participant
Years ago

directions for junior comp

been discussion for ages on promo / relegation system and whether it would improve our national competitiveness.

the question is - who holds the power? what is driving our junior comps? results? participation? club based objectives? association based objectives?

let's have look at the clubs and what they might vote if we revisted
1) only 1 div 1 team per club
2) would a promotion / relegation scheme benefit their club

Sturt - would benefit from promotion / relegation - most of their top div 2 teams could compete in div 1 - they have the player numbers as well

vote - yes - sturt would benefit in both boys and girls, fielding more div 1 teams

Forestville - may benefit from promo / relegation in some grades, like sturt have the numbers - would not be threatened by relegation system, maybe field a couple of div 1 teams in some grades

vote - yes - same as sturt

North - definitely in the girls - they could field a couple of div 1 level teams in several girls grades - boys keep the status quo

vote - yes, girls benefit, boys status quo

Norwood - maybe, depends on the grade - suffered at u16B level a few seasons ago when they had 2 strong div 1 teams.

vote - probably yes - would not affect norwood much - teams would stay the sameish

Mavs - they could maintain div 1 teams with average results - depth seems to be the problem in lower grades

vote - no - they would hope to pick up some players with div 1 aspirations from larger clubs that can not crack the div 1 team - that has happened already

tigers - plenty of teams / players - would not lose div 1 level of teams

vote - no - same as mavs

South - plenty of teams in all grades, would not be relegated or promoted too much - same as tigers - fielding mid range div 1 teams - may be threatened in some grades where their div 1 team is struggling

vote - no

Woodville - would lose some div 1 teams to div 2 - not too bad number wise - but many div 1 teams near the bottom

vote - no

west - boys doing ok - woodville and west seem to feed off each other - girls struggling to even get numbers in some grades - may get a couple of div1 teams in boys and maybe 1 girls grade

vote - no - no clear benefit to bearcats by voting yes

Centrals - this would be the club most affected - bar 1 or 2 div 1 teams they would be in div 2

vote - no


so conclusion - whilst the clubs can vote with the majority ruling it will stay the same.

yes it would make the competitions that 10-20% more stronger with the promotion / relegation system. But the power base is not with that mind set. The power base seems to be with each club - and there is more of the have nots than haves at present

Topic #3617 | Report this topic


The Godfather  
Years ago

And thats how stupid some clubs are, they would rather ruin the chances of young talented players development than loose their spot in div 1.

Reply #42123 | Report this post


what the  
Years ago

it is a cultural thing here - having affiliations with vic teams - they see nothing wrong with being in metro 1, 2 or 3 - they have had their chance to prove themselves and graded accordingly

they accept that is where their game is at - in fact they strive harder to acheive - and it allows any rebuilding to happen in less competitive grades - (bit like what is going on in u10,12 and 14 girls at west)

where should the influence / benchmark be?
on our national results at interstate games? on the amount of clubs we have in adelaide?

Reply #42125 | Report this post


Paul Arnott  
Years ago

Participant,

Your analysis neglects the possibility that a club might vote in what it perceives to be the best interests of SA basketball, rather than just in the best ineterests of their own current situation.

For example, a club which might not be immediately affected by a change to pre/rel might vote against, because they believe that pro/rel will result in too much emphasis on winning at the expense of development. Or, a club which might initially lose division 1 teams in pro/rel might vote for, because they believe it will result in a higher level of competition in future.

Interesting analysis though.

Reply #42134 | Report this post


what the  
Years ago

what about upping 2 more spots per div 1 grade - all current clubs maintain their div 1 teams.
so the div 1 program would be between 12 teams - balancing out the current 22 odd round season

BUT the 2 extra spots can be second teams from other clubs ie sturt 2, foretville 2.

the particular 2nd teams are selected by where they finished over summer - so it would have needed to have been a sturt v forestville div 2 summer GF

if sturt 2 wanted to stay in div 2 the third best div 2 team would get the invite to nominate ie south 2

it would stop after the 3rd best div 2 team - so we might only end up with 11 div 1 teams not 12 (or still only 9 or 10 teams)

relegation would require a play off match between the teams with a second div 1 team and the challenging team - ie sturt 2 may have finished 8th in div 1 play tigers 2 as they won the next summer GF in div 2.

so even if centrals finished 10th they would not be relegated - the relegation only can occur to the clubs with 2 div 1 teams - and only if they lose the challenge match from the contesting div 2 team

Naturally if a spot in div 1 is open no challenge game would occur , or if that clubs wants to go back to one div 1 team

this would keep both sides of the argument happy and allow for a results driven promotion relegation system for the larger clubs

Reply #42135 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Godfather, I think it is extremely unfair to label Clubs "stupid" becuase of one persons thoughts on which way they might vote if the issue was raised.

