Scotty Parker anyone?

What about VDS?

What will justify my position is that we wont sign him..... if he ends up at Chelsea or Arsenal I'll eat my words.
 
I think the hatred for Parker is clouding a lot of posters' judgment.I'm not a fan of the player, I think he's been way overhyped last season.I'm also not saying that we should sign at all costs, it's just that if a decision has to be made between adding no more midfielders and Parker on loan, I'd choose the latter
 
The hatred? :lol:


The only fact is Chiefs crystal ball is no clearer than mine.
 
if rumours are true that Inter are prepared to let Cambiasso go, I'd rather him than any other defensive midfielder
 
kouroux said:
I think the hatred for Parker is clouding a lot of posters' judgment.I'm not a fan of the player, I think he's been way overhyped last season.I'm also not saying that we should sign at all costs, it's just that if a decision has to be made between adding no more midfielders and Parker on loan, I'd choose the latter
Click to expand...

I'm completely ambivalent to Scott Parker. I just don't think he's good enough at football to play for us.
 
If we need another body in midfield and we're unable to get any of our longer term targets then I'd happily take him.

He's not great and would start the majority of our games from the bench but he'd be a decent option considering how short of numbers we currently are. We arguably only have Carrick who is able to start every week. Anderson is inconsistent, Giggs is 37 and other options like Cleverley and our academy players have never played there in the top flight. Don't ask me what's going on with Fletcher.]

Give me a younger and better option any day, only as a last resort.
 
Would he really a bad stop gap signing on loan. Could do a job for us until next year when Pogba, Morrison are ready to step up. With Fletch's virus, he would be a decent option as I don't think there is too much difference between him and Fletch.
 
Should have got him when he left Charlton.Saf would have got the best out of him,bit last resort now.
 
KM said:
Would he really a bad stop gap signing on loan. Could do a job for us until next year when Pogba, Morrison are ready to step up. With Fletch's virus, he would be a decent option as I don't think there is too much difference between him and Fletch.
Click to expand...

Massive difference, IMO. Parker has never played a CL game.
 
Lance Uppercut said:
Massive difference, IMO. Parker has never played a CL game.
Click to expand...

But with Fletch's virus, we're are lacking in midfield options Lance. Parker would be a decent option for us, he is experienced in Premiership and wouldn't be that expensive at all.
 
I don't disagree that he has extensive PL experience, and that he wouldn't be a costly purchase.

I just believe we can do a lot better.
 
Redknapp said it made no sense to pay a transfer fee of £8M and wages of £5M/year. I think it would make more sense to sign Tiote.
 
Parker is overrated as he is underrated.

I think a lot of people look at his age and immediately think that because he's the wrong side of 30 that he is finished. He has one of the best engines in the league IMO, fitness wise he has had a lot of injury problems which is part of the reason I don't think he ever fulfilled his potential.

With regards to him being able to play at United. I do think he is a player who would benefit from being around better players, he has a good short passing game, and can probe forward box-to-box, and can shoot. Similar to Gibson, just better defensively and a lot more mobile.

Is he the right answer? Well if the likes of Modric and Sneijder are not available, then he could certainly fill a squad role. Whether or not that's what he needs to be is another question.

I'm sure that every fan here would prefer Sneijder or Modric, but I don't think Parker would be anywhere near as bad as some people claim. Yes he was overrated this season, but that's not to say that he didn't have a great season still.
 
Plan M said:
How on earth has Scott Parker been average in recent seasons?!
Click to expand...
Parker is a big fish in a very small pond. He couldn't brake into Chelsea team when much limited player like Tiago was ahead of him in the pecking order.

You FIFA/Football Manager muppets need to start accepting that the football world doesn't behave the same way it does in games. The fantasy signings half of you lot want only really happen at clubs like Real Madrid.
Click to expand...
So how the football worlds work, oh wise one? Start buying players that have been relegated with their respective teams? 31 year(soon) players which would bring nothing to the team we have other than depth? A player that would most likely stall the development of some young player to make a start rather than him in the lineup?

We desperately need a midfielder and I'd personally welcome one with proven Premier League experience at a low price.
Click to expand...

So let's but Adam, Parker, Brunt and every other bottom table midfielder who had a decent, even good season? On the side note, should we had bought Phillips on the basis of 2 good seasons and Cole and Sheringham leaving?
It's not about quantity it's the quality that we need. It doesn't have to be a super star to fall into piece with our midfield.

Over the last years we had Scholes, Keane, Robson, how does a 30 years old Parker fit in there?

Of course I'd prefer Sneijder but the balance of the team concerns me a little if we did actually purchase the Dutchman.
Click to expand...

so you think buying another average midfielder would keep the balance in midfield...the mediocrity maybe? How does that help?

