Calling out the weak SANFL development clubs

[marty36]

It's the same as here

So do those private schools not allow them to play in the TAC as the schools here wouldn't they cant play SANFL 18s unless it's exiat or holidays so they may get 4 or 5 games throughout the year




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[marty36]

Exactly the same as SA, Private School footy is 1st priority.

With over 4 x population

Although saying that there were 10 SA boys drafted out of 70 so around a 15 percent success rate which is pretty good for a 7% population

I can understand no Vic club going for Fogarty with the go home factor whilst their were quality Vic kids available although he was rated a clear top 10 choice


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[screech]

But more than happy to take money from AFL clubs whenever they get the opportunity.

Compensation

 

[twiggy4PM]

So the op has called out the clubs by naming none ?? Agree that SANFL could do more in terms of development but there’s not much difference between them all at the moment in terms of producing afl talent

Development costs money that they don't have.
Glenelg has produced a steady stream of recruits but maintaining their zone in the South East is expensive. The clubs that have to maintain Yorke & Eyre peninsulas and the Riverland spend a lot on development. As funds get diverted away from the SANFL and towards the AFL then things get harder. Ifeople are serious about player development they need to find the money for it.

 

[Cleric]

Who has been drafted from north , Hayward and jarman and weren't they from Saints and CBC not their zoned schools oh more private school draftees


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Lol...Burton

 

[Cleric]

But no one can explain that the majority of players are being drafted from private schools who do not allow their students to play when and where they want

So please explain how a tac comp will work with this majority of elite talent

No one seems to have an answer


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Pretty simple. If said players want to be drafted they would have to play the TAC cup type comp to get that exposure.
They have more elite private schools in Vic but manage to run the TAC correctly.

 

[Cleric]

So the op has called out the clubs by naming none ?? Agree that SANFL could do more in terms of development but there’s not much difference between them all at the moment in terms of producing afl talent

Compare Sturt to Centals.

 

[Cleric]

Sturt don't? The Eagles don't?

Some clearly do.

Sturt provided more than half the SA kids drafted this year so far, yet won seniors, reserves and 18s GFs.
They obviously arnt listening to Marty.

 

[Crowked]

Please. Last I heard North Adelaide only had something like 15 high schools in their Zone. They however have done better than Centrals.

I’m not comparing them to anyone. Central zone includes a population that is massively trending away from AFL to soccer. Don’t care if you doubt it or deny it, I see it daily. It’s about 10-1 boys playing soccer over AFL, and the growing African population in the northern suburbs is more like 100-1.

 

[Cleric]

I’m not comparing them to anyone. Central zone includes a population that is massively trending away from AFL to soccer. Don’t care if you doubt it or deny it, I see it daily. It’s about 10-1 boys playing soccer over AFL, and the growing African population in the northern suburbs is more like 100-1.

Soccer has always had more participation numbers at jr level than football. Thats why the local clubs need to be going into the schools are getting auskick programs running.
Its a sales game.

 

[feenix67]

Soccer has always had more participation numbers at jr level than football. Thats why the local clubs need to be going into the schools are getting auskick programs running.
Its a sales game.

There's a shit load of AusKick going on, that's not the issue.

The pathway is disjointed and filled with parties with vested interests. The SANFL clubs oversee the primary school footy comps, but really dont have the resources to do so effectively. So the amateur league junior programs are often seen as the better place for kids to play. The problem is, the SANFL clubs dont have any input or affiliations with the Ammo clubs, so there's a disconnect there. Meanwhile, many of the Ammo league junior clubs are run by parents determined to give their little johnny/mary a leg up, and the coaching is usually done by parents with good intentions but low skill sets (coaching wise), so they're not a great place for junior development.