On the other hand I think that it would be rather short-sighted of Clubs not to realise the potential of pro/rel. Who knows what might happen in a couple of year time and basketball may hit boom times again.

Reply #42171 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Not stupid,

Just lazy and not committed to development.

There is no greater incentive for weaker clubs to develop their juniors than to have div 1 rights taken away from them.

Even if it is not pro/rel then at least have some sort of only the top 8, 1 from each club in div 1 and then the next best 8 teams in div 2. Including the teams from clubs that are not good enough fro div 1 and the next best 6 teams.

Maybe then clubs would do some work on their juniors.

Reply #42181 | Report this post


$talks  
Years ago

I don't think Godfather is too far off in his "stupid" reference. The pro/relegation issue is not the first time clubs have been guilty of taking a short term club based approach.
How many people know whether their club channels money from juniors to fund their senior programs? As an ex-treasurer of a club I know it was common practice at several clubs and not small bickies either. These funds would have easily covered the costs of some development officers but success at the senior level was considered more important to the club.

Reply #42184 | Report this post


$talks  
Years ago

I don't think Godfather is too far off in his "stupid" reference. The pro/relegation issue is not the first time clubs have been guilty of taking a short term club based approach.
How many people know whether their club channels money from juniors to fund their senior programs? As an ex-treasurer of a club I know it was common practice at several clubs and not small bickies either. These funds would have easily covered the costs of some development officers but success at the senior level was considered more important to the club.

Reply #42185 | Report this post


Mott the Hoople  
Years ago

Why does everyone think that pro/rel will improve competition? Most are basing it on Victoria who have 3-4 times the participation rate we do. They are better than us becuase of the sheer weight numbers.

Why not organise more interstate trips and play against the Victorians if you think playing against better opposition will help. You won't find that much better opposition in Div 2, marginally better perhaps in a few grades.

Pro/Rel will make stong clubs stronger. Weaker clubs are trying hard to improve but it will take time. I like the idea of Div 1 having 12 teams.

Reply #42226 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Mott,

1/ Weaker clubs generally spend they money on ABA. Fact.

How many weaker clubs are willing to spend money on a JCD to make them full time. Or rather do they spend $50k on their senior teams.

2/ Victoria are no where near as dominant as they were in previous years. Fact

The reason for this is that they have had all of the weaker clubs push to be in the championship grade. Rather than the weaker club improving their junior programs like Dandenong did in the 90's. They voted for a 20 team competition. Now the best player do not play against each other week in week out. Ask any high level Victorian coach and they will tell you that their competition has gone down the toilet. And their results at nationals have done the same thing. Both boys teams lost to WA in the tournament and their 18 girlsa didn't even make the finals.

3/ Participation has a minimal effect on it. Fact.

NSW Metro has more players than Victoria and they hardly even have good teams.

4/ Cost prohibits more travel. Fact

Basketball is already a highly expensive sport. Adding unnecessary cost will only decrease the available talent pool in basketball. If a kid is choosing between basketball and football/netball. And they aren't a big money family. Adding costs will only deter them from playing. So why not pro/rel.

Let the best play the best. Clubs should either shape up or ship out. I challenge any club to show that they are spending all of their junior fee's on juniors. If that is the case they they wouldn't need to worry about pro/rel.

Reply #42231 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Mott,

To say that the weaker clubs are trying hard to improve is not true.

They think they are but they aren't, because they have no idea what is being done outside their club, let alone what is being done at the successful clubs.

The amount of work being done at the top few clubs to develop their juniors is so far in advance of what the weaker clubs are doing it doesn't even compare.

At least two of the weaker clubs don't even train twice a week or even make their kids turn up to trainings when they do train. And when they do they just muck around, it's not really training.

It gets worse, these clubs actually believe that they are working hard and scoff at suggestions they are not. One of these is on the record as saying they will not support pro/rel so they can pick off kids from the strong clubs who don't make higher division teams.

THIS IS THE REAL PROBLEM!

If you want to look at SA clubs that have worked its way back through hard work, look at Forestville or West on the boy's side, so it can be done.

