Detailed exposé of Sheffield United's deadline day dealings

[G STAR RAM]

3 minutes ago, Penelope Pendrex said:

Football clubs are a business. They aim to spend the least they can on their staff to maximise profits. Agents do the hard work of negotiating so players don't have to. Most players don't want to deal with that. It's by far the best option for most players. Players who didn't have agents such as Paul Scholes and Ian Wright did so knowing they wouldn't be getting as much money as they could have gotten. Most players naturally want the most they can get in what is a very short career.

And season ticket prices? You're just arguing for the sake of it now.

Allowing for inflation (2.7% a year), it's not too far off. Clubs charge what they think they can get. They make a lot more money off TV these days, anyway.

And Sky prices have zero to do with agents. They bid against other broadcasters, such as BT, and pass the costs on to customers. Players wages aren't connected. If it wasn't for agents, a larger portion of those TV profits would be sitting in the Club Executives' pockets rather than the players' pockets.

Have to agree to disagree I'm afraid.

Agents do the hard work of negotiating? What is wrong with the player telling the club they think they are worth more, just the same as millions of employees up and down the land manage (without any help from an agent)?

My season ticket has gone up some 25% in the last 4 or 5 years, which seems to correspond with us buying players on big wages.

Sky prices have nothing to do with agents? Think about the chain of events....transfer fees/wages rise so the clubs want more TV money, sky have to pay more for the TV rights, sky consequently but subscription prices up.

Points 1 and 2 of that chain may be the wrong way round but the end result is the same.

[ronnieronalde]

4 hours ago, Dimmu said:

 (wThat's the thing, most of them are lawyers.

This one is a good article from the inside of football, not just fan opinion.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/feb/19/football-agents-monaco

I personally found them extremely useful, I could only concentrate on playing. And I'd find it extremely stupid to have tough negotiations before moving to a club, much easier to let the third party do it. I would compare it having a fight with your girlfriend before ending up with her. No sense at all.

 

I fully agree they're needed Dimmu, that's not at all the issue I've got. I know there are some very decent agents. Denis Roach for example was always a belter. Coming from senior level recruitment where the basic salaries were usually in excess of 100k,(with the highest being 1.1m euro) I understand the need to have someone in the middle taking away the need for tense negotiations between the two parties.

No issue with them existing/operating. Huge issue with the fact that they were brought in (and needed) to stop players from being exploited, now they've gone full circle and it's them doing the exploiting. Once an agent starts to dictate who is and isn't signed at a club, that club is on very rocky ground indeed. One of the reasons I could never and would never warm to or trust Sam Rush.

You don't hear of too many agents saying "you know what sunshine, you signed a 3 year deal, you're developing well where you are, let's honour the contract eh?"

[Sparkle]

I don't care what an agent gets paid so long as they only get paid by the player then it is purely the players choice if they want or need one.

[therealhantsram]

2 minutes ago, Sparkle said:

I don't care what an agent gets paid so long as they only get paid by the player then it is purely the players choice if they want or need one.

This is how it should work. Clubs should be banned from paying agents. Agents work for the player. They should be paid by the player.