How do you grade them coming into championships?

I dont know how that works? I am not 100% sure on how aussie rules does it either.

U18s would be easy enough to do (go on form from u16s) but u16s would be tough

May simply just need to be allocated based on historical performances (how that state has placed in the past) I know this is hard because you occasionally get outstanding teams from states you wouldnt generally expect like ACT boys winning silver at u16 last year. I reckon divisions would be as follows;

Division 1
Vic Met
NSW Met
WA Met
Vic Country
Sa Met
NSW Country
QLD South

Division 2
SA Country
Tas
NZ
NT
ACT
QLD North
WA Country

How about when SAC is getting in top 4?

Or getting medals like 4 yearas ago?

Should the Worlds or Olympics be cut into 2 divisions?

Or like when VICM finished 7th in both boys and girls like they did in Adelaide.

Taking kids away from situations where they need to understand elite is about winning isn't helping them.

May I suggest you go sit around a camp fire, sing Kombyah with all like minded people and let the best of the best have their own tournament.

PS Tassie got a silver medal last year in U16 boys. You would not even have them in the top 7.

I know its not a perfect system but I believe it is better than what we currently have. I know the AFL is a different sport, but they do it and it works. There is never going to be a perfect way to do it and everyone will never be happy or be in a perfect situation. The NT boys (in div2) beat the VICM boys (who won div1) in the AFL U18 champs so its obviously not perfect, but you cant get it perfect.

The worlds and olympics arent cut into divisions no, but they only let the best teams from each region go (unless they qualify afterwards) which creates arguably the best quality competition that can be created. If you're not good enough you dont go. I am not saying this is what we should do with our nationals as they would be horrendous , i am just outlining that is why we dont have divisions for worlds and olympics.


I agree that "Taking kids away from situations where they need to understand elite is about winning isn't helping them" to an extent. On 1 hand its not necessarily helping them, on the other hand it allows them to have the opportunity to actually compete more and learn HOW TO WIN, not just how to go out every game and loose.

The comment "May I suggest you go sit around a camp fire, sing Kombyah with all like minded people and let the best of the best have their own tournament" almost supports my argument, let the best of the best have their own tournament, that is almost exactly what I am talking about.

Chill out lol 79, its not a bad idea, although it may be difficult in practicality to make it work.

I think what is important about what abc said originally is that we do have a championship structure that almost always has a significant number of very lopsided results. That is not good for the quality of the championship or for the development of athletes.

So how then do you assess the best kids if some are playing div 2?

How does a div 2 team beat a div 1 team?

Why is the current system broken when your initial assesment has been shown to be wrong in the first place?

WHy do all the games need to be close?

And considering our National junior teams finish in the top 5 in the world.

How is it that these tournaments are bad?

Please explain why lop sided results are bad?

The kids in div 2 will still be seen by all the appropriate talent scouts, it's ok. It would probably be best to have both divisions playing the same week at the same venues. This would mean no extra organization for BA and also mean all the kids have the opportunity to be recognized.

I don't know how the div2 team in NT beat the div1 team in VIcM, the afl nationals works over like 6 weeks or something with a few practice matches in between and no finals, it's fairly different, but has aspects I like.

What do you mean tht the initial assessment was wrong in the first place?

All games don't need to be close, just competitive. Nobody wants to see an u16 girls team win by 70+ points like Vicmet did today against NT, how is that good for anyone? What does that teach the athletes and coaches? I think its embarrassing!!

Top 5 in the world is a good result, I agree, but I believe that we could perhaps have the opportunity to do better with a different national junior champs.

Please explain why lopsided results are good? They are bad because nobody learns anything, you don't improve during these games, just pump up stats, it creates bad habits, it's not good for sport or for the people involved. Anyone that LOVES lopsided results is not in the game for the right reasons in my opinion.

Better check your facts lol 79.

Tasmania U16 Boys finished top of one pool last year (5 wins and 1 loss) but lost their semi to the ACT by a few points and got beaten comprehensively in the bronze medal game vs NSW Metro.

Finished 4th.

One of their best performances in 16's in 20 odd years.

Agree that 2 divisions is a crap set up and makes no allowance for improved state basketball programs.

Example: Nobody much rated Tas 16 Boys a chance last year. First 2 games - thumped Vic Country 88 - 60 and beat NSW Metro the following morning by 4 points.

Carn Tassie !!!

All the best in Tamworth.

Your initial assesment is wrong because you assume that teams like Tassie and ACT are not competitive from year to year. Sure NT are out of their depth every year, but other than that, all teams have good and bad years.

This tournament is not about learning. It is about getting results. Not making people happy. THis is elite, if you want nice close games, go play domestic.

How do you select kids for the AIS or Australia teams when they dont compete against each other?

Football does not have that problem.

What happens when a kid/team from div 2 is sigificantly better than all the other div 2 teams, like ACT and Tassie at last years U16 Nationals?

You will get lop sided results no matter your grading due to different age groups from different states having different abilities from year to year. (That is what the whole tournamenty is about)

Without having the ability to have the chance to grade teams, you cant ever get it right without it being just pot luck. NOt a smart grading tool.

Currently, the first round of the tournament grades the teams for the semi and final games.

PS with regards to results, why would close games make selection, coaching and results better???

Why do something because it works for Aussie Rules. It is an insignificant sport worldwide and junior development is only about finding players for the clubs or gaining participation numbers so the sport can grow.
Basketball is a major worldwide sport and junior nationals is an integrall part of the talent ID processs, which ,despite all the flack it gets about favouritism etc, is the envy of much of the world. Junior nationals is about identifying individual talent while playing a team sport and as such results matter little in the big picture. I am not trying to talk down the thrill of competing or winning at nationals that the players and families enjoy so much. I am just stating that a great individual showing by a single player in a poor team is the most valid reason for including all. Our continued successs internationally at most levels across either gender is proof that what we have works as well and arguably better than most considering the low profile of the sport in Australia.

Not only is AFL irrelevant internationally, but it's irrelevant in all but a few states in Aus. That alone would make it much easier to put their state teams into divisions. Basketball isn't the same like that in Aus. Also 1 or 2 gun players on a bball team ( out of 5 on court) makes it much easier for a "weak" state to achieve a good result S opposed to in footy where 1 or 2 out of 18 may have considerably less impact.