Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Tuna

Agent Fees

Recommended Posts

Posted

What really p1sses me off is that when I was about to leave school the fvckin 'careers' bloke never ever asked me if I wanted to be an agent !! ...    I'd have fvckin jumped at it !    Work in a bank ...   good steady job ...    what a load of cock !!

Posted

So Newcastle have spent twice as much as us. We got a premier league title, they got relegated lol 

Guest Papasmurf
Posted
7 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

I was more interested in this story at the bottom of the page. Not sure if anyone's picked it up before but looks like Rudkin has been spending his time finding a trainer for the owner's horses to run at Royal Ascot :rolleyes:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4321742/Leicester-City-owner-eyes-Royal-Ascot.html

Or he's been spending his time making sure we're not burning p's on agent fees. 

Posted

The fact we haven't spent so much on agents fees says a lot about our scouting IMO.

 

We haven't been driven by agents recommendations, weve gone after the players we want... Would hate to see the figures under Sven where it looked like we signed every player offered to us.

Posted
3 minutes ago, TheUltimateWinner said:

The fact we haven't spent so much on agents fees says a lot about our scouting IMO.

 

We haven't been driven by agents recommendations, weve gone after the players we want... Would hate to see the figures under Sven where it looked like we signed every player offered to us.

I've got a faint memory that the figures were published while under Sven and they were about the highest in the league. I'm sure someone on here can dig it out.

Posted

I really do think that the players themselves should be paying their agents, these top agents really do know how to milk the cesspit of bottomless money and the clubs, desperate for instant success, seem happy to throw the money at them. 

Posted
10 hours ago, Izzy Muzzett said:

I was more interested in this story at the bottom of the page. Not sure if anyone's picked it up before but looks like Rudkin has been spending his time finding a trainer for the owner's horses to run at Royal Ascot :rolleyes:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4321742/Leicester-City-owner-eyes-Royal-Ascot.html

One of the most bizarre thing I've ever read and if only a quarter of it is true it concerns me. 

Posted

More than £5m spent on agents' fees is a lot of money, but it's good to see we're not being held ransom by the agents, as other clubs do.

It does make me feel more confident in our management.

 

For a club of Bournemouth's size to spend almost twice as much is quite revealing, and kudos to Arsenal for trying to keep those costs down.

 

In the Championship, Newcastle and Villa stick out as massive spenders, but what intrigues me is the sums spent in relation to their current league position. When you look at Barnsley spending so little, but still being able to compete that well, it gives hope to others that you don't need to handle the monies excessively.

 

Charlton spent so much due to their new owners, I suppose. But it's a lot of cash for a club lingering in 16th.

Portsmouth disappoint me - for a club in such financial difficulties in the past, they apparently spend a bit too much beyond their means.

Posted
13 minutes ago, matty98 said:

I assume all those who have blamed Rudkin for everything will now also praise him for us having low agent fees?

I have it on made up authority that he paid himself £16.7million for setting up all the deals. 

Posted
1 hour ago, MC Prussian said:

More than £5m spent on agents' fees is a lot of money, but it's good to see we're not being held ransom by the agents, as other clubs do.

It does make me feel more confident in our management.

 

For a club of Bournemouth's size to spend almost twice as much is quite revealing, and kudos to Arsenal for trying to keep those costs down.

 

In the Championship, Newcastle and Villa stick out as massive spenders, but what intrigues me is the sums spent in relation to their current league position. When you look at Barnsley spending so little, but still being able to compete that well, it gives hope to others that you don't need to handle the monies excessively.

 

Charlton spent so much due to their new owners, I suppose. But it's a lot of cash for a club lingering in 16th.

Portsmouth disappoint me - for a club in such financial difficulties in the past, they apparently spend a bit too much beyond their means.

Newcastle and villa wanted to get rid of quite a few players - clearly that's expensive re agents. Newcastle also spent a fair bit considering they went down. 

Posted

I'm surprised that agents have been able to manipulate football like this so it's now the accepted practice.

 

Every penny that an agent receives comes indirectly out of the players pockets and directly out of the clubs pockets.

 

It's great work if you can get it receiving millions of Pounds just by putting a footballer and a football club who want each other together. How on earth did football clubs get in the position that they have to pay the agent when the agent is employed by the player?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...