Scott Brown Signs 3 Year Deal

agents are * parasites

 

Brown should get his agent to * and sign the deal.

He's lucky to be getting one with such a wage.

 

maybe we should all get on to brown ourselves and let him no how we feel about him trying to rip the pish out of the club and us since it is our club

Fuckn *!

 

No doubt about it.

I would have thought it was standard procedure for clubs to pay agents negotiating fees. I could be wrong though.

 

Why should the club pay it? The Agent is working for the player, not for the club. If the player wants to enlist a high-roller agent to maximize his income from the negotiations, that is his perogative - but payment for those services should be incurred by the recipient of them.

 

Doesn't matter if Ramis' agent wanted £1.5m or if Brown's only wants £15, the principle is the same. The agent is brought in by the player to negotiate on their behalf, and as such the player benefits from this arrangement, so the agent should be recompensated by the player whom he representing, because he is a client of the player, not the club.

 

Isn't it a normal thing for the club to pay the agents fee, especially in recent years?

I think the main problem is usually agreeing that fee to pay.

 

Not so sure about that. In any sort of negotiation or legal matter, where you are being represented, even before the negotiation begins the first thing a player would do when time comes for a renewal is talk to his agent.

That discussion would set the targets of what would be the best case scenario & minimum of what would be acceptable in terms of 'x' years at £'x' per week (or season etc) and bonuses for 'x', 'y' & 'z'. Think of these as being the KPI's (key performance indicators) of the negotiation, so far as the player is concerned.

So when a deal is finally agreed with the club, depending on how well the agent has performed in achieving these targets that the player initially discussed with the agent, surely the player is the one that would be the only one that knows how well the agent has performed in getting the terms that they had discussed at the outset.

It's the player that has this knowledge & it's the player that ultimately decides that the deal that the agent has been able to work out on his behalf is good enough, so then the player should cough up. The only question is whether there is a standard part of the player-agent agreement (say a certain percentage for example) or the player has to decide how much the agents services are worth based on how he achieved when compared with the initial set of KPI's.

 

Broony is holding us up (as in daylight * robbery) by even looking for a new deal

 

I'm not saying I think it's right that the club should pay it. I'm just saying that I would have thought that is the way it would work.

Everything is tilted in favour of the players these days. I'd be surprised if it isn't the club that usually pays up in these situations.

 

Newcastle United are poised to * Scott Brown for free after the midfielder's talks over a new contract stalled over a free due to his advisers, while Feyenoord and Hamburg are also interested in the Scotland international. (Daily Record)

 

If he goes to Newcastle I'll be * Gutted.

Stop been a tight * Brown and take your deal man

 

The longer this drags on the more fans will see greed as being the reason for the delay. These days I'm not sure who pays the parasitic agents their fees but I believe it should be down to the player who employs these people in the first place.

 

£4.4m for a talentless footballer then losing him on a free at the end of his contract, ahh the celtic way

 

CAn't lose him for * all. He's still got a lot to prove here, plus it would be up there with one of the biggest wastes of money I've seen at Celtic.
1 and a bit decent seasons does not consitute £4.4million.
If he were to go sell him in Jan just get him tae if he signed a pre contract.

 

sell him in jan too * and rip captain off celtic off him too. i prefer victor in team too him, i say kayal, ledley, ki, forrest, victor and commons would be ahead off him, if commons find his form again, brown wouldnt get in my team anymore, our midfield should be
forrest/commons, kayal , victor/ki , ledley/commons
only kayal would be defo starter.

 

I don't think it's a gOOd idea to sell him in january for the squad. Things are just starting to get better and I know brOOnie hasn't played much but for this team to lose their captain and clearly the dressing rOOm prankster could have a detrimental effect on the morale of the team.

 

I honestly think our inconsistency in results comes down to team selection and the constant changing of our midfield to accommodate the likes of Brown.

If we were to sell him in January or indeed lose him in the summer for free, I don't think it would be a problem.

We have Kayal, Ledley, Ki and Wanyama who are all better than Brown. Not to mention the likes of McGeouch to bring through.

 

You are my Brooony, my only broony...

 

I don't think it would be a disaster if we lost him in january, if he doesn't sign a new contract then we need to get some form of fee in january, cannot let him go for sweet * all after investing something like 8million in the guy.

If he eventually does sign the contract then that is good, we will either
a) get a scott brown tied to the club chomping to get his first title as captain
b) we can sell him for more money come the summer