you think you know better than them what he brings and what not?

(add on: based on transfermarkt.de, 7(!!!) out of the Top 20 Premier League transfers (based on fee) are Uniteds, Chelsea 6, City is on 4, Liverpool 2, Arsenal 1. The players of United are
4. Pogba
5. Antony
6. Maguire
7. Sancho
8. Lukaku
16. Di Maria
18. Casemiro

You could argue that Casemiro does look like a good transfer, but it is early days. Antony and Sancho is early days as well but Sancho looks like flop and for Antony it is clear we grossly overpayed. Di Maria - flop, Lukaku - flop, Maguire - Flop, Pogba - flop. So much money gone, so many considered a guarantee. And what have we ended up with?

"We have to pay up to bring in the best" my a**.


This mindset is the headline above all the bad decisions in terms of recruitment in the last 10 years. And again - I am not saying that Kane isn't a good player or that he couldn't be of use to us. But he will cost a leg and the money spent on him we won't be able to spend elsewhere on the team. It is the opposite of forward thinking (pun intended). The player made the decision to give his best years to Spurs and some of our fans are rooting for us to provide him with the last big paycheck in his carreer. My mind is boggled.

Antony and Sancho are exactly the sort of young, hungry, talented players people like you are suggesting we sign. Look now, you’re suggesting they’re shite. That fella at Napoli, or the one at Atalanta, folk are raving about is exactly the same level of risk.

Kane, under Ten Hag, in this United, isn’t a risk. It just isn’t. It’s guaranteed goals. At least 20, probably 30 in the league alone. That’s what he is.

You’re sitting there as Captain Hindsight and looking too much into the fees. Lukaku and Maguire are exactly the sort of high performing, reasonably young players folk wanted us to go for. We did, and for different reasons they didn’t/haven’t worked.

What is the alternative, exactly? Some punt for £20 million. We’ve been there and done it. Amad gets brought in for a wedge and folk whinge that we don’t see the worth for a while. We bring in the likes of Darmian and Schneiderlin and folk get all excited because they’re not ready-made world beaters, yet ready to step up - turns out they weren’t. Again, you name it, we’ve tried it.

We need one of the best strikers in world football. More than anything we need that. That player is Harry Kane.

I’m sick of this talk around building for three or four years away. We’re in no position for this and neither is Ten Hag. He needs goals and he needs them in September. Kane brings them as a guarantee. And it is a guarantee. There’s no evidence to the contrary. Get him in, pay the fee, and then look ahead.

 

[Wilt]

I’m sick of this talk around building for three or four years away. We’re in no position for this and neither is Ten Hag. He needs goals and he needs them in September. Kane brings them as a guarantee. And it is a guarantee. There’s no evidence to the contrary. Get him in, pay the fee, and then look ahead.

Totally agree this.

Laughable anyone could argue otherwise.

 

[Kag]

Totally agree this.

Laughable anyone could argue otherwise.

They’re fecking headcases. No other way around it.

There has not been a more obvious signing to blast the budget on since Ferguson packed in. Just do it. Break the bank. Ay, we need a goalkeeper, and we need a midfielder, but Kane is transformative. We go from a fairly decent side to one with one of the best out and out forwards on the planet.

Vlahovic, Oshimen, your man at Atalanta. Even if they come good then that could be two or three years. By that time Varane, Casemiro and Bruno are on the way out.

It’s been ten years since we won the title. Twenty will come around just as quick. Kane would be the single biggest factor in changing that by far.

 

[ColvaleGoa]

Looking at it from Kane's POV.

- There will most likely not be any CL for the next 3 years at Spurs. United, Newcastle, Liverpool, Arsenal, City looks to be the future top 4 competitors. On the plus-side then that makes you more fresh to break the premier league goal scoring record.

- Will Spurs give him a big contract again to extend? He's on 200k a week now, he could probably get 250-300k another place like United or Newcastle. His offers might be better elsewhere, but Spurs should be desperate as they might drop off a cliff without him (if they get 80-120 from shipping him off, then that wont be enough to rebuild a whole team).