Parker is a good player for a middle tabled team or a bottom one. But he's not a player that you would put in a top team.

BaldwinLegend said:
I think it was more a well established Lampard and Makelele (at their peaks) he struggled to get past - the others just illustrate the strength in depth Chelsea enjoyed at the time, something we lack in that area currently.
Click to expand...

yet Tiago got into the lineup twice as much compared to him. Tiago would be a nice backup, should we buy him as well?

There's a reason why no one is interested in the so called "best player last season", according to bunch of gimps who nominated and chose him. Even Pool with all the deadwood they bought recently (Adam, Henderson) don't seem to see the "bargain" in Parker.

Let's see, what our rivals have in central midfield:

Arse: Fabregas, Nasri, Ramsey, Wilshere
Chelsea: Essien, Lampard, Ramirez
Tottenham: Modric, Kranjčar, Sandro, Pienaar, Palacios
Shitty: Toure, De Jong, Barry
Everton: Arteta, Fellaini, Rodwell
... etc.

Parker can start in neither of those teams.

Even Muamba and Tiotte had arguably as successful seasons like Parker, if not were better(subjective).

And facepalm to those who claim Parker is better than Fletcher. Same Fletcher who proved over and over again against the big dogs that he's a big game player..
 
I feel we might already have our future midfielders in our ranks, the problem being, they are just a little young and inexperienced.
If you sit back and really think about it, taking Parker on a season long loan isn’t a bad option if SAF can’t acquire the targets he wants. He’s not going to be a vast improvement on what we already have, but would offer a reliable option if required.
With Fletchers uncertain fitness problems, I think he would add valuable cover for us, and also allow opportunities to bed in the likes of Pogba and Morrison, which might not happen if we signed a much more highly rated midfielder and that resulted in less playing time.
 
A lot of people who are in favour of signing him see no problem in throwing a average pensioner straight into a squad, which, will also hinder youth progress in the first team and for the love of God, is no better than Anderson, Carrick or Fletcher.

Just think, if we signed Parker, the effect it would have on our current CM's. They'd be pissed off, and rightly so. "Are we so shit that we need a relegated nearly man as a player in our squad?" There's more to signing a player than him playing on the pitch. The signal it would send to the rest of the squad would not be of a good one.
 
Wayne_Rooney said:
A lot of people who are in favour of signing him see no problem in throwing a average pensioner straight into a squad, which, will also hinder youth progress in the first team and for the love of God, is no better than Anderson, Carrick or Fletcher.

Just think, if we signed Parker, the effect it would have on our current CM's. They'd be pissed off, and rightly so. "Are we so shit that we need a relegated nearly man as a player in our squad?" There's more to signing a player than him playing on the pitch. The signal it would send to the rest of the squad would not be of a good one.
Click to expand...

I understand your point of view, but Parker would hinder youth progress far less than signing a more highly rated midfilder (who would expect to play more)

I'd honestly just see him as a stop gap loan, to cover while the youth got the experience.
 
Shrek said:
I understand your point of view, but Parker would hinder youth progress far less than signing a more highly rated midfilder (who would expect to play more)

I'd honestly just see him as a stop gap loan, to cover while the youth got the experience.
Click to expand...

We're Man United, we don't need to bring players to the club on loan.

It's not worth a discussion. We won't sign him, or loan him. We're no way near that desperate. We got to the final of Europe for gods sake, with a combination of Carrick, Giggs and Fletcher in the centre. Don't forget comfortably winning the PL.

Scholes will be a big, big miss. His class in that position is irrefutable. However, towards the second half of the season he saw himself becoming second choice for the big games. If we had relied on Scholes like we had Giggs last season, I could understand the reasoning behind Parker more.

Fergie wants to overcome Barcelona, ask yourselves lads, would he start with Scott Parker to answer our "midfield problems"?
 
Wayne_Rooney said:
We're Man United, we don't need to bring players to the club on loan.
Click to expand...

Larsson came on loan didn't he?

There is no shame in bringing a player on loan to United. A year long loan of a Parker or a year contract for a 30 year old Michael Owen? What's the difference? Owen came from a club that just got relegated didn't he?

Parker could do a job for United as he can play either the Carrick of Fletcher role should either be unavailable. He has played the terrier type role of trying to win the ball back and also played a sitting role effectively. He isn't what we need to take us forward for the next 10 years but, he certainly could do a job next season.

I don't think he'd hold any of the up and coming youth back either because outside of Cleverly we don't have youth that are ready to even fill in for meaningful games in the league or CL. It's not like if Carrick is out for a league game, Fergie is going to say well lets get Pettruci or Pogba in for him is he even if we don't have Parker or another CM? What may happen is instead of trying to suddenly make Anderson play a sitting role or even Giggs - we'll have the option to put Parker in there.
 
