All top sports have a geographric representation for the level the sport represents. IE in the Olympics each country can qualify for a sport, you cant have US with 2 Basketball teams. Same principal with AFL right down to local SAAFL.

Basketball does have a big gap and some kind of promotion / relegation is needed. However along with promotion / relegation should be ways to help the outer lying clubs. Prime example of this is zoning of the competition into conferences up to U14 (alls Divs) and U16s DIv 3 and below. Nth and Sth conferences. That way parents at U10 level dont have to travel 3-4 hrs on a saturday to get their kids to a game. Then the outer clubs will prosper. Another thing is including rules to stop all players moving to the clubs likely to qualify more teams into Div 1. Zoning (or something like it) would be ideal in my opinion.

Perhaps instead of zoning, the "outer" clubs should work out WHY players - often from the country who live even further away - drive straight past them to play at North or Norwood (in Centrals case) or Forestville or Sturt (in Easterns case). Better coaching/training? More "extra" sessions? Better uniforms? Who knows? Well find out, and put measures in place to rectify these issues.
Or maybe we should just give these clubs a cop out and force kids to play for them who don't want to be there because they live nearby. Then these players would probably quit, as they can't choose which club provides them with the best service - at great expense in basketballs case. Yup, that would really improve the standard of our elite players at a national level....

Also, if we "conference up" the U12 and U14 div 1 grades, how would that improve competition in grades where there are only two standout teams (ala U14 girls the last x years). What if one team was in the North conference, the other in the South? Then, these teams would have even LESS competitive games than they do now (which isn't many). So they have a LESS ideal preparation for U14 Nats/Classics etc.

So explain how this would help our elite at "National" competitions?

119078, drawing from a specfic recent example.

Yes, I asked a kid/parent who is close to making a state team and was very close to leaving our club. They got told by "top coaches"/parents of some other clubs that they are good enough to play NBL one day and if they stay at their current club this wont happen. They were told that staying at their current club will mean they will be overlooked for state and SASI programs.

This is not the case but the kids/parents might be naive about the basketball system believe this. They beleive what others are telling them and move on.

Luckily we nipped this one in the bud but I can tell you this kid was close to leaving for all the wrong reasons. Before you tell me its to do with the coaching or team playing in finals, the kid was told all this by a club that finished lower than we did in the age group.

I suspect the above false perceptions has alot to do with it.

we should have 12 team comps - the 10 memeber clubs always have the option on nominating a team in that grade - 2 spots are kept open for a promo / relegation spot.

so the top 2 teams from teh grade below can qualify over summer for the next grade up -

u14 div 1 boys -
all 10 memeber clubs qualify for a team.
then the 2 top div 2 teams over summer qualify for div 1 - if they want over winter - if a team declines - the 3rd div 2 team gets the option - after that no other div 2 teams get asked - to keep a standard up.

afte r the winter season - it goes back to scratch for teh next summer - and the top 2 from div 2 qualify again.

the winter season is 24 odd weeks - so it allows for a round comp for 12 teams

so for example u14 div 1 boys could be -

west
woodville
forestville
centrals
norwood
mavs
south
tigers
sturt
north

over summer

north and forrestville finish 1 and 2 over summer in Div 2

so winter would be -

west
woodville
forestville 1
centrals
norwood
mavs
south
tigers
sturt
north 1
forestville 2
north 2

--------------------

this concept could be used from div 3 to 2 as well

------------------------

this way it ensures the up and coming teams get the competitive needs and the clubs do not lose opportunity to field front line teams.

Groundhog day!

Groundhog day #096 because no one has the balls to do anything about it cept yawn!

#078
Its not about why kids go to the successfull clubs but how useless it is having too few successfull clubs! The present system encourages clubs to poach and recruit above their needs to build super clubs.
Coaches want to start and stay with super clubs, not have top work hard on mediocre talent in the other clubs so it becomes catch 22.
Individually clubs success can be cyclic because of such a structure and depends on the drive and focus of the committee but unless comps become more competitive every one loses and you need to understand this, so read Panthers response as a starting point which in part explains Vics success, (sheer numbers excluded).

Here is my issue with the current situation.

Over summer, in the U16 girls Eastern didn't enter a team in div 1. Their div 2 team has a record of 4W - 7L.