- Will he reach most scoring striker at Spurs? He's missing 49 goals and he turns 30 in july. That's 2 seasons at a stable side where he's the star man like at Spurs if he does it quickly like this year. He'll reach it no matter what imo. Even if he takes 3 years at United with moderate succes / 13 goals a year, he'll still reach Shearers' record at some point before hanging up his boots.

- Will he be a success at another club? Almost likely in any way yes. If he chooses Newcastle, plenty of crosses and will be the star. If he chooses United, plenty of games and plenty of talent around him.

- Possibility of winning actual trophies elsewhere? Yes. Plenty. Stay at Spurs and you compete for Europa League and domestic cups.

Reason says he should move, but he might be too much of a conservative guy who's afraid of taking the risk of moving. He'd be absolutely adored wherever he moves, so I wouldn't understand why he'd want to stay.

I think Levy might be a problem. So Kane just needs to grow a pair and get out of Dodge, hopefully to United!

 

[sullydnl]

I’m sick of this talk around building for three or four years away. We’re in no position for this and neither is Solskjaer Ten Hag. He needs goals and he needs them in September. Ronaldo Kane brings them as a guarantee. And it is a guarantee. There’s no evidence to the contrary. Get him in, pay the fee, and then look ahead.

Ah, memories.

If only goals were all that mattered in football and looking ahead was a bad thing.

 

[Valencia's Left Foot]

I’m sick of this talk around building for three or four years away. We’re in no position for this and neither is Ten Hag. He needs goals and he needs them in September. Kane brings them as a guarantee. And it is a guarantee. There’s no evidence to the contrary. Get him in, pay the fee, and then look ahead.

Agreed. Go get the closet player to a sure thing (Kane) and then focus on bringing in an understudy or the next up-and-comer in 2-3 years time.

 

[Red in STL]

Ah, memories.

If only goals were all that mattered in football and looking ahead was a bad thing.

Ultimately the only thing that matters in football is to score at least 1 more than the opposition, do that every game and you'll have a Quadruple

 

[Abraxas]

They’re fecking headcases. No other way around it.

There has not been a more obvious signing to blast the budget on since Ferguson packed in. Just do it. Break the bank. Ay, we need a goalkeeper, and we need a midfielder, but Kane is transformative. We go from a fairly decent side to one with one of the best out and out forwards on the planet.

Vlahovic, Oshimen, your man at Atalanta. Even if they come good then that could be two or three years. By that time Varane, Casemiro and Bruno are on the way out.

It’s been ten years since we won the title. Twenty will come around just as quick. Kane would be the single biggest factor in changing that by far.

Why do we need to break the bank?

He's out of contract next year. We have no reason to pay this money for one year of Harry Kane. Some of you lot must be Levy's accountants, I can't see any other reason for such desperation and tunnel vision.

The reason we'd be getting Harry Kane this summer would be because we're the only mugs willing to do it for the numbers mooted. Whereas if we get him for free we're getting him because he desperately wants to come to United. It's a double whammy. We get Harry Kane and we get to spend that 100 million on welcoming him into a stronger squad.

 

[Lecland07]

Why do we need to break the bank?

He's out of contract next year. We have no reason to pay this money for one year of Harry Kane. Some of you lot must be Levy's accountants, I can't see any other reason for such desperation and tunnel vision.

The reason we'd be getting Harry Kane this summer would be because we're the only mugs willing to do it for the numbers mooted. Whereas if we get him for free we're getting him because he desperately wants to come to United. It's a double whammy. We get Harry Kane and we get to spend that 100 million on welcoming him into a stronger squad.

Going a season without a top goalscorer would be a massive risk. If Liverpool have their recent form next season, they will be an entirely different prospect. If Chelsea sign a striker, who can actually score, they will be far better, especially with Pochettino in charge.

We could end up losing top four and then losing out on Kane due to that. He won't join a club that isn't at least in the Champion's League.

That would be a huge risk for us.

 

[Abraxas]

Going a season without a top goalscorer would be a massive risk. If Liverpool have their recent form next season, they will be an entirely different prospect. If Chelsea sign a striker, who can actually score, they will be far better, especially with Pochettino in charge.

