Imagine if Big Ange comes down from Scotland, We keep Kane in his last year and somehow win the PL (ala Leicester)..... I think the world would go into meltdown... I honestly think Sky Sports would self combust

comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 33 minutes ago
I guess the question is can you stomach him running out to play against you in a Chelsea or United shirt in a years time which is a very real possibility if he doesn't go now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’ll be United or City.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Unless Haaland is leaving at some point I don't see City being interested. Chelsea will be appealing to Kane if he wants stay in London.

comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 11 minutes ago
Reported the actual deal on the table only guaranteed Spurs 73m.

Awk jog on Bayern
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not according to other more reputable sources like Paul O’Keefe. The actual number was over £100m BEFORE add ons.

comment by Diamondlights (U20501)
posted 3 minutes ago
Imagine if Big Ange comes down from Scotland, We keep Kane in his last year and somehow win the PL (ala Leicester)..... I think the world would go into meltdown... I honestly think Sky Sports would self combust
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is Scotland the country with the most amount of top flight wins outwith English managers?

by wins I mean league titles

isnt 5th UCL for the 2024/25 season?

whether he actually told Bayer the price, you'd have to think it was always 125mln or so ?

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 21 seconds ago
isnt 5th UCL for the 2024/25 season?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it ?.... Did the PL get an extra place ? If so, why ?

comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Makes sense to keep Kane. Why give him away for under his market price?

£100 million should be minimum amount if any club wants him, then Daniel Levy can tell them to feck off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dont get this drivel. Demanding 100m or else they can feck off, yet fine with Kane walking for 0m in 9 months, rejecting 86m bid

The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.

comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 1 minute ago
The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Think he's talking about UCL money. Prize money is £60m plus but you also have increased revenue from matchday (8+ games) increased sponsor payouts etc if you qualify and go far!

comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 33 minutes ago
I guess the question is can you stomach him running out to play against you in a Chelsea or United shirt in a years time which is a very real possibility if he doesn't go now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’ll be United or City.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Unless Haaland is leaving at some point I don't see City being interested. Chelsea will be appealing to Kane if he wants stay in London.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kane wouldn’t sign for a London rival ….he would destroy his relationship with Tottenham fans , something he obviously cares about or Bayern wouldn’t be tempting him

comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 55 minutes ago
Makes sense to keep Kane. Why give him away for under his market price?

£100 million should be minimum amount if any club wants him, then Daniel Levy can tell them to feck off.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dont get this drivel. Demanding 100m or else they can feck off, yet fine with Kane walking for 0m in 9 months, rejecting 86m bid
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Its quite simple, which is probably why you're struggling to understand.

comment by Blackpolespur (U9242)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by BelfastSpur (U15068)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 33 minutes ago
I guess the question is can you stomach him running out to play against you in a Chelsea or United shirt in a years time which is a very real possibility if he doesn't go now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It’ll be United or City.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Unless Haaland is leaving at some point I don't see City being interested. Chelsea will be appealing to Kane if he wants stay in London.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Kane wouldn’t sign for a London rival ….he would destroy his relationship with Tottenham fans , something he obviously cares about or Bayern wouldn’t be tempting him


----------------------------------------------------------------------

You thought Campbell wouldn't do that but he did. Nothing is impossible in football.

I think Levy has done the right thing for once, which ever way it goes from here, this was never the right moment for Kane to leave, it would have been a chaotic start for the new manager and the club could never allow that to happen, now hopefully Levy will prepare ready for 24/25 season and the eventualities that may occur

comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 19 minutes ago
The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to Champions League match day revenue

Money aside, there is an exicting reason for keeping Kane this season

His telephatic understanding with Maddison.

That goal where Maddison chips one to Kane, is lock picking at best!!

Fantastic...This partership alongside Kane/Son partnership adds a new dimension to our attack.

I would say they will be few defense that would be able to cope with this attack, of Solomon, Perisic, Son, Kane, Maddison and Kulu. (Add Gil when he is back)

I think I cannot wait for the season to start..

With VDV joining us, and maybe one more signing we will do ok this season.

Don't mention it though...Its nice to be under the radar a bit

comment by der kloppites Hi, wie geht es dir * (U13373)
posted 1 hour, 16 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 1 minute ago
very true, if he doesnt go to Bayern there is a very good chance he will go to Man Utd for free imo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That would hurt tbf
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Would hurt Liverpool more if he went to Utd

comment by Gezza-Spurs (U18952)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 19 minutes ago
The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to Champions League match day revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
were Spurs never planning on getting into the CL after Kane retires then ?

