Mark Robins (57 Viewers)

[rob9872]

The thing he's done particularly well with are wages and youth. We were in the lower half on budgets last year and secured 7th .If it's as I understand it this year without any figures to back it up, I believe we have the 8th largest budget in terms of squad. If we don't go up, I'm sure that will be cut next season (Bayliss money filled the gap this year, need Wilson or a current player sold to bridge it for next term).

On that basis anything above 8th is progress and playing above levels if finance is a direct attribute of success as it would appear, but we have a young improving squad, which is our model and I think he's doing a decent job. Hard to compare with history based not only with off-field issues, finances or eras, but also as we were competing with other teams on a more level playing field a generation ago. The gap between the haves and have nots has never been wider. In the face of adversity, getting to the Championship is a significant achievement, but staying there and establishing ourselves in it, even to mid-table obscurity would be an even greater one.

 

---

[Ring Of Steel]

Weve sold Wilson, Maddison, Bayliss, Chaplin, etc for decent sums though. Net spend is probably as low as anyone else since relegation.

You can look it up

Coventry City - Transfers 18/19

Just makes Robins look very, very shrewd.

 

[shmmeee]

We sold Maddison under Mowbray and Wilson under Pressley

Sorry misunderstood.

 

[CCFC88]

The only fee we spent in L1 before Robins arrived were £25,000 for Vincelot and a rumoured £100,000 for Jones and Turnbull.

Robins has done well but let’s not make out he’s done it on a shoestring - he’s been well backed

He's also sold players Bayliss (which he developed from the youth team and sold for ), McNulty (signed on a free sold for 1.2m) and Chaplin (bought for 500k sold for 750-1m)

To say "He's been backed" is slightly misleading as it sounds like he's been provided with unheard of riches. Ever ask yourself why "he's been backed"? Maybe its because he has been successful and the board clearly feel he's good enough to invest in based on prior results?

 

[Ring Of Steel]

The thing he's done particularly well with are wages and youth. We were in the lower half on budgets last year and secured 7th .If it's as I understand it this year without any figures to back it up, I believe we have the 98th largest budget in terms of squad. If we don't go up, I'm sure that will be cut next season (Bayliss money filled the gap this year, need Wilson or a current player sold to bridge it for next term).

On that basis anything above 8th is progress and playing above levels if finance is a direct attribute of success as it would appear, but we have a young improving squad, which is our model and I think he's doing a decent job. Hard to compare with history based not only with off-field issues, finances or eras, but also as we were competing with other teams on a more level playing field a generation ago. The gap between the haves and have nots has never been wider. In the face of adversity, getting to the Championship is a significant achievement, but staying there and establishing ourselves in it, even to mid-table obscurity would be an even greater one.

Can't really argue with you.

We have to go up quick otherwise anyone half decent will be sold off- if we don't get promotion can you see Westbrook, McAllum etc being with us next year with Leeds, Villa, West Ham sniffing around? Every year we don't go up means another complete rebuild in the summer.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

He's also sold players Bayliss (which he developed from the youth team and sold for ), McNulty (signed on a free sold for 1.2m) and Chaplin (bought for 500k sold for 750-1m)

To say "He's been backed" is slightly misleading as it sounds like he's been provided with unheard of riches. Ever ask yourself why "he's been backed"? Maybe its because he has been successful and the board clearly feel he's good enough to invest in based on prior results?

Under Pressley and playing at a different ground like the situation now we sold Wilson for £3m and Clarke for £750,000. The next season all the signings were free agents and not a penny was spent

 

[Ring Of Steel]

He's also sold players Bayliss (which he developed from the youth team and sold for ), McNulty (signed on a free sold for 1.2m) and Chaplin (bought for 500k sold for 750-1m)

To say "He's been backed" is slightly misleading as it sounds like he's been provided with unheard of riches. Ever ask yourself why "he's been backed"? Maybe its because he has been successful and the board clearly feel he's good enough to invest in based on prior results?

Yes!! He's not being backed financially whatsoever, we have net income every year, but if you're SISU then you want this guy staying put as he is the single biggest thing to cling to in terms of getting their investment back- he might just be the one.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

T


You are proving my point. Mowbray failed, so did Pressley. Robins is flourishing- and he has no ground and half the regular income they did.

