by jo172 » Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:45 am
by Q. » Wed Feb 25, 2015 11:11 am
jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
by Demon Juke » Wed Feb 25, 2015 9:16 pm
Q. wrote:jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
At the end of the day it's the choice of a parent/child. If they want to be at a club with 937 junior teams then so be it.
by turk186 » Wed Feb 25, 2015 9:27 pm
Demon Juke wrote:Q. wrote:jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
At the end of the day it's the choice of a parent/child. If they want to be at a club with 937 junior teams then so be it.
by Jetters » Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:47 pm
Bluedemon wrote:Jetters wrote:jo172 wrote:It's naive to think clubs with multiple juniors teams don't deserve them. In my experience the junior programs at the bigger junior clubs (GG, TTG, Modbury etc.) offer kids a much better environment to learn, develop and enjoy football.
Just little things like having a white and red age group allowing kids to play at an appropriate skill level is great for kids.
That's ultimately what it should be about.
Nah that's a bit BS.
What you said is self fulfilling, big clubs can offer the best environment because they have the most players (resources, success etc).
You have to find a balance between encouraging clubs to provide great junior programs so they prosper and also allow competition.
I think NEJFA have this balance pretty far off
and let the other clubs with less of a junior program to fold their juniors??
all clubs should help out each other so that everyone can prosper
by Jetters » Wed Feb 25, 2015 10:53 pm
jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
by jo172 » Thu Feb 26, 2015 7:58 am
Jetters wrote:jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
Of course it's about the kids.
If a parent 'knows' that one club will certainly have a team(s), but they are unsure whether the club down the road will, they will choose the club that they know will have a team and a spot for their child.
This becomes a self fulfilling cycle. They go to the bigger club not because they run a better program, but because it's a safer option.
More competition will force clubs to run better programs because they know if they don't players/parents will speak with their feet and move. If there's no/few other options big clubs can run mediocre programs to little of their own detriment.
Balance between allowing good programs to prosper and competition which will demand quality.
by Burras » Thu Feb 26, 2015 9:16 am
Jetters wrote:jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
Of course it's about the kids.
If a parent 'knows' that one club will certainly have a team(s), but they are unsure whether the club down the road will, they will choose the club that they know will have a team and a spot for their child.
This becomes a self fulfilling cycle. They go to the bigger club not because they run a better program, but because it's a safer option.
More competition will force clubs to run better programs because they know if they don't players/parents will speak with their feet and move. If there's no/few other options big clubs can run mediocre programs to little of their own detriment.
Balance between allowing good programs to prosper and competition which will demand quality.
by Jetters » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:08 pm
jo172 wrote:Jetters wrote:jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
Of course it's about the kids.
If a parent 'knows' that one club will certainly have a team(s), but they are unsure whether the club down the road will, they will choose the club that they know will have a team and a spot for their child.
This becomes a self fulfilling cycle. They go to the bigger club not because they run a better program, but because it's a safer option.
More competition will force clubs to run better programs because they know if they don't players/parents will speak with their feet and move. If there's no/few other options big clubs can run mediocre programs to little of their own detriment.
Balance between allowing good programs to prosper and competition which will demand quality.
@Jetters do you really believe there's no merit in allowing clubs to enter a side in a Red and White (A and B grade in reality) in the same age group?
Surely there's something to be said for allowing kids to play against their own ability group to allow them to do things like actually get a kick instead of just having the team's best 10 players do everything.
From my personal experience as a White Grade Coach I'm certain that I've had at least 10 boys become reasonable footballers who will continue it into adulthood. I'm certain that if those boys were thrown to the wolves by playing with team mates who were exceptionally more gifted than they are (which my observations of the Red Division is full of them) they would barely have gotten a kick in 3 years and would be lost to the game by now.
I should also add, Jetters, I assume you've not had an experience with a Red/White set up but watch from a far? The only problems we've had with the Red/White set up from a perspective of what matters (parents and kids) are the parents who are convinced that little Johnny's obvious AFL future is being compromised by a stint in Under 13 Whites.
by Jetters » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:11 pm
Burras wrote:Jetters wrote:jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
Of course it's about the kids.
