Scott Parker to United?

KM said:
If we're looking to sign a midfielder from a bottom PL club, then we should sign Charlie Adam.
Click to expand...

Think Parker is a much better player to be honest.

I would have Parker but only if someone else is brought in, if we got rid of Hargreaves & Gibson and replaced that with Sneijder and Parker I can't say i would be disapointed although I still wouldn't be sure if Parker would be required but we usually play close to 60 games per season and with injuries and rotation at a reasonable price i think he would probably get enough game time to justify.
 
Widnes said:
Think Parker is a much better player to be honest.

I would have Parker but only if someone else is brought in, if we got rid of Hargreaves & Gibson and replaced that with Sneijder and Parker I can't say i would be disapointed although I still wouldn't be sure if Parker would be required but we usually play close to 60 games per season and with injuries and rotation at a reasonable price i think he would probably get enough game time to justify.
Click to expand...

I don't think Parker will offer us anything more than Fletcher offers us, plus he is about to get 31 and not sure he'll join us for a squad role. Adams is younger and plus has performed better in a much poor side this season.

Let's hope we don't sign any of these players though
 
Excal said:
Kinell. Muppetry or no muppetry, we can surely do better.
Click to expand...

Of course we can Excal, if we are talking a creative player. As a defensive minded midfielder also capable of getting forward there are very few i can think of who would offer more than him.

All i am suggesting is that at time we have missed a combative DM this season, especially away from home. Parker has shown this is the area in which he excels and he does so consistently. I think at this stage of his career he may be prepared to accept being a squad player at Utd in exchange for winning some trophies. Look at Sheringham, it certainly didn't turn out too bad for him.

Hargreaves is probably done unfortunately, and imo we do need someone to fill that position. It shouldn't really affect any plans to acquire a more creative midfielder, as Parker would probably not be that expensive. But i have little doubt he would add some steel to our midfield that we currently lack.
 
With the 25 over-21's rule for premier league squads, I don't see how there is room for players who hardly ever appear, like Hargreaves. Already we have Owen who doesn't play much, and if Scholes stays he may not get much time either.

Someone has to take Hargreaves's place, whether Parker or Cleverley or some high priced signing. Parker could be useful against combative midfields in away games (only 5 wins in 18 this season).
 
KM said:
I don't think Parker will offer us anything more than Fletcher offers us, plus he is about to get 31 and not sure he'll join us for a squad role. Adams is younger and plus has performed better in a much poor side this season.

Let's hope we don't sign any of these players though
Click to expand...

I think he would be happy with a squad rotation role leaving a team thats getting relegated for a team that has a good chance of winning the league & european cup, Adams has only actually had one good season in the premiership and still that was mainly in the first half of the season. I'm not saying that I really want Parker but i wouldn't mind to much if we was losing a couple of midfielders and he was 1 of a couple that was brought in as replacements.
 
With Hargreaves surely being let go at the end of this season, we do need someone who can play that role. When Fletcher is out we don't have anyone else who can, so we're a bit limited in our options. Look at how desperate Fergie seems to be to get Fletch fit for Barca - if he doesn't make it we'll have to play a completely different type of game, as we have no-one else capable of doing that job.

As such, I'd be very happy to take Parker on the cheap. Direct replacement for Hargreaves.
 
The whole central midfield scenario is interesting as there are a lot of varying routes we could go down.

It's widely accepted to be our weakest area with a variety of issues. Scholes ageing, Anderson promising but unable to string together a good run of form, Hargreaves permacrocked, Gibson showing flashes of ability but receiving widespread criticism. However, in the youth setup there are a handful of extremely promising prospects in Cleverly, Petrucci, Pogba, Morrison and Tunnicliffe and a couple of others.

So any signing will have to be made with the current first team in mind, and perhaps with an eye on the players coming through. It'll be interesting to see how SAF approaches it. What type of midfielder we go for, what age, and the implications it has on our current players.