Failed with what? He never had the transfer funds Robins has had.

Pressley sold nearly £4m worth of players and next season all were free agents

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Under Pressley and playing at a different ground like the situation now we sold Wilson for £3m and Clarke for £750,000. The next season all the signings were free agents and not a penny was spent

and how did Pressley get on under those conditions compared to how Robins is doing? You can't even throw the Sixfields argument in because Robins has the same situation.

Look what are you saying here? Robins is crap, overrated, worse than Mowbray and Pressley? What is your actual point??

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Failed with what? He never had the transfer funds Robins has had.

Pressley sold nearly £4m worth of players and next season all were free agents

Robins has had ZERO transfer funds- nil, nada, nothing. The Godden signing was funded by half the Bayliss money.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

and how did Pressley get on under those conditions compared to how Robins is doing? You can't even throw the Sixfields argument in because Robins has the same situation.

Look what are you saying here? Robins is crap, overrated, worse than Mowbray and Pressley? What is your actual point??

I am saying Robins has been backed more than Pressley. Do you agree?

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Robins has had ZERO transfer funds- nil, nada, nothing. The Godden signing was funded by half the Bayliss money.

And that’s more than his predecessors have had

 

[Grendel]

The only fee we spent in L1 before Robins arrived were £25,000 for Vincelot and a rumoured £100,000 for Jones and Turnbull.

Robins has done well but let’s not make out he’s done it on a shoestring - he’s been well backed

This is what I don’t get about difficult circumstances - we have a set up and funding provision that makes us competitive compared to what has gone before

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Pressley could have had £2m worth of signings if he had half the Wilson and Clarke money

The next season all we bought in were free agents

 

[Grendel]

and how did Pressley get on under those conditions compared to how Robins is doing? You can't even throw the Sixfields argument in because Robins has the same situation.

Look what are you saying here? Robins is crap, overrated, worse than Mowbray and Pressley? What is your actual point??

How is this similar to Sixfields?

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

How is this similar to Sixfields?

Not similar at all. Before the season started we bought in Manset and Webster on frees - that’s it

 

[Ring Of Steel]

We had Mcnulty - did he get sold after 4 games?

Marc McNulty scored 28 goals in his first full season, and had 7 by the January window, he didn't even start some games up to then, then went mad with 21 in the run-in and was immediately snapped up. Steve Bull scored 52 in his first full season and had 25 by Christmas. If we had someone like him now he'd have been gone in January.

I am struggling to understand why so many are determined to run down Mark Robins when he is doing what he is doing, and his achievements are backed by facts, figures and stats. Whats the agenda here?

 

[rob9872]

Why can't we all just agree that he's doing a good job without the childish arguments about whether he's better or worse than a, b or c?

We're playing good football, have a team that connects with the fans and look like we're on our way back up. If we can secure the Ricoh for next season we'll all be happy.

 

[Magwitch]

Robins has had ZERO transfer funds- nil, nada, nothing. The Godden signing was funded by half the Bayliss money.

And don’t forget the Chaplin profit

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

Marc McNulty scored 28 goals in his first full season, and had 7 by the January window, he didn't even start some games up to then, then went mad with 21 in the run-in and was immediately snapped up. Steve Bull scored 52 in his first full season and had 25 by Christmas. If we had someone like him now he'd have been gone in January.

I am struggling to understand why so many are determined to run down Mark Robins when he is doing what he is doing, and his achievements are backed by facts, figures and stats. Whats the agenda here?

It is not correct to say he hasn’t been backed - the money spent on Godden is the largest transfer fee this club has paid since 2008 and we were in the Championship until 2012

 

[ccfchoi87]

Robins is doing well but has had more funds available to him than previous managers. I can’t understand how people are disputing this?

We have no comparison to make to the league 2 season.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

It is not correct to say he hasn’t been backed - the money spent on Godden is the largest transfer fee this club has paid since 2008 and we were in the Championship until 2013

it is 100% correct- he got half the Bayliss money. We don't even know what Chaplin went for but its a safe bet Robins saw none of it.

