Karl Robinson - Is he right or wrong?

OX14 said:
Your not far off from being right to be honest. Before the January transfer window shut we were flying and everyone was tipping us to go up as champions. Then we sold fosu, baptise and lost Cadden and we hit a slump. It was only the last 5 games we won in a row that bought are ppg up considerably. Obviously Covid put a stop to the season and we may have continued the form and took second place, but we could of also ended up mid table. We wern't playing that great before lockdown it took a last minute ruffles header to even get us in to the play offs.
Click to expand...
We’d won five in a row. Just be quiet
 
If we are looking at the points per game over similar periods of the season;

Games 1-8 8pts 1ppg
Games 9-17 21pts 2.3ppg
Games 18-26 12pts 1.3ppg

Without Fosu/Bap
Games 27-35 19pts 2.1ppg

So the "slump" if there was one, had already happened. Our form between the transfer window and lockdown was better than Coventrys ppg meaning we would have won the league if rolled out over the season.

Not bad for a team that "weren't playing that great before the lockdown" and where our transfer business "pretty much ruined our season"!!!!
 
tonyw said:
I just don't see how you can blame the Board for Cadden leaving. It would be barking mad for a League One club that's in as much debt as we are to fork out a million quid for a right back. And Karl even said so himself at the time.

Want to blame anyone for our RB leaving in early January - blame Karl for signing someone to play that position on a half season loan.
Click to expand...

I don't think Cadden leaving was the issue, more the lack of a replacement. The club knew he was likely going in November/December so had plenty of time to source a replacement. They failed to do that. Getting in a replacement could've been the difference between us having an awful Jan/early Feb and a decent one and, dare I say it, the difference between us being promoted via PPG and having to play in the play-offs.
 
Just seen the 1/2 hour Robinson interview with Jerome Sale on ifollow. As somebody else has already said, it’s a must watch for all supporters. Theres absolutely no doubt about how much he cares for this football club, and how much he’s hurting. Having seen it, my feelings are that his words about where we go from here, arent really directed at the board, its more him voicing his frustrations and feelings of concern about the general climate around football. This talk of a £2.5M wage cap in league 1 and a £18.5M wage cap in the championship is disgraceful and as Robinson says, is plainly the first steps in creating a Prem2. If it happens it will make the step up impossible.

I also feel a lot more optimistic about where the owners want to take us - if they are allowed to by the EFL!
 
Had we beaten Wycombe last Monday and most expected it, there would be little discussion about Fosu and Baptiste.
We were let down by an uncharacteristic poor performance by senior players who underperformed.
If we can retain most of our player we have to go again....I’m resigned to losing Brannagan and Dickie as well as Eastwood. Surely we can a few decent players who can challenge again.
My concern is whether we can retain Robinson next year. It will be difficult but there’s surely money to spend. I’m not sure how much Ipswich and Portsmouth have to spend but it depends how wisely it’s spent. I would back Robinson over Lambert and Jackett to get promotion.
Probably the biggest worry for Oxford is Sunderland...surely they won’t screw it up again will,they?
 
battman said:
I don't think Cadden leaving was the issue, more the lack of a replacement. The club knew he was likely going in November/December so had plenty of time to source a replacement. They failed to do that. Getting in a replacement could've been the difference between us having an awful Jan/early Feb and a decent one and, dare I say it, the difference between us being promoted via PPG and having to play in the play-offs.
Click to expand...

It wasn't as if it wasn't for the lack of trying

At one point we were linked with five or so defenders, none of which came to anything.
 
yellowbow said:
Just seen the 1/2 hour Robinson interview with Jerome Sale on ifollow. As somebody else has already said, it’s a must watch for all supporters. Theres absolutely no doubt about how much he cares for this football club, and how much he’s hurting. Having seen it, my feelings are that his words about where we go from here, arent really directed at the board, its more him voicing his frustrations and feelings of concern about the general climate around football. This talk of a £2.5M wage cap in league 1 and a £18.5M wage cap in the championship is disgraceful and as Robinson says, is plainly the first steps in creating a Prem2. If it happens it will make the step up impossible.

