Board/Owners Related Stuff

[Romey 1878]

3 minutes ago, Paddock said:

Nope- ALL players should be assigned an agent governed by the FA who makes sure players and clubs get treated fairly- the agent should be paid a yearly wage that is capped so he has no interest  in what deal gets brokered whatsoever. Nobody should be allowed to make money from a transfer other than the club and the player- it should be regulated strictly and stop all the circus that is ruining football.

At the very least it should be the players that pay THEIR agents. Sure as shit, the agents wouldn’t be getting as much money then. 

[Quinn31]

10 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

At the very least it should be the players that pay THEIR agents. Sure as shit, the agents wouldn’t be getting as much money then. 

This is how it's done over here in the land of backwards.

[nogs]

20 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

At the very least it should be the players that pay THEIR agents. Sure as shit, the agents wouldn’t be getting as much money then. 

Exactly. They were talking about this on 5Live. It's ludicrous that clubs have to pay agents on top of any transfer and signing on fees. Agents work for players,  not clubs. I don't really get why clubs put up with it, I know they want to sign players but if they all said they weren't going to pay agents fees, there wouldn't be an issue. 

[Bailey]

53 minutes ago, Romey 1878 said:

At the very least it should be the players that pay THEIR agents. Sure as shit, the agents wouldn’t be getting as much money then. 

 

57 minutes ago, Paddock said:

Nope- ALL players should be assigned an agent governed by the FA who makes sure players and clubs get treated fairly- the agent should be paid a yearly wage that is capped so he has no interest  in what deal gets brokered whatsoever. Nobody should be allowed to make money from a transfer other than the club and the player- it should be regulated strictly and stop all the circus that is ruining football.

 

29 minutes ago, nogs said:

Exactly. They were talking about this on 5Live. It's ludicrous that clubs have to pay agents on top of any transfer and signing on fees. Agents work for players,  not clubs. I don't really get why clubs put up with it, I know they want to sign players but if they all said they weren't going to pay agents fees, there wouldn't be an issue. 

But agents are also key in getting clubs to sign players not just players to sign for clubs (if you get what I mean).

Chelsea paid Barkleys agent £7 mil because they got the player £20mil cheaper than they could have. Chelsea benefit and therefore so does the agent. The player will also be paying the agent as well I suspect.

I don' think you can impose any controls as it' a free market. If clubs don' want to play ball then don' pay agents and see how far you get. 

[Paddock]

9 hours ago, Bailey said:

 

 

But agents are also key in getting clubs to sign players not just players to sign for clubs (if you get what I mean).

Chelsea paid Barkleys agent £7 mil because they got the player £20mil cheaper than they could have. Chelsea benefit and therefore so does the agent. The player will also be paying the agent as well I suspect.

I don' think you can impose any controls as it' a free market. If clubs don' want to play ball then don' pay agents and see how far you get. 

Players should be advised properly and wisely by agents- do you think it’s a smart move for Barkleys career, or Delph, Drinkwater the lists endless to make the moves they did for their careers? Fanancially it was better but for their development and hapiness in their role it wasn’t  and it’s not like they wouldn’t of been wealthy people without the move is it. Money has ruined the game Baily and greedy agents wrongly advisong clients and making ludicrous demands to clubs is the main reason why it’s being ripped apart.

[Paddock]

11 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

At the very least it should be the players that pay THEIR agents. Sure as shit, the agents wouldn’t be getting as much money then. 

That wont stop them making unreasonable demands and expecting clubs to move the earth for players. The more money they rinse the club out of the more they can get a % of. Imo the only way to go is to ban all agents and train and employ a new bunch to represent all parties at the same time 

[Chach]

16 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

Pad, Moshiri is a fucking balloon and really needs to just keep his fucking gob shut. Why? Because he embarrasses himself and the club every single time he makes an appearance. It’s like Bill Kenwright on fucking steroids the levels of cringe this fella brings on. 

He's an ego maniac and I can't imagine its going to get any better.

"As long as I am major shareholder financial issues are irrelevant."

I really hope he's just minding the fort until Alisher gets here.

[Shukes]

Well there not irrelevant are they Mosh? Aren’t we sourcing two thirds of the finance for the stadium.

[Romey 1878]

1 hour ago, Paddock said:

That wont stop them making unreasonable demands and expecting clubs to move the earth for players. The more money they rinse the club out of the more they can get a % of. Imo the only way to go is to ban all agents and train and employ a new bunch to represent all parties at the same time 

That's why I said at the least.

[rubecula]

15 hours ago, hafnia said:

If lukaku had a bone he would concede possession of it. 

[nogs]

12 hours ago, Bailey said:

 

 

But agents are also key in getting clubs to sign players not just players to sign for clubs (if you get what I mean).

Chelsea paid Barkleys agent £7 mil because they got the player £20mil cheaper than they could have. Chelsea benefit and therefore so does the agent. The player will also be paying the agent as well I suspect.

