This is a good idea,only it looks like teams from around 5 clubs only would make up the div one .Maybe this would boost junior development in other clubs as they might be embarrassed by playing in second division with their best teams.

The problem with basketball in this state (which IMO is in a disgrace) is that there are two clubs who dominate the comp, 4 or 5 in various states of decay, and 3 or 4 on struggle street.

The issue with the Division 1 competition is the dis-parity between the top and bottom team. Pro/Rel will not fixed that, but the egos of some people may be boosted to such an extent that their head won't get through the door. "they might be embarrassed by playing in second division with their best teams" - what a crock of you know what. Rather than put your foot on a drowning man, why not extend a hand. Playing against fellow club teams is boring as. District basketball is about representing a district and rather than creating clicks and stroking egos.

Basketball in this state is so skewed and this skew will only continue with such a ridiculous proposal. This will not grow the sport, this will only accelerate it's decline and turn this sport into a minor minority sport.

I firmly believe that it all boils down to coaching competence and the plays/methodologies at the clubs. Struggling clubs need to attract coaches with styles that work, then kids will be attracted to their club. If those weaker clubs were lifted up through competent coaches, then the standard would improve and everyone would benefit.

I challenge all the coaches who consider themselves "better than most" to extend themselves, take a step out of their comfort zone and accept the challenge of a stint at a "weak" club to show us all how good you really are. By concentrating yourselves at "strong" clubs all you are doing is creating a black hole which is weakening the sport by slowly sucking the life out of it.

there will always be a top team and a bottom team in a competition.

The question is pro / rel will make teams earn a spot that they want.

Some clubs need a reality check and be honest with what grade they nominate their teams for.

All clubs that have built up start with solid results in a lower grade and works up - there is more pride and accomplishment in that feat.

Pro / rel is the way - capped at 2 teams per club per Div and i suggest challenge games if any dispute.

zoning would not have worked for us - our local club was a backyard arrangement and had we not been able to drive to where we wanted to - my kids would not have been involved in the sport.

Instead they got 9 years of juniors - then seniors from us.

"Playing against fellow club teams is boring as."

how do you know this? have you ever been involved with this happening.

Your experience is different to mine. The 2 teams fight harder for the ball it is a "save face" game to prove who is the better team in the division and who deserves to be there more.

Some of the best games I have seen in District basketball have been 2 teams in the same division from the same club.

Your challenge to the coaches just shows how lazy the club you are at must be. You expect the better coaches to leave their clubs where hardwork comes from the top and goes through to the bottom, and come to one where hardwork is a foreign word and laziness is the order of the day.

Struggling clubs need to recruit themselves and put the hard work in themselves and instill hardwork in their players to succeed. The black hole exists because instead of doing the hardwork to lift your club, players, caoches you moan about the division, instead of doing something about it.

Contact the gurus of basketball in this state ask them to come out and show your coaches how to run a successful junior programme. I am sure they would be more than willing to extend their hand and guide you in the right direction to make your club successful. Get off you backside and do the hard work and stop whingeing!

Junior soccer has promo/relegation and they have alot more clubs and participants than junior basketball.

truth is there is probably around 10 junior teams across the board that are in the wrong div.

all i ask for is common sense - why have byes in div 1 when you can fill it with a second div 1 team from another club.

hardly going to be the demise of basketball in SA.

why have teams in grades where they win no games and have a % less than 30.

you must earn your stripes.

we won a div 4 GF once and it acheived more to the people than getting thumped in Div 2 every week.

Why not just split both Forestville and Sturt into two clubs each?

This has been done a million times, P/R and Zoning are band aids.

I think everyone misses the big picture.

GET THE FOUNDATIONS RIGHT AND SUCCESS WILL FOLLOW

1) Get more children playing the sport.
2) Ensure entry level programs are designed to attract and retain.

The answer to all the problems with Basketball in SA from the 36ers to Club ABL to under 10's and junior program's is the number of members and hence the amount of money to improve/invest on the product and development.

