FIFA will need to ban agent fees all together. Idiotic to think that you pay 60m for the player then you pay another 90m to fill some money grabbing blokes pockets with cash. After the Pogba episode I don't want anything to do with that guy. He is also an idiot leaving United out. There aren't that many clubs who will pay 100m + for a player. So eliminating one of the biggest spenders isn't really that clever.
Erling Haaland
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
- Status
This will only end up with clubs paying that tax obviously.
Does that means if a player transfer for free, the agent will receive no agent fees?
Dortmund cuckolded.
Yeah people seem to forget Ibra was presented by that fat fecker when he was at United too. And still now.
From my observation most seem to blame the circus and toxicity entirely on Raiola. I hate that fat fecker too but let's not forget he works for the players, not the other way around.
I mean this is what I've been saying - the fact that a player has Raiola as their agent either can bring up their personality or intelligence.
Lukaku, Balotelli, Lingard, Zlatan, players like Pogba, Widjnaldum and Donnurumma becoming run the contract merchants and leaving on a free..
If Haaland does join us - the chance he leaves is is already 100% in his plans; arguably even possibly leaving us on a free aswell.
It's just hard not to want him though. Just a player I feel like I have to be happy if he does come and happy if he doesn't.
Yeah that I'd agree with. If a young player chooses that fat fecker to be his agent then probably it's actually better to stay away from them.
Pretty toothless regulation tbh, there’s nothing preventing the agent to negotiate a higher wage/sign on bonus for the player and take his cut from that. I don’t see the top dogs like Mendes or Raiola to be negatively affected at all by this.
He probably adds a low release clause on the contract like he did for Dortmund. Let's say 100m, if Utd fail to make top 4 with him he can leave easily that way.
Honestly I would rather not get haaland than deal with this agent. I would love to have him here but it means dealing with Riaolo then no thank you.
The frequent comments and media coverage is something we don't need not when we have so many issues to fix. It is not always the case the team with the best striker wins the biggest prize. Look at Portugal and Argentina. While having Haaland helps, but it is not the end of the world if we don't get him. I would not want us bend backwards for Riaola and made use by him for any bidding wars.
The frequent comments and media coverage is something we don't need not when we have so many issues to fix. It is not always the case the team with the best striker wins the biggest prize. Look at Portugal and Argentina. While having Haaland helps, but it is not the end of the world if we don't get him. I would not want us bend backwards for Riaola and made use by him for any bidding wars.
I don't object to a release clause in principle for a footballer like Haaland. It would have to be a robust fee, but if the player turns out to be happy at OT he can always extend his contract...and if he's not happy and wants to leave, he's going to leave anyway.
Given our current striker situation...
Ronaldo, brilliant but aging quickly
Cavani, brilliant but too often unfit, is aging and is out no matter what at the end of the season
Greenwood, brilliant but still very young
Rashford, crumbling before our eyes and in any event is not a striker
Martial, a player who can't be bothered with working hard
...it would in no way be insane to bring in Haaland if there were a way to make it work.
We let Cavani and Martial go. That's the easy part. Ronaldo is a tricky one but it's not hard to envision Ronaldo making it work. Greenwood still has a long career ahead of him but he needs to learn how to work harder and smarter on the pitch. Rashford can come on when needed in support of Haaland. Four strikers: Haaland, Ronaldo, Greenwood and Rashford. Not bad at all. Ridiculously expensive so I'm not sure how realistic this is though. But we should put up a fight as it would be horrifying to see him go to City or Chelsea, or even worse -- Liverpool.
Given our current striker situation...
Ronaldo, brilliant but aging quickly
Cavani, brilliant but too often unfit, is aging and is out no matter what at the end of the season
Greenwood, brilliant but still very young
Rashford, crumbling before our eyes and in any event is not a striker
Martial, a player who can't be bothered with working hard
...it would in no way be insane to bring in Haaland if there were a way to make it work.
