Having just a few strong clubs is going to do nothing for improving SA basketball.
Pro/rel is ther way to go, justy as I have clearly stated in previous threads.
It allows teams to play in the most appropruiate division according to their ability. Will potential lead to decreased levels of poaching/transfers from club to club.
Vic moved to pro-rel years ago and it has reinvigorated their rep-ball competition and has since the emergence of many new associations.

Can only do SA basketball a world of good.

I hate the thought of a promotion/relegation system. If what you say is correct, it will only be the clubs that make up the numbers that will be going up and down between divisions. Clubs should take a look at there results, see what age group they struggle at or if its boys or girls and mabye look at the coaches. The coaches may not be developing their players enough. Maybe they should start looking outside of there own club for coaches, look to those top clubs (i.e. Sturt, Forestville, North) and try and persuade some coaches to come over to their club. I don't think there is a rule against poaching coaches is there ? The top clubs hold coaching clinics for their players during school holiday's, what do the other clubs do ?

LC,

Completely agree.

Will not happen as clubs will lose the luxury of guaranteed div 1 places, and may actually have to put more work into junior development. But they will try to find other ways to ensure they can continue to stay lazy and force players to play for them (zoning).

Of course, using example like the Vic (and to a lesser extent Qld Sth) systems having helped clubs that work hard (even small clubs like McKinnon) won't help - they will turn a blind eye to that!

Jesus,

I agree to an extent but maybe not with the poaching of coaches, clubs can do this to develop there coaches as well as there players. Have senior coaches hold coaching clinics for the junior coaches, yea its takes a bit of time and effort and no you might not get the piece of paper at the end of it but having experianced coaches sharing there knowlage with inexperianced coaches can only benifit the coaches, players and over all the club as well.

As ive said before on this forum the at under 10's and 12's each club basically starts a fresh, barring those existing families. Parents will generally sign there kids up at the closest club. This being said clubs then need to get there butts into gear and start developing these kids from the moment they step in the door because lets face it if someone is playing in a winning team they will have no reason to leave that club be it Sturt, F'ville or Centrals, it won't matter if there team is winning.

The success of a club begins with admin and the coaches and ends with the players.

Once again another post about pro/rel started with someone not even bothering to get the facts.

Based on Boys Div 1 up to latest round giving teams 10 points for 1st and 1 point for last over all age groups Under 10 to 20 the following is the Club status.

1 Sturt Sabres 56
2 Norwood Flames 36
3 Southern Tigers 33
4 North Adelaide Rockets 29
5 West Adelaide Bearcats 28
6 Forestville Eagles 27
7 Eastern Mavericks 26
8 South Adelaide Panthers 25
9 Woodville Warriors 25
10 Central Districts Lions 12

Yes thats right Southern are 3rd and oh Forestville who you want to play Sturt each week are 6th. Maybe they should withdraw and leave it up to the top 4 Sturt, Norwood, Southern and North.

If we are going to talk about Pro/rel could we please present the facts and base discussion on this. Clubs go through phases and I am sure some of those that have struggled recently are on the way up.

Yeah, good stats; I wonder if the womens comp would have made you take your blinkers off!

Long Ha Platt

I think you have missed the point. Regardless of whether the stats are for Boys or Girls.

The long held belief and purpose of this post was that there are only 2 Clubs worth anything in SA but this is not supported by these in fact it is a great achievement by some of the Clubs that cop a caning on this site.

It would be good to see the Girls Stats.

Actually huge differences between clubs just shows that Basketball SA might actually need to spend some time on development of the weaker clubs?

"These are the facts", I have looked at the Boys comps (U10 to U20) and offer the following. The point system is OK, but I have looked at average ladder position.

1. Sturt - 2.65 ave
2. North - 5.04
3. Western - 5.25
4. Southern - 5.44
5. Torresn Valley - 5.50
6. Eagles - 5.62
7. Norwood 5.96
8. Mavs - 6.57
9. South - 7.00
10. Lions - 7.43
11. Woodville - 7.64
12. West - 8.37

The other things to consider are Minor Premierships and Wooden Spoons.

MP's
1. Torrens Valley, Western & Sturt - 25% of all teams are in #1 position.
4th. North - 21.7% of teams

Wooden Spoons:
1. West - 37% of all teams are bottom of their div.
4th. Woodville, Mavs, & Lions - 14% of teams

When you compare the average position at clubs across year groups, Sturt drop off in the U20s, North are weak in U12s, but improve in the older grades, Southern have a blip in U18, Eagles, South and Norwood improve with the age levels, Lions and Woodville look good in U12, then level out, and West are consistent.

IMO, forget about a restructure and pro/rel stuff, provide more assistance with junior development at club level to bring players up to a level. Looks like West and Woodville could pick up some pointers from Sturt and North. The outer metro clubs too.

Average ladder position means nothing unless you consider division played. If Magic's top team is in Div 3 and coming say 4th, that's hardly impressive is it??

It is not the competition that needs massive restructure. It does need some tweaking, but we have had this format for many years and produced some great basketballers.

