Jump to content
Greasy Lake Community

The Man City Thread: The Pep Years


Jimmy James
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just now, Jimmy James said:

Yep. Start kind of last year. It will get worked out.

£150 just became £160. And the deal needs to be done by Tuesday, so we can spend the money :)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JimCT said:

£150 just became £160. And the deal needs to be done by Tuesday, so we can spend the money :)

 

The question here is do want that to happen? Btw the result of this match doesn't change with Kane on our team. Spurs played a great match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, JimCT said:

£150 just became £160. And the deal needs to be done by Tuesday, so we can spend the money :)

 

Not Tuesday Jim the window is open til the 31st so two more weeks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, JimCT said:

£150 just became £160. And the deal needs to be done by Tuesday, so we can spend the money :)

 

I can see 100 and a player. Most likely the only way it can get done.

BTW why would you need anything else you just beat the Champions?;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, AMIW said:

Not Tuesday Jim the window is open til the 31st so two more weeks

I know the window is open longer. But Daniel Levy will not let Kane go at the deadline. The tell here is if Spurs get a deal for a top-of-the-line striker across the line soon. One of Levy's brilliant moves was to put in place a credit facility he can use for player fees. So he can agree a deal with Citeh, and get the replacement in using the line of credit, then repay the LC with Kane's fee. But that requires agreement now, not 2 weeks from Tuesday. Because the moment a deal is announced for Kane the price of the replacement striker goes up at least 10 million of whatever currency matters, probably more. And I'm certain that has been communicated to Citeh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn’t make sense to pay the price Levy will only sell at for Kane, who has a history of ankle problems and a plummeting resale value which begins at age 28. 
I wonder, would Dortmund still say no to an offer of £160M considering they are compelled to sell Haaland for £70M in 11 months time? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, JimCT said:

Citeh won’t win either the EPL or the UCL without him. What’s that worth to the sheikh?

They won the EPL w/o him last season no?

And I have them in second this year and I don't think Kane would change that.  My view is he's injury prone, probably on the wrong side of this career arc, and hasn't shown he can carry a team and win anything.  The last may be a touch harsh but it makes me wary.  All in all I think he is just too expensive for what he might bring.  

My view is that they should skip signing him and look in the winter window or next summer for a younger player.  

  • Bruuuuce! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Getting back to this big hurry to sign a striker! Last year after 8 matches City was in 14th place, without a striker(even though Jesus is a striker). But it turned out pretty well don't you think? 

Liverpool's and Man U starting lineups Saturday didn't have a striker, they seem to get it done! 

Question is: is the game changing a bit? not using the typical striker? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Patched Tube said:

They won the EPL w/o him last season no?

And I have them in second this year and I don't think Kane would change that.  My view is he's injury prone, probably on the wrong side of this career arc, and hasn't shown he can carry a team and win anything.  The last may be a touch harsh but it makes me wary.  All in all I think he is just too expensive for what he might bring.  

My view is that they should skip signing him and look in the winter window or next summer for a younger player.  

100% my man!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Patched Tube said:

They won the EPL w/o him last season no?

And I have them in second this year and I don't think Kane would change that.  My view is he's injury prone, probably on the wrong side of this career arc, and hasn't shown he can carry a team and win anything.  The last may be a touch harsh but it makes me wary.  All in all I think he is just too expensive for what he might bring.  

My view is that they should skip signing him and look in the winter window or next summer for a younger player.  

The problem is others got better. Kane in that lineup is good for 25-30 goals (hell, just him taking penalties after Grealish or Sterling is fouled in the box should be 7-10 :)If they do not add him or another true #9 and lose that will be the only way to know for sure. Unfortunately for ownership, that will be too late.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jimmy James said:

Question is: is the game changing a bit? not using the typical striker? 

I think fluid forwards who can play through the channels or central is ideal. Greenwood’s goal on Saturday was a good example. A phenomenal finish. That’s where I think United have an ideal blend of all types of striker in Greenwood, Cavani, Sancho, Martial and also Rashford when he returns in October. Cavani is the central striker and he offers something the others don’t, but doesn’t massively weaken the team when he’s not playing. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  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

×
×
  • Create New...