The weak will only get weaker if they don't put in the work. In Victoria there are many clubs thriving now that were not 10 years ago (eg McKinnon, Doncaster, Werribee) because they are putting in the work.

Pro/rel now!

Reply #42238 | Report this post


Mott the Hoople  
Years ago

That is a broad sweeping statement to say weaker clubs are not trying.

I am yet to hear a convincing arguement that pro/rel will improve the overall competition. So two weak teams will go down and two slightly stronger teams will go up - still weak. What will that acheive? Good players leaving weak clubs to play in the second Div 1 team at a strong club. How is that good?

I think this arguement is like relion and you can preach all you like but I can't see this being good for basketball.

Things have a way of going in cycles and you will find some weaker clubs will be in a stronger position in the future.

Reply #42245 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

At the moment SOME of the weaker clubs blunder along and drag us all into mediocrity. Here's 7 reasons for pro/rel:

Reason 1
Pro/rel involves comps of 6 in the summer and 8 in the winter so the competition will be closer than the 10's and 12's we are running at the moment.

Reason 2
What will make it even closer will be that the top 8 will be the top 8 not 1,2,3,4,6,8,10,12,13,15 (for example) like it is at the moment.

Reason 3
Every grade will be closer because each team will settle at their own level. Less kids will drop out in winter because they are getting thumped every week. Numbers will be better, the pyramid will get wider and therefore taller.

Reason 4
Good players leave weak clubs NOW. The playing field is as un-level as it has ever been. Under pro/rel there will be limits of the numbers that a strong club can take in, in any one year. So player movements from weak to strong will actually decrease.

Reason 5
Weak clubs will be forced to lift their game and come up to the level of the strong clubs. Strong clubs will have to raise their levels to stay at the top. This can only be good for SA basketball. Pop quiz: When was the last time SA won an Aust title? (Under 20's is watered down by players leaving for college and therefore doesn't count!).

Reason 6
SOME (not all) weaker clubs ARE NOT doing the work. SOME are glorified social clubs! Club basketball at the top level is elite, not another social competition. This will force them to get serious!

Reason 7
The best junior comp (Melbourne) has used this system for many years and the proof is in the pudding. It has only been since they have become more like us that they have slipped. By the way, they are about to rectify this and when they do we will be even more screwed.

I am sure I could think of more if I had to!

Reply #42250 | Report this post


incognito  
Years ago

Anon 42250,

Your post and points are very interesting indeed and most are probably accurate.

Its very easy to find the faults of what is currently in place. However you need to also look at the potential faults of the alternative.

With pro/rel:
Put any joe bloe as a coach of an OK team in a strong U18/U20 Div 1 competition and that team will develop at a faster rate than the kids in the Div 2 comp with a good coach, even though that club may be working harder for their players. Therefore pro/rel could potentially mean that the stronger clubs no longer have to work hard to develop their kids. The nature of the competition could ensure that this just happens anyway.

That is my view but I will let you all consider that for yourselves.

Also, you need to be careful to not put too much winning emphasis on u12s / u14s. There are some views that during these sampling years that the kids should be trying other sports. Some clubs support this and their younger age groups only train once a week and the emphasis is on enjoyment and development rather than winning. We need to ensure pro/rel does not push clubs to win at all costs at u12 level to ensure they get a higher seeding for the following year.

With the current model: The problem I see is that there are the odd 1 or 2 teams in some Div 1/2 age groups that just should not be there. They are well below OK. A pro/rel model SHOULD be looked at to improve the evenness of the competition but still challenge the top clubs to continually improve through their own efforts not just the structure of the competition.

Reply #42272 | Report this post


wish I could dunk  
Years ago

Motts is quite right pro/rel wont work....will always have strong and weak teams....just ask Carlton right now....things go in cycles...forestville has improved their club...maybe eventually others will take note and spend some money on junior development....I just wish clubs would grade their teams more realistically and not be in Div 1 just for the sake of being in Div 1....little jonnie might be more at home in Div 2 or 3

Reply #42274 | Report this post


The Godfather  
Years ago

The last time I checked div 1 is about winning and improving. If it were just about improving, why have a state champs. Winning and competitive nature is fine with juniors.

Div one is the elite division of each age group and should have the most elite players/teams there. If teams want to make it a social environment why place them in div 1 where they get beat by large amounts every week.

Reply #42288 | Report this post


tt  
Years ago

Godfather, you are right its about winning, improving and having fun at U12/14 level. There needs to be balance between all 3.

Reply #42307 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

So.....kids that are playing div 1 and getting thumped by between 20-80 each week are having fun? Or would they have more fun playing in a lower division against teams where they may get some close games, maybe a few wins?

Reply #42310 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

Incognito,

The sampling phase of development is when children play multiple sports for fun. Sampling years end at the age of about 10 years old. For some sports like gymnastics it is at about 6.For basketball it would be at about 9.

For U/12 and U/14 the development phase would be where players play only 1 or 2 sports. The Selective phase. Phase 2. Therefore 2 trainings are not a bad thing. And you are arguing my case for me. I agree some SOCIAL clubs think 1 training is enough. Let them play in a competition where there relative strength allows for 1 training. And let the elite thinking clubs play in the top grade.

I disagree totally with your assumption that a good U/18 team will improve more because of top competition. And the results over the long weekend prove otherwise.

In U/16 Girls,. both the Sturt and North Girls teams beat Centrals and South. Who both play in div 1. Therefore should be improving at a much faster rate. But why may I ask did div 2 teams that play in a worse competitionj beat them. Good coaching, good development I might suggest.

Or maybe we can look at U/14 Div 1 Girls. Two years ago Centrals won the U/12 Grand Final. Now they have lost to Sturt, North, Forestville and Southern by over 20 points each. When they played in Melbourne they beat a div 2 team by only 20 points. Two years ago they would have beaten them by 50+. But they are playing in div 1 and must be improving you say! Not even close.

wish I could dunk,

I agree totally that there will always be strong and weak teams in each grade. But as the years go on the divide is only becoming greater because the competition allow for mediocraty. But pro/rel does not allow for mediocrity. Each club is then in an equal position when they recruit and develop from U/10's and up. If any club does the work in recruiting U/10 player, and then develop them, then they will have good teams and will always have div 1 teams in each grade. Simple.

Finaly Mott,

Sturt has a full time employee to be their JDO and JCD. They won the State Campionship. And dominated the reserve grade.

Forestville has a part time employee to be their JCD, and another to be their JDO and have improved their clubs dramatically.

North have lost the person who was their JDO and JCD and have slowly moved back in the standings.

DO you think that this shows the other clubs something?

Why do they not have a full or Part time paid employee to be their JDO and JCD?

If they don't then they are not trying.

Reply #42320 | Report this post


Jenifer garner  
Years ago

there should be only one div 1 team for each club if they want to play div they need to work harder or move to a worst club

Reply #42443 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

What a great idea!

Take the kids who have improved at one club and send them to another club where they will stop improving. That will fix the situation. (sarcasm inserted here)

Better still, lets teach kids to be disloyal and not respect the opporunities and development a club gives them. (sarcasm inserted here)

Finally, how a bought some clubs just get playrs from other clubs rather than develop their own. Because that might actually take some effort. (sarcasm inserted here)

The whole idea is to promote an elite competition so that we dont have a National Championship where SA has it's worst ever reslut again like we did last week.

You, people like you, with your attitude are the reasno this state is steadily moving backwards.

Reply #42459 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

'worse ever results' had very little to do with junior development from any club but dont let that stop your little ill informed argument.

Reply #42466 | Report this post


messy one  
Years ago

Pro/rel has been an issue for a long time and is a clear-cut example of tall poppy syndrome. No sensible player would trade good coaching for a guaranteed div 1 position. This implies that the smaller clubs that hope to improve through opposition of pro/rel largely hope so in vain.

At the same time, both kids and parents are happier when games are close, and this also happens to be better for the development of young players.

It seems that the clubs that accommodate the majority of SA players would opt for pro/rel.
Would it be time that the number of club members is represented weight of the vote?

Reply #42494 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

unfortunatly messy one, kids sometime have no choice. Its the parents who would rather see their kids stunt their development in a div one team then progress as a player in a div two team.

Reply #42501 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

So anon(#42466),

Do you think that clubs play no part in the development of players, and therefore their results at national junior level.

And if so then what does.

Reply #42543 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Years ago

anon(#42466),

If clubs play no part in the State results why have club basketball at all. let's have church and school and pick the best kids out of that to train with State. (sarcasm, is there an emoticon for it?)

The development of players by the clubs and the competition they play in are the major factors in Nationals performance. For the last 40 years the best performed States are the ones with the toughest comps not the largest populations.

Reply #42561 | Report this post




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



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

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: 9:29 pm, Fri 29 Mar 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754