Not sure what the list of names will do other than satisfy curiosity as to who has been invited.

That does not solve the problem that the opportunities are made available to the same kids over and over again, and the rest have to fend for themselves!

"BA has sat on their hands and done nothing for too long and now have lost touch with a lot of talented kids around Australia who for what ever reason didn't come thru the associations"

Even for the kids that do follow the "sanctioned" path - Association, NITP, State representation - even the third or fourth best player in their position and age group nationally - you will not get a look in for these things!!!

They will tell you in a generic email that they are watching you, but they are not!!

Lets talk ADC - if this really is an Australian Development Camp, why do they just invite the same kids every year? Why not make it that you can only go to one? Invite different kids every year? Really open it up?

Any wonder that the private scouting agents and basketball tours do so well - they actually see the group of talented kids that BA has left behind! And thank goodness they do!

BA are not promoting Australian basketball or developing Australian basketball - all they are interested in is themselves.

Some nice BA bashing in the last couple of posts. Sometimes BA bashing is warranted, sometimes it's not...

In this case its probably not.

The comment about Aussie Hoops, its all about the numbers and not about growing the sport is really just dumb.... if they get the numbers they will be growing the sport perhaps? if you don't measure growth by numbers there are probably not a whole lot of other ways you can do it.

BA has limited resources and should rightly focus those on who they see as the best kids, being those with the best chance of being future senior national teams players. I have argued here before that they have rarely got that wrong in the past. Plenty of times I have asked people to throw up the examples of the kids who were never in the system and still made it. Only a few names are ever put forward, and none of them are superstars of the game now.

It is the states job to look after second tier athletes. That is why the sport has two tiers of elite athlete development, NPP and NITP. The larger grouping is NITP and the whole it is the states job to nurture these athletes. In Victoria at least there is another tier called SPC - not sure what that is to be fair.

If BA are looking after 100 kids in each age group (ADC invites, special trainings, AIS visit etc) then that is TOO many. if they are looking at/after 20-30 they probably have it right.

BA should not be involved dozens of good, and scores of relatively fair kids that get places at US colleges. It's a distraction from their real job.

"If BA are looking after 100 kids in each age group (ADC invites, special trainings, AIS visit etc) then that is TOO many. if they are looking at/after 20-30 they probably have it right."

Agreed. But there is some middle ground here. At the moment BA only "look after" 15 to 20 kids per age group at best. Much less than that in some age groups depending upon what is taking place that year. Maybe they should throw the net a little wider.

Same kids + every event = no opportunities for anyone who is not top one or two in their age group!

BA talk the talk, but definitely do not walk the walk.

HO.... So basically what your saying is that all that government funding should only go to 20 or 30 individual kids who those at the CofE currently say in their personal opinion are the best there is?


May I point out its all down to personal preference and many good athletes have missed out purely down to their names not being known, and that's endemic right through the ranks,
Look at the frolings, yes they are good players but p,entry of better ones would have been around when they were getting their names added to the AIS, purely because of the parents......

BA do nothing to assist anyone get to college, frankly they would prefer they didn't go, and to be honest I've not seen anyone come back from college better than those who chose the Aussie path way, but that's not the point.
The point is if BA are going to start to get involved with this process they need to give equal access to this type of thing across the board.
Let's face it those already on the BA radar with national and state teams are already getting exposure to colleges, it's the others that don't. And those already at the Cof E or in National teams they certainly do not need more exposure.
Guidance maybe but not exposure.

@Anonymous, I believe in part what HO is trying to say is that even BA's resources are limited, so to make their programs more effective and to satisfy their own key performance indicators they can only really service about that 20-30 amount of athletes at the elite level.

Certainly this combine, as you call it, will have costs associated to it and if it is linked to the NCAA I am sure there are some strict rules that apply also.

It isn't just about BA channeling all their funds into just a few athletes, as HO is trying to point out, the State level programs and even local Associations have all got their own responsibilities and avenues to help kids on their appropriate pathways.

Funding is finite, at all levels.

Having been involved in several Australian State and National level basketball programs I can give you an objective view point based on personal experience and knowledge, however I have concerns that you are posting largely based on subjective and limited knowledge, but I could be wrong...

Stating that kids are not treated equally is like you are suggesting that all kids are equal, but as you have already commented on in your posts, they are not!

May I suggest you wait until you see the lists of boys attending if such a list is made available, then at least you may have some facts to base your opinion on.

^Bear

Sure, let's wait to see the list - and just reading off the boys team currently in Europe, let's make some predictions:

Bines
Dent
Dalton
Froling
.....
through to Zunic

As the original post says, how much exposure and development and investment do these kids need versus say the next 20 boys of the same age group (1999 and 2000) - over the past two years they will have had ADC x 2, New Zealand trip, China Trip, Europe Trip and now the college combine plus various trainings at (if not full scholarship to) the COE

And the next kid on the list gets nothing!

The State Associations play zero role in pathways to the next level, which for most juniors would have to be an overseas scholarship.

Hence the proliferation of US tours!