Wayne_Rooney said:
We're Man United, we don't need to bring players to the club on loan.

It's not worth a discussion. We won't sign him, or loan him. We're no way near that desperate. We got to the final of Europe for gods sake, with a combination of Carrick, Giggs and Fletcher in the centre. Don't forget comfortably winning the PL.

Scholes will be a big, big miss. His class in that position is irrefutable. However, towards the second half of the season he saw himself becoming second choice for the big games. If we had relied on Scholes like we had Giggs last season, I could understand the reasoning behind Parker more.

Fergie wants to overcome Barcelona, ask yourselves lads, would he start with Scott Parker to answer our "midfield problems"?
Click to expand...

Forget Barcelona, that match is statistically not likely to happen anyway. Let's worry about the league first. Is this midfield still good enough for the coming season? A "Scott Parker" type of signing is not ideal, but we should consider any options that would improve our team. Right now our transfer market options are running low, so we either look for a stop-gap, or throw players like Cleverly, and maybe even Pogba into the deep end.
 
Shimo said:
Larsson came on loan didn't he?

There is no shame in bringing a player on loan to United. A year long loan of a Parker or a year contract for a 30 year old Michael Owen? What's the difference? Owen came from a club that just got relegated didn't he?

Parker could do a job for United as he can play either the Carrick of Fletcher role should either be unavailable. He has played the terrier type role of trying to win the ball back and also played a sitting role effectively. He isn't what we need to take us forward for the next 10 years but, he certainly could do a job next season.

I don't think he'd hold any of the up and coming youth back either because outside of Cleverly we don't have youth that are ready to even fill in for meaningful games in the league or CL. It's not like if Carrick is out for a league game, Fergie is going to say well lets get Pettruci or Pogba in for him is he even if we don't have Parker or another CM? What may happen is instead of trying to suddenly make Anderson play a sitting role or even Giggs - we'll have the option to put Parker in there.
Click to expand...

Owen and Larsson used to be pretty good players, that played on top top level. They came due to their experience and quality showed in the past. Also they cost nothing.

Parker had couple of good seasons - nothing special and dross/sicknote/average in the others...

Why would WHU loan Parker? The only way we'll see him at OT is buying him. I don't think we need dross and buy a player just to occupy a squad number...
 
Colin129 said:
Its a year old, but Parker was on £60K a week 12 months ago...

West Ham's wage bill in full - Telegraph
Click to expand...

This is only the basic fee as well. Appearance fees way a lot and then you have your goal scoring bonuses, clean sheet bonuses and plenty of other bonuses.

Mido with 1k per week. Obviously some kind of pay as you play deal.
 
Shimo said:
Larsson came on loan didn't he?

There is no shame in bringing a player on loan to United. A year long loan of a Parker or a year contract for a 30 year old Michael Owen? What's the difference? Owen came from a club that just got relegated didn't he?

Parker could do a job for United as he can play either the Carrick of Fletcher role should either be unavailable. He has played the terrier type role of trying to win the ball back and also played a sitting role effectively. He isn't what we need to take us forward for the next 10 years but, he certainly could do a job next season.

I don't think he'd hold any of the up and coming youth back either because outside of Cleverly we don't have youth that are ready to even fill in for meaningful games in the league or CL. It's not like if Carrick is out for a league game, Fergie is going to say well lets get Pettruci or Pogba in for him is he even if we don't have Parker or another CM? What may happen is instead of trying to suddenly make Anderson play a sitting role or even Giggs - we'll have the option to put Parker in there.
Click to expand...

The difference is that Owen was much the better player. He is a proven goalscorer at the top club level and international level. He's had experience in playing for the biggest clubs and performing, Liverpool + Real Madrid. Owen proved he could do a great job wherever he went.

Parker's played for a big club and failed. Simple as that. He's done well for mediocre Premier league clubs, but that's as far as it goes. If we were talking about a player who was rising then I'd be in favor, but we're not.

With Anderson, okay they don't play the same positions, but a guaranteed squad position for Parker would put Anderson's development at jeopardy and I don't think the gamble is worth it. Adding another number to the squad for the sake of doing so isn't worth it.

fatboy said:
Forget Barcelona, that match is statistically not likely to happen anyway. Let's worry about the league first. Is this midfield still good enough for the coming season? A "Scott Parker" type of signing is not ideal, but we should consider any options that would improve our team. Right now our transfer market options are running low, so we either look for a stop-gap, or throw players like Cleverly, and maybe even Pogba into the deep end.
Click to expand...