We let Cavani and Martial go. That's the easy part. Ronaldo is a tricky one but it's not hard to envision Ronaldo making it work. Greenwood still has a long career ahead of him but he needs to learn how to work harder and smarter on the pitch. Rashford can come on when needed in support of Haaland. Four strikers: Haaland, Ronaldo, Greenwood and Rashford. Not bad at all. Ridiculously expensive so I'm not sure how realistic this is though. But we should put up a fight as it would be horrifying to see him go to City or Chelsea, or even worse -- Liverpool.
The players only obligation is to fulfill the contract they signed. They have every right not to renew the contract. You can always sign player like Cavani or Depay to avoid paying a transfer fee if that is the concern. Mbappe, Dybala, Ousmane Dembélé, Antonio Rüdiger, Andrea Belotti and Lacazette are all available for free transfer next summer. Raiola is not their agent, if it makes any difference. Free transfer only mean no transfer fee, doesn't mean the players come for free. It will never happen.
Last edited:
Sure I'm not saying that running down a contract is wrong - but it seems like Raiola players can really try do that than show any signs of loyalty. It's not even about a free transfer - how many Raiola players are long lasting or show some signs of wanting to be at a club for a long period of time?
Anyway, I absolutely hate PSG right now, how so many players are just straight free transfers to arguably the richest club in the world. Alot of this money is going to agents who are working behind other clubs back. This stuff is happening with widjnaldum, Donnurumma, Pogba, Lingard and I'm sure more.
The arguably worst agent ever is currently effecting us both on players leaving us and potentially joining us - almost talking out of his own arse like the player should be bigger than the club.
I just think you would understand a bit if Arsenal spent their minimalised transfer money (compared to other teams) on a Raiola player that has started making noise about leaving the club through Raiola - sounding like they are bigger than the club so could do better and maybe leaves even on a free after costing the club much much more initially.
He is the epitome of the player is bigger than the club. I want Haaland as much as anyone - but I'm not deluded in to thinking he is going to be this nice guy alongside another 22 just being a simple part of a team puzzle. He will move and act like he is bigger than Manchester United both if the club fails or even if the club turns out successful.
Last edited:
What loyalty? why does any club deserve "loyalty" from players? It is just a business. A job. Players are not renewing their contract nowadays and it is the trend. Even if they renew they will ask for big sign on fee anyway. Player comes and goes and the industry will find a solution or balance in the end. Me as a fan would not worry about it.
Arsenal spent lots of money on player transfer and players keep leaving on free. Arsenal did really bad on player management. Chelsea on the other hand is top top!
how many Raiola players are long lasting or show some signs of wanting to be at a club for a long period of time?
U can google it but why the players need to stay at a club for a long period of time? what's wrong with switching job? may be the players want a new challenge, want a bigger pay cheque, want to join a bigger club, want to work in a city with better weather, just like everybody else in other industry?
Sure that's your opinion.
If i bought a phone and it only lasted me 6 months then that would be a dissapointment.
Then we look at our clubs buying a players, especially players who are regularly costing over 100million just for transfers (never mind wages and signing on fees). These players decide they are unhappy and wants a new challenge 3 years in to their career at your club after achieving shit all because they believe its the club holding back their potential rather than them not doing good enough. Maybe they even leave on a free to not be able to get 100mil+ transfer money back even to some amount?
No one is asking players to be like Giggs and spend their whole career at one club - but not exactly be Di Maria. Haaland has already talked about how he wants to play in England, Spain and Italy - like is that worth it to spend 100 mil for him for a player that has already thought about leaving before he has even joined?
The player is a bit self centred and whilst I'm not saying everyone is- there is plenty of players Raiola works for that are exactly that, self centred.
if the math is not right then don't spend that kind of money to acquire his service. If i am the club i spend 20 million transfer fee for a player with a 4 year contract, the cost of his service each year is his annual salary + 5 million each year, not include signing on fee and agent fee. that would be the cost of his service for 4 year. The math is the same when you sign CR7 for around 12m+8m add on.
Tielemans is not renewing his contract with Leicester either. this is the trend. Mbappe is available for free next summer and every club has the chance to sign him for free
Last edited:
Not sure why Di Maria is relevant to this given that we recouped basically all of our money on him (after amortisation). It’s the opposite of losing a player on a free transfer.