I also feel a lot more optimistic about where the owners want to take us - if they are allowed to by the EFL!
Click to expand...
Just finished watching the same interview and fully endorse your comments.
A very interesting and honest interview. It says something that, despite poor sound (Jerome) and dodgy lighting (Chris) I watched and listened to the entire 30 minutes.
It is very encouraging to hear that KR spoke to all the directors after the final and does so on a regular basis. Not a collection of "train set" owners.
 
yellowbow said:
Just seen the 1/2 hour Robinson interview with Jerome Sale on ifollow. As somebody else has already said, it’s a must watch for all supporters. Theres absolutely no doubt about how much he cares for this football club, and how much he’s hurting. Having seen it, my feelings are that his words about where we go from here, arent really directed at the board, its more him voicing his frustrations and feelings of concern about the general climate around football. This talk of a £2.5M wage cap in league 1 and a £18.5M wage cap in the championship is disgraceful and as Robinson says, is plainly the first steps in creating a Prem2. If it happens it will make the step up impossible.

I also feel a lot more optimistic about where the owners want to take us - if they are allowed to by the EFL!
Click to expand...

To be fair, the proposed £18.5M wage cap in the championship would be extremely helpful for a club like ours in terms of competing at that level.

There's no way that we could operate with a wage bill that high, but the average Championship wage bill in 2017/18 (the last comprehensive figures I can find) was £34M, and Villa spent £73M! If everyone was forced to keep under £18.5M, it would bring the moneybags clubs, and especially the parachute payment clubs, closer to clubs like us.

But the £2.5M in League One does sounds low - comically low for a club like Sunderland.
 
tonyw said:
To be fair, the proposed £18.5M wage cap in the championship would be extremely helpful for a club like ours in terms of competing at that level.

There's no way that we could operate with a wage bill that high, but the average Championship wage bill in 2017/18 (the last comprehensive figures I can find) was £34M, and Villa spent £73M! If everyone was forced to keep under £18.5M, it would bring the moneybags clubs, and especially the parachute payment clubs, closer to clubs like us.

But the £2.5M in League One does sounds low - comically low for a club like Sunderland.
Click to expand...
Those figures are actually quite shocking
 
The 2.5 million figure sounds like a powerplay by smaller teams to limit the spending of others and improve their chances of going up.

Hull will struggle to get even near that when they come down
 
werthersoriginal said:
Can many teams afford more than that? Wouldn’t it be a good idea if they stayed more within their means?
Click to expand...
How would any team with good backing ever get out of the league? What happens to the likes of Sunderland, Peterborough, Portsmouth, Ipswich with their already bigger budgets? What happens to the sides that get relegated from the Championship? Sunderland came down to League 1 with Premiership parachute payments still in place, what happens to them?
And, if promoted to the Championship, it would require an entire re-build of the team with players of a higher standard due to the wage differential.

Sorry, doesn't work. FFP should work but the EFL are totally ineffectual and the system has been abused from outset.
If a club has got the means and desire to progress and the owner has got the financial clout, why shouldn't they be able to spend what they feel is appropriate?
 
Manorlounger said:
How would any team with good backing ever get out of the league? What happens to the likes of Sunderland, Peterborough, Portsmouth, Ipswich with their already bigger budgets? What happens to the sides that get relegated from the Championship? Sunderland came down to League 1 with Premiership parachute payments still in place, what happens to them?
And, if promoted to the Championship, it would require an entire re-build of the team with players of a higher standard due to the wage differential.

Sorry, doesn't work. FFP should work but the EFL are totally ineffectual and the system has been abused from outset.
If a club has got the means and desire to progress and the owner has got the financial clout, why shouldn't they be able to spend what they feel is appropriate?
Click to expand...
Yes agree it's too much of a blunt instrument to work properly
 
Manorlounger said:
Sorry, doesn't work. FFP should work but the EFL are totally ineffectual and the system has been abused from outset.
If a club has got the means and desire to progress and the owner has got the financial clout, why shouldn't they be able to spend what they feel is appropriate?
Click to expand...