When the kids leave the primary school system it gets worse. High school (public) comps have really fallen away over the last 10-15 years, as has many high school sports. Similarly, Ammo clubs struggle to fill numbers after about u13 level, because parents support falls away and the kids at that age generally fall into 2 categories - those who have been picked for SANFL dev squads and those who havent. Those who havent tend to lose interest and gravitate to other activities, so the numbers dwindle. It's not unusual for an Ammo junior club to have 4 U9 teams but struggle to fill an U16 squad. Meanwhile, many of the kids end up at Colleges that have varying interest in Aussie Rules. The good footy colleges - Rostrevor, SHC, PAC etc - are extremely focussed on college footy "flags" and demand priority over other footy commitments. College is great for the good players, not so much for those developing slower or needing coaching. The cream is pushed to the top in the College system.

Unfortunately, though, the Colleges couldnt give a rats about pathways. So, while the good kids are working through the year levels in the college system, they're also trying to get into/stay in SANFL development squads. So the good kids are getting smashed through their various footy commitments 6 days a week, because they have to train and play for their college, and they have to keep training at their SANFL club (even if they cant play) to stay on the radar.

The problem with all of this is leakage. There are so many points along the way where kids fall out of the system. This may be because of a lack of coordinated teams at primary school level, a lack of good coaching to develop skills, or the big one imo, kids in limbo at the transition from primary to high school/college. With the degradation of public high school footy, and the inwardly focused college system, together with the lack of quality teenage Ammo comps, a lot of kids just drop off, because they simply havent got somewhere to play, or are forced to play at an Ammo club that is always short, or poorly coached or coordinated.

This is all exacerbated by the draft age imo. When the big league in town was the SANFL (pre AFL), the system kind of worked, because it was contained within the state. There was no draft, and the school systems were 100% more committed and coordinated than they are now, particularly at high school level. There was less leakage, and more opportunity for kids to play in well coordinated environments right through high school. This was important, because kids develop at different rates, so the player at 12 who hadnt grown yet was able to stay in the system and potentially blossom at 15 once his growth spurt kicked in. These days that kid is long gone from the system by 15 and this is my point. The draft age is too low and it pushes kids that dont develop at key ages out of the system, because there arent enough opportunities for that kid to stay in the system and be well coached, and play in well coordinated comps. Generally speaking, a kids card is stamped at 12 (the first age that a State team is selected), because clubs and scouts have a limited timeframe to pick talent (4-5 years after that squad). You wont find many kids in SANFL U18 squads that werent at least in the State squad conversation at 12. Many of those stand out kids at age 12 then go through the system but dont make it because their dominance at age 12 was largely due to physical development. Meanwhile, the later developing kids who would have naturally overtaken them are long gone and off playing basketball or soccer or nothing. I personally think this is why we have so many first round busts, because many of these kids are hyped up during their junior footy years based on early development, but by draft age their physical dominance is diminished and their footy flaws are exposed. eg how many AFL players are running around these days who cant bloody kick? It blows my mind.

Anyway, they key is, our system does not fit the AFL landscape. Its still built on the SANFL model despite the SANFL not being the top rung of the ladder anymore. Couple that with an unrealistically low draft age and these are the reasons our representation at the draft is usually less than you'd expect from a traditional footy state. Dont blame the SANFL clubs - with limited resources and a tough market, they have to focus on winning, not developing kids they're going to lose. The trouble is, who drives the change that is so obviously needed? The SANFL are still the self appointed custodians of SA footy, but where is the incentive for those clubs to form a junior system designed to feed AFL clubs? The AFL have shown scant regard for grassroots footy (quoting Auskick numbers to illustrate junior strength is entirely disingenuous) and are far too Vic-centric. So how does the system change? What's the catalyst? I really dont know, but I fear the catalyst will be a severe drop in junior participation, at which time the horse will have probably already bolted.

The end

 

[Tadpole]

Pretty sure there used to be something like that in place. The grassroots club would get money for a player drafted and more if they reached certain milestones (ie 100 games).

This is from the Club and Parent Handbook in the section for Under 18s on the Sturt website (down the bottom of page 6):-

"When a player is drafted, his local club receives $3,000 and the league that his club is affiliated receives $1,500."

http://sturtfc.com.au/attachments/article/504/Club and Parent Handbook.pdf

Don't know about anything for playing a certain number of games, though.

