He has done plenty of groundwork. He has learnt how to repeat this wonderfully successful year next year and the one after. I can't wait.

What a joke, what groundwork has been achieved this year? Its certainly nothing that I want the club to learn from except put a stop to it immediately. Why risk another year? This season has been a total disgrace and embarrassment. Yes, harsh words but if I didn't care, it wouldn't affect me this way.

Local players are more likely to stay (if looked after properly, not taken for granted) as well as perhaps getting greater spectator support as these players are known through playing in the State league.

Its more dribble & its bullshit. Hes a head strong imbecile & his players wont have faith in him after this year. Unless hes got something major up his sleeve (mills or Bogut) piss him off now!!!!

What I want to know is how the 36ers have let a team who was at one stage this season 1-14 (Sydney) overtake them on the ladder leaving them looking like wooden spooners for the second season running.

Surely that in itself is a problem that needs to be addressed.

Our current players aren't that bad. But they are showing that as a team, they aren't that bloody good either. I'll continue supporting them and always will but something needs to change, be it a new coach or a few, new, more experienced (and somewhat better) players.

ah holden, the current players are that bad!!!

Players are too small, boring to watch, show no passion and have no leadership. I loathe Clarke I tried to look at it glass half full for a stint this season but that quickly died. Worst season I've ever owned a season ticket too, and I've missed one game in 16 seasons. I knew there'd be issues when they went and resigned the majority of last seasons team....but went shorter real bloody short! Idiots at that club, SOS saved the day now time to show some big balls and make the moves this offseason.

I'd take a look at the factors that have been consistent across the last few seasons in isolating reasons we're no where near playoffs.


The coaching staff has changed - majority of players have not - and the results are virtually identical.

yeah the players are favourites, especially hacks like holmes, NG, Hill.

Hill and Ng are not the primary guys we're counting on to get the job done. Holmes is in that boat to a lesser extent too.

Loco, who are the 'primary guys' plural that we are counting to on to get the job done?

I assume you are referring to Balls, and our various imports? That is not enough 'primary guys' to build a successful team on.

I have been as critical of Ballinger as anyone lately, but if the 'primary guys' are limited to Ballinger and Shannon, that alone tells us something about why we are losing and the lack of depth in our squad.

In my view, we cannot afford for Ng and Hill to be a passengers in this team (I don't think either are). Ng is a 7 year player, and Hill is approaching his prime years - both need to claim a role as 'major contributors', otherwise we do have a problem.

I think Hill and Ng are both quality players, and have earned a right to be considered on any team. But there is no doubt the ownership issues to present a conundrum. Would either player be signed by any other team on an open market? Probably, yes, but only if they were a good fit for what that team's specific needs. Clearly the Sixers need a different look, and this is where the problem arises if Hill and Ng are a lock to be re-signed because of jobs for the boys.

Clarke had a major say in who was signed on for this season, that I'd a major isse right there IMO. Considering his main attribute was eyeing talent. Adelaides team doesn't have to much.

XY - My point was more along the lines of needing to establish a core of 3 or 4 guys that are able to consistently win games and build the supporting roles around them.

For example, if we had on court leadership and some big bodies willing to bang, you'd reconsider Holmes' position in the team, given that his primary outputs are no longer as critical.

Same applies to Hill. If we finish up with a solid swing man forward that is a slash and finish type and Creek sticks around, Hill's value diminishes.

Ng I'm not so fussed with, as I personally think he's still underated. But again, if we land a quality shooter that can defend better than Ng, you'd re-evaluate.

Where those guys come from is anyone's guess, but it's been made clear in my opinion that the Ballinger / Holmes / Hill combination does not work, especially when not complimented by quality imports that offset their areas of weakness.

Easy to type than achieve, granted.

So basically try to upgrade at every position, and then sign whoever is left that fits the bill? Can't fault that approach! I agree that the challenge is in finding the upgrades!

XY - Ha! Were it that simple.

Here's my rather simplistic view of the world:

- Ballinger has been here a while and the team results are not good enough. That means one of two things; we're not building the correct team around him, or he's not the guy to build around.

- If Ballinger stays, the support cast needs to be specifically selected to complement his strengths and weaknesses. We'd need strong defenders and other big bodies to help him out. We'd also need players with oncourt leadership skills to bring tight games home in the clutch.

- If Balliner goes, we need to look at what Clarke wants from this team and weigh that up against what talent is available (and obviously $$$s).

- If the latter scenario happens, I'd suggest Hill and Holmes' positions in particular will be at the mercy of incoming guys.

Not sure if I'm doing a good job of summarizing, but the current incarnation of the 36ers does not and has not worked for some time.

I think we can all agree, fundamental change is needed.