I don't even want to begin to guess what SAF will do. When we signed Smalling and Hernandez I was confused because we had Evans, Welbeck and Macheda pushing through, but obviously he has a better eye for talent than me and even the most knowledgeable anoraks on here (despite their protestations!)

This post probably doesn't really belong in the Scott Parker thread, but the possibility of a stop-gap option to bridge the gap between our current first teamers and promising youth players got me to thinking...
 
I can't see us getting Scott Parker as a stop gap. I mean we've already got Giggs (36), Fletcher (27) and Carrick (29) whose got more CL and international games experience then Scott Parker would ever dream of having. If we're going to strengthen CM then we'll do it with some real quality. That doesn't necessary mean spending 30m though (we can always find a midfielder's version of Hernandez).

The only way I can see us getting Parker if plan A fails miserably (Owen's style of transfer).
 
If he was available for the right price, of course we should go for him. He could be a great squad player for us. He was misused at Chelsea but I am sure Ferguson would get the best out of him for the squad.
 
Now West Ham are down the scramble for him will begin, I wonder if he has a clause in his contract that covers relegation.
 
Can't see it myself. Spurs if they lost Modric could do worse.

You'd wonder if West Ham would want to do business with them though, all things considered. Mind you, might not have a choice now.
 
We'd never sign him. SAF doesn't rate him as a United player.

If he did, we'd have signed him years ago to replace Roy Keane.

The other point is what we're looking for in our CM players. Once upon a time we needed heavy ball winners when we didn't have the ball. Now we keep the ball so much better, the heavy ball winners are not as necessary. What we need are CM players who can pass the ball first time, keep the passing quick and slick, drive the team forward and score the occasional goal.

Not saying Parker can't do this, but this transfer won't happen.
 
I reckon 'Arry will probably sign him, to further his dreams of fielding a football team comprised entirely of centre midfielders.
 
I am genuinely disturbed by the number of people who would want us to sign him.

We should be aiming higher than an average 30 year old who has already failed at a top club.
 
Who knows had SAF signed him back in 2003 instead of the likes of Djemba and Kleberson (and subsequently Miller). Although it's possible Parker also wouldn't have come good with the club and moved on like the aforementioned players. But I think he'd have done well at United. People forget he did well initially at Chelsea until suffering a severe injury and enduring Mourinho's multiple signings in his position.
 
We got Alan Smith before, so I wouldn't be surprised if we went for Parker...

He is a good player, definitely good enough for us and will be rotated in and out imo...

Personally, I'd only go for Parker if Hargreaves and Scholes retire at the same time... Still have my hopes for OH to return with a full pre-season behind him.
 
Much rather Rodwell than Parker, even at an extra £12million.
 
tintedsepia said:
We'd never sign him. SAF doesn't rate him as a United player.

If he did, we'd have signed him years ago to replace Roy Keane.
The other point is what we're looking for in our CM players. Once upon a time we needed heavy ball winners when we didn't have the ball. Now we keep the ball so much better, the heavy ball winners are not as necessary. What we need are CM players who can pass the ball first time, keep the passing quick and slick, drive the team forward and score the occasional goal.

Not saying Parker can't do this, but this transfer won't happen.
Click to expand...

Assumption. The mother of all feck ups.

He's also not a "heavy ball winner". Uses it very well and has matured into a very good player for a side who are surely one of the worst in the PL in recent years.

I'd like to see him in a good side - he deserves the chance to play at a better level that West Ham after his performaces for them over this season and last.

Spurs or Liverpool I reckon, and I think he'll do very well.
 
RedThaiDevils#7 said:
We got Alan Smith before, so I wouldn't be surprised if we went for Parker...

He is a good player, definitely good enough for us and will be rotated in and out imo...

Personally, I'd only go for Parker if Hargreaves and Scholes retire at the same time... Still have my hopes for OH to return with a full pre-season behind him.
Click to expand...

For me, whether or not Owen Hargreaves stays should be ignored for the purposes of United needing to strengthen the centre of midfield.

He can't be relied upon - great if he does come back and he's an extra body, but the chances are slim.
 