I don' think you can impose any controls as it' a free market. If clubs don' want to play ball then don' pay agents and see how far you get. 

If every club refused to pay agents fees the system would carry on as normal, just the players would have to pay for the service they get. That's no restraint of a free market. Of course, all it takes is one scab of a club to step out of line and offer an agent shit loads of money to land the player they want. And that's the problem with the game - no honour. But given how much players earn, it is outrageous that they shouldn't even have to pay agents fees in transfers. It needs to change by consensus, and I'd like to see the Premier League to take a more proactive role. They negotiate the huge TV money deals the clubs benefit from after all, they should at least be able to coerce clubs into some kind of voluntary code of conduct on agents. 

[rubecula]

10% for agents paid by the players seems reasonable,  but only if the agent actually does something in regards to the transfer.

[nogs]

The other thing is, if players aren't having to pay them out their own pocket, there's no incentive for them to be arsed about whether the agent actually does anything constructive. Agents might be held to account more if players had to pay them

[Paddock]

2 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

That's why I said at the least.

They seriously need to get a grip of it before it all implodes on itself- it’s almost legalised extortion 

[Bailey]

3 hours ago, Paddock said:

Players should be advised properly and wisely by agents- do you think it’s a smart move for Barkleys career, or Delph, Drinkwater the lists endless to make the moves they did for their careers? Fanancially it was better but for their development and hapiness in their role it wasn’t  and it’s not like they wouldn’t of been wealthy people without the move is it. Money has ruined the game Baily and greedy agents wrongly advisong clients and making ludicrous demands to clubs is the main reason why it’s being ripped apart.

The players don't have to move. The agent is there to get them the best options. Who knows how well Barkley etc will do but I imagine Delph is happier at city than he would be had he stayed at Villa. Ultimately players make decisions. It' on their head not the agents.

1 hour ago, nogs said:

If every club refused to pay agents fees the system would carry on as normal, just the players would have to pay for the service they get. That's no restraint of a free market. Of course, all it takes is one scab of a club to step out of line and offer an agent shit loads of money to land the player they want. And that's the problem with the game - no honour. But given how much players earn, it is outrageous that they shouldn't even have to pay agents fees in transfers. It needs to change by consensus, and I'd like to see the Premier League to take a more proactive role. They negotiate the huge TV money deals the clubs benefit from after all, they should at least be able to coerce clubs into some kind of voluntary code of conduct on agents. 

The free market comment was in regards to Pads suggestion.

46 minutes ago, nogs said:

The other thing is, if players aren't having to pay them out their own pocket, there's no incentive for them to be arsed about whether the agent actually does anything constructive. Agents might be held to account more if players had to pay them

Players do still pay agents as far as I am aware. In Barkleys move Chelsea would pay the agent to engineer the move so why should Barkley pay more for that? The agent didn't save Barkley £20mil he saved Chelsea that money. Both players and clubs use agents and they exist in society except because of the money in football generally it attracts more attention. 

If players wanted to take more responsibility for their careers they wouldn't need an agent to represent them. They would rather pay someone else to do that for them.

[nogs]

47 minutes ago, Bailey said:

If players wanted to take more responsibility for their careers they wouldn't need an agent to represent them. They would rather pay someone else to do that for them.

I'm not sure I get that, I thought that was what agents were for? 

My main point would be this - agents represent players at all times, not just during transfers. And yes they get paid retainer fees to do so. But they also know that they make their big bucks from transfers, so they are always on the look out to get their man a move. Which is fine if that's what the player wants, but how much is agents seeking a big pay day? Now the fact that that pay off comes from the club, not the player, is a distorting factor for me. If it was the players paying commission on a move, transfers would only be instigated by the player - none of this 'hey I've been on the phone to my friend who knows the presidents gardner at Barca, I can make a move happen.' Agents instigate transfers for money, not always because a player decides to move on. 

And yes clubs might make use of agents. But they don't employ them. They employ scouts and technical directors etc who run player recruitment. The fact that clubs actually end up playing agent fees for transfers is like some kind of legalised bung. If it happened behind closed doors, it would be called corrupt. 

[Bailey]

55 minutes ago, nogs said:

I'm not sure I get that, I thought that was what agents were for? 

My main point would be this - agents represent players at all times, not just during transfers. And yes they get paid retainer fees to do so. But they also know that they make their big bucks from transfers, so they are always on the look out to get their man a move. Which is fine if that's what the player wants, but how much is agents seeking a big pay day? Now the fact that that pay off comes from the club, not the player, is a distorting factor for me. If it was the players paying commission on a move, transfers would only be instigated by the player - none of this 'hey I've been on the phone to my friend who knows the presidents gardner at Barca, I can make a move happen.' Agents instigate transfers for money, not always because a player decides to move on. 

And yes clubs might make use of agents. But they don't employ them. They employ scouts and technical directors etc who run player recruitment. The fact that clubs actually end up playing agent fees for transfers is like some kind of legalised bung. If it happened behind closed doors, it would be called corrupt. 