Focus on doubling membership for all the aspects of Basketball in SA, think about every issue you have, ask your self the question. If we doubled or trippled the participation / membership will that issue still be there?

Basketball has very high participation numbers, in the top 3 in the country and most states.
SA's problem is that it is fragmented. District Clubs have no connection with participation programs. Everyone will shoot me down, but go have a look at Goden Grove, Sports for All the school comps. Where does that money go?
Answer: not back into basketball.

If you want further proof, go look at how many teams Sturt have in the Unley competition. You will then understand why their under 10 programs are always strong, that is a major advantage simply because the basic development is happening at least one year before the rest.

The fact that Sturt has teams in the Unley competition is proof of my argument. How can that happen!!!!!!!!!

I am not a fan of pro/rel as such as there are too many variables. Pro/rel is more about driving using the rear vision mirror than looking out the windscreen. I am a fan of clubs placing teams appropriately based on skill level. I am not a fan of teams getting beaten by +30 each game. I consider the best games are those +/- 10 points. I am not a fan of a strict zone, but I am a fan of kids supporting their closest club first. I am a fan of clubs putting their hand on their heart when kids who are closer to other clubs come to them and they say "have you considered X, who are closer to you?" I am not a fan of clubs offering incentives to junior players to play for them like $50/yr fees, free uniforms, petrol money etc.

The gap between the #1 and #10 clubs is just too large. I am not saying the strong clubs need to get weaker, the weak clubs need to get stronger.

The sport needs to get more kids playing the sport. The AFL model is a massive pyramid and they know the bigger the base, the better the point. This must be the same principle adopted in basketball. There are too many barriers at the moment preventing growth in the sport.

Same old, same old; Your comment about fragmentation is valid. In SA you can play basketball without having any affiliation to BSA, yet with AFL, that is not the case. BSA need to be in control of basketball, but if you are playing social ball at one of the Rec Centres scattered around the suburbs, what does BSA offer? and if you are one of those operators, why support BSA when all you good players then move on and you loose revenue?

As part of this government funded facilities review, there also needs to be a review of how the game is structured and controlled in this state.

Anon
I am not talking about growing the District competition, it is increasing participation numbers and membership and available revenue.
Not to mention the basic principle of the more playing, the more pressure on the Div 1 spot. Again, get the base right the rest will fix it self in time.

Jack, your argument is valid regarding what does BSA have to offer, possibly nothing other than insurance savings and referee development etc. However, this is business and I would like to suggest if BSA cannot work with them then compete against them, offer a better product, take the business.

Unfortunately this problem has eveloved because there has been no interest from BASA and the Clubs in the participation side of the sport, others have filled that gap and now the Sport is paying the price.

Should BSA, North and Norwood offer a competition structure better than Golden Grove, that would be about 3000 members that could come back under the umbrella.

Zoning isn't bad, it isn't the end of the world and the curtains won't fade if it is introduced. For new entrants into a sport it helps direct them to start with their local club/association.

What zoning is totally ineffective at doing is controlling how evenly the top 80 players in a sport are spread among the clubs.

In particular for basketball, how does zoning work when up to half of some div 1 teams are country players?

As for Pro/Rel, it could help even the competition, but you would have to totally ban any player movement between teams within a club, right from the start of Summer. Otherwise teams get stacked to qualify & the competition doesn't become any more even than it is now.

how bout coaches/clubs be realisistic about the team they coach, if they are getting smashed in div 1, put in a case to go down to div 2 so the team can get better, and develope against people of their own standard. The days of all these too proud people saying every year level must have a div 1 team needs to end.

i did it with a team, they went down got some confidence, went back up and almost made the finals. We need to think developement, think beyond the year, what can you do to bring your kids up to the standard of the league.

i would like to know which clubs "dont make an effort"?