If a parent 'knows' that one club will certainly have a team(s), but they are unsure whether the club down the road will, they will choose the club that they know will have a team and a spot for their child.
This becomes a self fulfilling cycle. They go to the bigger club not because they run a better program, but because it's a safer option.
More competition will force clubs to run better programs because they know if they don't players/parents will speak with their feet and move. If there's no/few other options big clubs can run mediocre programs to little of their own detriment.
Balance between allowing good programs to prosper and competition which will demand quality.
Jetters you are way off the mark here mate..
Why should a club like GG, who have spent the last 20 year building a "family" culture have to give up future senior players of the club becasue other clubs who are more senior driven have no juniors and start to whinge when they find themselves slipping down the grades.
by jo172 » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:16 pm
Jetters wrote:jo172 wrote:Jetters wrote:jo172 wrote:I hold the view it's about the kids rather than the Clubs. It should be about creating the best environment for children to play football rather than creating some kind of socialized environment to ensure some kind of equal arrangement amongst clubs
Of course it's about the kids.
If a parent 'knows' that one club will certainly have a team(s), but they are unsure whether the club down the road will, they will choose the club that they know will have a team and a spot for their child.
This becomes a self fulfilling cycle. They go to the bigger club not because they run a better program, but because it's a safer option.
More competition will force clubs to run better programs because they know if they don't players/parents will speak with their feet and move. If there's no/few other options big clubs can run mediocre programs to little of their own detriment.
Balance between allowing good programs to prosper and competition which will demand quality.
@Jetters do you really believe there's no merit in allowing clubs to enter a side in a Red and White (A and B grade in reality) in the same age group?
Surely there's something to be said for allowing kids to play against their own ability group to allow them to do things like actually get a kick instead of just having the team's best 10 players do everything.
From my personal experience as a White Grade Coach I'm certain that I've had at least 10 boys become reasonable footballers who will continue it into adulthood. I'm certain that if those boys were thrown to the wolves by playing with team mates who were exceptionally more gifted than they are (which my observations of the Red Division is full of them) they would barely have gotten a kick in 3 years and would be lost to the game by now.
I should also add, Jetters, I assume you've not had an experience with a Red/White set up but watch from a far? The only problems we've had with the Red/White set up from a perspective of what matters (parents and kids) are the parents who are convinced that little Johnny's obvious AFL future is being compromised by a stint in Under 13 Whites.
Kids playing against others of a more similar ability in theory is a positive. However, if you had more clubs to compete with, that talent would be spread over those extra clubs and the competition would be more even. You would also have more competitive games and a more interesting competition as there would be more teams involved
by Jetters » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:18 pm
by Jetters » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:20 pm
by jo172 » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:26 pm
by jo172 » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:28 pm
Jetters wrote:Look at the two leagues when they play association games (even though your league is 3 times the size), look at the rate of kids drafted from the MSJFL, look at the number of clubs looking to move into the MSJFL and the rate of growth in the league. I think our approach is working.
by jo172 » Thu Feb 26, 2015 5:31 pm
by woodublieve12 » Thu Feb 26, 2015 8:30 pm
by mighty hounds » Thu Feb 26, 2015 9:24 pm
woodublieve12 wrote:Those club you mention aren't in the southern league
by G_Leonard » Thu Feb 26, 2015 9:29 pm
by Look Good In Leather » Thu Feb 26, 2015 11:05 pm
G_Leonard wrote:Sorry to interrupt this debate, but has anyone heard how Seaton are looking?
Had heard about their mass exodus early in the summer, but I hear they've got a few recruits locked in.
I've heard:
Ali Vessali, a tall forward/ruckman most recently from Aldinga... one of their more handy players;
Sam Harvey, full forward most recently from Victor Harbour (I think), pretty handy, solid replacement for Loechel
Shane Harris, small forward/pinch hit in midfield most recently at Portland
Has anyone heard any others?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |