I wouldn't say we exactly need Ashley Young, yet Fergie bought him to the club. It's all about the squad with everyone contributing throughout the season
Scott Parker to United?
- Thread starter Carl
- Start date
SATA said:
You'd be wrong, then. We needed an attacking threat from the left, given that Nani doesn't quite do as well there, and Park offers little, and is better centrally anyway, while Giggs will mostly play centrally.
Try again.
So you are going to start the season with Fletch, Carrick, Giggs and Ando as central midfield options whereas we have Nani, Park, Giggs, Valencia and probably Obertan as wing options. Central midfield is the most important part of the pitch and usually being good there is a remedy to winning football games
Try again
Try again
BTW, summer's not over yet.
Just saying.
Anyway, none of this is relevant. Piling up little quality isn't the way we operate.
You say that, and conventional wisdom would agree - but there have been a few interesting articles this summer about how this Utd side (10/11) won the league and reached the CL final with a very average central midfield, and focussed instead upon wingplay and a good central defence
For the good of the game I'd like to see Parker stay at West Ham, him and Nolan in midfield would easily get them promoted
Parker would be an improvement on Hargreaves and Gibson, given Hargo's injuries and Gibson's current level of ability.
So, he'd be an improvement on a player who played four minutes for us, and another player who, after his best season yet, was sold to Sunderland for 5M. Pretty high bar.
Improving on the squad piece by piece season after season is surely the aim? The squad won the League last season, so any improvement is indeed a pretty big achievement.
Parker would compete for a place with Carrick, Fletcher and Anderson all 3 of whom have showed erratic form over the past year.
With a ton of talented young CMs in the squad if the right CM doesn't come along then I can see us signing a 30-something stop gap. It's not as exciting as when we were linked to Senna or Gattuso a few seasons ago, but it'd be a solid signing that'd improve our squad. As we know Ferguson is a manager who values attitude and experience.
When we start signing the likes of Scott Parker and Charlie Adam, our era as the dominant club in England is over. They're ok bit clearly a step below and IMO don't come close to the level associated with Manchester United.
They don't come close to Darron Gibson? Ok...
I don't particular want us to sign either, and certainly not Adam, but it'd be hilarious to see the reactions here.
I don't particular want us to sign either, and certainly not Adam, but it'd be hilarious to see the reactions here.
Well Gibson is seemingly being offloaded so not a great example. Also he's a lot younger and didn't cost a transfer fee so (as with a lot of youth products) it's a 'wait and see' scenario with only a small % being good enough to stay and develop into a first team regular.
If you're going to spend £millions buying an experienced player, you don't have that luxury.
And people's reactions (mine included) would be amusing but come on, it would not be good for the club's future.
How would signing a good premiership player to play as part of the squad for a couple of seasons be damaging for the club's future?
Keeping Gibson would be damaging for the club's future. Giving Hargreaves a new contract would be damaging for the club's future. Replacing them with a better player in the short term is not.
The reactions would amuse me because they'd be annoying about what he isn't rather than what he is.
Keeping Gibson would be damaging for the club's future. Giving Hargreaves a new contract would be damaging for the club's future. Replacing them with a better player in the short term is not.
The reactions would amuse me because they'd be annoying about what he isn't rather than what he is.
A logical point and I agree to an extent but look at the PFA Team of the Year for the past 5 odd years and you'll see the likes of Chimbonda, Clichy, Milner etc - if you had the likes of them in the squad now, I'd say we'd never had won the league this year.
And that's my point - you fill the squad with decent (not top drawer) players and you go the route of Liverpool in the 90's. Of course Scott Parker could be a decent squad player bit say Rooney/Vidic go and you replace with Adabeyor/Kompany (both in very recent PFA teams of the year) and you're left with a much reduced squad quality, when apparently replacing people with good players.
And that's my point - you fill the squad with decent (not top drawer) players and you go the route of Liverpool in the 90's. Of course Scott Parker could be a decent squad player bit say Rooney/Vidic go and you replace with Adabeyor/Kompany (both in very recent PFA teams of the year) and you're left with a much reduced squad quality, when apparently replacing people with good players.
I guess you're alluding to the departure of Scholes? Parker obviously wouldn't be someone to fill Scholesy's boots.
I'm not really arguing your point of replacing 'like for like' with better players, which I can agree with in theory but more the overall quality of the squad. A simplistic argument being a midfield of Ronaldo, Fabregas, Scholes (at peak) and Nani is much better than Valencia, Adam, Parker and Young. Not that any of them are bad, useless and not fit for Utd.....just if you start filling you're squad with them and you get worse and fail to compete for trophies.
I'm not worried - I trust in Fergie but as I'm writing my opinion, I don't think Parker etc would be the right signings.
ffs, this is only 2nd to the adam thread in terms of what gives me the shits when i see it at the top of the transfer forum.