 

[feenix67]

This is from the Club and Parent Handbook in the section for Under 18s on the Sturt website (down the bottom of page 6):-

"When a player is drafted, his local club receives $3,000 and the league that his club is affiliated receives $1,500."

http://sturtfc.com.au/attachments/article/504/Club and Parent Handbook.pdf

Don't know about anything for playing a certain number of games, though.

I dont think the 50/100 game bonus exists anymore

 

[marty36]

There's a shit load of AusKick going on, that's not the issue.

The pathway is disjointed and filled with parties with vested interests. The SANFL clubs oversee the primary school footy comps, but really dont have the resources to do so effectively. So the amateur league junior programs are often seen as the better place for kids to play. The problem is, the SANFL clubs dont have any input or affiliations with the Ammo clubs, so there's a disconnect there. Meanwhile, many of the Ammo league junior clubs are run by parents determined to give their little johnny/mary a leg up, and the coaching is usually done by parents with good intentions but low skill sets (coaching wise), so they're not a great place for junior development.

When the kids leave the primary school system it gets worse. High school (public) comps have really fallen away over the last 10-15 years, as has many high school sports. Similarly, Ammo clubs struggle to fill numbers after about u13 level, because parents support falls away and the kids at that age generally fall into 2 categories - those who have been picked for SANFL dev squads and those who havent. Those who havent tend to lose interest and gravitate to other activities, so the numbers dwindle. It's not unusual for an Ammo junior club to have 4 U9 teams but struggle to fill an U16 squad. Meanwhile, many of the kids end up at Colleges that have varying interest in Aussie Rules. The good footy colleges - Rostrevor, SHC, PAC etc - are extremely focussed on college footy "flags" and demand priority over other footy commitments. College is great for the good players, not so much for those developing slower or needing coaching. The cream is pushed to the top in the College system.

Unfortunately, though, the Colleges couldnt give a rats about pathways. So, while the good kids are working through the year levels in the college system, they're also trying to get into/stay in SANFL development squads. So the good kids are getting smashed through their various footy commitments 6 days a week, because they have to train and play for their college, and they have to keep training at their SANFL club (even if they cant play) to stay on the radar.

The problem with all of this is leakage. There are so many points along the way where kids fall out of the system. This may be because of a lack of coordinated teams at primary school level, a lack of good coaching to develop skills, or the big one imo, kids in limbo at the transition from primary to high school/college. With the degradation of public high school footy, and the inwardly focused college system, together with the lack of quality teenage Ammo comps, a lot of kids just drop off, because they simply havent got somewhere to play, or are forced to play at an Ammo club that is always short, or poorly coached or coordinated.

This is all exacerbated by the draft age imo. When the big league in town was the SANFL (pre AFL), the system kind of worked, because it was contained within the state. There was no draft, and the school systems were 100% more committed and coordinated than they are now, particularly at high school level. There was less leakage, and more opportunity for kids to play in well coordinated environments right through high school. This was important, because kids develop at different rates, so the player at 12 who hadnt grown yet was able to stay in the system and potentially blossom at 15 once his growth spurt kicked in. These days that kid is long gone from the system by 15 and this is my point. The draft age is too low and it pushes kids that dont develop at key ages out of the system, because there arent enough opportunities for that kid to stay in the system and be well coached, and play in well coordinated comps. Generally speaking, a kids card is stamped at 12 (the first age that a State team is selected), because clubs and scouts have a limited timeframe to pick talent (4-5 years after that squad). You wont find many kids in SANFL U18 squads that werent at least in the State squad conversation at 12. Many of those stand out kids at age 12 then go through the system but dont make it because their dominance at age 12 was largely due to physical development. Meanwhile, the later developing kids who would have naturally overtaken them are long gone and off playing basketball or soccer or nothing. I personally think this is why we have so many first round busts, because many of these kids are hyped up during their junior footy years based on early development, but by draft age their physical dominance is diminished and their footy flaws are exposed. eg how many AFL players are running around these days who cant bloody kick? It blows my mind.