We could end up losing top four and then losing out on Kane due to that. He won't join a club that isn't at least in the Champion's League.

That would be a huge risk for us.

It's not that big a risk. You're creating potential catastrophies out of complete unknowns with Liverpool and Chelsea. The fact is we finished fourth and we will get stronger too, we are not going to stand still this summer irrespective of Harry Kane. So why pump up their chances and reduce ours?

100 million is a risk. It's a big chunk out of our revenue as a football club for someone that with some patience, commercial acumen and negotiation skills we can persuade and cajole into joining us anyway. Christ, I don't think we'd lose 100 million quid if we finished 5th next year, that's how ridiculous the fee is.

 

[Red in STL]

Why do we need to break the bank?

He's out of contract next year. We have no reason to pay this money for one year of Harry Kane. Some of you lot must be Levy's accountants, I can't see any other reason for such desperation and tunnel vision.

The reason we'd be getting Harry Kane this summer would be because we're the only mugs willing to do it for the numbers mooted. Whereas if we get him for free we're getting him because he desperately wants to come to United. It's a double whammy. We get Harry Kane and we get to spend that 100 million on welcoming him into a stronger squad.

It doesn't need to be 100 million though, we need to persuade Spurs to take one or two of our players, we don't know, and until they get a manager, I suspect they don't know ,what they want or need.

 

[Abraxas]

It doesn't need to be 100 million though, we need to persuade Spurs to take one or two of our players, we don't know, and until they get a manager, I suspect they don't know ,what they want or need.

These player trades rarely happen in reality. They sound good on forums but realistically the chances of it are remote. They're not going to take some of our cast offs for their prize asset and come up smelling of roses are they? They'd look ridiculous after an already terrible season of PR.

The only out Levy has is what some of our fans are advocating for. Us extending our hand into that deep, dark hole he's stuck in and passing him a suitcase full of money in exchange for Harry Kane. He can sell that as getting the best possible bad outcome from their situation and repackage it as going directly towards squad improvement.

 

[Wilt]

Why do we need to break the bank?

He‘s out of contract next year. We have no reason to pay this money for one year of Harry Kane. Some of you lot must be Levy's accountants, I can't see any other reason for such desperation and tunnel vision.

The reason we'd be getting Harry Kane this summer would be because we're the only mugs willing to do it for the numbers mooted. Whereas if we get him for free we're getting him because he desperately wants to come to United. It's a double whammy. We get Harry Kane and we get to spend that 100 million on welcoming him into a stronger squad.

What makes you think if Kane leaves on a free next season he’d still want to come to Utd?

 

[Abraxas]

What makes you think if Kane leaves on a free next season he’d still want to come to Utd?

Well if he doesn't...he doesn't. That isn't so bad to me. If we get a player because he has a wealth of options and he picks us, it's a perfect demonstration of his commitment. We start that process of convincing him now. If he comes because we were the only option, the only dumb money in town then it doesn't show much except Spurs are terrible and we offered him an out.

If he wants to stay in England we're the most historic club in the country and we are on a good path with this manager. I like our chances. He could go to Real, Bayern, PSG of course he could, I'm not naive to that but I still like our chances.

 

[lex talionis]

I don't think it's just a question of how many goals it's when he scores them as well, he's scored in 75% of PL games this season, if he was able to do that with us it would be transformative in the number of games we win rather than draw or even lose

The problem I have with a younger striker is that by the time whoever it is capable of scoring like Kane obviously can we'll be replacing our other best players because of age, to take advantage of Casemiro, Bruno, Varane we need a top striker now

My view precisely. We have a squad ready to win now, but we need more winning mentality players like Kane and fewer players like Martial, Maguire and McTominay.

Bring in a proven striker like Kane and then we can talk about intriguing prospects at 8, 6, and CDM.

 

[Doracle]

Why do we need to break the bank?

He's out of contract next year. We have no reason to pay this money for one year of Harry Kane. Some of you lot must be Levy's accountants, I can't see any other reason for such desperation and tunnel vision.

