The all new Striker thread..

[milo]

No such thing as 2nd choice in a squad fighting on 3 or 4 fronts.
We'll play 60+ games so need 2 capable players in each position

OK, I will ask a different question. If you were Harry Kane's agent and Spurs signed Dzeko, what would be your starting point for negotiations the next time you sat down with Levy and would you consider bringing this conversation forward?

 

[Jurgen the German]

OK, I will ask a different question. If you were Harry Kane's agent and Spurs signed Dzeko, what would be your starting point for negotiations the next time you sat down with Levy and would you consider bringing this conversation forward?

I would ask for more and deservedly so. If we want to stand any chance of keeping him, we need to be paying him £100,000 a week.

 

[Baleforce]

OK, I will ask a different question. If you were Harry Kane's agent and Spurs signed Dzeko, what would be your starting point for negotiations the next time you sat down with Levy and would you consider bringing this conversation forward?

Kane isn't at Dzeko's level yet, he must know that

and like Jurgen says, he's probably worth more than we are paying him anyway, the same could be said for Rose, Bentaleb and Eriksen, high profile signings always get a better wage than the academy or lower profile signings to start with, it's not right, but that's the way it is

 

[Craig_J]

Oh come on guys, nobody thinks he might end up a changed man under the right tutelage?

Ever since Balotelli first came to the Premier League he's seemed a lot to me like the kind of player who thinks he's already made it and doesn't need to prove himself any further rather than a young player who needs to put the work in to fulfil his potential.

His wages are probably ridiculous anyway so that should hopefully keep him away from the club.

 

[alekaras]

A lot of negativity against Balo and I understand why. I always like to think players like him can mature. We'll see in 2-3 years where he's at.

 

[milo]

Kane isn't at Dzeko's level yet, he must know that

and like Jurgen says, he's probably worth more than we are paying him anyway, the same could be said for Rose, Bentaleb and Eriksen, high profile signings always get a better wage than the academy or lower profile signings to start with, it's not right, but that's the way it is

He certainly hasn't proved it over as long but even at his best Dzeko has been a streaky striker which is why he has never been able to nail down a first team place at City.

He's 29 and will want around £100k a week. In a couple of years time he will be worth very little. As a player who could come in and make an impact next season, you are probably right but those are not the waters we are swimming in.

 

[Lemonade Money]

I still think Balo would be worth a punt if we can get him for less than 10 million quid. After all he's been through, I wouldn't be surprised if he shapes up to prove a point. Wages might be an issue, though.

Thank you for taking the time to post Mr Rodgers.

 

[monkeybarry]

OK, I will ask a different question. If you were Harry Kane's agent and Spurs signed Dzeko, what would be your starting point for negotiations the next time you sat down with Levy and would you consider bringing this conversation forward?

Would I be prepared to pay 10m a year in wages on fwds that would very likely get us top 4 (albeit a hard task with the other 4) - yes.
That has risk mitigation in it as if Kane continues to be as good as he was last season, the I. He should be on big money II. We have a great chance of top four.
If I. Kane doesn't turn out to be that good, we'll need a Dzeko qlty player or II. We fail to get CL and Kane is qlty, he may want to leave and will have sale value.

at present Kane is a one season wonder.
Dzeko has done over many seasons in Germany and here. Yes he is a bit streaky, but name me more than a handful of strikers that are not.

 

[Rorschach]

A lot of negativity against Balo and I understand why. I always like to think players like him can mature. We'll see in 2-3 years where he's at.

Puberty.

 

[Baleforce]

He certainly hasn't proved it over as long but even at his best Dzeko has been a streaky striker which is why he has never been able to nail down a first team place at City.

He's 29 and will want around £100k a week. In a couple of years time he will be worth very little. As a player who could come in and make an impact next season, you are probably right but those are not the waters we are swimming in.

he's got a one in three record over 3 seasons with City, that's not bad, hes been in and out of the side (as they have a superior forward and often play just one) so that partly explains the streaks

could you not say Kane has been equally streaky (looking at his entire first team career, not just for us)?

maybe I've been swayed by all the times he's absolutely murdered us, I wouldn't be at all surprised to be told he's scored more goals at White Hart Lane than Kane, it certainly feels like it ;-)

lastly, these days is 100k a week a lot to be paying a good PL player for a top 6 side? I'd say that's pretty average and would be surprised if Lloris, Verts and Lamela were not on that kind of salary

 

[Rorschach]

OK, I will ask a different question. If you were Harry Kane's agent and Spurs signed Dzeko, what would be your starting point for negotiations the next time you sat down with Levy and would you consider bringing this conversation forward?

I do get the wages argument but we did have a 100k forward (technically) on our books for a few seasons and it hasn't distorted our wage structure as far as I am aware. Anyway if we were thinking of bringing in Dzeko they could get creative with signing on fees and whatnot to avoid he 100k per week wages headline.

Bar the financials, I think a real stumbling block for landing Dzeko is the assurances he would be pushing for. I'm sure he wants a club where he is top dog. In reality there are more than enough matches to go around for two main strikers at a club, but come the start of the season if he is sitting on the bench it won't feel like that to him.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I do get the wages argument but we did have a 100k forward (technically) on our books for a few seasons and it hasn't distorted our wage structure as far as I am aware. Anyway if we were thinking of bringing in Dzeko they could get creative with signing on fees and whatnot to avoid he 100k per week wages headline.

