For most it's how well they run and promote their domestic competition. It generates money for coaching and programs and if there is a constant flow of kids coming into the rep program they get a chance every year to be a positive influence on a new batch of kids to build towards future success.

The number one priority is culture.

The Coaching Staff and in particular the Director of Coaching.

If the DOC has multiple roles (eg DOC and Head Coach of 1s Rep teams and / or NBL1 teams) they will not have enough time to focus on developing a decent Coaching Team.

Without a decent coaching team, you cannot develop a decent Culture.
Without a decent coaching team, the quality of Domestic level competition will be poorer.

As they say, "A fish always rots from the head down".

Agree with Xxxx - domestic comp is the key.

You want lots of participation with multiple grades for beginner, intermediate and advanced players.

You also want strong competition in the top grades. Mandatory domestic participation for rep players is important I think.

This should all flow into strong rep outcomes but of course DOC and Coaching appointments contribute to that as well.

Mandatory Domestic competition for Rep players is no longer practical unless players have the option to play Rep for an Association while participating in any domestic competition - not just a Domestic competition associated with same Association they play Rep for.

Even then, players aiming to be elite are often better served spending time training with Academies or squads where they usually get much better quality coaching and support than they would with a Domestic team.

And many Domestic competitions seem to be becoming a lot more informal in order to attract a larger number of participants to the sport.

Domestic clubs that label themselves as "Family Friendly" tend to focus a lot more on the social aspects of the sport than the developmental ones which are crucial to becoming an elite player. More and more domestic clubs and domestic competitions are labeling themselves as family friendly to generate more membership income.

So the divide between Domestic and Representative ball is becoming a lot wider.

@karma basketball Why do you say impractical for rep players to play domestic?

Our Association (a large Melbourne one, typically in VC) requires domestic participation and 99% of rep players adhere (a few have exemptions). A-grade is highly competitive and akin to Div 3 rep ball. It's good extra reps for rep players and great comp for advanced players not interested in rep (often footy players). It’s pretty fierce tbh -definitely not "family friendly."

Playing rep for the Association you play domestic in is what rep basketball should be about IMO.

@Vander18 Reread my post. I didn't say it was impractical for Representative players to play Domestic ball.

I suggest it is impractical for Associations to force players to play Domestic ball with a team in their Association as a pre-req for playing Rep ball for the same Association.

As you say, your Association is a "large one". Not every Association has the same luxuries that yours appears to have. And even you say that your Association grants exemptions to some of its own Rep players.

For sure, in a perfect world, a player would play Rep ball with the same Association as the Domestic team they play for. That was the original meaning of REPRESENTATIVE basketball. And it worked well back in the day.

But times change. I know of many players - particularly in Girls Basketball - that play Rep ball who play Domestic for a club in a different Association, or don't play Domestic ball at all. They do so because it seems to be to best way for them to further their development and take advantage of opportunities that are often not presented to them in their "Local" Association for a range of reasons.

The #1 barrier to growth is lack of access to courts.
Establishing a culture of high performance - having a vision, inspirational leaders, growth mindset, accountability and values.

Agreed on access to courts. That's a major reason why NSW at a state level historically underperforms I think - not enough court availability for their associations to develop enough kids.