MrMarcello said:
Who knows had SAF signed him back in 2003 instead of the likes of Djemba and Kleberson (and subsequently Miller). Although it's possible Parker also wouldn't have come good with the club and moved on like the aforementioned players. But I think he'd have done well at United. People forget he did well initially at Chelsea until suffering a severe injury and enduring Mourinho's multiple signings in his position.
Click to expand...
Spot on.
 
i'd prefer Jordan Henderson myself. Looks very similar to Scott Parker when he first burst onto the scene and still has most of the potential that Parker had before he went to Chelsea.

Not that parker isn't still a very good footballer but he seemed to lose alot of offensive prowess during his time at Chelsea.

Jordan still looks like a player who can be moulded into a true box to box player whos a consistant threat at both ends of the pitch.
 
I think this lad is miles better than Rodwell and is an all round midfielder in the mould that we are missing. His age and injury record will probably put us off though, as well as his unsuccessful last stint at a trophy-chasing club.
 
BAMSOLA said:
i'd prefer Jordan Henderson myself. Looks very similar to Scott Parker when he first burst onto the scene and still has most of the potential that Parker had before he went to Chelsea.

Not that parker isn't still a very good footballer but he seemed to lose alot of offensive prowess during his time at Chelsea.

Jordan still looks like a player who can be moulded into a true box to box player whos a consistant threat at both ends of the pitch.
Click to expand...

If parker goes to any of teh top four it'll be because he'd be available at a decent price and as a player who can slot stright into the side.

Henderson on the other hand would likely cost a fortune and would be more of a project for a top four club.
 
RedRover said:
If parker goes to any of teh top four it'll be because he'd be available at a decent price and as a player who can slot stright into the side.

Henderson on the other hand would likely cost a fortune and would be more of a project for a top four club.
Click to expand...

Watching Henderson this season(whilst watching Welbeck) i'd have to disagree with calling him a project. He understands what his game is far more than Rodwell does becuase he only plays in midfield(right or central rather than defense and midfield) and because he is a first team starter for Sunderland with more first team games under his belt overall.

People were calling for us to sign Rodwell at a possible 20mil + but this player won't cost that much. I think an offer of 14mil + add ons could be enough to tempt Sunderland in a very similar deal to the Carrick one.

What we would then get is a Tall athletic player with a physical presence(which we've missed when fletch isn't about) as well as a good solid passer of the ball who is suprisingly skillful(see his run and first time finish from an Gyan cross against West Ham) and seems to be gradually adding goals to his game(something we've missed from central midfield this season).

I've previously questioned the wisdom of signing a player who I always thought looked good but too similar to fletch, having seen more of him lately I can see the wisdom in it. I would bank on him becoming a better player than Rodwell.
 
johnmufc said:
I am genuinely disturbed by the number of people who would want us to sign him.

We should be aiming higher than an average 30 year old who has already failed at a top club.
Click to expand...
If I remember correctly he actually started well at Chelsea, then he got injured and by the time he was fit Chelsea had Makelele and Essien holding their midfield so Parker never got a real chance.

I don't think anybody want to sign him to strengthen the strongest 11. But with Hargreaves perma-crocked, Fletcher is the only player in our squad capable of playing that style. If he's injured/suspended/poor form, we lose the option of playing that style (as happened in the 09 CL final, and looks likely to happen in the 11 CL final). We need someone capable of playing that role, and Parker would be one option. Alternatively we could give a youngster a chance (Tunnicliffe?), or make a big signing who would be looking to go straight into our starting line-up.
 
MadDogg said:
If I remember correctly he actually started well at Chelsea, then he got injured and by the time he was fit Chelsea had Makelele and Essien holding their midfield so Parker never got a real chance.

I don't think anybody want to sign him to strengthen the strongest 11. But with Hargreaves perma-crocked, Fletcher is the only player in our squad capable of playing that style. If he's injured/suspended/poor form, we lose the option of playing that style (as happened in the 09 CL final, and looks likely to happen in the 11 CL final). We need someone capable of playing that role, and Parker would be one option. Alternatively we could give a youngster a chance (Tunnicliffe?), or make a big signing who would be looking to go straight into our starting line-up.
Click to expand...

