..no not me. Heaven forbid! But, if you are a Tottenham Hotspur supporter - II believe they do exist - who would you like as your new manager/coach?
First though there is the Harry Kane question. If you assume that Kane will not stay at Spurs for the rest of his career - which seems likely given the club's dearth of trophies - when is the optimal time to sell him? Kane is 27, arguably in his prime. He has a contract until June 2024. He has a consistent, although slight, problem with ankle injuries - and a tendency to push himself to come back from injury before fully recovered, resulting in a game or two at less than full effectiveness. transfermarkt.co.uk estimates his value in the transfer market at £108 million, down from a high of £135 million three seasons ago. Is this an ongoing, age-related decline in value or a reflection of a difficult post-pandemic market? It's not clear but you would have to conclude that the value trend is more likely to be down than up.
In the 2018/19 season Spurs made £90 million from their run to the final; last season £61 million from a run to the round of 16; this season they were in the Europa League, which provides much lower income. Currently they are on the cusp of not being in Europe at all next season; certainly not in the Champions League. Supposing Spurs keep Kane this summer, hire a coach with a strong Champions League history and earn £60 million in 2022/23 and again in 2023/24: that's £120 million in the bank but Kane then leaves for nothing.
So the maths suggest that, if you could get £150 million for Kane this summer, that would be the optimal financial decision. There are two problems though with this scenario:
- in the post-pandemic world there are probably only five clubs which could afford that money. Of these, Barcelona and Real Madrid are hugely in debt but still pursuing as their first choices Erling Haaland (age 20) and Kylian Mbappe (age 22) respectively, so can be set aside. PSG would need a replacement for Mbappe, have Pocchetino - Kane's manager at Spurs - who would probably like to hire Kane but Leonardo, the Sporting Director, calls the shots on transfers. Which leaves the two Manchester clubs. United have posted profits in recent quarters despite the pandemic causing a decimation of match day income, so are in the ballpark for a £100+ million signing and a proven striker seems a perfect fit for their team development. City posted a staggering loss of £126 million for 2019/20, which included only three months of no match day income. They do however have something like unlimited investment possibilities from the Abu Dhabi owners.
- The kind and quality of manager Spurs are able to attract probably depends on whether Kane is at the club.
Which brings us back to the original question. But first - why would Manchester United or City take a punt on a player whose value will halve over the period of a three year contract, where Spurs might not? Simple answer: Premier League titles. If Harry Kane costs us £60 million plus wages over three years but helps us win two League titles, job done. You might quibble that I haven't included Liverpool in the list of potential suitors but I think their owners are much more conscious of resale values, e.g. the sale of Coutinho to Barcelona enabled Liverpool to bring in Van Dijk and Alisson, which enabled them to win the League title last season.
Managers likely to be willing to come to Spurs but only if Kane is there probably include those with huge experience such as Rafa Benitez, Max Allegri and Maurizio Sarri (of those apparently available) but the list of those with a penchant for developing young players, forging a strong collective and overachieving as a club is longer: Brendan Rodgers, Roberto Martinez, Julien Lopetegui, Eddie Howe, even perhaps Gareth Southgate. Ex RB Leipzig coach Ralf Rangnick has been mentioned recently but he's 61 and that doesn't seem Daniel Levy's style.
As for a recent trend for clubs to go for distinguished ex players to bring in a strong fan support base, that has had mixed results - Frank Lampard, Stephen Gerrard, Mike Arteta, Scott Parker - and would be a punt, if you could even find one suitable. Jurgen Klinsmann's name always comes up but he's a bit of a transient with no real interest in long term visions. Spurs tried with Ossie Ardiles and he took them into the bottom half of the Premier League.
Given the recent hiring - and firing - of Jose Mourinho, it seems Spurs chairman likes big names. But that proved that there is only room for one big beast at the top for Tottenham, and it won't be the manager.
I would have thought that Brendan Rodgers would be the perfect fit but he has ruled himself out (at the moment). Maybe Martinez or Southgate after the Euros.
I'm not sure where this is going but I'm willing to bet Levy will be tempted to cash in on Kane this summer, with a big bid from Manchester City who have cleared the decks for a new striker with Aguero leaving. He will hope to engineer a bidding war between United and City and take it down to the deadline day wire. As is often the case it will come down to the player: do you want to join the League champions on almost double your current wages and play in the Champions League, Harry? Only one answer to that.
Finally, how would Tottenham replace Harry Kane? There's a ready made replacement in my opinion: Gareth Bale. I watched him on Sunday thrash a hat trick past Sheffield United (I know, it's Sheffield United) in a game where Kane was peripheral. Aged 31 but where else is he going to spend his final contract? Cash in on Kane, give Real Madrid £20 million and Bale Kane's wages and a lifetime membership of Wentworth and in three years he'll get you a bagful of goals. And he'll be happy as Larry.
What do you Spurs fans think?