Love the Game - Hate the Industry

Ten years is a long time in football. Many things are said in football that don’t and won’t stand the ten year test. However, in February 2015, when Sky & BT Sport paid £5.1bn between them to screen Premier League games for the next three seasons – a 70% increase on the last deal, Sir Alan Sugar infamously commented about the similarity between Mother Nature’s laxative and the fiscal nature of football:

Anyone who knows the effect of prune juice, it is pretty simple, it goes in one end and comes out the other and that is exactly what is going to happen with this money.

All the money they have got they have given to players and players agents.

~ Sir Alan Sugar 2015

Fast forward ten years, nearly to the day, to Monday 14th April 2025, when the FA published their 2024-25 FA Registered Football Agent Fees and Transactions.

Some quite frankly ludicrous numbers were published. Look, more detailed analysis can be found elsewhere by the spreadsheet geeks and more talented writers than myself, so to be clear this is not the place forensic accounting.

However, as regular readers will know I like to look at both ends of the spectrum. I love juxtaposition to identify the absurdism in modern day football. So, briefly (because the numbers talk for themselves) I will just focus on the Premier League’s numbers and then League 2’s numbers.

Let’s Dig

Between Feb 2024 and Feb 2025, Premier League clubs spent more than £409mn on agents’ fees, including £126,180,237 between just Manchester United, Manchester City and Liverpool.

Premier League agent fees have risen from £318,219,426 in 2022/23 to £409,592,929 in the current period.

For the record, Championship spending is also up, from £36,317,802 to £61,340,767.

Here’s League Two’s numbers…

Carlisle are the outlier here. They spent £192k on agents fees and they currently sit 23rd out of 24th only 4 points from safety, and for months have been staring relegation in the eye which would result in dropping out of the football league entirely. Literally staring into the abyss will cost you £192k. Carlisle United Football Club is owned by Castle Sports Group, a company run by the Piatak family from Jacksonville, Florida. The Piatak family took ownership of the club in November 2023. If they stay up, they may argue it’s been money well spent - but truly, at what downstream cost?

The Financial Drain of Football Agents

Football agents have become some of the most controversial figures in modern football.

They now wield immense power over simpleton players (who prioritise accumulation of money), transfers, contracts, club directors and club strategies

Their influence mirrors Sir Alan Sugar’s infamous critique of financial recklessness:

“Business is not about come in, piss my money up the wall, ‘oh, never mind, sorry you lost it, now you’ve learnt your lesson, you won’t do it again’”.

Like a poorly managed investment, agents frequently extract staggering sums from the game without reinvesting in its future. A poorly managed investment such as say, Mino Raiola historically pocketing £20mn from Paul Pogba’s Manchester United move.

Such fees disappearing out of the game, divert resources that could otherwise fund:

• Youth academies and grassroots development

• Stadium upgrades or community outreach programs

• Financial stability for lower-league clubs

Raiola was quite the character. For example, Borussia Dortmund was forced to sell Henrikh Mkhitaryan to avoid paying Raiola a multimillion-euro penalty clause, destabilising their squad and tactical plans. WTF? How does a club get itself into that position?

Agents as Power Brokers, Not Partners

The football ecosystem increasingly resembles a zero-sum game where agents have skewed the odds in their favour and profit no matter what, at the expense of clubs and players. It’s like going to Vegas knowing you’re going to win.

More chutzpah = more profit.

Let’s look at 3 influential ways they skew odds:

1. Inflating transfer fees = Clubs overpay, reducing funds for development

2. Dual representation deals = Conflicts of interest harm fan, player and club trust

3. Leaking rumours to the press = Destabilisation of squad, destabilises management, distracts from performance.

Only last week Ange Postecoglou said in a press conference

'Someone is leaking Tottenham team news'

You’d be betting heavy odds on that an agent’s paw prints is all over the leaking.

Sir Alan Sugar’s disdain for “arse-lickers” and “bullshitters” resonates here: many agents prioritise short-term payouts over nurturing careers or fostering loyalty.

The Reinvestment Void

Unfortunately, clubs and players often lack the financial literacy to push back, leaving agents free to syphon money out of the game.

A player securing a huge deal benefits them personally, their family, and their family’s family. However, the broader sport gains little, how can it when there are:

• Regulatory failures: FIFA’s 10% commission cap is easily bypassed via loopholes.

• Exploitative practices: Young players’ families are offered bribes to sign with agencies.

• Misaligned incentives: Agents profit from frequent transfers, not long-term player development.

A Call for Accountability

The past week, seeing these numbers sent my chimp into orbit.

Regular readers will know I operate at the grassroots level coaching my lad’s U9s football team, i’m a season ticket holder at Salford City (whose numbers I saw made me wince) and a former Manchester United season ticket holder (whose numbers made me shake my head in utter, total disbelief).

Sadly, I feel that the FA actually taking bold steps to stop the bleed of money out of the game is futile, like Waiting for Godot, but three points immediately strike me as quick wins:

1. Transparency mandates: Public disclosure of all agent fees and contract terms.

2. Reinvestment clauses: A percentage of agent commissions directed to youth programs.

3. Strict conflict-of-interest rules: Banning dual representation in transfers.

Never going to happen is it?

As Sugar bluntly puts it:

I don’t like liars. I don’t like cheats. I don’t like bullshitters.

Finally, on agents and conflicts of interest, just chew on this, because this is an example of where our money that is syphoned out of the game, is going.

Remember Kia Joorabchian? Kia was infamous for owning the economic rights to Tevez and Mascherano - remember him now?

Well, Joorabchian’s model often prioritised financial returns over player stability, exemplified by MSI’s Corinthians partnership, where he was key to reshaping Brazilian football’s transfer market.

He reeked of dual-representation conflicts, he’d simultaneously be advising clubs and players, as seen in Everton’s 2022 protests over his influence.

Kia has built quite an operation away from football…in horse racing and racehorse breeding.

Just this week at the Newmarket sales, his racing operation ‘Amo’, bought 25 horses at the three-day auction – some of which were bought with associates including Evangelos Marinakis, the owner of Nottingham Forest. Some of the horses included a Frankel filly for 4.4m guineas (£4.6m) and a Wootton Bassett colt who set a record of 4.3m gns for a yearling colt. One assume that was paid straight out of the top pocket by Kia.

As reports state:

He was accompanied by bloodstock agent Alex Elliott and Nottingham Forest FC owner Evangelos Marinakis.

"All the teams select the best horse and it is who blinks first, and fair play to Kia he certainly did not blink," said Elliott.

I suggest it’s easy not to blink when you’re buying with someone else’s money.