Jump to content

Other clubs' transfers


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

I don’t get the big fuss about the PL record.  If he stays in the league and fit he’ll get it. He’ll end up with more goals than Shearer in pro football and he may triple his England tally. 
 

There’s nothing to prove on that point. It’s not even like Shearer is the best PL striker we’ve seen and the record is proof.  
 

Question for the forum: overall whi is better - Kane or Rooney? Include their prime, overall career and talent. 

Rooney was a better footballer in terms of technique on the ball, he was amazing up until that metatarsal injury. After that he was still a fantastic player but he was less explosive. Kane is a better goalscorer and better long passer along the ground for sure. If I had to choose who I’d go for based on their entire careers, I’d probably go for Kane even though his career honours are pitiful 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has Lavia to Chelsea been facilitated by us buying Livramento? It means money has to pass from Southampton to Chelsea for his sell-on clause, unless a player goes there instead. With taxes, FFP or whatever, it might be easier to send a player. Or easier for Chelsea to outbid Liverpool for a Southampton player, given the credit they have the Southampton bank and what can be submitted to the authorities on paper as the price. 

 

fwiw, I think Caicedo is probably overrated. I suspect the safest bet to buy from Brighton would be Mitoma, the player with the highest individual skill that would be replicable in any system. I like Caicedo to Liverpool as a transfer, because its going to be Declan Rice money and all that bollocks about moneyball and "ceilings" goes out the window.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My guess is this whole rumour about Kane just now thinking of staying at Spurs was a ploy by him to hurry the transfer along.

 

He stays for another year, refuses to sign an extension as Levy has messed him around, then goes for free after that. Meaning Spurs need to take the offer or leave it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, AyeDubbleYoo said:

If I was Spurs I wouldn't try to spend the money this window. 

 

Maybe get a backup to Richarlison in and just roll with him. 

 

I think he'd do well tbh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I reckon even though Spurs have accepted the bid, it’s not out of the question he stays. He does have a get out clause though where he can say “I wanted to stay but the club agreed a fee and I felt I had to go given the club’s stance”. Think that’s the weasely option he’ll eventually plump for now 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, gbandit said:

I reckon even though Spurs have accepted the bid, it’s not out of the question he stays. He does have a get out clause though where he can say “I wanted to stay but the club agreed a fee and I felt I had to go given the club’s stance”. Think that’s the weasely option he’ll eventually plump for now 

 

I would have thought after the first rejected bid if Kane wasn't interested, they'd have said back then. Find it hard to think they'd keep upping the bid unless there was encouragement from Kane's end?

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Optimistic Nut said:

 

I would have thought after the first rejected bid if Kane wasn't interested, they'd have said back then. Find it hard to think they'd keep upping the bid unless there was encouragement from Kane's end?

I think there probably was encouragement but I think he probably is caught in two minds. I think he’d happily stay or go and he’d prefer the decision was made by someone else. He hasn’t pushed this move through but he’s been open to it is my reading on it all. I just think he doesn’t want to be painted as a disloyal player to the Spurs fans 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I always thought Kane had no intention of leaving but was using interest from other PL clubs, Bayern and PSG as a negotiation tactic with Levy to either A) Get more money himself B) Strengthen the team around him...

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, gbandit said:

Rooney was a better footballer in terms of technique on the ball, he was amazing up until that metatarsal injury. After that he was still a fantastic player but he was less explosive. Kane is a better goalscorer and better long passer along the ground for sure. If I had to choose who I’d go for based on their entire careers, I’d probably go for Kane even though his career honours are pitiful 

By technique do you mean striking technique? Because I think Kane's is slightly better. First touch? About equal. Rooney was the better at manipulating the ball at his feet but that's more dribbling (close control, agility, balance etc.) than technique.

 

Rooney was the more creative and audacious player too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, gbandit said:

I reckon even though Spurs have accepted the bid, it’s not out of the question he stays. He does have a get out clause though where he can say “I wanted to stay but the club agreed a fee and I felt I had to go given the club’s stance”. Think that’s the weasely option he’ll eventually plump for now 

I don't get why he is so passive.

Like I've seen the lad on the Arsenal invincible parade bus. I know he's not a lifelong Spurs fan. He's given them the best decade of his career. By not forcing a move he's respected his contract - just say what you want with chest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...