spalding
Years ago

how will pro / rel affect winter season

ok - so there are 15 teams in div 3 playing 3 pools of pro / rel over summer and no div 4.

how will this work for winter?

top 8 in div 3 and bottom 7 in div 4 created for winter?

or all in div 3 like u18 div 2 G and the top teams play in a pool and the bottom teams play in another - but then this would not reflect a true home and away season and a bottom team could get more wins than a team playing the tops teams.

Topic #22365 | Report this topic


Jack Toft  
Years ago

I think there are stills some issues that need to be resolved

Reply #268387 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

if your talking about the u16 girls i think that there are a few teams that havnt been playing with who their going to have for winter which will make grading interesting. but i think there is still a clear cut top 8

Reply #268400 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

What about U20's Div 2. Every member club allowed to have a team which is clear. But what about a club having 3 teams, one of which is poor (very) and in Div 3 one team winning easily. Who decides if a move can or should be made if no pro/rel between Div 2 and 3.

Reply #268403 | Report this post


Jack Toft  
Years ago

This whole pro/rel stuff is fraught with danger. At Div 1 and 2 level, the teams are pretty constant, but Div 3 are kids who usually come and go and so to use the results from one season to grade the next is risky in the case where teams can change substantially.

I think it might be better just to leave it to the clubs to nominate correctly.

Reply #268454 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

What frustrates the .... out of me are member clubs which are entitled to a Div 1 spot but don't place a team in Div 1 but nominate them in Div 2 where they do extremely well. Unfortunately one team has to finish last but I do not believe some of these teams are any worse than the bottom rung teams in Div 1. There should never be a bye in Div 1!!!

Reply #268459 | Report this post


Jack Toft  
Years ago

459,
It gets to the depth of the club, but you are bang on the money with that issue. I think you'll find those clubs affected are the smaller clubs who don't have the depth of other clubs. Now, success breeds success and so that is why some clubs tend to be stronger than others. Kids (and parents) tend to aspire to these clubs and so may bypass the nearest club to be at the stronger club.
My question for you to consider is this. Why do strong clubs continue to accept players from those areas covered by other, smaller clubs?

Reply #268506 | Report this post


Melvin Corpuscle  
Years ago

I don't see what your problem is with under 20's. Clubs place their teams based on expectations - some teams exceed expectations, some do not. The clubs then have the option to request promotion or demotion of a team if they think it's in the best interest of the team(s) involved, and BSA also (I believe) have ultimate power to decide whether to let a team remain in it's div, or force them to change divisions.

Reply #268534 | Report this post


Melvin Corpuscle  
Years ago

Hang on .. I just noticed that that team that is supposedly " ... poor (very) ..." sits 7th out of 11, with 4 wins from 11 ... dont think anyone would even CONSIDER demoting a team with a record that good !!! Pull ya head in anon ...

Reply #268535 | Report this post


Why?  
Years ago

I'll take a stab at that Jack.

Because this is a market place. Why would clubs knock kids back? The risk is that these kids would choose another sport rather than play for their closest club due to the poor service and coaching provided!

For all clubs it will increase their revenue, improve the standard of players and therefore makes other players work harder, attend trainings or risk being dropped a team and builds a club spirit of excellence rather than acceptance.

These smaller clubs contiue to drag the sport down and complain about kids moving without addressing the issues in their own clubs. And until they do, players will continue to move.

Reply #268554 | Report this post


Jack Toft  
Years ago

Why?,
I am glad someone has nibbled on the worm.
Yes, clubs are a business. They provide leisure opportunities for players. As you said, basketball is just one leisure pursuit and so if clubs want to sell their product, they need to market themselves properly to attract customers.

There is nothing wrong with wanting the best kids at your club and being strong. However, the issue is concentrating kids at one or two clubs and creating a shortage of talent at other clubs. Some kids (parents) are happy to play 5 mins/game as a bench player for Div 1 at one club, rather than 30 mins/game as a starting 5 player at a different club. You cannot change human nature.

However, the issue is that of byes in Div 1. A club with 50 kids in one group means the top 8 players (16%) are usually pretty strong. For a club with 20 players in that same group, the top 8 players (40%) usually means only the top 4 are pretty strong. It gets back to depth.

Therefore, if we don't want a bye in the Div 1, then as a basketball community we probably need to look at how the "weaker" clubs can become more attractive to players and attract the players they deserve. The best competitions are those with close, hard fought wins, not boring, predictable results. I say work as a team to raise "weaker" clubs up, not pull stronger clubs down.

Reply #268563 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Jack,

This is a major issue and it is so frustrating for so many. There is no one thing which is happening. In your last paragraph I would use the word retain instead of attract and still be fairly accurate.

As one or two good players move from a poorer team to perhaps chase the glory of winning it simply widens the gap and makes the good kids remaining at the poorer club question whether he wants to keep playing. If he does he either shows character and heart and sticks with his club, he takes the path of following the others to other clubs as they want to win or switch to other sports.

We are in this boat and I see all three things happening. If my son comes to me one day and says I am no longer enjoying this then I won't push him to keep playing - he can go and do something else.

Reply #268566 | Report this post


Why?  
Years ago

These same "weaker" clubs, are those that have enough money to pay ABA imports, and recruit ABA player, but don't have a full time coaching director.

Why should all clubs help these clubs when for 20 years they have continually not helped themselves?

Over the next 5 years, we will see the exact same situation, they will have some people come into their committee that are junior orientated, juiors will pick up. Their kids will go into seniors, and the senior program will try and win ABA by selling out the junios and their juniors will feel neglected and drop off. And they will be back to square 1. And it wont matter a bit what the rest of the clubs do themselves.

Until these "weaker" club put together a long term junior development plan, and stick to it. That includes putting all their resources out of ABA and into juniors they will never make any headway.

In the short term, any effort tto force kids to play at these clubs and not allow them to move will only make kids choose other sports rather than basketball. And that in no way makes basketball better.

Reply #268574 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Why? This is a gross generalisation and it is completely false for one of the clubs I am referring to. As I said earlier this is a complicated area and it is way to easy to generalise.

Perhaps we need to define weaker at this point in time - maybe there is a switch in what are traditional strong and weaker clubs>

Reply #268575 | Report this post


Why?  
Years ago

Continue and explain,

Define weaker - stringer under your philosophy then.

I would suggest, teams numbers, success of teams (both senior and junior) wouldbe a fair indicator.

Reply #268598 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

My definition: Able to consistently field strong Division 1/2 teams generated by development of local juniors. Numbers of teams to me is irrelevant. If we are talking about developing a good strong local competition then the number of Div 3/4/5 teams in itself doesn't mean strong. It might mean the club is providing a service to these people and generating cash for whatever but in itself the number of teams doesn't mean strength.

Reply #268608 | Report this post


old and gray  
Years ago

until junior players are locked into playing for a regional zone, then team numbers are the only real measure of strength.

Performance in the top junior grade can be greatly dependant upon single factors, an individual "state" coach, 2-3 players who transfer from other clubs, a parent/teacher who actively recruits athletically talented kids, these affect team performances.

But if a club is strong in numbers, say 3 x u10 teams , 4 x u12 teams and 5 x u14teams in a single sex, then that club will , over time, be "stronger" than those clubs who don't. This is something that has been clear in every state I have spent time in, Qld, Wa, Nsw , Sa.

Reply #268926 | Report this post




You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.



Close ads
Little Streaks - The fun and interactive good-habits app designed especially for kids.
Serio: Tourism photography and videography

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 1:53 am, Fri 29 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754