Imo this free transfer trending would eventually ruin football if let too loose like recently. Especially for the clubs who rely heavily on developing young players then sell them to the bigger clubs. Who would invest time and money to develop the young players if all the top ones would leave on a free eventually?
You may argue the big clubs then must focus on developing the young players. Yes, but most of them can't afford playing time for the young players. So in the long term the small clubs will turn to merely some place for the young players of the big clubs to get game time. The gap between the top clubs and the smaller ones will become even bigger. Most leagues will turn to a few top clubs and a bunch of their reseves/ youth teams. And then even the big clubs won't care about the young players anymore since they can sign free players. Why spend time and money to develope your young players when it's actually much cheaper to try and sign other top young players from other teams for free? It'll be very bad for football imo.
The worst part of all this is the money, which was supposed to flow into the small clubs, then invest into the youth development will now simply flow into the agents' and players' pockets. The wages for top players would sky rocket even more while there's basically no money left for the young and average players.
Imo it's like the mortgage market. That market will be a mess if after 5 years the bank can renegotiate new terms with their clients as they wish. If the clients don't agree to the new terms they'll lose the mortgage. It's exactly how it works with that fat fecker and his players recently. It won't supprise me if Fifa will soon introduce rules and regulations to battle this.
i would argue that won't affect clubs that develop young players. Young players at smaller club tend to have much smaller wages and it is not their best interest to run down their contract and leave on free. they also may not be able to replicate their performance and interest from big club may drop. I would assume the young players would like to catch the chance and jump to a bigger stage asap. Of course playing time is also a big factor as well.
You forgot one very important thing that the rate of a young player would make it to the top level is actually very very low. And it's not only the wages for young players but also equipment, food, clothing, sometime housing, the pitchs, wages for the coachs, match expense etc.
The smaller clubs have to pay all that for like hundres young players for years to get just one decent enough out who they may recoup the fee they've paid through the sale of that one. If that decent one would eventually leave for free then like any business model, it's not gonna work anymore and the smaller clubs would have to stop developing young players. Simply because it's not sustainable anymore.
Then like I said they'll become merely a reseved/youth teams for the top clubs. Eventually no one will really care about youth development. It's be very likely the death, or at least very very bad for football imo.
Like him or hate him he’s too at what he does. If I was a footballer I’d want him as my agent.
Bloody agents. Greedy B*stards.
Not that I see him coming to us but I hope we steer well clear, the rumours of demands from agent fees to his salary are ridiculous and even if there isn’t any real truth or facts behind these claims it just goes to show the absolute fecking circus that will come with signing this player and his arse of an agent, yeah he’s good but it just ain’t worth it for me.
Yea would hate having to deal with him as a club but you can see why so many top and young players gravitate towards him.
He'll try to maximise their value and earning potential at whatever cost
Does it though? All other agents seem to get the job done without being so much of a cnt. Does Raoila saying in the press that lots of clubs are after Haaland get all football boardrooms in a flurry of activity? 'Oh sht. Raoila says other clubs are in for Haaland!!!' 'Noooooo. Did he mention us as a possible. Please let it be so.'
I get being a cnt to get your players what they want but I just cant see it being effective. Same as all the sht about Pogba. Are our board members so weak that a few press articles end up in them throwing a few hundred grand more to Pogba. 'Please have more. No more articles. Please.'
I doubt it. Yes we probably are offering a huuuge contract but we probably would have done that regardless, see De Gea, Henderson etc. If this was such an effective technique loads of agents would be at it. The players would be demanding it.
On the flip side what do the players get out of it. Why is Pogba letting Raoila be a cnt towards us? Does it get him sympathy? Cos thats not working. Does it get him more cash? As I previously said I doubt it. So why?
And he takes 0 crap. He would have your back through thick and thin, you scratch his back, he’ll scratch yours kinda guy.
how so?
I think you're right, it does have some similarity with the mobile phone business in how you can have a monthly contract or pay a large sum up front.