Yeah but you're the guy who had a massive hissy fit when we signed Hernandez instead of Douglas Costa last summer so I think I'll take your opinion on our transfer dealings with a big ol' pinch of salt.
No offence.
He'd replace Hargreaves nicely.
Has there been any news on what is happening to Parker?
Its one of the mysteries of this transfer window - not a mention of Parker at all.
Its one of the mysteries of this transfer window - not a mention of Parker at all.
I don't think clubs are willing to meet West Ham's valuation, due to his age.
That, and 'Arry has to sell before he can buy.
That, and 'Arry has to sell before he can buy.
So Spurs are the favourite to sign him?
If you believe what you read in the press.
Parker to go on loan... maybe..
West Ham co-owner David Sullivan insists the club have yet to receive an official approach for Scott Parker but would consider loaning him out.
The 30-year-old reigning Football Writers' Association Footballer of the Year has been linked with a host of Premier League clubs following the Hammers' relegation to the Championship.
Parker has admitted he would like to remain in the top flight in order to keep alive his England career, leading to reports linking him to the likes of Arsenal, Aston Villa, Tottenham and Chelsea.
The latter have been hit this week by the news Michael Essien will be out for the next six months and reports have suggested they are considering a loan move for the West Ham midfielder.
Parker, who played for the Blues between 2004 and 2005, has reportedly been lined up as the Ghanaian's replacement and, while Sullivan insists there has been no contact, he says a loan deal would suit the Hammers.
"We have had no approaches from any club officially," he told Sky Sports News.
"We keep hearing rumours and I would be wrong to comment further.
"I have not spoken to Scott myself. I think he has indicated and his agent has told me for his England career that he would like to play in the Premier League.
"But if we can't get the right fee for him I think he accepts he will be playing for West Ham next year in the Championship.
"He is a supreme professional and I am sure he will do a wonderful job whether he is with West Ham or somebody else.
"I mean we would love a deal - and this has been mooted - that maybe we loan him out for the season for a substantial fee and then when we get promotion he comes back to us.
"That sort of deal would appeal to us because we love Scott.
"We would obviously want a loan fee because he has substantial value and has three or four years left of his career.
"They would probably be getting the best of those three of four years.
"He is at the absolute peak of his game at the moment and is playing out of his skin.
"He would be a superstar wherever he goes and in the Championship he would be the best player."
Sullivan favours Parker loan - TEAMtalk | Latest Football News, Results and Fixtures
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know what the askin price is, but it just makes a mockery of him winning the Football Writers Player of Year Award, when no-one's willing/bothered to make a concrete offer for him. He's a decent player tho & i'm baffled why no-ones made a decent £5-10m bid for him - the likes of Everton, Newcastle etc..
West Ham co-owner David Sullivan insists the club have yet to receive an official approach for Scott Parker but would consider loaning him out.
The 30-year-old reigning Football Writers' Association Footballer of the Year has been linked with a host of Premier League clubs following the Hammers' relegation to the Championship.
Parker has admitted he would like to remain in the top flight in order to keep alive his England career, leading to reports linking him to the likes of Arsenal, Aston Villa, Tottenham and Chelsea.
The latter have been hit this week by the news Michael Essien will be out for the next six months and reports have suggested they are considering a loan move for the West Ham midfielder.
Parker, who played for the Blues between 2004 and 2005, has reportedly been lined up as the Ghanaian's replacement and, while Sullivan insists there has been no contact, he says a loan deal would suit the Hammers.
"We have had no approaches from any club officially," he told Sky Sports News.
"We keep hearing rumours and I would be wrong to comment further.
"I have not spoken to Scott myself. I think he has indicated and his agent has told me for his England career that he would like to play in the Premier League.
"But if we can't get the right fee for him I think he accepts he will be playing for West Ham next year in the Championship.
"He is a supreme professional and I am sure he will do a wonderful job whether he is with West Ham or somebody else.
"I mean we would love a deal - and this has been mooted - that maybe we loan him out for the season for a substantial fee and then when we get promotion he comes back to us.
"That sort of deal would appeal to us because we love Scott.
"We would obviously want a loan fee because he has substantial value and has three or four years left of his career.
"They would probably be getting the best of those three of four years.
"He is at the absolute peak of his game at the moment and is playing out of his skin.
"He would be a superstar wherever he goes and in the Championship he would be the best player."
Sullivan favours Parker loan - TEAMtalk | Latest Football News, Results and Fixtures
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I dont know what the askin price is, but it just makes a mockery of him winning the Football Writers Player of Year Award, when no-one's willing/bothered to make a concrete offer for him. He's a decent player tho & i'm baffled why no-ones made a decent £5-10m bid for him - the likes of Everton, Newcastle etc..