I attended the Forestville junior trials last weekend and was astounded at how many non-Forestville kids were seeking a spot. And we're not just talking U12s here - but U16s and U18s so I assume they are looking to transfer from other Clubs. I would imagine that Sturt and Norwood would be facing the same situation.

And it's not just financial resources that make the top 3 Clubs strong. Without belittling the efforts of volunteers at other Clubs, the top 3 just seem to have large numbers of talented and dedicated people who donate signficant time and energy to their juniors. Who can blame parents for wanting their kids to be a part of that?

Thanks stats room, I enjoyed that!

The criteria is not the ladder the criteria is the amount of members and teams throughout the whole club u10' to seniors/ABA

I thought that the criteria I used was on the top of the page.

Didnt say it was anything other than what it is. For div 1 and 2 juniors. From U10 to U18. Will do a U10 to U23 all club wrap up hopefully by Fridy, but that is a lot more involved.

A great summary of the past season,good work.

#527, please, don't insult our intelligence by claiming Southern as one of the top clubs.

Stats Room - didnt mean to confuse - yes I understand your criteria - I thought they were referring to the Big 3 as is often spoken about on Hoops which would be also the same as your Overall top clubs

"So why do kids return after a year or two at being at the so called big three??

eg
Sturt
Forestville
Norwood

Sorry I didn't mean my post (506) to be a gloat about some clubs over others.

Meant to say that I would like to see the effort and non-financial resourcing repeated across all clubs and that this, rather than zoning, was the best way to get some balance across the metro area. Whether more government and BSA finances need to be devoted to some areas over others (for junior development programs) to make this happen is another question, but at the moment the playing field looks pretty uneven.

In the end those parents (and their kids) who have the means, will go where they think the best options for success and development are and the numbers show that the options they are prepared to consider are pretty limited at the moment. The future of basketball in SA relies on us presenting more options rather than less for all parents, regardless of where they live.

anon,

Surely that is the responsibility of the clubs. All clubs have the ability to utilise their resources and push them where they wanr.

You cant expect BSA to come in and spend thousands of dollars on clubs that spend their time, effort and resources in trying to win ABA Championships.

if you look at South. They had a very successful 90's, winning or competeing for Championships. but this has come at a massive cost to their junior program. But that was thier choice.

I would find it to be a bit wasteful for BSA to come in now and spend money trying to prop them up when history shows that if they get back to 50 teams, they will just take all the money from these teams and spend it in their senior program again.

Same could be said for Woodville and Eastern. Both won ABA championships at great expense, but at what long term cost?

A systyem where all clubs recieve money based on criteria that set a long term goal of development is more appropriate.

Give clubs an incentive to do the right thing, rather than say 'here is some money and resources because you have been blatantly bad and spending in the past' would be better.

Looking back on it. You might put North in that basket as well.

Pretty sure Sturt have not been helped by BSA in any way.

They dont have a miniball comp at PAS.

They didnt have a stadium for 18 months when the old one burnt down.

They didnt have pas for 9 month due to the floors.

THey didnt have the canteen for 3 years while the school and BSA ran it at a loss.

The BSA JDO's have not given them 1 player, it has been their own club that has done that, along with coach development.

WHat do you think BSA has done for Sturt exactly

All Clubs have a golden run, some longer than others. A significant input determining a club strength is the strength of the volunteers at the club, with the parents not willing to positively contribute to the club being the leeches that eventually suck the life out of the club.

I say show me a club with an excess of volunteers and I'll show you a club that is successful because "things just happen". Show me a club where you can't even get parents to score on game night and I'll show you a club in trouble.

If ALL parents volunteered in some capacity at their club be it on the Committee, Fundraising, Team Manager - the list goes on, for just a fraction of the years while their child is active at the club, then they would be pleasantly surprised at how much more successful their club would be. When selfish parents leave it to a few conscientious parents, then eventually the cycle of doom starts.

Basketball is like all sports/hobbies/pastimes. You are always going to get swings and roundabouts with who is the strongest and who is the weakest. The issue is that it makes no sense to have a very large gap between the strongest and the weakest.

So how do you reward the "weak" for past decisions without enabiling them with the notion that. "Hey doesn't matter, if we do the wrong thing again, BSA will just come in and bail us out again"?

There are miniball games, but only overflow from Marion. This term I believe that there are 4 games on a Monday.

Sturt didnt have Forestville for the whole of the time between CLG burning down and Pas being built. Only for 18month out of 3 years. And BSA still received rent from the club over that period.

BSA fixed the courts so that they could make money, not for the club to use. Because the club does not make any money from the stadium.

Sturt acutally paid for the bar and office space to be built at Pas, with the insurance they received from the club room burning down at CLG. And they took over the running of the canteen after 3 years of the stadium being built because DECS was losing $5k per year running it, and didnt want to continue. That is a cost Sturt now takes as a part of the canteen. Do other clubs want to pay for that? Or pay for their own bar and/or canteen.

Sturt makes no income from junior finals. All that money goes to BSA, just like at other stadiums.

BSA JDO's do not place kids into clubs. They are actively pushing kids into their own programs that are competeing with club programs. It hasn't happened, and a past JDO will be more than willing to let you know that he was specifically told to NOT pass on club info to any people.

Junior players move back after 2 or so years because they are not as good as their parents think that they are.

Are these kids really playing for their own enjoyment
or to satisfy their parents egos?

A tall U12 div 1 player moves into being a small first year U14 and so on through the grades. Playing Div 1 as a second year does not mean that you will play Div 1 in the next grade up.

Which loses $5K, because it must be open to servie the school which has about 250 kids total and must only serve appropriate food to them.

So where are the results of these activities? What are the KPI's and have they been met? Playing nice and sitting round the camps fire singing 'kombyah' is getting the sport nowhere.

The main problem with your logic is that BSA hasn't seen and incresae in either miniball, nor district.

In fact district numbes have been steadily decreasing for the past 5 years, to a point where some clubs may not exist soon. It will be too late for them to "reap the benefits' of the JDO's.

The clubs provide BSA with over $1M. If they let theis cash cow die, who will fund the sport?

In every other state, clubs run domestic assocations. Why dont we here? Why has BSA spent 5 years having meetings, making promises and leading everyone concerned on to believe that domestic models were coming. Becaseu without it, there will be no transfer from miniball to district.

SOOK!

Term for "cry baby" or "whiner". One who sulks.
A person who whinges a lot. Cries about nothing.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=sook

They should have a much more KPI based model for kids getting involved in the sport, rather than the the look at how many kids we made contact with. It should be look how many kids came to aussie hoops and domestic competitions.

And if they dont meet their targets, heads should roll. If you cant show what you are doing is making an impact, you need to focus on those things that do make an impact.

And, they should work with those club ready to move forward, and the surlus of domestic competitions should be shared so that it can be used to assist other clubs in their modeling.

This might be the necessary incentive clubs need to get their act together, do it and you will get more money.

But, BSA will scrap association model, because once they generate income from them running it themselves, they will use it to employ more people. And the competitions will never be handed over to the clubs because BSA wont be able to "afford it" and therefore we will never get to association model.

And for all those watching at home, this will be what comes back from the $90K survey they just did.

anon,

At the moment that would be partially true. BSA take the money from clubs and are putting it into programs that make BSA more money.

Why would the commission want anything else but for them to make money. They have no direct interest is how the clubs do as they do not have an true understanding of how the sport runs and are trying to create other revenue streams so that they dont need the clubs anymore.

This is because country and church have 5 out of 8 votes on the council and therefore are able to dominate the direction of BSA.