Stones needs shut of that agent.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It was a phantom request, he must have used the same stationary that the club used for the Yarmolenko bid
Stones needs shut of that agent.
Depends on your perspective.
Agents should get the best for their clients. If agitating a move to Chelsea ended up with Stones trebling his wage and playing for the Champions, then you could say he's done his job.
However I would argue agents also need to understand their clients and not cause them havoc in a personal way. What works for Raheem Sterling and Joleon Lescott may not work for John Stones.
Aye that's what I mean. Needs an agent that understands his character and that sort of stuff.
Aye that's what I mean. Needs an agent that understands his character and that sort of stuff.
Martinez said on Wednesday that 'we need to look after him' basically having a dig at his agent, and i dont know about everyone else but that TR was a shock to me mainly because i didnt believe John was that type of person/player and again it comes back to the agent.
Hardly. He would have walked into that Chelsea team, won stuff and made twice as much doing it. It would have been a good move for him, make no mistake. He signed a contract with us though and we were right not to sell him.
Great theory, but it belongs in Corbyns dossier mate.The issue with agents is all to do with alignment of interests.
An agent is interested in activity regardless of whether or not it is in the player's best interest because generally they earn a percentage of their client's earnings. Thus if a player benefits financially from a move (fees/percentage of transfer fee/increase in salary/image rights etc) then so does the agent.
How about an entirely different business model where the agent earns a flat fee regardless of what the player earns.
It happens elsewhere in business, I might pay a lawyer and an accountant a flat fee for their advice and work over the course of the year - it has nothing to do with what I might or might not earn - I just pay for their time.
If agents were remunerated on the same basis, perhaps then they'd act in their clients interest rather than be driven by activity/turnover.
Great theory, but it belongs in Corbyns dossier mate.
When the agent is earning more, then so is the player, that's why it is as it is. Greed driving greed. Sad but true.