The reason we'd be getting Harry Kane this summer would be because we're the only mugs willing to do it for the numbers mooted. Whereas if we get him for free we're getting him because he desperately wants to come to United. It's a double whammy. We get Harry Kane and we get to spend that 100 million on welcoming him into a stronger squad.

Based on this type of analysis, why would Spurs demand £100m for him this summer when, if they can’t sell him, they get nothing for one of the worlds best players and risk seeing him turn up at Chelsea or Arsenal?

 

[Siorac]

but we need more winning mentality players like Kane

The man who literally won nothing, ever. Praise his goalscoring or passing or haircut for all I care but I'm not sure what evidence there is for this vaunted winning mentality.

 

[Abraxas]

Based on this type of analysis, why would Spurs demand £100m for him this summer when, if they can’t sell him, they get nothing for one of the worlds best players and risk seeing him turn up at Chelsea or Arsenal?

Because they don't have any good options. Just a series of bad ones. Either bad economically, bad in terms of PR, or bad for next season, or any or all of the above in combination. You only tend to get bad options when your one shining light is leveraging his contractual position. So what they'll want is to find the most palatable bad option that is presented.

Selling him directly to the likes of Chelsea and Arsenal is unthinkable. If Kane goes of his own volition they have less culpability so that's a pretty major difference between selling him and seeing him go as a free agent to anywhere.

Second worst is probably selling to what they see as a rival like ourselves. They'll want compensating for that, the economic side has to outweigh the way it looks. Let's be serious he's not rocking up here for 60 million quid. I love the optimism of those that think this might be possible. It's quite brilliant but it will be costing more than that.

Their best one may be selling abroad. Possible, certainly. They save a bit of face on the commercial side and don't see him rocking up against them. They would probably like this but they are limited by what the market says about it.

Having him play on for a year and leave on a free, I don't know where that stands for them but it's probably a good fall back if they don't get a good fee from abroad or a ridiculous fee from us. They can package it as playing the strong arm with Kane and they can hope he produces miracles next year. Certainly they'll be a better side with him.

 

[sullydnl]

My view precisely. We have a squad ready to win now, but we need more winning mentality players like Kane and fewer players like Martial, Maguire and McTominay.

Bring in a proven striker like Kane and then we can talk about intriguing prospects at 8, 6, and CDM.

Phrasing it like that is just mean to Kane and invites cheap shots.

 

[NZT-One]

I wouldn't exactly call overpaying for a striker that's banned for 4 months smart business. Nor is paying 50m quid for a guy from the Austrian league. Also when you compare the sure bets and the risks we took on players with massive potential, guys like Varane and Casemiro are infinitely more important to this team than Martial, Sancho, Antony have shown to be, who we gambled big on because of age and future.

If we want talented young players get them straight from the source or even our own academy, not from an Atalanta, Ajax, Monaco, Dortmund etc.

Hojlund, Sesko, Toney are still going to cost us a fortune anyways. I'm not saying we should pay the 100m Spurs want, but those other options look worse to me.

Nobody advised to "overpay". Thats the thing here. Bring in good value for good money. Look out so you don't get fleeced again. The chances of that are there with Kane. As good as he is.

Kane has just scored 30 goals for a Spurs team with no creativity whatsoever. We have the most productive number 10 in terms of chance creation in the league and Eriksen, with whom he had a great relationship in the past.

You also seem to be more or less writing off the next three seasons. Don’t we want to compete before Casemiro, Varane, Eriksen and Bruno are also too old and need replacing?

FFS. Football isn't a card game where you put one card into another deck and then they perform without anything.

And to your question: Of course we want to compete. People look at fecking Brighton. Look at Newcastle. Those teams have been "competing" well in the last one or two years. And thats without going crazy on the market. What you are suggesting is doubling down on problematic decisions - nobody forced us to bring in Casemiro or Varane. There is already the need to bring in deputies for them right now. Because we have Lindelof and ... nobody to replace Casemiro. We won't be able to do that because next season, you will scream for Costa or Maignan for 70 million and the season after for Frimpong for 60.

