Instead of going through all of that why not just make the season a three round season?

The Aussie public don't want Conferences especially when there really is no need.

Everyone plays everyone 3 times, following year home/away/home setup gets reversed. Pretty simple.

Its now a matter of getting the clubs to agree to it, instead of voting it out as they did this year.

The reason I suggested the Conference format was, because I knew that there were some clubs against the 2 year format for Home/Away/Home scenario.

I agree that would be the simplest way, but I guess one of the major problems is, that in terms of numbers, the people who play ABL are minor in any club and there are more people on committees that are solely concerned with Juniors.

Not sure what the answer is, maybe the committees have to talk to their Senior (ABL) people more, or some ABL people need to get onto Committees at their clubs.

Just seems a shame that the season has finished already, although I guess there are few teams are happy its over, (thinking more of the bottowm 3 Women's teams there)

With this salary cap thing there is less money for many clubs to play players and then you want 26 games??Fact is it takes alot of people to run ABL games from coaches, all the volunteers to players. Then you want the crowds coming along. I like 18 games because everyone is right into it for the whole 18 games. Any more than 18 games starts to wear a little thin and trying to pack in too many double headers in a 26 game season just leads to wear and tear type injuries for players. DOnt forget there is the silly season as well. The idea is trying to find out which club is the best prepared, most talented, greatest work ethic etc. to be number 1 in our conference. With each team playing each other twice + finals I would think this is enough to sort out the best.

18 game ABL season = Every club other than Forestville and Central can't find enough volunteers for a 27 game season. Soft excuse but what can you do?

There has been talk about the Junior program on here for some time and the post by Shut Up! (you better hope your club doesn't find out who you are) gave me an idea.

How about bringing in the Conference system to the Junior Summer Season? Play every team in your conference twice in the Summer Season, top two make finals cross over with top two from the other side. 6 teams per conference (gives those bigger clubs a chance to play 2 teams in one grade where room and under conditions). Even if you went top four from each conference makes the final 8 and maybe that 8 qualify for Division One in the main season.

Also cuts costs to parents meaning less travel.

Thats all we need in juniors. A further watering down of the competition. For example, the Sturt U 14 boys wuold not get a game inside 50 before March, or maybe April, depending on the winter season program. Or North U/18 girls get to play Centrals and Woodville twice over summer. Would love to be there for those games. Promotion/relegation, Promotion/relegation, Promotion/relegation

Out

Your right lets set up the whole junior program for the benifit of two teams. Sturt 14 boys have one team (West) that's been close to them. South and Forestville have gotten as close as Norwood. Centrals, North, Woodville get nowhere near them, oh wait they wouldn't play Sturt til the Main Season, if they qualified for it!? SO what's your point? Sturt should play West every week so they only win by 20?

This conference argument is flawed anyhow - BASA already implemented it to an extent a while back in I think a girls lower div comp(not sure if its around anymore) - and that's where it should stay, for boys and girls. The best bet to get kids to come out and play for a district club is to keep it at that lower level, where the clubs make most of their money from new players joining up. I know I've had friends who have turned against playing district ball because of the travel to hillbilly county. A conference system for the lower divs makes sense as an introduction to district ball for those players who won't neccessarily jump straight into the top program. And these players are generally the kind that play div3/4 their whole lives and play div 4/5 mens after they leave juniors too!

It also allows those local clubs - Northern Rattlers, Torrens Valley, Gawler Gunners (now playing them WAS an experience), that Southern team (Southern Vales? unsure, I know there was a Coast team awhile ago) an opportunity to attact players and grow as well with the advertisement of local games.

Can't be bothered going through sporting pulse to check, Jirachi and others know if it still exists, whether its on the board?