That's the way i see it too, DM is not a priority and i wouldn't want a signing in that position to hamper our chances of strengthening in other more vital areas.

However, Parker is an experienced pro and we know what he will bring. If we can get him for a reasonable fee, he would be a valuable option and the only player we would have which would reasonably enable us to rest Carrick.

We definitely would have benefited from another DM option this season imo, especially away from home. Had we someone with Parker's combative nature we may well have fared a little better domestically away from OT this season.

Fletcher for me is not a DM, he does not hold his position when we have the ball. He played there alongside Scholes in the early part of this season and we shipped 7 goals away to Fulham, Everton and Bolton. The defence was exposed far too often and this problem only really began to abate following the return of Carrick.
 
The similarities between Fletcher and Parker are that they are both what you'd call tough. They get into opposition players faces and will work hard to press and win the ball back. Ball winning CM.

However, as apotheosis said, Fletcher isn't a DM. He can't really play the Carrick role IMO of a sitting DM. Parker can play that role and I think he could also play a Fletcher role along side Carrick. I think of Hargreaves that way - he can play either role like Parker. So if Hargo isn't going to be given a chance and Parker is available at a reasonable price, would be a good squad player. However, I don't think he'll want that after the accolades he's won this season, he'll want to go some place where is a most game starter - just a feeling.

In the end I hope we forgo Parker in that Hargreaves plays for us another season. He'll be useful to back fill for either Fletcher or Carrick as needed.
 
Shimo said:
However, as apotheosis said, Fletcher isn't a DM. He can't really play the Carrick role IMO of a sitting DM. Parker can play that role and I think he could also play a Fletcher role along side Carrick. I think of Hargreaves that way - he can play either role like Parker. So if Hargo isn't going to be given a chance and Parker is available at a reasonable price, would be a good squad player. However, I don't think he'll want that after the accolades he's won this season, he'll want to go some place where is a most game starter - just a feeling.
Click to expand...
Actually, that's a good point. I focused on Fletcher because he was the obvious one (missing 09 CL and probably this coming one), but we'd miss Carrick even more.

Parker would give us cover for both. If we're looking for a cheap squad player to give us a bit more depth in that area, we could do a hell of a lot worse.
 
Shimo said:
The similarities between Fletcher and Parker are that they are both what you'd call tough. They get into opposition players faces and will work hard to press and win the ball back. Ball winning CM.

However, as apotheosis said, Fletcher isn't a DM. He can't really play the Carrick role IMO of a sitting DM. Parker can play that role and I think he could also play a Fletcher role along side Carrick. I think of Hargreaves that way - he can play either role like Parker. So if Hargo isn't going to be given a chance and Parker is available at a reasonable price, would be a good squad player. However, I don't think he'll want that after the accolades he's won this season, he'll want to go some place where is a most game starter - just a feeling.

In the end I hope we forgo Parker in that Hargreaves plays for us another season. He'll be useful to back fill for either Fletcher or Carrick as needed.
Click to expand...

I agree for the most part, but consider Parker's age. He may well want regular football, but i would bet he would like some trophies even more.

At this stage he will surely want something to show for all his hard work throughout his career, and a potential 3 yr deal at Utd, regularly playing CL, seriously contesting the EPL and an extremely good opportunity to bag silverware every season, would surely be a wiser use of his recent accolades, than first team football at somewhere with no realistic chance of trophies.

Sorry Horses mouth that rules your lot out! ;)
 
For trophies he could do worse than United but, if he also has England aspirations for Euro 2012 then being a squad player won't help his cause.

I just think W. Ham are going to milk him for all his worth and no way we'll pay their valuation which will be quite high - though not sure of which other top clubs in the PL that would pay their valuation. Outside of Spurs, I can't think of another club where he'd be a vast improvement over what they have - even Arsenal who could do with a bit more bottle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.