I'll say it again - nobody is against paying big money. But you have to have a plan. And going big on 30yo striker in the hope that he might help us limp over a line next season (of course only if other teams slip up) doesn't sound like a particularly good plan to me.

I don't think you can really spend 120-130 million on a player if you're not confident he can play at the EPL level. And I don't like the idea of putting all our eggs in one basket as far as strikers go.

The thing about Kane is that we all already know he's going to produce, and his production won't fall off as much as it does for strikers who rely on speed. I'd much rather we spend the 80 million on Kane and then sign a young striker or two in the hopes that they'll eventually take over once Kane ages out.

I wouldn't be surprised if Kane still has 75 EPL goals in him, and given that, I'd love it if he scored them for us over the next 3-4 seasons. With a player like him, some of our losses end up being draws and some of our draws end up being wins.

Granted - nobody is advising going crazy on unproven youngsters. I just look at Alvarez who went to City for 25 million and I'm asking myself if there aren't other players around like that.

The trouble is half the forwards we are linked to who are severely below that level of quality are still being quoted at £60m too. Then the £40m you save might buy us another player but even then of what level, position and quality? For example is Rabiot on a free and Kane for £100m any worse than the combination of £100ms worth of two players you could pick out?

I’m also not sure how much Bruno, Varane, Casemiro will want to have another year of not seriously challenging for a title and our lack of goals is something that is seriously concerning. It’s not due to lack of chances but lack of finishers in my view.

Maybe this sounds stupid but I couldn't care less about what they want or not. The club should be the focus of everything. And not individual players or managers or a single season. I'd like to see ManUtd rise to the top again and I don't think, those short-term solutions will do that.

Now I’d be happy enough with most of the players were linked with because they are good and importantly fit options that could develop or could offer excellent finishing but Kane for me represents the best striker for the next 3 seasons without question. I don’t see a scenario where we sign him and he doesn’t win us more games with the goals he brings and improve us with his overall CF play.

I’m genuinely curious who you would bring in instead and for what fee you’d imagine they could be attained for?

I certainly wouldn't let me push into bad business. If it really is the case that there is not a single semi-decent striker option for a reasonable fee out there, then I'd probably try to bring in a veteran somehow and delay the decision for one year. Not like the team couldn't do with 100 million investments in other places. I am sure this is a hot take and its not a case of me being completely sure that it is a good decision but for now I don't think the football world isn't taking us very seriously. I'd rather pass and be proactive then being the fool who either stands alone when the music stops (like with Sancho) or end up with an extremely expensive player we probably didn't even planned to buy (Antony, maybe even Casemiro).

This is where the scouting department has to come in. FFS I'd take a guy on Mitrovic level from Spain or Italy to help us out if nothing better is available. But I'll give you that - Shelling out 100 million on Muani or 60 for Hojlund would be problematic to me as well (still not as problematic as Kane as with a young player, you could at least sell him to get a few bucks back).

Re: Casemiro
I look at the prospect of our current season with and without Casemiro and I’m comfortable in saying he’s been a huge success this season. We absolutely needed him to be here this season and unquestionably are worse off without him. Longevity while desirable wasn’t the major issue before he arrived. He’s bought us time to develop or find a longer term successor.

Well I agree then. He has been a success in his first season. I was talking about him being a success as a transfer and thats still to be seen.

An interesting point about the possibility of Kane cannibalizing goals that others would score, but I'm not sure of that. Under the present no circumstances let's take a look at our players who are expected to score goals.

Rashford. With respect to Rashy, your point is well taken. He might drop off 5-6 from the current 22 goals he has in all competitions this season.
Martial. Your point is not well taken.
Sancho. Nope.
Antony. Nope.
Wout. Nope.
Garnacho. It seems more likely than not that Garnacho's goal production will increase next season even with Kane.

There's not much in our attack to worry about being cannibalized.

As for speculation as to the goal tally Harry would add, I've been thinking more like 20-25 rather than 25-30. Harry is currently on 29 goals in all comps and there's no reason to believe that he'll collapse next season into a 15 goal scorer as you suggest. But what I do believe is this, that because Harry has excellent holdup play and can find a key pass in the final third that not only will he NOT cannibalize goals from Rashford, Sancho, Antony and Garnacho -- he will substantially improve their production.