Bar the financials, I think a real stumbling block for landing Dzeko is the assurances he would be pushing for. I'm sure he wants a club where he is top dog. In reality there are more than enough matches to go around for two main strikers at a club, but come the start of the season if he is sitting on the bench it won't feel like that to him.

I would rather have Charlie Austin here than Dzeko.

 

[parklane1]

He certainly hasn't proved it over as long but even at his best Dzeko has been a streaky striker which is why he has never been able to nail down a first team place at City.

He's 29 and will want around £100k a week. In a couple of years time he will be worth very little. As a player who could come in and make an impact next season, you are probably right but those are not the waters we are swimming in.

This for me and why I do not want him here, I have a mate who is a City S/T holder and he says in a lot of games he is no more then a passenger.

 

[milo]

I do get the wages argument but we did have a 100k forward (technically) on our books for a few seasons and it hasn't distorted our wage structure as far as I am aware. Anyway if we were thinking of bringing in Dzeko they could get creative with signing on fees and whatnot to avoid he 100k per week wages headline.

I think that there is a difference between having a player on £100k a week when a young player breaks through, to bringing one in to be an equal to or cover for a young player who has established their self as first choice.

If I was Kane's agent and we sign Dzeko (or any other striker on big wages) I would ask for parity or he would be off to United.

 

[Pandy]

I would rather have Charlie Austin here than Dzeko.

It is a struggle to provide a dignified response to that.

 

[Pandy]

I think that there is a difference between having a player on £100k a week when a young player breaks through, to bringing one in to be an equal to or cover for a young player who has established their self as first choice.

If I was Kane's agent and we sign Dzeko (or any other striker on big wages) I would ask for parity or he would be off to United.

And if I were Levy, I would tell Kane's agent where to go...

He just signed a new contract in February. For all we know he could be another Franny Jeffers. He can have his new contract at the end of the season, if he still deserves it.

 

[Pandy]

This for me and why I do not want him here, I have a mate who is a City S/T holder and he says in a lot of games he is no more then a passenger.

No more than a passenger... in one of the best teams in the league. How are we going to sign someone who is at the centre of everything at Emirates Marketing Project??

The very fact we have a chance of signing him should indicate that he isn't quite good enough to hold down a first team spot at City. That isn't something to sniff at. He has been behind strikers like Aguero and Negredo for years, strikers who wouldn't dream of coming to Spurs.

When he does play, even from the bench, he scores goals.

Moreover, he is a far more complete package than Austin for example. If we are looking for a backup/competition/mentor to Kane, we really couldn't do any better in footballing terms.

In financial terms, sure, Austin may be the better deal. He would probably command £50k a week tops, although even in terms of a transfer fee, he would probably cost a similar amount to Dzeko.

Don't be surprised if Dzeko ends up at Arsenal or Roma (i.e. in the Champions League, and out of our reach).

 

[parklane1]

No more than a passenger... in one of the best teams in the league. How are we going to sign someone who is at the centre of everything at Emirates Marketing Project??

The very fact we have a chance of signing him should indicate that he isn't quite good enough to hold down a first team spot at City. That isn't something to sniff at. He has been behind strikers like Aguero and Negredo for years, strikers who wouldn't dream of coming to Spurs.

When he does play, even from the bench, he scores goals.

Moreover, he is a far more complete package than Austin for example. If we are looking for a backup/competition/mentor to Kane, we really couldn't do any better in footballing terms.

In financial terms, sure, Austin may be the better deal. He would probably command £50k a week tops, although even in terms of a transfer fee, he would probably cost a similar amount to Dzeko.

Don't be surprised if Dzeko ends up at Arsenal or Roma (i.e. in the Champions League, and out of our reach).

You do make some good points however there are several reason why I think we should avoid this.

( 1) I doubt he will come here to play second fiddle to Kane and he would want to be first choice.

(2) The wages he would want for what he will give us is to much

(3) The transfer fee for a player who will be 30 before the end of next season is also to much.

And added to his disappearing acts in a lot of City games makes me think he would be a big mistake to sign.

 

[Pandy]

You do make some good points however there are several reason why I think we should avoid this.

( 1) I doubt he will come here to play second fiddle to Kane and he would want to be first choice.

(2) The wages he would want for what he will give us is to much

(3) The transfer fee for a player who will be 30 before the end of next season is also to much.

And added to his disappearing acts in a lot of City games makes me think he would be a big mistake to sign.

You're right, there are a lot of non-footballing considerations that weigh against signing him.

Strictly in terms of what he'd give us when he actually gets on the pitch though, we can't do any better.

 

[parklane1]

You're right, there are a lot of non-footballing considerations that weigh against signing him.

Strictly in terms of what he'd give us when he actually gets on the pitch though, we can't do any better.

To be honest I think Austin would be a better buy for us and would work better with Kane ( if we play both in some matches) buts Stop! Hammer time.