Way I see it, for FFP to really, genuinely work they have to massively increase the clarity and transparency of the system.

First, they have to be very clear and public about what revenues can be included by clubs - for me that should be match day income, TV money, commercial revenue, sponsorship and gifts from owners. Not loans. If an owner wants to put his (or her) money into their club to give it a boost, fine, but they should not be allowed to saddle the club up with debt in the hope that they can get to the Premiership one day and pay it off.

Then every club should have to publically disclose those revenues, and make any paper trails available for the EFL to audit.

You then have an agreed percentage of the previous year's revenues that any club is allowed to spend on wages in the next (maybe 60%). And then the clubs need to publicly release those wage figures as well to show openly that they are compliant.

Yes, players and chairmen alike probably won't like it, because that sort of transparency shows up to the fans very clearly who is, and who isn't value for money.
But it's done elsewhere. I've posted it before on here, but here's the wage bill for the hockey team I follow - https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canucks
And here's one for the baseball team - https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PHI/philadelphia-phillies-salaries-and-contracts.shtml

The NHL has a salary cap, and MLB does not, but the principle is the same. Openness and transparency, and then it becomes much harder to abuse the system.

If they can do that in North America, why can't they do it in Britain?


But if the clubs won't sign up to openness and transparency, and want to continue to operate FFP as a shady, opaque system that mostly ends up in the courts to resolve, then it isn't going to work. Then you have to go for a simple, hard salary cap as it's the only way to create something enforceable.
 
tonyw said:
Way I see it, for FFP to really, genuinely work they have to massively increase the clarity and transparency of the system.

First, they have to be very clear and public about what revenues can be included by clubs - for me that should be match day income, TV money, commercial revenue, sponsorship and gifts from owners. Not loans. If an owner wants to put his (or her) money into their club to give it a boost, fine, but they should not be allowed to saddle the club up with debt in the hope that they can get to the Premiership one day and pay it off.

Then every club should have to publically disclose those revenues, and make any paper trails available for the EFL to audit.

You then have an agreed percentage of the previous year's revenues that any club is allowed to spend on wages in the next (maybe 60%). And then the clubs need to publicly release those wage figures as well to show openly that they are compliant.

Yes, players and chairmen alike probably won't like it, because that sort of transparency shows up to the fans very clearly who is, and who isn't value for money.
But it's done elsewhere. I've posted it before on here, but here's the wage bill for the hockey team I follow - https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canucks
And here's one for the baseball team - https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PHI/philadelphia-phillies-salaries-and-contracts.shtml

The NHL has a salary cap, and MLB does not, but the principle is the same. Openness and transparency, and then it becomes much harder to abuse the system.

If they can do that in North America, why can't they do it in Britain?


But if the clubs won't sign up to openness and transparency, and want to continue to operate FFP as a shady, opaque system that mostly ends up in the courts to resolve, then it isn't going to work. Then you have to go for a simple, hard salary cap as it's the only way to create something enforceable.
Click to expand...

Only sponsorship from non-connected party‘s. Otherwise you end up with the Man City scenario.
 
tonyw said:
Way I see it, for FFP to really, genuinely work they have to massively increase the clarity and transparency of the system.

First, they have to be very clear and public about what revenues can be included by clubs - for me that should be match day income, TV money, commercial revenue, sponsorship and gifts from owners. Not loans. If an owner wants to put his (or her) money into their club to give it a boost, fine, but they should not be allowed to saddle the club up with debt in the hope that they can get to the Premiership one day and pay it off.

Then every club should have to publically disclose those revenues, and make any paper trails available for the EFL to audit.

You then have an agreed percentage of the previous year's revenues that any club is allowed to spend on wages in the next (maybe 60%). And then the clubs need to publicly release those wage figures as well to show openly that they are compliant.