Thats my point, it is what agents are for (from a player perspective).

I think they make big money from any new contract that gets signed as well. So if Rom had signed I am pretty sure his agent wold have got a tidy sum for that as well. He probably can probably get more from the other "new" club than he  would from the current club for just signing a new contract. 

When you go to a travel agent, that agent will have links to different resorts or airlines. You pay the travel agent their fee as part of the whole package and they also get kickbacks from the resort for recommending them. The only difference is the amount of money changing hands!

[markjazzbassist]

13 minutes ago, Bailey said:

Thats my point, it is what agents are for (from a player perspective).

I think they make big money from any new contract that gets signed as well. So if Rom had signed I am pretty sure his agent wold have got a tidy sum for that as well. He probably can probably get more from the other "new" club than he  would from the current club for just signing a new contract. 

When you go to a travel agent, that agent will have links to different resorts or airlines. You pay the travel agent their fee as part of the whole package and they also get kickbacks from the resort for recommending them. The only difference is the amount of money changing hands!

who in the internet era uses a travel agent?  waste of money in my opinion.

[Bailey]

2 hours ago, markjazzbassist said:

who in the internet era uses a travel agent?  waste of money in my opinion.

I don't know either, but unless you book directly with the provider the same principle applies!

[Lowensda]

@Romey 1878

 

[Romey 1878]

41 minutes ago, Lowensda said:

@Romey 1878

 

Thanks for that, J, you’ve ruined my Sunday nice and early. 

[rubecula]

3 hours ago, Romey 1878 said:

Thanks for that, J, you’ve ruined my Sunday nice and early. 

as if it wasn't already

[Matt]

Despite all the gaffs from Kenwright, I’ve shown support because there’s was always a bigger picture/frame of blame. 

But he personally vouched for Moshiri and for that I’m finding it hard to forgive him

[Bill]

23 minutes ago, Matt said:

Despite all the gaffs from Kenwright, I’ve shown support because there’s was always a bigger picture/frame of blame. 

But he personally vouched for Moshiri and for that I’m finding it hard to forgive him

Since he came he spent nearly £200m on transfer fees, paid off the Club's debt, and is in the process of sorting us out with a state of the art new stadium.

It's difficult to grasp exactly what people expect of the man.  I think he's done ok already and it will get better, have some patience.

[London Blue]

34 minutes ago, Matt said:

Despite all the gaffs from Kenwright, I’ve shown support because there’s was always a bigger picture/frame of blame. 

But he personally vouched for Moshiri and for that I’m finding it hard to forgive him

What else do you want Moshiri to do?

Grab some boots and be a left back!

The money for players, the debt cleared, the new stadium, smartend up Goodison, that's what a chairman is supposed to do.

Yes he appointed Koeman and that was a mistake but most of us thought he would be a very good manager. Allardyce is only here till the summer so this season is a write off. Lets see who he gets to manage us next.

[Bailey]

I don't think you can knock Mohsiri for anything he has done other than when he opens his mouth. 

He maybe needs to realise that throwing money around doesnt buy success too but I am sure that is starting to hit home!

[Matt]

1 hour ago, Bill said:

Since he came he spent nearly £200m on transfer fees, paid off the Club's debt, and is in the process of sorting us out with a state of the art new stadium.

It's difficult to grasp exactly what people expect of the man.  I think he's done ok already and it will get better, have some patience.

 

1 hour ago, London Blue said:

What else do you want Moshiri to do?

Grab some boots and be a left back!

The money for players, the debt cleared, the new stadium, smartend up Goodison, that's what a chairman is supposed to do.

Yes he appointed Koeman and that was a mistake but most of us thought he would be a very good manager. Allardyce is only here till the summer so this season is a write off. Lets see who he gets to manage us next.

He has done a lot of good, and I’ve acknowledge this. But he has also publically humiliated the club with his manager selection process, eventual appointments and communication “skills”. 

Just angry after yesterday and, at the end of the day, the buck stops with him and his inability to run the club properly. 

[London Blue]

27 minutes ago, Matt said:

 

He has done a lot of good, and I’ve acknowledge this. But he has also publically humiliated the club with his manager selection process, eventual appointments and communication “skills”. 

Just angry after yesterday and, at the end of the day, the buck stops with him and his inability to run the club properly. 

I would say that the club is very well run. 

[Matt]

1 minute ago, London Blue said:

I would say that the club is very well run. 

Recruitment sure as shit isn’t, neither is media. Aside from that, it’s ok but not good enough, except our EITC which is exceptional

[London Blue]

20 minutes ago, Matt said:

Recruitment sure as shit isn’t, neither is media. Aside from that, it’s ok but not good enough, except our EITC which is exceptional

Media is ok, apart from the Jim White stuff, which he has admitted was a problem and has now stopped.

Apart from a new manager which he will be judged on, what else should he be doing that he is not doing now, or improve on?