B 100% correct

Solution to your problem...................
.
.
If your unhappy with Basketball in S.A.
.
.
Come over to the DARK SIDE
.
.
Move to VICTORIA
(we have 3 times the same sort of crappy problems you guys have)


COMMENT WRITTEN - tongue in cheek

Nothing has changed since I started playing juniors for South Adelaide in the mid 1960's. The only difference is that all juniors were then played at either the old Forestville (Boys) or Bowden (girls) stadiums. The population burst and urban sprawl in the 1970s and 1980s resulted in new stadiums being built around Adelaide, especially the outer suburbs, many of which developed their own competitions outside of BASA. Concentrate all junior competition to a couple of inner metropolitan stadium with a limit on the number of teams from each club in each grade and things may change.

Anon 316837

"Basketball is a very small sport" the facts don't quite agree with you.

Basketball has more players registerd in Australia than Aussy Rules.
In SA it is the 3rd highest ranked participation sport.
59,500 registered players over the age of 15 years
Only 6000 less than Aussy Rules.

The Adelaide District Clubs are about 3500(approx) of the 59,000.

How many players in your Club?

Your Club already finances itself by offering 5 divisions in the Elite comp. Why?
Answer = money

Zones and P/R are just masking the real problems that no-one wants to deal with, or cannot deal with.

5 Divisions in the elite comp, seriously, how does that make sence.

Clubs are trying to finance themselves by attracting new members to lower divisions and at entry level. Problem being, they have to charge elite competion fees while trying their best to offer the same service to all. That works!

Zones will not fix these basic issues, while the structure is wrong, these endless threads on band aid discussions will continue.

Zones have no bearing on domestic comps, they do not have an elite mindset, parents wont drive from one side of Adelaide to the other to play in a better team in the recreational competition.

Sturt would get bored beating the same team each week

being around a long time and having kids that played div 1 at other clubs and sturt.

One simple thing - sturt div 1 coaches know what they are doing.

methusla

as a Div 1 coach that doesnt coach at sturt i find it offensive that you would assume that i dont know what i am doing.

I have coached Div 1 at two clubs, and been very successfull although haven't won a state champ or a winter season have had many players go on and play college or ABA.

Have not lost to sturt this season!! dont plan on losing to them either.

As everyone should know by now, Sturt have a very basic offence and defence which works very well against undisciplined teams who over-dribble the ball, don't pass off and are lazy on the boards. They are very poor shooters from the arc in my experience. Force them to take their shots outside and they don't like it. They are VERY good from the FT and the keyway, but average from the arc. We all know that they play a back court trap on the ball carrier every possession and everyone should know how to beat a trap by now. They have a defensive structure which has a high fouling potential that they use to break up the opposition flow and attempt to steal. Use that against them and foul out their arm slappers. Unfortunately, a lot a refs let it go. Have a look at your old scoresheets coaches, Sturt always average a few more fouls per game than you don't they. They have a tendency to hard foul the player in the key. I suppose it slows things down, make you earn the points, and gives their players a rest.
All their offence revolves around a fast break as their preferred scoring option, but whenever YOU get a fast break, they tend to grab foul to stop it. When they get held up in offence, they always look for the low baseline player that is left alone after the help D comes. Sturt get frustrated when you return the favour and play like them. My rule against Sturt is simple, we play our style of ball, but "we do to them what they do to us".
As soon as they start grabbing the fast break, we just do the same back.
As soon as they start slapping the player going for the layup, we just do the same back.

For all our friends at North this week, just watch for those pointers, and for those who video tape games, just re-watch the Sturt games and you'll see what I mean for when you play them next.

Good Luck!

sorry to offend - but i did not say that you did not know what you were doing.

Oh my God,

Sabres Slapper has worked us out.

We are now dooooomed.

This whole time we have been playing basketball and teams haven't been trying to stop us.

I guess its hard to have people like you when you are considered Goliath. :(

And that musn't happen too often then.

