Robin van Persie: RVP Would Make Manchester United Forget About Eden Hazard
Who needs Eden Hazard?
Will Man U land RVP?
If Manchester United acquires Robin van Persie, fans will forget about the days when their football club was ever linked to the now-Chelsea striker. Sure, Hazard is as promising as they come, but right now, Van Persie is a superior option to help the Reds win today, not tomorrow.
Darren Lewis of Mirror Football reported that Sir Alex Ferguson is confident that they’ll land RVP. If the 28-year-old Dutch forward demands a move to Man U, Arsenal will be forced to sell him with one year remaining on his contract. In early July, he announced on his official website that he wouldn’t sign a contract extension with the Gunners.
If the Reds sign Van Persie, just crown them Premier League champions now.
Man U fell short of the EPL title by the narrowest of margins last season. While their bitter rival Manchester City has yet to make any huge splashes this transfer window, the Reds have reeled in 23-year-old Japanese midfield Shinji Kagawa. Throw Kagawa and Van Persie in to Man U’s already stacked scoring attack, and they’ll be unstoppable next year.
In the 2011-2012 campaign, Wayne Rooney put the Reds on his back, scoring 27 goals in Premier League action. The only footballer who scored more: RVP. Pairing the two All-World talents would be an absolute nightmare for opposing goaltenders.
Who's a better fit for the Reds?
Van Persie launched home a grand total of 43 goals last year for Arsenal and the Netherlands. Comparatively, Hazard scored just 21 in just four fewer starts, and he played against inferior competition to what Van Persie faced off against.
When Chelsea is looking up at Man U in the Premier League standings next season, Hazard will know that he picked the wrong club. And Ferguson will know that he signed the right attacking force.
David Daniels is a featured columnist at Bleacher Report and a syndicated writer.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?