They lost to Forestville by 71 - 15.
They lost to Sturt 45 - 18.
They lost to North 31 - 24
They lost to Southern 38 - 22.

But now over winter they nominated for div 1. How many 100 point losses before these kids lose interest and they start forfieting? How does this reward development?

Why do people think that this kind of thing is actually helping basketball in this state?

anon #119073. No they don't. Soccer doesn't have a one size fits all mentality, only football does.

Its not about why kids go to the successfull clubs but how useless it is having too few successfull clubs!

It IS about why the kids go there!! Find out why, and provide this service at your club. Perhaps then these players will come to your club, instead of driving straight past it to go somewhere where they are getting what they are after. We have too few successfull clubs because too many spend their time whinging about Sturt/Forestville/Norwood/North, rather than finding out why they are where they are.
It wasn't that long ago that Sturt were extremely average - particularly the boys - maybe 10 or so years. And 10 years ago Forestville were at or near the bottom of the pack. Now these two are either leading or obviously improving their positions. Why? It certainly isn't because 10 years ago they whined about West/Norwood/North (who were clubbing them at the time). They implemented a plan, and got people in with the work ethic and nous to implement it.

Coaches want to start and stay with super clubs, not have top work hard on mediocre talent

Utter nonsense. Forestville were down amongst the bottom 10 years ago. Paul Arnott, Jerry Coombe, Scott Lewis, Dave Laurie and co didn't bolt for the super-clubs, they developed their club from within, and made it into the force it is today (whilst adding other good coaches such as Tony Casella, Ben Osborn, Grant Roberston and Mike Christian). Paul and Dave would be amongst the best handfull of boys coaches in the state, and would have gotten a gig anywhere, but they stayed and built.

but unless comps become more competitive every one loses and you need to understand this, so read Panthers response as a starting point which in part explains Vics success

Agreed. But Panther's response is only partially correct. The grading phase is used to determine DIVISIONS first, and "conferences" second. The top 20 play Vic Championship, this is then divided into two pools of 10. Then Metro 1 is the next 12 best teams (21-32). Then Metro 2 has teams 33-44 etc. So it is in effect VERY similar to promotion/relegation model that has been proposed and shot down here numerous times. And many in Victoria would claim that the recent lack of Victorian success at National Championships (relatively!) is due to the expansion of VC from 12 to 20 teams (pandering to clubs self-interest instead of the best interest of Vic basketball as a whole) as they now have many blowouts in VC rather than grueling games week in week out as they did 5 years ago.

anon #119103,

Panther forgot to tell you that only the top 20 teams qualify for the top grade. With an unlimited number able to try and qualify. And that no club has a guarenteed position in Championship. Or that clubs are allowed to have 2 teams in the championship grade.So I would agree with this type of system, would you?

"Paul and Dave would be amongst the best handfull of boys coaches in the state"

Whoops.... left out Jerry, who probably is THE best boys coach in the state.

Is the dark side is at it again? It sounds alot like it! Watch out or Darth Vader will get you yet. We need more Jedi knights to fight the evil empire.

pro/rel debate.

sounds oddly familer?

If it's the right way, why aren't we doing it?

why do people keep pushing for pro/rel? there has to be a benefit to it, otherwise people woudnt ask for it?

is there any logical argument against it? who would be able to change the competition structure?

Clubs before state success, always has been' always will be. Ego's at club level wanting to beat other clubs and not interested in an overall SA basketball improvement.
Weak clubs will get weaker and strong clubs stronger because nobody wants to go to the souths, woodvilles, west adelaides, centrals and mavericks.
I doubt some of the top club's illustrious coaches would make significant difference to bottom club results as they don't have the cattle to work with nor the luxury of numbers.
The weaker clubs do have themselves to blame for their current predicament and need to find answers but most of the solutions mooted here are victims of catch 22.
The member clubs need to work together to strengthen district basketball and clubs need to be allowed to field 2 div 1 teams if they are good enough. Incentives need to be introduced by lower ranked clubs to attract players and a time limit set to introduce zoning in the future so that realistic geographical areas can be used and real consequences for poaching introduced.
A better understanding of the complexities need to be exhibited by BSA when allowing non member district clubs to participateat district level and member clubs have to have their rights to automatic div 1 revoked if the quality of the product is sub standard.