Jump to content

Non-Chelsea Transfer Pub


Steve
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Jype said:

😂

Their biggest ever club legend treats them like shit. Funny stuff.

Nope, that title was probably between Blanchflower, Mackay, or Greaves. Kane is nowhere near them unless he won a few titles. 

Edited by Blues Forever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be interesting to see how this Kane saga evolves. 

Spurs may be reluctant to deal with us, but if they feel that City have tapped Kane up in any way Levy may also sour towards them too.

Levy will probably feel he can save face a little in this situation as he's not the one actively selling Kane, but instead Kane is trying to force his hand. In that scenario I think Levy will just want to get the best deal for Spurs rather than being concerned over who he's dealing with. Might be worth throwing our hat in the ring with a bid if we're serious about trying to get hold of a top striker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Milan said:

A genuine question here - assuming we are actually spending 150M on a striker, would you rather go for Haaland or Kane?

If £150M gets you either and they're both available at the same price and similar wages, I'll take Haaland any day.

Kane might be more proven, especially in the PL, but has a growing amount of injury worries every season and is 7 years older so thinking 3-4 years in the future Haaland's value should be multiple times higher than Kane's. And if Haaland could be extended beyond the initial 5-6 year contract then he could easily end up staying for almost a decade at the club, something Kane certainly wouldn't be able to do.

Not that either of those two are available to us sadly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Milan said:

A genuine question here - assuming we are actually spending 150M on a striker, would you rather go for Haaland or Kane?

Is that a serious question!!!?

Halaand all day and every day but neither will be coming here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Milan said:

A genuine question here - assuming we are actually spending 150M on a striker, would you rather go for Haaland or Kane?

Haaland is much younger and for me has more potential due to him being significantly more athletic than Kane. As brilliant as Kane is when fit we’ve already seen how he has lost a step due to constant injury.

As for this saga now, I wonder what would happen if we offered them something like £100m + Tammy they’d go for it? They get massive cash as well as a ready made striker that’s about as good as they’re going to find in this market. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • 0 members are here!

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...