Worry about the league? We won it last season. We dominated Chelsea domestically and in Europe. They have a midfield of Essien, Lampard, Mikel. Giggs and Carrick were far superior in all games we played.
Arsenal - Won 2 lost 1. On paper, a centeral midfield containing O'Shea and Gibson is a fecking nightmare but we breezed passed them. The slip up was Arsenal away. That was sandwhiched between 2 CL games and that was just an off game for us. Park was exhausted and lost Ramsey for their goal.

I think what you're both forgetting is that we're not in trouble, at all. We don't need a emergency loan. We have 7 weeks to find a player. I think Fergie will sign someone and they'll be a far better option that Parker. We're the 2nd best team in the world right now as a team.
 
So what if Parker tried and failed at a big club? You think that experience he's gained since then hasn't made him a better player?

Parker and Adam both have enough quality in them to be United squad players but, that's not what we were looking for. Of the two, Parker would fill a more pressing need in terms of squad player need. That is a back up for Fletcher or Carrick. None of our current CM have shown they can play either of the roles those two guys play for us. Scholes at least used to play a sitting CM as did O'Shea. As for Fletcher - we've seen clearly the miss he has been in games where we need a bit more tenacity in there - absolutely no one else has been able to give us what he does over the last couple of years.
 
Wayne_Rooney said:
Worry about the league? We won it last season. We dominated Chelsea domestically and in Europe. They have a midfield of Essien, Lampard, Mikel. Giggs and Carrick were far superior in all games we played.
Arsenal - Won 2 lost 1. On paper, a centeral midfield containing O'Shea and Gibson is a fecking nightmare but we breezed passed them. The slip up was Arsenal away. That was sandwhiched between 2 CL games and that was just an off game for us. Park was exhausted and lost Ramsey for their goal.

I think what you're both forgetting is that we're not in trouble, at all. We don't need a emergency loan. We have 7 weeks to find a player. I think Fergie will sign someone and they'll be a far better option that Parker. We're the 2nd best team in the world right now as a team.
Click to expand...

Just because we won the league doesn't mean you are automatically entitled to another one. Chelsea is clearly looking to strengthen, and City have yet to gel but they can only get better. In the meantime we've lost Scholes, Fletcher is (reportedly) still recovering from illness, and Giggs is a year older. Even Fergie admits the midfield is not as covered as he'd like to be. Our strength was in attack and defence, and will remain the case this coming season. We won games in spite of Gibson, not because of.
 
Sean_RedDevil said:
Parker or Adam aren`t United quality.......i can`t believe this discussion here :lol:
Click to expand...


This!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I honestly can not believe we are discussing even thinking about scott parker as a manchester united central midfielder. it really is rediculous!!!

yes we are short in that position, if fletcher is injured arguably very short. giggsy is a 37 year old converted left winger. so in carrick and anderson it is reasonable to argue that we may start the season with only 2 centre midfielders. obviousley we need (2, in my opiion) players in. but scott parker??

i like many are slightly concerned about the current "squad" being weaker than last year. wes, JOS and neville offered huge experience and cover while scholesy and vds not only offered the experiance but also genuine qaulity. the da silva's along with evans, smalling and jones replace nev, jos and wes but de gea WILL make mistaes and scholesy has yet to be replaced on a midfield we where already short on.

Having said all of that.......we have a certain man in charge who seems to know what he was doing. this time last year i thought we desperatley needed a centre forward....couldnt see where the goals would come from. SAF brings in hernandez from know where and he gets 20 goals. so whilst i honestly dont see us signing snieder.......i really hope we dont get parker but would not be suprsed in the slightest to see us sign some relative unknown, or maybe two. failing that....who know how good the likes of pogba are going to be.

so rather than worrying and proposing shit players out of desperation, trust in Sir Alex, he'l sign the right player.......and if he doesnt he'll make sure anderson has one hell of a season and that some of the younger players make the step up.
 
Excal said:
Now that they're being forced to sell their best player, and all...
Click to expand...

I think Tevez is a double-edged sword. His desire to leave is not driven by lack of money or success ... it's just a "Tevez" thing. Laugh at City if you want, but if they ever get a proper manager in who can make that squad gel, they'll be tough to beat.
 
fatboy said:
I think Tevez is a double-edged sword. His desire to leave is not driven by lack of money or success ... it's just a "Tevez" thing. Laugh at City if you want, but if they ever get a proper manager in who can make that squad gel, they'll be tough to beat.
Click to expand...

Tevez is a massive pain in the arse, but you can't seriously question that he's been City's best player by some distance since they got him. His departure will be a serious blow to City's progress.
 
Excal said:
Tevez is a massive pain in the arse, but you can't seriously question that he's been City's best player by some distance since they got him. His departure will be a serious blow to City's progress.
Click to expand...

Tbh you can when you see how Kompany has performed for them in the last couple of seasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.