I expect that kids born 1998 - 1999 will make up most of the players, according to the eligibility ages of those in year 12 right now Anonymous, of course there may be some from 2000, I am not sure what the specified age criteria is.

I also expect any kid who already has committed to an NCAA college does not really need to attend, so once again naming kids based only on previous opportunities placed before them is speculative at best.

Suffice to say that it is BA's first attempt at this kind of event, so they will want it to be successful so they can perhaps expand on it in future...

^Bear, and so, as I see it, we again come back to the original post - good initiative, poorly executed.

Hope BA don't promote it as something great they are doing for Australian junior basketball, because it certainly seems on the face of it that it is NOT - the kids in Europe now are firmly on the College radars and many are already fielding offers. Parading them again in front of College scouts and pretending it is good for junior basketball or had any influence on that kid getting noticed would just be rubbish!

So guessing your kid did not get invited!

By now we know who the d1 kids are and aren't. And from my experience this sounds like an angry parent who cannot swallow that their kid is not a d1 kid. Fly over and watch d1 and d2 teams practice and play. Caporn played and coached at that level, you would think he knows what he's talking about in this field compared to a parent with rose coloured glasses on.

And maybe the BA college scrimmage would suit some kids that aren't already fielding D1 offers? Or even fielding offers.

But if playing the same kids over and over again makes Caporn and BA feel good and like they have achieved something in junior development, it is their call!

But IMO they have let junior basketball down in this country if they think that these are the only kids worth looking at. And I say that because it IS the same kids at every BA event!

No one is saying you have to play college, or even a D1 college, to be good.

I think the point is that BA "look after" the same very small group of kids, every time.

#589333
I'm from Victoria - Your comments are not correct re the Frolings.

The girls dominated at U18 Nationals in Brisbane. They were are key reason why QLD North won the U18 girls nationals. Check the Stats for the tournament, if you doubt me.

Please if you are going to post - stick to facts and leave the emotional personal opinions out of it.

Way too much emotion here from I can only guess are jilted parents?

This is a bit like going for your first job - who are the going to pick (hire). What is the selection criteria? You're not going to get every job you apply for let alone an interview.

I agree to a certain extent of favoritism, however, keep banging the door down. Let you kids' results do the talking.

There are plenty of opportunities. NITP, NPP, East Coast Challenge, Australian School's Champs, National Champs, State Leagues, Big V, SEABL

Please be realistic with you kid's expectations & ensure they are as well.

I remember I was young once & I knew if I was better than another kid. Your kid probably knows that as well. But do you?

The other problem with basketball is you are playing for one of two spots on a team. Either you are the best or 2nd best.

Please do your research before posting emotive arguments.

As an aside there is a wall at the AIS with photos of BA AIS/COE attendees since inception. I would say there would be lucky to be one or two in each year group that 'have made it in basketball'.

Plenty of the AIS kids go to college, but go nowhere after that. Plenty of kids make state teams at U16, but by top age U18 are gone, other kids have bypassed them. It is an ever changing landscape. Some peak early, some peak late. BA know this and they are observing.

You will find most that are playing in the NBA or Europe Major leagues went to the AIS. So BA don't have that bad a track record! Have there been any glaring mistakes??

Also, be aware that it is the State programs that nominate kids to BA. So maybe your beef should be with the state programs/coaches.

"I think the point is that BA "look after" the same very small group of kids, every time."

Anon, I am not sure you understand what BA is meant to do.

Its primary focus from a development point of view is National teams. If it is looking after 15-20 kids (male and female, preparing for U17 and U19 worlds, Boomers and Opals) then it is actually looking after closer to 80 athletes at the junior level alone.

BA is handed cash from the Government, which is ALL about winning senior medals now. It used to be that your funding was supported if your junior national teams did well - really none of that matters now. The ASC is almost exclusively focused on senior olympic and WC medals. Getting those medals or performing very well at those levels will keep the money flowing. So the balance is the right investment in the two senior teams, while ensuring we have a pathway to keep those teams competitive in the future. If your net is wide then you have got the talent ID wrong to be honest.

Its focus should not be US Colleges, and it has to rely on the States to look after the next tier of athletes. Just how it is. US College is absolutely not the preferred pathway for girls, and I think BA would openly say that. For many boys it has also not proved to be a great choice although your chances are better.

If you are the same person who made the walk the walk comment you are really off course.

How long since an Australian Junior team has been embarrassed at an International event? Decades. How many of our athletes are making the grade at all sorts of levels all over the world. How many of these same athletes came through the same opportunities people are whinging about here (ADC, COE, tours etc) - almost all of them.

All BA can do is deliver results, and in this space they have consistently for a long long time now.

yeah, weird paragraph when i re-read it.... lemme try

-BA should not have as their focus helping kids get to College, it should not be BA's core business. I have long held the view that they could employ someone who could independently help kids with questions about College, but not actively place kids there

- I think they are quite open about not wanting our elite girls to go to College as the success of that as a pathway is even more questionable for girls than it is for boys - very few of our Opals over a long period of time have needed the College route.... young female bodies can compete in the WNBL, and its a better competition/training environment than College can provide

- While BA have to look after the top tier of junior athletes (the 60-80) in conjunction with the State HP guys, the next tier of athletes really has to be left to the States to look after. Some of the States have hooked up with College recruiting services already

But overall, getting kids to College would for me be one of BA's lowest priorities given so many other issues they have on their plate.

