Fees will include all current players that have re-signed contracts as well as players sold, left club
J
Jack Griffin
Guest
I'm sure the papers will write a story comparing agents expenditure of all the clubs in the FA leagues now the figures are publically available, so we should be able to get an idea where city are in the overall picture compared to other clubs in the division.
Last edited by a moderator:
If conspiracy theories suddenly stops, then someone must be stopping them - surely. But who? And for what purpose?
http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/8f/8c/0,,10794~167055,00.pdf
For 2010 2011.
According to that QPR were the highest at 1.7 million, Scunthorpe were the lowest at 119 k
For 2010 2011.
According to that QPR were the highest at 1.7 million, Scunthorpe were the lowest at 119 k
In the report it states 6 loan players - I am sure we only had 3 come in - Doyle and Turner (the two keepers) and Danny Ward. We loaned out some players, most significantly Thomas to Liverpool so does that mean we paid agents fees to loan players out? Seems barking but thats football.
Interesting report.
Average spending on agents fee: £0.6m per club.
As agents fees should be pretty much scaleable with transfer fees we should be able to see proof to the assumption that the more spending, the more success. So let's see:
Most spending clubs - agents fee paid - (final position in bracket)
1: QPR - £1.8m (1st and promoted)
2: Middelsboro - £1.6m - (12th)
3: Leicester - £1.3m - (10th)
4: Hull - £1.0 - (11th)
5: Reading - £0.9 (5th)
6: Leeds - £0.8 (7th)
7: Bristol C - £0.7 (15th)
So only one club actually gained promotion and I suspect that their momentum build up in league 1 might also have an impact.
I would say that spending a huge amount on players does not in itself guarantee success.
Let's look at the least spending clubs:
24: Scunthorpe - £0.12m (24th and relegated)
23: Millwall - 0.17m (14th)
22: Watford - 0.17m (9th)
21: Preston - 0.19m (22nd and relegated)
20: Swansea - 0.24m (3rd and promoted)
19: Sheffield U - 0.28m (23rd and relegated)
18: Derby - 0.29m (19th)
17: Crystal P - 0.29m (20th)
All the relegated clubs are between the 6 least spending so that at least follows expectation. But Swansea stands out in that group gaining promotion although spending a lot less than average.
Average spending on agents fee: £0.6m per club.
As agents fees should be pretty much scaleable with transfer fees we should be able to see proof to the assumption that the more spending, the more success. So let's see:
Most spending clubs - agents fee paid - (final position in bracket)
1: QPR - £1.8m (1st and promoted)
2: Middelsboro - £1.6m - (12th)
3: Leicester - £1.3m - (10th)
4: Hull - £1.0 - (11th)
5: Reading - £0.9 (5th)
6: Leeds - £0.8 (7th)
7: Bristol C - £0.7 (15th)
So only one club actually gained promotion and I suspect that their momentum build up in league 1 might also have an impact.
I would say that spending a huge amount on players does not in itself guarantee success.
Let's look at the least spending clubs:
24: Scunthorpe - £0.12m (24th and relegated)
23: Millwall - 0.17m (14th)
22: Watford - 0.17m (9th)
21: Preston - 0.19m (22nd and relegated)
20: Swansea - 0.24m (3rd and promoted)
19: Sheffield U - 0.28m (23rd and relegated)
18: Derby - 0.29m (19th)
17: Crystal P - 0.29m (20th)
All the relegated clubs are between the 6 least spending so that at least follows expectation. But Swansea stands out in that group gaining promotion although spending a lot less than average.
Last edited:
Excuse my ignorance but why should the club have to pay the agents fees for re-signing new players? Surely the player pays his agent to negotiate him the best deal? Why would the club pay an agent to squeeze the best deal possible out of themselves?
When negotiating new contracts there will usually be a signing on fee, a weekly basic wage, various bonuses (e.g. goal, assist, win, clean sheet, loyalty). Players use agents to negotiate these for them, but agents charge the club an agent's fee - the complete opposite of traditional entertainment agents that charge the 'act' a percentage of any income they generate.
So they get paid by both sides? Nice work if you can get it.
Can a club refuse to deal with agents then?
Yes, it happened with young Nathan Cameron. Thorn told him he wouldn't negotiate with an agent bearing in mind the player's age. So Cameron sacked his agent and negotiated his own deal.
It was a bit of a gamble - there's always the chance that a player will simply say 'No, you either negotiate with my agent or I won't sign anything.'
Without a doubt that twat got his moneys worth out of us! Probably got paid for his interviews during the two fiascos involvijg King aswell (initial contract when he was, then wasnt, then was etc) and the second time before he went to brum (we all know which scenario that was!)
Unfortunately every player (I would assume) has an agent these days!
One player I dont think did was Jorgensen (probably explains why he never got a club after Blackpool - think thats when he tried training with clubs for nothing to try and earn a contract)
