Agents Fees paid by Championship Clubs

[ClaretTony]

This is from Feb 2024 to Feb 2025

Leeds - £18,836,447
Burnley - £5,305,608
Sheffield United - £4,442,940
Hull - £3,179,361
Norwich - £2,635,111
Middlesbrough - £2,507,136
Luton - £2,424,713
West Brom - £2,408,415
Cardiff - £2,383,264
Sunderland - £2,170,045
Watford - £2,096,862
Stoke - £1,855,865
Swansea - £1,703,989
Coventry - £1,554,751
QPR - £1,361,727
Bristol City - £1,305,087
Blackburn - £1,158,151
Millwall - £1,134,605
Plymouth - £1,009,797
Preston - £953,802
Sheffield Wednesday - £797,697
Derby - £707,077
Portsmouth - £696,189
Oxford - £572,808

[Boss Hogg]

Horrendous figures. Agents must love dealing with Leeds. All that money going out the game.

[Rowls]

Always awful to see the figures.

Sadly, there appears to be a strong correlation with league position.

[Nonayforever]

And they are the "reported" fees !

[DCWat]

How much could a quarter of that money help clubs further down the pyramid? Clubs have gone to the wall owing a fraction of what is spunked on agents each season.

I still can’t get my head around why clubs have to pay these fees. In my simplistic world, player wants an agent, player should pay for his agent.

[NewClaret]

How on earth have Leeds paid £18m??????!!!

Incredible.

[FeedTheArf]

This is from Feb 2024 to Feb 2025

Leeds - £18,836,447
Burnley - £5,305,608
Sheffield United - £4,442,940
Hull - £3,179,361
Norwich - £2,635,111
Middlesbrough - £2,507,136
Luton - £2,424,713
West Brom - £2,408,415
Cardiff - £2,383,264
Sunderland - £2,170,045
Watford - £2,096,862
Stoke - £1,855,865
Swansea - £1,703,989
Coventry - £1,554,751
QPR - £1,361,727
Bristol City - £1,305,087
Blackburn - £1,158,151
Millwall - £1,134,605
Plymouth - £1,009,797
Preston - £953,802
Sheffield Wednesday - £797,697
Derby - £707,077
Portsmouth - £696,189
Oxford - £572,808

It would be interesting to see the average cost of agents fees per transaction. We had a big turnover of players in the summer with another few deals done in January. That’s on top of contract renewals.

[Tall Paul]

I still can’t get my head around why clubs have to pay these fees. In my simplistic world, player wants an agent, player should pay for his agent.

The club would still end up paying it.

[exilecanada]

I still can’t get my head around why clubs have to pay these fees. In my simplistic world, player wants an agent, player should pay for his agent.

It's my understanding the player does have an agent to negotiate on his behalf, and pays the agent a percentage of the contract. What I DON'T get is why the club needs a different agent for each negotiation, surely it's more cost effective to employ a full time agent to negotiate contracts?

[FeedTheArf]

It would be interesting to see the average cost of agents fees per transaction. We had a big turnover of players in the summer with another few deals done in January. That’s on top of contract renewals.

Saw on the other thread it’s a total of 48 deals.

Average of £110k per deal. Obviously that includes everything right down to scholars which you’d expect to be next to nothing.

[CaptainKirk]

Probably agree with the sentiments above but, whenever people say “all that money going out of the game”, why is that worse than all the obscene players wages “going out of the game” or the millions paid to Managers, or god knows how much to the veritable army of staff marching across the pitch before every match?
I mean, what do they all actually do???

[willsclarets]

Eye watering figures at Leeds

[willsclarets]

Always awful to see the figures.

Sadly, there appears to be a strong correlation with league position.

At the very top, but there's a fair few outliers there below the top 3

[Vegas Claret]

Here are the PL ones, all money out of the game - staggering amount

[Rowls]

At the very top, but there's a fair few outliers there below the top 3

I posted it on an intuitative kinda vibes way, after seeing the top three. The top three really reinforces the idea. Anyway, you got me thinking about it more closely.

So I plotted it. Y'know, to add a bit of excitement to my Monday night.

Yeah, it certainly isn't as uniform everywhere but there are only a few outliers.

The big losers are Luton, Cardiff and Hull who are all well below where they "should" be. Nobody is turning straw into gold the way we did in 2013/14. Cov and Sunderland are the best overperformers.

I didn't plot the budgets on a quantative basis, which would have been a lot more informative, only numerical.

[Rowls]

In conclusion, there's a definite correlation but it's not uniform and it's weak in parts.

It kinda shows that it's very difficult to progress without spending money on agents but it's easier to spend money and get no return as -thankfully- clubs other than ourselves have ably demonstrated.

[willsclarets]

In conclusion, there's a definite correlation but it's not uniform and it's weak in parts.

It kinda shows that it's very difficult to progress without spending money on agents but it's easier to spend money and get no return as -thankfully- clubs other than ourselves have ably demonstrated.

Nice work! It does show you can waste money you haven't got to get you not very far. Unless you have the top budgets like us (for now) you're at a huge disadvantage. Just like us next year hopefully!

[Rileybobs]

In conclusion, there's a definite correlation but it's not uniform and it's weak in parts.

It kinda shows that it's very difficult to progress without spending money on agents but it's easier to spend money and get no return as -thankfully- clubs other than ourselves have ably demonstrated.

I would imagine agents fees correlate pretty closely with transfer spend, and in some instances player sales. Is this not the case? Spending money on agents isn’t really a choice unless you don’t spend money on players.

[Big Vinny K]

Not sure you need a graph to draw a conclusion that the greater your activity in the transfer market the higher the agents fees.

The correlation between spending money and success on the pitch is a completely different issue.
Biggest spenders in last couple of years Chelsea - struggling to make top 4.
Up there with the highest wage bill in world football - Man United….bottom half of EPL.

But look at the correlation between success on the pitch and spend in the transfer market / player salaries over a much longer period (10 or 20 years) and generally speaking there will be a direct correlation.

[aggi]

More detail on specifics of where it went on the earlier thread
viewtopic.php?style=2&f=2&t=81002

[jlup1980]

So Leeds have paid more fees than over half of the PL. That takes some doing in the Championship. It's a ridiculous table of figures. Upwards of £500m between the PL and Championship. I think we'd all love to know what they do for that money! Unfortunately, it's the modern game and won't change any time soon.

[Hibsclaret]

Unfortunately it’s a necessary evil and essentially no different than getting a normal job through an agency where your new employer pays the agent. The numbers are mad but the world of football is mad after all.

[Bacchus]

In conclusion, there's a definite correlation but it's not uniform and it's weak in parts.

It kinda shows that it's very difficult to progress without spending money on agents but it's easier to spend money and get no return as -thankfully- clubs other than ourselves have ably demonstrated.

I think the part that is missing from this analysis is that agents fees will also be paid on sales. Leeds & Burnley both had significant player sales last summer. If neither club had bought anybody they'd probably still be close to the top of that list.

I guess typically clubs who bring a lot of money in through sales will also spend a lot of that on purchases which goes some way towards supporting the correlation with league position, but it isn't quite the clear 'buying success' narrative that I think is being presented.

[Rowls]

… but it isn't quite the clear 'buying success' narrative that I think is being presented.

All of the additional factors you, and at least one other poster, have referenced are there.

It’s presented by me as a correlation between the two stats. There are inferences and nuance but it’s not being presented as a simple way of ‘buying success’.