Conferencing juniors would hurt more than just two teams - they just were the obvious examples.
Say for example, in 18 boys. Top 5 is Southern, West, Woodville, Norwood and North, close to if not in that order. How could Southern improve when it plays zero games against the other 4 (all in Northern conference) over summer/early winter, and (if the club manages to enter them!!) make an assault at Classics, which was their aim I believe from the start of last October?
Surely we should be trying to get good games to our top teams to try and compete with the top Vic clubs come Classics time? When was the last time we actually won a Classics?
Or in 12 boys, where the top 5 is Sturt, Eastern, South, West and Southern I believe roughly in that order. 4 of those teams would be in the Southern conference - Westies Northern. How will the West boys improve over Summer season/early Winter to the point where they can give State Champs and Classics a real shot when they don't play quality opposition to improve against. It's would be an unfair advantage to the other 4 temas in this case, as they play 6 games against quality teams over summer to Wests zero.
And the 14 boys situation is fairly unique - I can't think of any real situation to make it more competitive after the top 4 - although perhaps the teams that came up from div 2 should have stayed there - Centrals didn't even MAKE the div 2 finals over summer season I believe. I think Westies won div 2 (and Sturt had 2 div 1 team maybe?) - perhaps the 2 div 1 teams may rear it's head again? Or else maybe just run with 8 and let West, Sturt, Norwood and Forestville play each other 3 times. Why (possibly) dilute the strengh of opposition more than it is already?

What is an ideal situation?

1. Require parents to travel less (especially in lower grades)
2. Keep competitions as even as possible

I'd start from something like that, and work backwards. A half-half split obviously might not be the best way to do it, but are there alternatives?

Lets not copy too closely to the Victorian model. Or better still, lets take the good and leave the bad. Vic Met U/18 Boys 3rd, and the U16 Boys have already lost a game. In the 16's the Vic met girls only beat SA country by 6 I think. If you talk to any Victorian coach, they are majorly concerned with the lack of competition that the new two conference/20 team format has produced. And maybe the results are already visible.

The Div 1 and 2 district junior competition needs to be more competitive with the best players up against each other week in week out. This level is not social basketball, but rather ELITE level competition for our future International, National and State players. Promotion/Relegation.

The Sturt paper allows for the lower level competition to be borken up into North/South, and then later North/South/East/West if all clubs are able to generate enough teams. We are in agreement that the decrease in cost and travel would increase the number of players coming into the sport. But the point is mute until each club begins their own domestic competition. Or rather until domestic compeititons are able to become lower level comps for lower level players.

But whatever the format, keep ELITE basketball as just that. Not a watered down competition

I believe that the gap between us and the Victorians is decreasing, and from what I've heard one reason is the one which Dohhh! brought up - the increase to 20 in their top competition. Now instead of playing a tough game every week - as was the case a couple of years ago - they are very similar to our comp - the top teams have tight games irregularly.

Anyone got any ideas??? Perhaps Liam Flyn might know know whats up with the QLD.

Just to clarify, I never said ALL juniors should be conferenced:

ONLY the lower divisions say 3 and below, to introduce new players to district ball.

Though the Vic model seems to be the go.

And QLD - they breed 'em big, that's why!

I agree with the conferencing system for Div 3s and below, for no other reason than the travel (time and cost)involved. I know of several talented players whose parents won't entertain the thought of District Basketball simply because of the idea of travelling from one side of the city to the other.
Saturday mornings are also the prime time for school sports and for those keen enough to try and play both school and club sport (same or different sports)having to travel 2 hours return to play a club game makes participating in the school sport inconsistent at best, impossible at worst.
Sure the competition at the more elite levels of Div 1 and 2 needs to be of a strong standard and therefore the conference system may not be the way to go for them, but for kids who play at Div 3 and below, lets make it more attractive. Travelling from the southern areas to Starplex or vice versa for a 9 am game, or even 8 am (God forbid) is not what I would call a good enticement for parents to let their kids play District.
There are so many demands on our precious time these days, don't let us deny kids the District experience because of things we can control.

I did a few 8am at Morphett Vale in my time back in 14s...not a great advertisement for district ball, I tell you.

Especially when you lost by 50.

Coached one or two 8am/8:30am at Morphett Vale and the Leisure Centre as well. They were ok coz we won by 50 :D

Don't understand what it is you are proposing then. How would teams qualify for the best possible division? How would you break up into north and south if one division has 8 teams and the other 2 in a lower division? Put up what it is you are proposing Jirachi!