Clubs amortised those transfer fees so it's always going to be the case that the player in demand will get the money, whether it's through a signing on after a 'free', a pay rise after an extension or some combination of the two if bought by another club.
If anything, I might be most wary about keeping a player on an increased salary who had been looking for a move. It's got to demotivate them?
The same way that agents have managed to convince clubs to pay them stupid money for a transfer.
Reality is the clubs are the only ones who can shut agents down, but they don't do it they're so desperate to get some players that they're willing to pay 30 or 40 million to an agent which is nonsense. So if this tax thing goes through agents will increase their demands so they don't take the hit.
Let's use Salah as an example. If Liverpool can convince him to renew his contract, even with huge signing on fee and/or big pay rise (he deserves it), it is the same math to calculate the cost of his service for next 4 years, and liverpool also has 4 more years to amortise the transfer fee they paid for him in the beginning. In the end Liverpool will do the math and see if they can afford Salah for 4 more years, or cheaper/better for them to sign someone else (big transfer fee or free) to replace him. It is just a business. As a club I won't bet on getting any transfer fee back from player anymore.
It doesn't matter if Raiola is the agent for the players, Raiola actually did a really good job in good faith by inserting a release clause in Haaland's contract. BVB paid 20M for his service for 2 years, he scored 1 goal a game average, and in the end Haaland will leave for 60m+ in 2022. BVB got his service for 2 years and will make 200% return from the transfer fee in the end. Excellent business. I would assume Raiola had been transparent with BVB for his client Haaland's intention, BVB did the math and accept the deal. That's why BVB and Raiola has excellent relationship.
"If anything, I might be most wary about keeping a player on an increased salary who had been looking for a move. It's got to demotivate them?"
There are some players lost their motivation after earned their big contract - like Adebayor. It doesn't matter they are looking for move or not. They lack professionalism.
if i am an agent i will ask for a huge signing on fee for the player i represent and get a cut from there. I don't know how it will work. It is supply and demand. Top player has high demand. I highly doubt Raiola can get much agent fee from Balotelli transfer.
He is a beast and has unbelievable numbers at his age, his clause is around 75m we should do whatever it takes to make him our number one target. Read that Madrid is leading the race to get him.
Sad truth is we have no chance to get him, he's wanted by literally all the top teams. He can choose between Madrid, Bayern, PSG, City, Liverpool, etc
All of them have a more attractive and solid project than us and can offer the same wages, so unless he's secretly a United fan I don't see how we can get him.
Here's one for... y'all: we're going to get a shitload of player wages off the books between January and summer and put together the package for Haaland.
A deep and well thought out theory, I know. Perhaps an original one too, as I'm not trawling through a gazillion pages to see if anyone else has taken such an amazing conclusion from so few clues.
A deep and well thought out theory, I know. Perhaps an original one too, as I'm not trawling through a gazillion pages to see if anyone else has taken such an amazing conclusion from so few clues.
Is Haaland leaving in January?
Waving to the fans after yesterday's home game.
Waving to the fans after yesterday's home game.
He worth every penny and will make an instant impact and for his age and ability he is one or maybe the best striker in the world alongside Mbappe and Benzema now. How much is Riola wants anyways?
Don’t forget we will offload a lot of money if the likes of Martial, Lingard, Jones, Mata, Matic and now even Cavani leave the club so it makes a room to go and sign this special talent and swallow our pride a little bit because we do need these kinds of lethal goal machines!
Oh that’s something if so. Wonder who will get him. My wish is we sign him but..
Clubs were foolish to start paying agent fees in the first place. The agents are working on behalf of the players, their salary should be coming from them. Who thought it was a good idea to start paying someone a crap ton of money, who is only ever going to act in the interest of the player and not the club. Mental
That is a question for the ages really, baffling to say the least.Clubs were foolish to start paying agent fees in the first place. The agents are working on behalf of the players, their salary should be coming from them. Who thought it was a good idea to start paying someone a crap ton of money, who is only ever going to act in the interest of the player and not the club. Mental
- Status