Yes, players and chairmen alike probably won't like it, because that sort of transparency shows up to the fans very clearly who is, and who isn't value for money.
But it's done elsewhere. I've posted it before on here, but here's the wage bill for the hockey team I follow - https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/canucks
And here's one for the baseball team - https://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/PHI/philadelphia-phillies-salaries-and-contracts.shtml

The NHL has a salary cap, and MLB does not, but the principle is the same. Openness and transparency, and then it becomes much harder to abuse the system.

If they can do that in North America, why can't they do it in Britain?


But if the clubs won't sign up to openness and transparency, and want to continue to operate FFP as a shady, opaque system that mostly ends up in the courts to resolve, then it isn't going to work. Then you have to go for a simple, hard salary cap as it's the only way to create something enforceable.
Click to expand...
On your point about gifts from owners (rather than loans), is that what happens in the NHL and MLB, too? Because while this sounds good in principle, I suspect the commercial reality is that many rich individuals simply wouldn't be interested in putting money into clubs at all if there was no guaranteed prospect of their getting their money back. The kinds of men and women who have made enough money to be in a position to purchase a football club are not the kinds of people who are going to be suddenly struck by a benevolent urge to throw millions at a third division football club!
 
ttg17 said:
On your point about gifts from owners (rather than loans), is that what happens in the NHL and MLB, too? Because while this sounds good in principle, I suspect the commercial reality is that many rich individuals simply wouldn't be interested in putting money into clubs at all if there was no guaranteed prospect of their getting their money back. The kinds of men and women who have made enough money to be in a position to purchase a football club are not the kinds of people who are going to be suddenly struck by a benevolent urge to throw millions at a third division football club!
Click to expand...

I'll be honest - MLB teams aren't as transparent about their revenues as they are about their expenses, so it's not 100% certain. But by most financial analyses, it's expected that all 30 teams are profitable. In the NHL, it was about 80% last year. So gifts/loans from the owners aren't really necessary.

But that's a little beside my point. The purpose of FFP and/or a salary cap is to stop clubs being put at risk because they spend outside of their means.
For all that Steve Dale is a mean and odd man, Bury are gone now not primarily because of him, but because their previous owners massively increased their wage bills beyond what they could sustain, and leveraged them up to the max, in the hope that increased future revenues could pay for it.
Almost all the clubs that have gotten themselves into financial turmoil lately - Bolton, Portsmouth, Notts County etc. - did something similar.

Fans like the idea of a white knight coming in to buy the club, because it allows us to dream of a future of unbridled possibilities without pesky financial realities.
Fine - we can still have that.
But if an owner wants to come in and turn a football club into their new plaything, let them take on the full financial risk of doing so, don't let them pass the bulk of that risk on to the club. And if they won't do it, because the risks are too high, then that would be pretty telling.
 
Pillox said:
Do you support Oxford or Karl Robinson?
Click to expand...

If you support Oxford, you want the best for them. You want them to win, to play good football, to develop exciting young players, to be run in a way that is sustainable and to make a real difference in the community.

If Karl Robinson offers all of that, then why wouldn't he get the full support of us fans?
 
Scotchegg said:
If you support Oxford, you want the best for them. You want them to win, to play good football, to develop exciting young players, to be run in a way that is sustainable and to make a real difference in the community.

If Karl Robinson offers all of that, then why wouldn't he get the full support of us fans?
Click to expand...

You know exactly what I mean.

Your better than this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Fan's View Karl Robinson
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
ChamonixOx
ChamonixOx
"Karl Robinson is doing a great job. He plays a great style of football and is building a great team." (Q&A)
Replies
0
Views
1K
Vital Lincoln City
Who Are The League One Managers? No.15: Karl Robinson
Replies
0
Views
1K
Vital Lincoln City
Yellow Hoods
The Karl Robinson years at OUFC are difficult to analyse.
2 3
Replies
61
Views
8K
RyanioBirdio
RyanioBirdio
Oxymoron
General Karl's not happy
Replies
5
Views
2K
Victor1986
Back
Top Bottom