Anyway, they key is, our system does not fit the AFL landscape. Its still built on the SANFL model despite the SANFL not being the top rung of the ladder anymore. Couple that with an unrealistically low draft age and these are the reasons our representation at the draft is usually less than you'd expect from a traditional footy state. Dont blame the SANFL clubs - with limited resources and a tough market, they have to focus on winning, not developing kids they're going to lose. The trouble is, who drives the change that is so obviously needed? The SANFL are still the self appointed custodians of SA footy, but where is the incentive for those clubs to form a junior system designed to feed AFL clubs? The AFL have shown scant regard for grassroots footy (quoting Auskick numbers to illustrate junior strength is entirely disingenuous) and are far too Vic-centric. So how does the system change? What's the catalyst? I really dont know, but I fear the catalyst will be a severe drop in junior participation, at which time the horse will have probably already bolted.

The end

You've made some exceptionally good points there

Especially about the college system and their control, all the kids wanting to play SANFL have to work double hard as they cannot neglect their college commitments it's simply not allowed and the parents and child will be told so. But that's what they sign up for. The college system isn't a bad one but it's only there for the colleges no one else although it does show to produce more talent, is that because they force the players to work harder training twice as much if they want to play elsewhere It's almost a bragging right for the colleges against the other colleges you would think the principals are 11 years of age. You will find some college kids wanting to play college, sanfl and club trying to fit it all in

But how different is it from when I was growing up I played school, club both junior and senior at 15, the SANFL had special squads back then. But we loved it and no social media

When you talk of the loss of players at certain age, that is a problem for every sport in the land. Has social media and technology played a part

Let's be honest training and commitment isn't the most enjoyable thing for most, personally I enjoy training but I know I am a nutter and not normal and yes I'm waiting for the agreeance


And I agree SaNFL clubs are battling financially it cost just to keep the facilities in order and pay the rent, they would be severely screwed without their volunteers

The AFL don't have a bottomless pit of money and lean on the SANFLs volunteers as no one will volunteer for them. Not because people wouldn't want to but people expect the AFL should pay, no different to the players wanting more and more because they expect it

Unfortunately SA s population is minimal and they will never put a team in the TAC parents seeing their kids put under more pressure to fly interstate weekly in the most important academic year of their lives, it would almost be morally wrong. As not all will get drafted and 50% of those that do will be cut in the near future anyway their futures are on the line in this particular year we are talking

The only real solutions are an entire comp run by the AFL at a substainial cost which still doesn't get the full attention of the majority of kids at college that are about to be drafted

Or

The afl throw a few million at the SANFL to employ coaches and assistant personnel Soley for that purpose and maybe better equipment which again wont get the full attention of college kids to develop kids at sanfl level

After all they pour millions into the northern states a ridiculous international series a women's comp where they kick like 11 year olds even throwing money into China who seriously couldn't give a toss about our game





On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[*PAF]

I'm confused why you think the SANFL should develop talent so they can go to a different competition and leave theirs

Seems a little Irish


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Because that is the pathway to a professional career for young kids in SA.

One that the clubs receive funds to develop.

 

[Huntercrow]

Not that at all but the SANFL is pretty much responsible for football in this state whether it be the kid playing at streaky bay , port Pirie , mount gambier, Murray bridge , Hallet cove , Salisbury , Hahndorf or Nuriootpa thousands of juniors

With about 10 to 15 kids might get drafted and only half of these succeed you want to throw thousands at 7 or 8 individuals against thousands of players who enjoy the sport and actually go onto to follow it because the enjoy it so much

You need to look at the big picture and think about where the money could be best spent

It's not about the flag ship at all for the state government and the SANFL it's about the sport

Ever considered why the state government allowed the SANFL to be part of the half a billion they spent on their asset being the AO and that doesn't consider the value of AO itself


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

The SANFL seem to plod along thinking everything is hunky dory and living in a bubble where Aussie rules dominates in the suburbs and at the schoolyard.

Then one day the situation changes. The schools are under pressure to fully utilise their sporting facilities or lose them. They have a decision to make. Do we rip out the goal posts on our vast footy ovals and replace them with soccer nets. Statistics are pointing to the “World game” being the preference of parents over the traditional local product that is harder on the bodies and provides far less of a career path. It would make more sense to install much smaller pitches where the huge AR ovals are currently taking up space to a dwindling number of participants.