Just going off the eyeball test only, but it seems pretty obvious to me that after we let go of Cavani and Ronaldo we've been playing without a striker for almost the entire season. Unless you have medical knowledge of Kane's fitness that he's about to collapse as a footballer, he would be the perfect fit for us.

That said, I have my doubts that Harry would want to join United. But if he is interested, and if we can get him for no more than the 80m that he's reasonably worth right now, we'd be daft to pass up on him...unless there really is something to the Mbappe rumors, which I doubt even more.

Good points but I'd add one point that bringing in Kane would bring the necessity to play differently or to more precise attack differently. Rashfords biggest (I hope not but maybe his only one) is running in behind the defense. Thats not Kanes game. So we probably have to be become better on the ball. Not saying it definitely isn't working but it brings its own difficulties as well.

Using the logic here we should only sign 29 year old players, you are right it's nonsense

But it was a misunderstanding. I didn't want to say that Toney is approaching his peak, he is well into it - but he's still 3 years younger than Kane who is in his prime right now (while some are seeing signs of decline). Toney is on an upward trend, not that I want to pitch him as the solution but I think, if the price is right, then at least we could get 4 years out him. With Kane I don't expect more than 2. For more money and probably bigger wages as well.

I don't think it's just a question of how many goals it's when he scores them as well, he's scored in 75% of PL games this season, if he was able to do that with us it would be transformative in the number of games we win rather than draw or even lose

The problem I have with a younger striker is that by the time whoever it is capable of scoring like Kane obviously can we'll be replacing our other best players because of age, to take advantage of Casemiro, Bruno, Varane we need a top striker now

We are starting to go in circles. I understand, some would want to take advantage of the Players in our team who are older right now. Fair enough. Don't think there is much into it but I can follow the train of thought

They’re fecking headcases. No other way around it.

There has not been a more obvious signing to blast the budget on since Ferguson packed in. Just do it. Break the bank. Ay, we need a goalkeeper, and we need a midfielder, but Kane is transformative. We go from a fairly decent side to one with one of the best out and out forwards on the planet.

Vlahovic, Oshimen, your man at Atalanta. Even if they come good then that could be two or three years. By that time Varane, Casemiro and Bruno are on the way out.

It’s been ten years since we won the title. Twenty will come around just as quick. Kane would be the single biggest factor in changing that by far.

1st: Lets not get personal, ok? We have a discussion on a football matter, I can understand people saying we have to make use of Casemiro and Varane as long as they are here and Kane might help with that. I don't think it is going to work but I can understand the notion.

2nd: Its been 10 years, you are right. But you can't watch United and think that we are just a Kane away from being the best team in the league... Our best chances (in my personal opinion) is investing in the whole team and keep working improving us on a team basis. Short term thinking is all we did in the last 10 years, continueing this forever will not miraclously change its outcome.

edit: sorry for long post, should have separated.

 

[Eddy_JukeZ]

His open play xG being down a good amount is slightly concerning.

Edit: Never mind. It's more in line with his other seasons too. I saw a poster say it's down a good amount, he must have got it from a different stat tracking website.

 

[BenitoSTARR]

Maybe this sounds stupid but I couldn't care less about what they want or not. The club should be the focus of everything. And not individual players or managers or a single season. I'd like to see ManUtd rise to the top again and I don't think, those short-term solutions will do that.


I certainly wouldn't let me push into bad business. If it really is the case that there is not a single semi-decent striker option for a reasonable fee out there, then I'd probably try to bring in a veteran somehow and delay the decision for one year. Not like the team couldn't do with 100 million investments in other places. I am sure this is a hot take and its not a case of me being completely sure that it is a good decision but for now I don't think the football world isn't taking us very seriously. I'd rather pass and be proactive then being the fool who either stands alone when the music stops (like with Sancho) or end up with an extremely expensive player we probably didn't even planned to buy (Antony, maybe even Casemiro).

