Manders
Last week

VJBL Recruiting

So, some teams are already actively starting efforts to recruit for 2025, particularly u16 and u18. It's all cloaked in "just kids wanting to play with their mates", but the reality is that there are coaches and parents engineering outcomes for super teams. It happened last year, this year and will happen next year. BV should come out against this, unless of course they are for it in which case silence will be taken as acquiescence. Your call BV and BV coaches - what do you really want and stand for??

Topic #51986 | Report this topic


Juice  
Last week

Funny thing is... in VJBL it's better to shine at your own club than to join another team full of stars. Winning VJBL has no impact on anything .. not state, not college nothing.. the only lure of so called super teams is making the classic. But you lose your spotlight going to a team like that. You also get better playing vs those teams than playing with them.

Reply #941578 | Report this post


DeepWombat  
Last week

I agree that it can be counter-productive for the mid-level players, I doesn't look like it's worked out that way for the top players who have moved to form super clubs. They seem to have upped their exposure, if anything. Instagram exposure is a very inexact science here in Australia, but they do concentrate on the top performing clubs and if you've just joined as one of the best players on that club you're going to get exposure.

But yes, if you're a mid-level player on a super club, you're probably better off remaining as the top player on your 2nd tier club, if exposure is your thing.

Reply #941579 | Report this post


Lobby  
Last week

It's pay to play and of course clubs are going to do it to boost their reputation.

Make receiving clubs pay larger and substantial transfer fees, allow that payment go to the sending clubs so they can be rewarded for their early work on development based on the years they played before moving. - won't stop it completely but I'm sure it will limit it some.

Do what some football associations do at the club and make player ineligible for higher selections for an 18 month window. So if it was association to association then make them ineligible for high performance programs and state teams.

Oh wait they won't do that it means less money.

We all need more dumb ideas.

Reply #941582 | Report this post


Really!!!  
Last week

Why should legitimate people looking to transfer from clubs that they are unhappy with be penalised.

This mean that if someone moves to a lesser club for opportunity they will also be financially penalised. And for some families, this would push them out of the game altogether.

Like in Europe, clubs need to accept that there are big/strong clubs and smaller/weak clubs. And the move from one to the other occurs, not through stopping transfers, but through proving to members the benefits of staying.

Otherwise we are rewarding mediocrity and penalising clubs looking to make changes for the better and getting results for their changes. Be they the bigger clubs or those smaller clubs looking to improve.

Reply #941596 | Report this post


CC81  
Last week

Agree that we shouldn't be stopping transfers of individuals who aren’t happy with their existing clubs but I think BV should set the rules that allow for optimal player development over the longer term.

In my opinion, that is achieved in an even competition where the top end talent is reasonably evenly distributed between clubs.

It’s easy for kids to look good when then get silver service in a super team but I don’t think they are necessarily developing all the skills that they might if they were in a weaker team and had to take more responsibility. For example, you might have a forward putting 20 points on every week in put ins playing with a great passing guard, but they never develop their shooting and driving skills as these weren’t required to score and win.

Reply #941610 | Report this post


Cantshoot3s  
Last week

Always an interesting conversation this one, and it depends which side of the fence you sit on !

Its risky for any league/association to have a one sided competition as it doesn't help the better teams or the struggling teams.

Its my understanding that SA are changing their clearance rules ( and if true ) i like them.

Only 2 Div 1 players can transfer from clubs per age group in one season. If they are nationals players only 1 player can transfer to that club. so 1 nationals player and 1 D1 player, or 2 D1 players. Cant have 2 nationals players in one season.

I can see this stopping clubs building a super team so they qualify for classics/nationals etc

Reply #941612 | Report this post


Juice  
Last week

I think domestic is where the money is made. In my estimation on average it costs around $800 for a child to play Rep.

30 Game season
- Training Court Hire $50 half Court - full $75 and hour 2x a week
- *Team sheet (Refs,Court hire)+ Entry. $340/Player for the season
- Some coaches get paid. On average it's $50/player a season some are more
- Uniform $125 every 3 or 4 years

Won't add tournaments those are paid as they come.

Not a lot of money to be made on Rep teams. Not enough to warrant decisions being made because of money in Rep. if you're paying between $700 and $900 its probably breaking even.

* Not sure of the accuracy of the team sheets, it may be a few bucks lower or higher.

Reply #941621 | Report this post


Red84  
Last week

In this world of NBA hype and meme's it has become fashionable to think that the reason why a team is successful is because of the presence of a "star player". Often a "star" will arise because of the ground work that has been laid - the systems employed are well thought out and executed; there are team mates who are unselfish, do the hard things off the ball that provide time and space; efforts which don't appear on a score sheet. Having come from NSW and viewing Vic metro teams, what strikes me is that individual players in Vic metro demand more from their clubs - more time, more shot opportunities - so that they can shine for college selection or whatever. And some well known clubs appear more willing than others to cater to these demands.

Reply #941634 | Report this post


+  
Last week

cantshoot3s - does that risk a player going backwards if they are restricted into a group that is not good. I'm more in favour of no more than 2 per receiving club - but if another 2 want to go - that's fine but elsewhere. PS also can't control parents if they want to move within by laws > let them go. Nothing that says they are 100% bound. Loyalty at our club used to mean a lot not now > they get rid of loyal players & parents for the flashy ones that'll be gone in 12 months. But that's what they want.......

Reply #941639 | Report this post


Manders  
Last week

I like the SĄ approach.

Sensible rules would be:

- No two State or National players can transfer to the one club in same age group

- If a club has one or more State or National player in an age group, they cannot recruit / accept another in the same age group

- If a club has a State or National coach in an age group or at DOC level, they cannot bring in any new State or National players

But of course certain clubs that have in recent years built or are planning in the future to build super teams are unlikely to support that for obvious reasons. No need to name them ...

Reply #941681 | 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: 2:55 am, Thu 23 May 2024 | Posts: 968,026 | Last 7 days: 754