Not insane when you are bankrolled by a state.
What do you say now? [MENTION=28284]Mateka[/MENTION]
100m for either Grealish or Kane is too much. Football is on the edge financially. It was pre COVID-19 and to see these figures in the EPL saddens me. City previous limit was 65 m. I would prefer they stuck at that limit, but understand clubs with a rogue chairman spend, spend, spend, and City have to compete in the market place to buy a player.
The only good thing that would come out of it, if signing one of them, is that City do not go in debt to do it, and the money stays in football. That amount may be a lifeline to another club.
City needs way more Kane than Grealish.
They need Kanes finishing ability more
They do, but rumoured value in Kane of 150m, I hope everybody ignores Levy. Levy a shrewd salesman - Gareth Bale, but a child in a sweet shop purchaser - what he bought with Bales money.
Can't imagine they get both and if they do then they should be transfer banned for the next 2 seasons. No way in hell would this be fair on the rest of the league. If he signs both I don't want to hear a thing about pep being a genius except for in his barca days.
And you felt that Barca should be banned for signing Coutinho up to 142m Dembele in excess 83m and Co?
Clubs have been signing top players ever since I can remember, and more than one a season.
Liverpool 2007/8 signed 14 players.
*
1998/99
The biggest spenders: Manchester United
The spend: ?29.35m 6 players
The biggest signing: Dwight Yorke (?12.6m, Aston Villa)
The finish: 1st
It took until the seventh season of Premier League football for the campaign?s highest spenders to emerge as champions.
*
City needs way more Kane than Grealish.
They need Kanes finishing ability more
I agree they need a striker more. Tho not at the price Levy wants.