Meanwhile at the parents house little Jonny (or Joannie) is being asked to make a choice.

“As a parent Jonny I would much rather as few trips to the casualty ward as possible. Development wise Soccer is the pathway to a very lucrative career. Playing and coaching wise. The sport is played all around the world. If you are good enough the sport can take you anywhere in the world if you so desire”

“As for Aussie Rules it is one of the greatest games invented. Unfortunately in South Australia development pathways are limited. The chances of becoming an elite athlete in this sport is limited. We could enroll you at a private school or just move to Victoria but this would be prohibitively expensive”.

“So which way Jonny? Tim Cahill or Mitch Grigg? One is known world wide and is about to play in another World Cup. The other reached the pinnacle of AR in this state after a sputtering AFL career”

 

[Scorpus]

There's a shit load of AusKick going on, that's not the issue.

The pathway is disjointed and filled with parties with vested interests. The SANFL clubs oversee the primary school footy comps, but really dont have the resources to do so effectively. So the amateur league junior programs are often seen as the better place for kids to play. The problem is, the SANFL clubs dont have any input or affiliations with the Ammo clubs, so there's a disconnect there. Meanwhile, many of the Ammo league junior clubs are run by parents determined to give their little johnny/mary a leg up, and the coaching is usually done by parents with good intentions but low skill sets (coaching wise), so they're not a great place for junior development.

When the kids leave the primary school system it gets worse. High school (public) comps have really fallen away over the last 10-15 years, as has many high school sports. Similarly, Ammo clubs struggle to fill numbers after about u13 level, because parents support falls away and the kids at that age generally fall into 2 categories - those who have been picked for SANFL dev squads and those who havent. Those who havent tend to lose interest and gravitate to other activities, so the numbers dwindle. It's not unusual for an Ammo junior club to have 4 U9 teams but struggle to fill an U16 squad. Meanwhile, many of the kids end up at Colleges that have varying interest in Aussie Rules. The good footy colleges - Rostrevor, SHC, PAC etc - are extremely focussed on college footy "flags" and demand priority over other footy commitments. College is great for the good players, not so much for those developing slower or needing coaching. The cream is pushed to the top in the College system.

Unfortunately, though, the Colleges couldnt give a rats about pathways. So, while the good kids are working through the year levels in the college system, they're also trying to get into/stay in SANFL development squads. So the good kids are getting smashed through their various footy commitments 6 days a week, because they have to train and play for their college, and they have to keep training at their SANFL club (even if they cant play) to stay on the radar.

The problem with all of this is leakage. There are so many points along the way where kids fall out of the system. This may be because of a lack of coordinated teams at primary school level, a lack of good coaching to develop skills, or the big one imo, kids in limbo at the transition from primary to high school/college. With the degradation of public high school footy, and the inwardly focused college system, together with the lack of quality teenage Ammo comps, a lot of kids just drop off, because they simply havent got somewhere to play, or are forced to play at an Ammo club that is always short, or poorly coached or coordinated.

This is all exacerbated by the draft age imo. When the big league in town was the SANFL (pre AFL), the system kind of worked, because it was contained within the state. There was no draft, and the school systems were 100% more committed and coordinated than they are now, particularly at high school level. There was less leakage, and more opportunity for kids to play in well coordinated environments right through high school. This was important, because kids develop at different rates, so the player at 12 who hadnt grown yet was able to stay in the system and potentially blossom at 15 once his growth spurt kicked in. These days that kid is long gone from the system by 15 and this is my point. The draft age is too low and it pushes kids that dont develop at key ages out of the system, because there arent enough opportunities for that kid to stay in the system and be well coached, and play in well coordinated comps. Generally speaking, a kids card is stamped at 12 (the first age that a State team is selected), because clubs and scouts have a limited timeframe to pick talent (4-5 years after that squad). You wont find many kids in SANFL U18 squads that werent at least in the State squad conversation at 12. Many of those stand out kids at age 12 then go through the system but dont make it because their dominance at age 12 was largely due to physical development. Meanwhile, the later developing kids who would have naturally overtaken them are long gone and off playing basketball or soccer or nothing. I personally think this is why we have so many first round busts, because many of these kids are hyped up during their junior footy years based on early development, but by draft age their physical dominance is diminished and their footy flaws are exposed. eg how many AFL players are running around these days who cant bloody kick? It blows my mind.