If you dont think you can get a striker this season to sign for you this season when you have an extra 90/100+m to help and a season worth of Kanes wages, then what makes you think you can do so next year FFP might mean your spending might have to be curtailed slightly with no euro football at all this season

Big clubs with revenues such as Spurs` are prepared to write off large sums of money if they see fit, it has happened many times before with other clubs, so Levy could absolutely afford to pass up £85m.

Fans who wet themselves at the thought of missing out on a large incoming fee suffer from Levyitis, 23 years of ENIC has conditioned them to think that way.

comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Gezza-Spurs (U18952)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 19 minutes ago
The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to Champions League match day revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
were Spurs never planning on getting into the CL after Kane retires then ?

If you dont think you can get a striker this season to sign for you this season when you have an extra 90/100+m to help and a season worth of Kanes wages, then what makes you think you can do so next year FFP might mean your spending might have to be curtailed slightly with no euro football at all this season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
good point - the last comment

hopefully, we won't have to face the situation of trying to get an expensive striker and be in danger of encroaching FFP rules.

comment by Admiral Ozil is my new favourite Star Wars character (U10178)
posted 1 hour, 35 minutes ago
I guess the question is can you stomach him running out to play against you in a Chelsea or United shirt in a years time which is a very real possibility if he doesn't go now.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Utd just about chels or absolutely God forbid your mob...absolutely not.😭😭😭🤣

comment by He who Dares, waits for Trophies (U15748)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Gezza-Spurs (U18952)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 19 minutes ago
The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to Champions League match day revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
were Spurs never planning on getting into the CL after Kane retires then ?

If you dont think you can get a striker this season to sign for you this season when you have an extra 90/100+m to help and a season worth of Kanes wages, then what makes you think you can do so next year FFP might mean your spending might have to be curtailed slightly with no euro football at all this season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
good point - the last comment

hopefully, we won't have to face the situation of trying to get an expensive striker and be in danger of encroaching FFP rules.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know if there will be any but if there is restrictions then it isnt gonna help.

this season from a FFP POV you will be allowed to spend more than next season I think. so if you take that bigger budget and the money made from Kanes sale it could be a damn site easier to replace him this season than next. and in the long term thats what more important... not keeping him another season , not helping him break records but by making sure your best placed to replace him when he is no longer there.

comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gezza-Spurs (U18952)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 19 minutes ago
The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to Champions League match day revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
were Spurs never planning on getting into the CL after Kane retires then ?

If you dont think you can get a striker this season to sign for you this season when you have an extra 90/100+m to help and a season worth of Kanes wages, then what makes you think you can do so next year FFP might mean your spending might have to be curtailed slightly with no euro football at all this season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're missing the point to be fair.

My article effectively says that we have absolutely no chance of finishing in the top 4 THIS SEASON WITHOUT KANE. So therefore the financials (which is all Levy cares about) means that it's more risky selling him this summer than losing him for nothing next.

Also, we have recruited a manager who is renowned for developing young players. It's clear that the club is thinking to the future with the potential signing of Veliz. He will be better prepared next season after a year with Ange and working alongside Kane. I'm not saying that he'll be anywhere as good as Kane, but this is the direction the club is going in. There's no way we're signing the likes of Vlahovic, Osimhen etc and £100m or no £100m

I think that's

comment by Gezza-Spurs (U18952)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by whodunnit (U22710)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gezza-Spurs (U18952)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Cloggy (U1250)
posted 19 minutes ago
The £59.1m mentioned above does not include matchday revenue, increased sponsorship deals, TV money etc etc.
-----------------
Why would having Kane at Spurs increase match day revenue or TV revenue? There will be no impact with or without Kane. You will always sell out matchday, and TV revenue is an agreed deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm referring to Champions League match day revenue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
were Spurs never planning on getting into the CL after Kane retires then ?

If you dont think you can get a striker this season to sign for you this season when you have an extra 90/100+m to help and a season worth of Kanes wages, then what makes you think you can do so next year FFP might mean your spending might have to be curtailed slightly with no euro football at all this season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you're missing the point to be fair.

My article effectively says that we have absolutely no chance of finishing in the top 4 THIS SEASON WITHOUT KANE. So therefore the financials (which is all Levy cares about) means that it's more risky selling him this summer than losing him for nothing next.

Also, we have recruited a manager who is renowned for developing young players. It's clear that the club is thinking to the future with the potential signing of Veliz. He will be better prepared next season after a year with Ange and working alongside Kane. I'm not saying that he'll be anywhere as good as Kane, but this is the direction the club is going in. There's no way we're signing the likes of Vlahovic, Osimhen etc and £100m or no £100m

I think that's
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and?

You effectively same things that have the same impact

I agree keep Kane, makes more sense to do so...

Every which way you look, it makes sense!