They were coming when Sturt had the old stadium at Colonel Light Gardens which was only marginally better than Marion or Hillcrest. They were coming when Sturt had no stadium because it burnt down and they were coming when Pasadena was out of action because the floor was being re-done. Stop making excuses!

Pro/Rel argument again........

Performance of clubs happens in waves. Starting from their junior teams (aussie hoops and U10s). If clubs have a great Aussie Hoops and U10 program their wave starts. This is not to say the other programs need to be strong but rather its more important to have your starting program the strongest. If Aussie Hoops is strong you are likely to have a better turn out to U10 trials. If your U10 program is well coached then the kids move to U12 with the right fundamentals to build on. This then creates a wave of players that will hopefully go all the way through to 18s. Memorable waves in the past were North Girls and Boys during late 90s.

Does a strong ABL program increase the chance of more people turning up for U10 trials? Not a chance. So why place loads of club money into the ABL program. Why not place all the money into getting more players to the club in U10s and having a good coaching program at that level. How do you do that? Well place the $20,000 into a part time Development Officer whose sole efforts for the year is to increase participation in Aussie Hoops and increase the number of players turning up for trials. Whilst this is happening organise your U10 coaching staff to make sure when the kids start arriving that they are getting the right development.

From memory during my first level 1 coaching course I was given a sheet of what players should be learning at each age level. It had when each skill should be taught along with when they should be competent to do skill with out guidence (at training) and also what age they should be strong at that skill to be able to complete it in a game. The form started at age 8 through to 15.

My two cents - Get your starting programs correct before worrying about your ABL programs.

Some of these comments are hiliarious. Most of the coaches that coach at STurt have been at other clubs and have left due to politics and the fact there is no stability at the their previous clubs. There results at othjer clubs have been good with what they were coaching. To the peanut that says STurt gets huge numbers at trials, I would say you are just guessing. I know for a fact that other clubs get more kids to their trials. The problem is that their coaches do nothing with them.

Kids play at a club and start friendships which means that they do not move clubs easily. Sick and tired of hearing the wo is me stories ,and complaining of what they have and what we don't.

It all starts with numbers and good coaching at Under 10s. Have excellent coaches in 10s, 12s and 14s (no disrespect to above ages), and your club will be in sound hands.

anon, So you have been to other clubs trials to compare? Coconut!

wow i didnt realize that sturt coaches were hated by the refs. I didnt get that memo. I will need to remember that at the State champs.

and as for the parents I missed that too.


I am practicing my "T's" at the moment.

Things can change very quickly in Basketball. A West Adelaide Team at full strength Under 16 DIV 1 was defeated last night by an injury plagued Southern Tigers team. The Team had previously gone undefeated at full contingent for 3 years beating Tigers last time by 60 points. What good would relegation done the Tigers last night? Not given them a chance to prove that they have gotten stronger and become a better team.

Stunned,

Why would the Southern team have been relegated? They have been a consistantly good, (if not great) team for a while and have a number of SASI and possible State team members. Great result for them, but clearly has nothig to do with promotion/relegation.

I would think Centrals, Woodville, South and North would have been more likely to be relegated if need be. And doubt if more than 2 of these would have gone down. Maybe a third if they couldn't beat a combined Sturt team from div 2. But that would be about it. And that would be doubtful.

Then it would have been in their best interest to organise those players at the start of the season. And then in the following 2 years, they would have moved back into Div 1.

Clubs would just need to be organsied.

And considering they are country players, they would just go and play for eastern, norwood or somewhere else.

To appropriately grade team, which would provide superior comeptition and therefore create more closely contested games.

This would then create a greater enviroment for consistant effort and reward performance in an elite competition.

The upshot would be greater development of players and a greater enphasis for clubs on development and recruitment to stop their teams from falling otu of Div 1.

hance clubs like Centrals would stop wasting money on ABL and start investing into their juniors. And rather than just recruit contry kids who may not want to play summer and may not even want to play in 2 years time because they dont make another State team.