watching wout makes me worried about osihmen. we would get pace & pressing but not the technical ability to play rashford in on goal
Osimhen v Kane
- Thread starter croadyman
- Start date
It would be Bruno's job to play both Rashford and Osimhen in on goal... And they can play each other on goal but with less quality than what Kane would offer.
Rashford as striker gives us a pacey player that can press & bruno can play in behind on goal, we saw it even today. Osihmens heading is class but so is kanes. Kane gives us a player that will play in inverted fws like rash,antony, garn, sancho,amad
& another whilst scoring himself
The belief that Lukaku tore the Serie A apart the way Halaand is doing the PL is a pure myth, entertained by some bias…
Using Lukaku as a stick to beat Osimhen’s Serie A performances is not fair. Lukaku scored 24 non penalty goals in the PL… His best tally in Italy, being serviced by the best team of that league was 18 non penalty goals..
Kane’s too good to be picking Osihmen over him.
Yeah, it’s not even close. A bit worried at the moment that he’s so good that he’s going to drive this average Spurs team to top 4.
He's the safer bet for sure, but I still think Osimhen is the better value signing. Considerably younger, lower wages, and more suited to Ten Hag ball too I'd say.
I think Kane will sign a career-finishing deal at Spurs.
Harry lives for personal accolades over actual trophies. If he just admitted it we could all move on
Na he’ll cost more than kane and I don’t think having Osimhen for 5 years doesn’t give us the same value as having Kane for 3 years.
I'd take Kane in a heartbeat. Maybe dangled a certain 21 year old player who hasn't played for us in a year (and who shall remain unnamed) in front of them to see if they bite.
You cannot want a player to not play for us and want them to play for another club based on the circumstances.
Personally I find that wrong. But each to their own..
Kane would be the safer bet since he is PL proven but in the summer will be 30. Nothing hugely wrong with that of course but you would expect in 3-4 years he may start to slow down.
The good thing with Osimhen is that he is at an age where you could have a top quality striker for 10 years. Obviously the risk is if he can adapt to the PL.
The good thing with Osimhen is that he is at an age where you could have a top quality striker for 10 years. Obviously the risk is if he can adapt to the PL.
List the top quality strikers we’ve had that have given us a good 10 years as number 1 over the last 35 years.
I meant because of his age, he could easily be a starting striker for us for 10 years and if not he would have resale value.
For sure not many but Wayne Rooney and Mark Hughes played for the club for a decade.
Kane can have an RVP like effect on us. He know the league, scores goals, by far the safest bet.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 19,973
- Supports
️
People are far too obsessed with needing a striker for 5+ years. How about we try and win something before worrying about longevity.
This. We have guys like Casemiro, Varane, Bruno, Shaw, DDG and others all in their prime years. We should absolutely aim to win now.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2015
- Messages
- 19,973
- Supports
- ️
In my mind the sensible thing is sign a Harry Kane then add a young striker who can grow into the role.
Thing is kane wont cost 24m pounds.. no where near that.
Prices have increased. 24m is probably about 80-90m now and Kane won’t cost more than that.
Knowing levy he might pushed it to 100m or over 100m
It would be Kane for me, he has everything that would help compliment our current attacking set up.
I doubt we get either though.
I doubt we get either though.
Levy isn’t an idiot. Faced with nothing next summer or 80m this summer, he’ll take 80m. All depends on Kane confirming he wants to leave though.
If you call NT football for Nigeria European football, then he has scored 20+ three times. If you're talking about European football, then no, only that one time in Belgium were he scored 20 in 36 games.That’s only true of “league goals”… If you include other competitions, he’s scored 20+ in 3 of his 4 seasons in European football. 26 last year.
He's been excellent this season though, for the first time in his career, and that despite being less involved in games than Haaland. Like a pure goalscorer should, he's a lot to handle for defenders.
Said before it's too early, Spurs could qualify for the CL again and Kane stays, they're in with a good shout from here. Either us or Spurs could get a few injuries and slip down as well, we're both so reliant of a couple of players. Levy probably would hang on to him for a final year anyway unless they really hit the buffers.
I don‘t believe we will go after Kane. He is still great but declining already. He could be a good signing for 1-2 years but too expensive for that.
Even account for inflation and all that, it's a fair point. Transfer fees have become insanity in general which is why more players are letting contracts run out.
We shouldn't have paid what we did for Sancho and Antony. Those were $100m gambles. Harry Kane would not be a gamble, he'd be a sure thing in comparison. I'm all for it.
Those 24 millions in 2013 are like 70-80 million in 2023.
I'd prefer for us to sign younger (than Kane) players in the summer, since we already have a spine of players around 30 years, which will need replacing at about the same time.
I don't really see why Kane would move to us in any event. If he leaves Spurs it should be for a club that more or less guarantees trophies. We don't really do that yet. You could argue that no English club does that at the moment, and that the one that did signed Haaland in the summer.
I don't really see why Kane would move to us in any event. If he leaves Spurs it should be for a club that more or less guarantees trophies. We don't really do that yet. You could argue that no English club does that at the moment, and that the one that did signed Haaland in the summer.
This, in 3, 4 years, we will have some new great strikers on the horizon to pick.
That being said, I don't think Spurs will sell him.
These days every second player is worth 100m
For those without access to that article it mostly just says what we already know. Osimhen a better fit for ETH stylistically, Kane a more proven quantity, Levy will look for £100m for Kane, Osimhen will cost a huge amount too, etc.
Wonder if Lewandowski would have had same level of impact that we saw from RVP in 12/13
Now I appreciate that Kane is a vastly superior player to Weghorst, but for me, in terms of style and intensity of our attack - I think one half of Weghorst centre forward and one half of Rashford tonight showed the difference of how we could look with either Kane or Osimhen. I just think in terms of profile, we’d find it harder to attack with the same intensity that we showed in the last 30 mins with the Kane profile.
I’d be happy with either option, although I do wish it was a 26 year old Kane who was more intense. Would be a no brainer for me.
I’d be happy with either option, although I do wish it was a 26 year old Kane who was more intense. Would be a no brainer for me.
Rashford’s heading ability just makes me believe he is too similar to Osihmen to spend 150 million on him.
Fast, pacer, has become strong, heading ability and good finishes.
Link up play and passing are their weaknesses so let’s try get that in the team.
Kane for me.
Fast, pacer, has become strong, heading ability and good finishes.
Link up play and passing are their weaknesses so let’s try get that in the team.
Kane for me.
Tonight shows we have to sign proven one,if it's neither of these two then gotta get Kolo-Muani/Vlahovic/Ramos instead