Pro / rel across all grades for me. If you are talking about what is best for juniors having them in group where they are able to contribute is better than being placed in a too higher grade.

I agree with pro/rel with all the divisions. Dont even bother with pools just do div 1 through whatever. That way the best teams are making div 1 and the worst are at the bottom.

Would it be easier and a lot less stress for clubs,players and parents to place teams where the club see fit at the beginning of the summer season and after round #9 before Christmas look where each team is at. Then nominate for the winter season with assistance from BSA.

Too many lower div 1 teams / clubs get a free ride. Can't tell me a double bye is helping the development. Why not allow a second div 1 team when there is no remote possibility of the position being filled ?

It's not just a case of competition standards it is also a concern for club sustainability. Throw into the mix of inter club politics inferred above the poisonous intra club politics and it all gets quite unattractive for teenagers and their parents.
The perennial arguement about team stability and loyalty versus 'blooding' first year players in too higher division hoping they will be good 'core' players in the second year always surfaces at this time. Successful teams are ones that play well together and that takes team stability, multiple years playing together and a transparent strategy from clubs. A div 2 team of first years will hone skills to be a far better div 1 team in the second year. But bottom age kids injected into top age teams is often a recipe for a team going backwards, poor player confidence, and club/coaching/administration recriminations.

I think you will find that summer upheavals at individual clubs will disenfranchise many players. Perhaps it will sporn a new round of club hopping which will only make things worse.

By the way what happened to Warriors u18B div 1?

Good points raised there and I agree re 1st years and 2nd years as a general statement. But expect exceptions. Why have a double bye when our best are sitting on the sidelines or at home on a Friday night ? I hope people find enlightenment through swapping clubs - whatever floats one's boat. We all have agendas.

Aaaah, the old Pro/Rel saga rears it ugly head once more.

I don't think anyone is happy with the current system and it seems the number of people happy with the BSA setup would probably be less than the crowd to a Crocs NBL game.

Instead of fluffing around the edges, perhaps the entire competition needs a rejig and new business direction. Look at how other sports are organised and then work out the best solution for basketball.

It appears that BSA are completely phasing out clubs having two division 2 teams (at least for summer). Only Sturt have a second division 2 team in U18 Boys. Western Magic have division 2 teams in U12 & U18 Girls.

# of <10 team competitions from U12-U18s:
Div 1 Boys - 1 (Woodville's U18B div 1 team have vanished into thin air)
Div 1 Girls - 5
Div 2 Boys - 0
Div 2 Girls - 2

8 team competitions (including double byes):
U12G Div 1
U16G Div 1
U18G Div 1

Double byes... really?

well read, I think you have just highlighted the elephant in the room is the girls competition.

The big Q I think all clubs need to focus on is "how do we get more girls into basketball?"

"The big Q I think all clubs need to focus on is "how do we get more girls into basketball?"

And how do we stem the dropout rate.....

girls play for different reasons and I just want to say restricting teams to one team per division is a big reason for several leaving the sport. This move is not promoting the sport to grow and the results will show. I would like to know what evidence base was used in making this decision ?

years ago we used to play the large clubs when 2 teams per club were allowed in a division - can even recall 2 teams from 1 club in div 1 one year. Anyway - back in those days the large clubs used to sit mid range with 2 teams - as their talent was spread thinner, that was the last time i can recall competing with them at div 1 level regularly. The struggling clubs still struggled - but the mid range clubs won a lot more games and premierships. Lower div results were spread around not like now when some lop sided results and powerful teams are playing below their level because of that suffocating rule of 1 team per club per div - well maybe they should enforce 'where is your 1 team per div" first

more evidence friday night some teams are in the incorrect grades - results speak for themselves.