This is where the scouting department has to come in. FFS I'd take a guy on Mitrovic level from Spain or Italy to help us out if nothing better is available. But I'll give you that - Shelling out 100 million on Muani or 60 for Hojlund would be problematic to me as well (still not as problematic as Kane as with a young player, you could at least sell him to get a few bucks back).


Well I agree then. He has been a success in his first season. I was talking about him being a success as a transfer and thats still to be seen.

I’m not sure I see 3 years of high quality performance as short term though. Which is the minimum I’d expect out of Kane and we can agree to disagree on time frame. In those years it allows for us to develop or scout more, work on our other signings and maybe take a few more risks in the market with the safety blanket of a world class striker. It all but guarantees a top 4 finish again and then opens the chance to challenge further.

There are semi decent options but I don’t see how spending even £40m+ into an up and comer is any more financially sensible than spending top dollar on literally the best striker we could buy (as we can’t now get Haaland). The veteran signing is laughable as a solution and more to the point there’s no player to do that role other than maybe Benzema at which point why not just get Kane? We’ve done that 35 YO do a job with Cavani, Ronaldo, Ibra, Ighalo and it’s too much. Passing on Kane and signing a stop gap isn’t being proactive it’s going to harm the club and result in another Weghorst.

I also maintain Antony was the best available left footed RW we could have bought and him being our most progressive carrier has improved our RW and retention no end. We paid due to supply and demnad

The issue it comes back to is that of quality. Can anyone say that a genuine world class player will be available next season? Yes and his name is Kane. All other options are slightly greater risks and less quality (even Osimhen who I think is very good).

Ultimately we’re going to have to spend to bring in the kind of striker with enough quality to progress us either immediately or in 2/3 years time. I personally think the best thing to do is bring in the best striker we can in Kane and then worry about a successor.

 

[Fts 74]

If there's a chance he's available we have to get him.There is nobody out there who is proven to score 20+goals a season in the PL

Levy will try and screw us over we know that, Kane would have to push for the move for it to happen I think

How much?£60m absolute minimum probably £80m I still think it'd be money well spent

 

[McGrathsipan]

Is there any actual traction to him leaving spuds or is it all just pundits guessing he will move and then people debating the merits!

 

[Wibble]

Which world class striker are we going to sign this summer for £70-£80m?

Hopefully not Harry Kane.

 

[lex talionis]

The following point was made:

Good points but I'd add one point that bringing in Kane would bring the necessity to play differently or to more precise attack differently. Rashfords biggest (I hope not but maybe his only one) is running in behind the defense. Thats not Kanes game. So we probably have to be become better on the ball. Not saying it definitely isn't working but it brings its own difficulties as well.

Even more reason to bring in Kane. We need our attack to "play differently".

 

[lex talionis]

The man who literally won nothing, ever. Praise his goalscoring or passing or haircut for all I care but I'm not sure what evidence there is for this vaunted winning mentality.

Without question Harry has never lifted a trophy, major or minor, but the man is indeed a winner.

Let's put it this way: Martial has a league cup winner's medal and Kane does not, but Martial belongs nowhere near the same sentence as Kane as a footballer. Maguire has a cup medal, but he's the very antithesis of a winner, an anti-winner (it may be harsh to call him a "loser", so I won't). Kane would fit in quite nicely -- fukk that, he'd be head and shoulders above Sancho and Antony, and quite frankly, Rashford as well.

 

[NZT-One]

The following point was made:

Good points but I'd add one point that bringing in Kane would bring the necessity to play differently or to more precise attack differently. Rashfords biggest (I hope not but maybe his only one) is running in behind the defense. Thats not Kanes game. So we probably have to be become better on the ball. Not saying it definitely isn't working but it brings its own difficulties as well.

Even more reason to bring in Kane. We need our attack to "play differently".

We do. But that isn't down to Kane unfortunately. He might be able to help to a degree but, as the user Adnan pointed out more than once now, our issues with dominating games start at the back. With a goalkeeper that is the opposite of a modern goalkeeper and midfielders and defenders who, with a few exceptions, aren't overly confident on the ball. So this is where we have to improve as well to play a playstyle that suits Kane more.

