Summer 2021 - Transfer Thread

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Status
Not open for further replies.
You admire Igula so much you wanted to become more like him 👀
LOL

The £100m wasn't a bid but City informally sounding out Spurs... Levy gave a hard no.

I've heard several journalists insist that there was an actual bid; but whatever..... I don't hold a great deal of stock in the media either way.

The Sun £160m is being slightly misreported by the media (and weirdly even the Sun headline misreported their own article).
There was no reporting that £160m was accepted. The source at Kane's wedding said that Levy had told Kane that he had changed his mind and was going to sell him. The potential price was pure speculation.

All of which (on face value) goes to further prove my point.... Ball's in their court; we're not "blocking his move".
 
That's a different comment and insinuation though.... And you KNOW it.
it amounts to the same thing, he's disgruntled with the lack of achievements and would rather not be here, so I don't see Kane as a fully committed striker.

IF - he's going to be asked to stay another year, we're dropping his price by about £50m, but then what, we need to find a new striker then, kick the can down the road.

IMO sell now if we can attract Vlahovic, get max price, you can bet your ass Dusan will be a LOT more expensive soon.

 
it amounts to the same thing, he's disgruntled with the lack of achievements and would rather not be here, so I don't see Kane as a fully committed striker.

IF - he's going to be asked to stay another year, we're dropping his price by about £50m, but then what, we need to find a new striker then, kick the can down the road.

IMO sell now if we can attract Vlahovic, get max price, you can bet your ass Dusan will be a LOT more expensive soon.

I'm in agreement with you actually, if Kane is going to leave next year for £100M, then there's an argument we should sell him this year for £150M.

However, we have to replace him with 3 quality players in my opinion. As I wrote in an earlier post, a lot of the potential alternatives are no longer possible, ie Isak, Malen, Daka.
Which 3 players would realistically do the job?
 
it amounts to the same thing, he's disgruntled with the lack of achievements and would rather not be here, so I don't see Kane as a fully committed striker.

I think Kane's the consumate pro and won't be a problem..... Hes earned that much faith as far i'm concerned.

IF - he's going to be asked to stay another year, we're dropping his price by about £50m, but then what, we need to find a new striker then, kick the can down the road.

IMO sell now if we can attract Vlahovic, get max price, you can bet your ass Dusan will be a LOT more expensive soon.

Perhaps we can resume this conversation should City actually make such a bid north of 150m.

Until then as per my subsequent posts; we're not blocking anything..... £100m is a derisory bid for such a player.
 
Last edited:
Regarding Kane, if he stays another year, how much will we lose then?

Contract run down more.... maybe lose £50m. Which would mean we're effectively losing £1m per week.

So unless he signs a new contract...... be as well selling now.
That 160m is pie in the sky imo. We know that we turned down 100m and he would be 80m+ next year probably.
 
I'm in agreement with you actually, if Kane is going to leave next year for £100M, then there's an argument we should sell him this year for £150M.

However, we have to replace him with 3 quality players in my opinion. As I wrote in an earlier post, a lot of the potential alternatives are no longer possible, ie Isak, Malen, Daka.
Which 3 players would realistically do the job?
My action would be replace him with Vlahovic (if possible), we already got Son, in this situation I'd get Ings for a season or two, bring Scarlett through.

Moura can still do a job imo plus we might have Gil.

I can remember when Liverpool were too reliant on Gerrard, but now they've done pretty dam well without him.

That's the best comparison I can think of presently. I'd have been more pissed off if we'd sold Kane when he was 24, We've had the best years, and can also sell high because he's presently highly sort after and with his contract.

I'd be happy if Kane stays, fuck the money but if I were holding the purse strings I'd see the sense in selling now, if we can get Vlahovic or the likes.



 
I'm in agreement with you actually, if Kane is going to leave next year for £100M, then there's an argument we should sell him this year for £150M.

However, we have to replace him with 3 quality players in my opinion. As I wrote in an earlier post, a lot of the potential alternatives are no longer possible, ie Isak, Malen, Daka.
Which 3 players would realistically do the job?
The problem is we have no idea. We could buy Isak and Scarlett may end up the next Harry Kane with Isak the next Soldado. If it were me, I'd go for that young Czech kid Hlozek, get Ings to fill in for a couple of years, and hope in the meantime one of Hlozek or Scarlett develop into a really good striker.
 
But if we get the top 4 then that will more than make up for it.
We should have been making this sort of bet more often under Poch (buy players, wins stuff to pay for them) and we never really did.

The amount of money we make from getting into the Champions League, combined with the sort of players that we would be in position to attract, as well as the sponsorship opportunities, would make up for selling Kane for £70m rather than £120m.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom