20 Jul 2023 18:20:01
Been thinking about this for a little while.

It's obvious to anyone that United need a proven number 9.

We paid $80m for Harry so my thought is why not just nut up and pay $100m for Kane, and any other proven goal scoring number 9.

Here is the states it's not uncommon for one of the NFL teams to go all in and get the player they truly want, New York Jets did it this year.

Sure it's a lot of money but if United truly feel that is the one position holding us back from being really good, great, than go ahead and pay.

Just curious everyones thoughts.

1.) 20 Jul 2023
20 Jul 2023 19:08:24
This is probably the reason why we’ve been getting mugged off over transfer fees the last few years because we just paid whatever.

If we’re to act like a serious club regarding transfers then we can’t just bend to any clubs demands.

We need to negotiate effectively and regarding Kane we have to balance his worth with his age.

So in a nutshell absolutely not just pay whatever to get him in.

2.) 20 Jul 2023
20 Jul 2023 19:38:17
Adding to this what if Kane has said he doesn’t want to join united hence why we’ve supposedly ended our interest. Or maybe it really is to do with our budget.

3.) 20 Jul 2023
20 Jul 2023 19:44:26
I think it’s more to do with the sale or no sale by the Glazers. Obvs that if they are serious about selling, they would want to spend the bare minimum.

A friend of a friend from The Athletic said he had it on good authority that at the start of the transfer window the absolute max budget available would be £100m, with anything over funded by sales. Kinda ties in with what we’ve seen so far.

4.) 20 Jul 2023
20 Jul 2023 19:53:02
This ship has sailed for a number of reasons. It’s a shame we didn’t go all in a couple of years ago when Levy was feeding him every lie under the sun.

5.) 21 Jul 2023
21 Jul 2023 00:36:14
Levy won't sell Kane to us, to concince him would take way beyond what he's worth.

6.) 21 Jul 2023
21 Jul 2023 02:22:40
I doubt Kane has ever particularly wanted to play for us. I would far prefer that we take our time to build for the longer term, rather than blow £100m plus on a 30 y. o. old striker who would prefer to be somewhere else.

7.) 21 Jul 2023
21 Jul 2023 11:03:05
I know it won't be a United purchase but I think anyone looking for a good no 9 in January could do a lot worse than Ivan Toney - would have 12 months on his contract and if he's not signing a new one would be great inexpensive business for a lot of clubs.