The quotes the user Sully quoted yesterday are a bit worrying as well - where Kane is called undynamic, unmobile. We had that with Ronaldo not too long ago. I think, the warning signs are there. But I guess if the player really(!) is ETHs choice, then he has an idea how to play him. I am doubtful though on that... The whole story reeks of Woodwards playbook...

 

[croadyman]

We arent going to sign him, only because levy wont let him go. He'll hold him to his contract till next summer then lose him on a free. Levy has already said he regrets selling kyle walker to city and wouldnt do business with a top 6 club again for one of his players.

Osihmein aint going to happen at £150mil, not when we need a elite striker, elite CM, a CB, a RB and some competition for de gea.

Which striker do you see us signing then?

 

[croadyman]

Was opposed to signing him but if we can get him and a younger striker, that would be great.

Yeah that would be the ideal solution,tough to see us affording Hojlund with the other areas we need to address too

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

Unless he is far cheaper than is being quoted why would we even consider buying such an old player with only a year left on his contract?

Because people think we are only one Kane away to challenge the league against Man City. So in their perspective, spend all the money to sign Kane.

 

[croadyman]

No, we need top players. Actual top players like Kane.

It’s easy to talk about ‘quality young players’ with the benefit of hindsight; look how readily you dismiss Sancho in spite of the obvious acquisition he was at the time. There’s no guarantee, but right now that’s what we need up top. Enter Harry Kane.

Buy Kane and surround him with the likes of Rashford, Bruno, Antony and Garnacho and you’ve plenty of legs around him.

Yeah he definitely would have that plus maybe Amad at times. Do people genuinely think there is a real chance he runs contract down and leaves on a free next summer.

 

[Tarrou]

I think we should just offer Spurs a take it or leave it bid at the start of the summer, of say ~75m

if they reject it, fine, we move on and find a different solution

in the past we'd negotiate all summer and then be left in a weak position going into the last few weeks of the window, and cave to demands.. we absolutely have to stop doing shit like that

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

We do. But that isn't down to Kane unfortunately. He might be able to help to a degree but, as the user Adnan pointed out more than once now, our issues with dominating games start at the back. With a goalkeeper that is the opposite of a modern goalkeeper and midfielders and defenders who, with a few exceptions, aren't overly confident on the ball. So this is where we have to improve as well to play a playstyle that suits Kane more.

The quotes the user Sully quoted yesterday are a bit worrying as well - where Kane is called undynamic, unmobile. We had that with Ronaldo not too long ago. I think, the warning signs are there. But I guess if the player really(!) is ETHs choice, then he has an idea how to play him. I am doubtful though on that... The whole story reeks of Woodwards playbook...

I think some people who are underestimating the goalkeeper problem don't realise that every managers have different way of playing. If we hire Mourinho, we don't need new keeper to improve our goals because Mourinho's way of playing don't rely on the principal of playing from the back to create chances. We are hiring ETH who has this principal of playing from the back that lead us in creating chances. Hence why if we don't fix our build up play or our way to play from the back then ETH will be forced to play long and ask his striker to win header of those long ball just like the Mourinho way. We have seen lot of moaning from people who criticised ETH for playing Weghorst but ETH is forced to play Weghorst because we are currently struggling to play from the back against high press.

 

[Wibble]

Because people think we are only one Kane away to challenge the league against Man City. So in their perspective, spend all the money to sign Kane.

I'd rather buy the next Haaland (or even this Haarland) and also stengthen the rest of the squad than spunk such a huge amount on one old player who will be older still by the time we hopefully challenge City again. Even if we get Qatari megabucks we still have to adhere to FFP, so we can't just buy a whole team of $150mill players.

 

[UNITED ACADEMY]

I'd rather buy the next Haaland (or even this Haarland) and also stengthen the rest of the squad than spunk such a huge amount on one old player who will be older still by the time we hopefully challenge City again. Even if we get Qatari megabucks we still have to adhere to FFP, so we can't just buy a whole team of $150mill players.

I agree.