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

it is 100% correct- he got half the Bayliss money. We don't even know what Chaplin went for but its a safe bet Robins saw none of it.

How much of £4m did get Pressley get?

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Robins is doing well but has had more funds available to him than previous managers. I can’t understand how people are disputing this?

We have no comparison to make to the league 2 season.

How has he had more funds available to him when he has spent a net negative amount?

Part of being a manager is bringing players through to generate transfer funds you know, its not fluke that players have come to us, flourished under Robins then been sold on, thats part of being a good manager too.

Try comparing our net negative spending with the wage bills of Portsmouth, Sunderland, Ipswich, Oxford etc and see how your argument stacks up.

 

[Grendel]

it is 100% correct- he got half the Bayliss money. We don't even know what Chaplin went for but its a safe bet Robins saw none of it.

No it’s not correct. As we’ve sold players in the past and then the manager has had to sign free transfers to replace them

 

[Ring Of Steel]

How much of £4m did get Pressley get?

None but do you want to compare the loanees that Pressley used & the way he built a team to the loanees Robins brings in & how he builds a team? Robins is in a different universe when it comes to building a team, there is zero comparison.

 

[Grendel]

How has he had more funds available to him when he has spent a net negative amount?

Part of being a manager is bringing players through to generate transfer funds you know, its not fluke that players have come to us, flourished under Robins then been sold on, thats part of being a good manager too.

Try comparing our net negative spending with the wage bills of Portsmouth, Sunderland, Ipswich, Oxford etc and see how your argument stacks up.

What is the wage bill at Oxford out of interest?

 

[SlowerThanPlatt]

How has he had more funds available to him when he has spent a net negative amount?

Part of being a manager is bringing players through to generate transfer funds you know, its not fluke that players have come to us, flourished under Robins then been sold on, thats part of being a good manager too.

Try comparing our net negative spending with the wage bills of Portsmouth, Sunderland, Ipswich, Oxford etc and see how your argument stacks up.

You do understand getting a percentage of money of the players sold is indeed backing a manager?

 

[mark82]

Robins has had ZERO transfer funds- nil, nada, nothing. The Godden signing was funded by half the Bayliss money.

How exactly do you think transfer funds should be generated? Should we just be racking up millions of pounds of debt? He has been backed as reasonably as can be expected given the situation the club is in. It's not like anyone is taking money out of the club. It's a model the vast majority of clubs at this level have to operate on - the only real exception is Sunderland because of parachute payments, but even then they've had to rely largely on free transfers this year.

 

[Grendel]

None but do you want to compare the loanees that Pressley used & the way he built a team to the loanees Robins brings in & how he builds a team? Robins is in a different universe when it comes to building a team, there is zero comparison.

Pressley has to reduce the wage bill by 30%

 

[Ring Of Steel]

No it’s not correct. As we’ve sold players in the past and then the manager has had to sign free transfers to replace them

Yes, and how well have they done with that compared to how Robins is doing?

 

[mark82]

You do understand getting a percentage of money of the players sold is indeed backing a manager?

It's as if people forget that spending well beyond our means is what got us in this situation in the first place.

 

[Ring Of Steel]

Pressley has to reduce the wage bill by 30%

Robins has a wage bill less than 75% of League One and we're three points off top spot with a game in hand.

 

[ccfchoi87]

How has he had more funds available to him when he has spent a net negative amount?

Part of being a manager is bringing players through to generate transfer funds you know, its not fluke that players have come to us, flourished under Robins then been sold on, thats part of being a good manager too.

Try comparing our net negative spending with the wage bills of Portsmouth, Sunderland, Ipswich, Oxford etc and see how your argument stacks up.

We aren’t comparing us to other teams, we are comparing Robins to previous managers.

As you have been repeatedly told, he has been given more funds from the player sales than any other manager of recent times. How many other managers were given £750k to sign a striker?

No one is critiquing the job Robins has done but you cannot deny he has been supported with funds. Maybe that is a credit to the confidence the board have in him.

 

[ccfchoi87]

Out of interest, how many players has Robins signed and sold on for profit? McNulty?