Here are my key issues:

1.Lack of infrastructure for clubs.

We sold our assets, to fund the 36ers for a decade, and now BSA has a balance sheet with little to show for 60 years of Trading. Our stadiums are crappy, and we are not seeking partnerships with councils to create more Starplex style facilities.

2. Self Funding Model.

BSA have no plan(because they have no assets to borrow against) to develop facilities that provide the income of 50k per year for each stadium to have a coaching director. There would need to be a pathway for full time work (at close to teachers rates) to attract people to such a position.
Forestville and Sturt who are lucky to be central and in A grade facilities, are the only clubs who have a finance model that allows a fulltime coach ie. Paul and Glen. This is a model that all clubs need but the finances are not available without an income stream.

Deal these two Fundamental issues and most of these pointless debates would evaporate.

Just my opinion though.

201719, interestingly 4 boys are going to the September Australian Development camp.

1xSturt, 1xWest, 1xCentrals, 1xNorwood.

So where are your facts?

Is all just pure demographics and cash.

If the Gliddons lived in Gawler no doubt SASI trainings and coaches would all be involved with Centrals.

The money is in the Eastern suburbs, its not in the west, south and far north.

SASI & BASA should be held accountable. How long has this been going on people??

You would think with the population of young kids north and south of Adelaide these centres would become a Dandenong ...but they don't have the money and support.

And this just came in from outside the window...

Maybe the competitions shouldn't be organised by age. Maybe it should be organised on a best-player type basis. For instance, if a club had a total of 96 male players they would be organised into 12 teams of 8 players (up to each club on how many in each squad) based on best in no. 1 team and 'less best' in no. 12 - age does not play a part in this. All the no. 1 teams for each club would play in a division right on down to the last ranked team.

At the end of each season there would not be any pro/rel of teams but of players.

for those who wanted to see the average placing for the girls comp is... (only div 1 btw)

1 F'ville 1.67
2 Sturt 2.8
3 North 4.33
4 West 4.4
5 Norwood 4.83
6 Woodville 5.17
7 Eastern 5.33
8 Southern 5.8
9 South 7
10 Centrals 8

Its pretty clear that other than F'ville the rest of the comp is pretty even with only a 3 position difference between 8th and 2nd.

Boys

Sturt 21 out of 23 in finals at 91% with 7 Top.
Norwood 18 out of 29 in finals at 62% with 1 Top.
Southern 13 out of 22 in finals at 59% with 1 Top.
North 14 out of 26 in finals at 53% with 5 Top.
Eastern 3 out of 7 in finals at 42%
South 10 out of 24 in finals at 41% with 1 Top.
Forestville 10 out of 26 in finals at 38% with 1 Top.
Centrals 2 out of 6 in finals at 33%
West 5 out of 23 in finals at 21%
Woodville 3 out of 16 in finals at 18%

Girls

Sturt 16 out of 19 in finals at 84% with 4 Top.
Forestville 18 out of 23 in finals at 78% with 7 Top.
Centrals 2 out of 3 in finals at 66%
Eastern 3 out of 5 in finals at 60%
North 10 out of 17 in finals at 58% with 1 Top.
Norwood 9 out of 20 in finals at 45%
West 6 out of 16 in finals at 37% with 2 Top.
Southern 5 out of 16 in finals at 31%
South 3 out of 11 in finals at 27%
Woodville 4 out of 12 in finals at 25 %

Overall

Sturt 37 out of 42 in finals at 88% with 11 Top
Forestville 28 out of 49 in finals at 57% with 8 Top
North 24 out of 43 in finals at 55% with 6 Top
Norwood 27 out of 49 in finals at 55% with 1 Top
Eastern 6 out of 12 in finals at 50%
Southern 18 out of 38 in finals at 47% with 1 Top
South 13 out of 35 in finals at 37% with 1 Top
Centrals 4 out of 11 in finals at 36%
West 11 out of 38 in finals at 28% with 2 Top
Woodville 7 out of 28 in finals at 25%

West girls are obviously going through a re-building phase (unlike Crows & Power) which means suffering for a while by trying to place a team in Div1 of every age group.
The tough decisions will pay off, but as previously mentioned, when your tallest (and most potential) player 'decides' to move to a stronger club (for development), it is a set-back.
The boys will bounce back next year.
It is a no win situation- if you don't rebuild, you cop the crap that Centrals recieve on here, but if you try to re-build, people put you down for losing.
Another reason for no pro/rel- clubs with 2 teams in Div1 will encourage players over to play Div1, thus delaying improvement of clubs in Div2.

Thanks for that nutter. At least now "these are the facts" & "U16 parent" should hopefully be able to see that only showing one side of the comp was actually giving only HALF of the facts!

Combine the two stats then draw your conclusions from there.

Probably "% in finals" is a week early - there are a few tables with uneven byes that will change & there's also one minor round game to go.

#201866 - the thread is about the structure of the competition, not how your team is going in Div 1.