Which is why, he's most likely not going anywhere until next summer. (unless one of the silly four bid for him). PSG won't bid for him. City, United, or Chelsea might- they often make illogical bids... but don't think City need him. And I don't think he'd want to go to Chelsea. So only United are really the only club to maybe go for him. Think they would be idiots to bid more than 45 for him, but they often throw money around on players that are overpriced. It's like Bellingham now supposedly being valued at £150mill... he's a good player, but he's now at a price where he would no-longer be a wise purchase. Just wait until his contract is over. (of course then he won't be considered HG, so his future value would be lower... it's really screwing Jude more than other clubs).
That's probably what it would take for Spurs to sell... but would be foolish for anyone to buy at that price. 90 mill for someone who wants to leave and is free in a year?
Contract situations and nationality aside, and assuming someone would make an offer at your valuation, if you had to put a valuation on each of them, what would they be?
Given Kane's age, contract situation, etc, I wouldn't pay more than £35mill. He gets mocked a lot by Liverpool fans, but he's a reliable goal scorer, but his age means anyone buying his contract is not going to be able to sell him on- I think there are good younger options if you're paying more than that. Salah's a little older, but a little better, and has a better name recognition, I think for a club in Europe a £40mill transfer is fair. I wouldn't spend more than that.
kane is not about pace. he's about poaching and has added some passing to his game. that extends his likely time at the top. some notable issues here. Lewandowski was 33 and went for 40 mil + and more add ons. we need to leave any bias at the door here with kane and thi k who will want him and what will they pay given their desire to land him utd need a cf. if they or someone above ten haag really really wants him then the fee will be big. psg don't really need kane. they.might pay the fee but he's not a big enough star for them. Bayern are sniffing but Bayern will never pay that fee. they'll wait to get on free. city have already gone elsewhere. Chelsea are mad enough to pay 120mil. it's just down to who will really pitch up here.
So you're placing Kane as more valuable than Salah? I get the point about bias. I can't stand Kane but I can leave that bias out of it in terms of his valuation as a player. Having said that, I don't think there's much between them in terms of valuation but I'm with Milk here. I would say Salah is worth slightly more. I would also question Kane's ambition thus far. He's the epitome of selfish. I think he may have been hanging on to beat Greavsie's record ( which will probably never be broken again). Personal glory over greater good every time with him.
Not necessarily. Utd need a specific type of player. Chelsea need the same. Salah has the longer contract, but whonneeds a slowing rw speed merchant? The answer is only psg. I do agree, kane stayed for the greaves record and will stay in prem for shearer's record.
I think Salah could also go to a Spanish club. Barcelona "have money problems"; but, both top Spanish clubs have historically spent excessively to get "a name" rather than a more sensible option, to keep the fans happy. It wouldn't surprise me terribly if either of them ended up signing Salah- especially since Salah does still have some decent ability to him.
our ever friendly fifa mad cancer surviving left full quasi cult legend Enrique has said that he has the scoop on Gravenberch joining us in the summer. the lad that's flopped utterly at Bayern
Valuation from spurs? Or from lfc? Spurs prob £100m minimum as he’s that vital to team and that’s only cos of his contract situation. if I was buying him, 60-70m prob be tops I’d go just because of age
We can afford to lose MO Salah next season. We made the mistake of buying Thiago and let our best midfielder go on free transfer.
He worked well with fab and Henderson in his prime, but it was an incredibly functional rather than spectacular midfield. They had a job and they did it well. Thiago is neither here nor there, if he'd joined 6 years ago with a fully fit and firing Henderson to do his running it could be a different matter, but now he's fairly pointless.
He was an interesting one. At times he looked great, at times he looked poor, but regardless of how he looked, we generally looked better as a team with him in the squad. Not sure he was our best by far, but he was a necessary part we haven't really replaced.