Anyway, they key is, our system does not fit the AFL landscape. Its still built on the SANFL model despite the SANFL not being the top rung of the ladder anymore. Couple that with an unrealistically low draft age and these are the reasons our representation at the draft is usually less than you'd expect from a traditional footy state. Dont blame the SANFL clubs - with limited resources and a tough market, they have to focus on winning, not developing kids they're going to lose. The trouble is, who drives the change that is so obviously needed? The SANFL are still the self appointed custodians of SA footy, but where is the incentive for those clubs to form a junior system designed to feed AFL clubs? The AFL have shown scant regard for grassroots footy (quoting Auskick numbers to illustrate junior strength is entirely disingenuous) and are far too Vic-centric. So how does the system change? What's the catalyst? I really dont know, but I fear the catalyst will be a severe drop in junior participation, at which time the horse will have probably already bolted.

The end

The draft age won't change because the threat of other sports sucking up talent at 18 before they are eligible for AFL

 

[marty36]

The SANFL seem to plod along thinking everything is hunky dory and living in a bubble where Aussie rules dominates in the suburbs and at the schoolyard.

Then one day the situation changes. The schools are under pressure to fully utilise their sporting facilities or lose them. They have a decision to make. Do we rip out the goal posts on our vast footy ovals and replace them with soccer nets. Statistics are pointing to the “World game” being the preference of parents over the traditional local product that is harder on the bodies and provides far less of a career path. It would make more sense to install much smaller pitches where the huge AR ovals are currently taking up space to a dwindling number of participants.

Meanwhile at the parents house little Jonny (or Joannie) is being asked to make a choice.

“As a parent Jonny I would much rather as few trips to the casualty ward as possible. Development wise Soccer is the pathway to a very lucrative career. Playing and coaching wise. The sport is played all around the world. If you are good enough the sport can take you anywhere in the world if you so desire”

“As for Aussie Rules it is one of the greatest games invented. Unfortunately in South Australia development pathways are limited. The chances of becoming an elite athlete in this sport is limited. We could enroll you at a private school or just move to Victoria but this would be prohibitively expensive”.

“So which way Jonny? Tim Cahill or Mitch Grigg? One is known world wide and is about to play in another World Cup. The other reached the pinnacle of AR in this state after a sputtering AFL career”

Yes you are caught up in the elite talent aren't you, how many Tim cahills are there or if you refer to that, Kyle chalmers or David Warners or Leyden Hewitts such a extremely small percentage of our population will make a living out of professional sport it's ridiculous. Seriously unless you are supremely talented I would as a parent let my child play sport for enjoyment and concentrate on schooling isn't that what sport is all about for fitness health and enjoyment

The sports controling body in this state is here foremost for the masses can't you work that are you seriously that ignorant

The masses are clearly what make the sport not the elite, as they generally support the sport if you don't have the lower leagues it's like a pyramid the whole thing collapses

It's a balancing act but far more funds need to be spent on grass roots and participation or it will be even worse


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[feenix67]

The draft age won't change because the threat of other sports sucking up talent at 18 before they are eligible for AFL

It depends, there are ways it could work. If you lifted the draft age to 20, you'd have to come up with a system that paid players between the ages of 18 and 20. The current SANFL clubs obviously pay players, but that isn't really the answer, because playing SANFL usually means your AFL dreams are over.

If a dedicated under 18 comp was established (in place of the current state based u18 comps), you could probably then also establish an u20 comp that paid players the equivalent of a rookie salary. Of course the State leagues would hate it for a variety of reasons, but this would mirror (to a degree) the US college system.