Thats such bullshit argument playing in the NBL or WNBL is nothing like playing at at D-1 program you work harder and play against better athletes than anywhere else at that age. It is a tremendous advantage to than come back to australia with the work ethic you gain by going to college. NBL and WNBL is trash and would get blown out by Top tier D-1 Schools and its not close.

I think the username of the above says it all.

@589395

I like evidence based outcomes.

We have had some wonderful success stories through the US College system.

But, we have a lot of athletes there, particularly boys, and I am not sure it has been everything it should have been for many of them. I hate using the word here on this forum, because so many people think it means "bad" but for many basketballers, i think college is "overrated"

The cream will get great things from it...

Hey Master, do you remember when Wisconsin beat Kentucky?

@589440

Sure, don't confuse that it was an answer.

College is fine, no problem, with it. Great life experience, inconsistent education quality etc.

But as a basketball experience, it is sometimes not what people believe they were getting or hoped they were going to get. Its not bad, its overrated sometimes in this regard.

Reply #589397
re: BA College Combine
Thats such bullshit argument playing in the NBL or WNBL is nothing like playing at at D-1 program you work harder and play against better athletes than anywhere else at that age. It is a tremendous advantage to than come back to australia with the work ethic you gain by going to college. NBL and WNBL is trash and would get blown out by Top tier D-1 Schools and its not close.


Master debater have you ever been over there and watched the caliber of the games, yes a few teams are good but the vast majority are no better than your average basic low div bigv team.

And that's a fact, add to the fact these college kids are not permitted to train or p,ay with adults, it's a basic un23 side, put that up against an NBL or WNBL or even a SEABL side and they would struggle,
Take away all the fancy arenas, the big screen TV and the media coverage and you have a basic game of average basketball for the vast majority of DIV1 teams, and that's in the top 25, outside of that and it's nothing to write home about.

Those college kids that come here to p,ay as so called imports will tell you they struggle with the more mature environment that the likes of SEABL and NBL/WNBL present.

College can be a great life experience, but it's certainly not the be all and end all of basketball. And their are a lot more options available for Aussie kids and European kids than any American, all they have is college if they want to keep p,aging past high school.
No BigV, SEABL, Euro league or WNBL/NBL for an American kid unless they go through college, where as our kids can have all those at different levels

Whatever you go into it is better to do it with both eyes open, going to US college on a basketball scholarship is no different and everyone considering that pathway would be encouraged to conduct their due diligence and research to find the best fit possible.

I know kids personally who have tried the college pathway and when the fit isn't right, of course the end result will be varied in its successful outcome rating.

I know kids personally who have stayed here and once again their choices has resulted in the outcomes based on what they wanted out of life and what they were prepared to do to get it.

One or the other isn't better or worse, it is totally up to the individual and who they are as a person, how they can cope with whichever pathway they choose and ultimately everyone must live by their decisions.

Given the opportunity and having a go at US college if you are good enough and qualify for D1 or D2 is something that comes along only once in a person's life time, so good for those who do give it a go and it's okay for those who choose not to.

In the end life gives you what you put into it most of the time, this combine appears to be another one of those great opportunities that the kids good enough and willing to do the extra work for have a chance to participate in.

College life as a scholarship holder, no matter the sport or discipline is tough and challenging, but also rewarding and worldly, those who have the right character and put in the effort will tell you that...

@HO, it would be an interesting debate between you and I on the subject of whether US College Basketball scholarships are indeed overrated or underrated!

if you limit the conversation as I do Bear, to basketball outcomes, I think you will find it hard to establish an underrated argument.

Scientific or evidence based outcomes are fine HO, but qualitative, first hand experiences and those lesser known outcomes are just as important.

They should not be precluded in such a debate IMHO.

While I am satisfied that statistics and such 'black & white' statements you may be keen to base your argument on do have a place, I think we should be talking about more than this.

By understanding that emotional and cultural experiences exist, as well as educational and future career options that unfortunately are not so easily measured this way, we can get a different view point.

Setting rules to such a debate would probably kill it before we started, but an interesting topic regardless...

HO I did see Wisconsin beat Kentucky whats your point Wisconsin is an awesome school both in sports and education. The intensity and level you have to play at in D-1 Basketball is second to none there are no plays off every possession matters hard to say that about the NBL. What imports have a tough time adjusting to is the way the game is called. The referees aren't nearly as good here and its just called differently also the game is played differently lot more pick and roll 4 out 1 in sets. In the states the bigs are true bigs on the block over right and left shoulder moves rebound many can't or don't shoot 3s obviously there are many exceptions to this but the two styles are totally different. The pace and passion of the game played in college can not be duplicated in any professional league.