 

[marty36]

It depends, there are ways it could work. If you lifted the draft age to 20, you'd have to come up with a system that paid players between the ages of 18 and 20. The current SANFL clubs obviously pay players, but that isn't really the answer, because playing SANFL usually means your AFL dreams are over.

If a dedicated under 18 comp was established (in place of the current state based u18 comps), you could probably then also establish an u20 comp that paid players the equivalent of a rookie salary. Of course the State leagues would hate it for a variety of reasons, but this would mirror (to a degree) the US college system.

There's an interesting idea somewhat of an apprenticeship at uni where you study and play sport identical to the US system you need to keep your grades up and you get to play sport which should then set the kids up if they fail at the sport or get injured


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

The draft age won't change because the threat of other sports sucking up talent at 18 before they are eligible for AFL

Yep and it's not an issue (if it is one) localised to SA

 

[Ramify]

There's a shit load of AusKick going on, that's not the issue.

The pathway is disjointed and filled with parties with vested interests. The SANFL clubs oversee the primary school footy comps, but really dont have the resources to do so effectively. So the amateur league junior programs are often seen as the better place for kids to play. The problem is, the SANFL clubs dont have any input or affiliations with the Ammo clubs, so there's a disconnect there. Meanwhile, many of the Ammo league junior clubs are run by parents determined to give their little johnny/mary a leg up, and the coaching is usually done by parents with good intentions but low skill sets (coaching wise), so they're not a great place for junior development.

When the kids leave the primary school system it gets worse. High school (public) comps have really fallen away over the last 10-15 years, as has many high school sports. Similarly, Ammo clubs struggle to fill numbers after about u13 level, because parents support falls away and the kids at that age generally fall into 2 categories - those who have been picked for SANFL dev squads and those who havent. Those who havent tend to lose interest and gravitate to other activities, so the numbers dwindle. It's not unusual for an Ammo junior club to have 4 U9 teams but struggle to fill an U16 squad. Meanwhile, many of the kids end up at Colleges that have varying interest in Aussie Rules. The good footy colleges - Rostrevor, SHC, PAC etc - are extremely focussed on college footy "flags" and demand priority over other footy commitments. College is great for the good players, not so much for those developing slower or needing coaching. The cream is pushed to the top in the College system.

Unfortunately, though, the Colleges couldnt give a rats about pathways. So, while the good kids are working through the year levels in the college system, they're also trying to get into/stay in SANFL development squads. So the good kids are getting smashed through their various footy commitments 6 days a week, because they have to train and play for their college, and they have to keep training at their SANFL club (even if they cant play) to stay on the radar.

The problem with all of this is leakage. There are so many points along the way where kids fall out of the system. This may be because of a lack of coordinated teams at primary school level, a lack of good coaching to develop skills, or the big one imo, kids in limbo at the transition from primary to high school/college. With the degradation of public high school footy, and the inwardly focused college system, together with the lack of quality teenage Ammo comps, a lot of kids just drop off, because they simply havent got somewhere to play, or are forced to play at an Ammo club that is always short, or poorly coached or coordinated.

This is all exacerbated by the draft age imo. When the big league in town was the SANFL (pre AFL), the system kind of worked, because it was contained within the state. There was no draft, and the school systems were 100% more committed and coordinated than they are now, particularly at high school level. There was less leakage, and more opportunity for kids to play in well coordinated environments right through high school. This was important, because kids develop at different rates, so the player at 12 who hadnt grown yet was able to stay in the system and potentially blossom at 15 once his growth spurt kicked in. These days that kid is long gone from the system by 15 and this is my point. The draft age is too low and it pushes kids that dont develop at key ages out of the system, because there arent enough opportunities for that kid to stay in the system and be well coached, and play in well coordinated comps. Generally speaking, a kids card is stamped at 12 (the first age that a State team is selected), because clubs and scouts have a limited timeframe to pick talent (4-5 years after that squad). You wont find many kids in SANFL U18 squads that werent at least in the State squad conversation at 12. Many of those stand out kids at age 12 then go through the system but dont make it because their dominance at age 12 was largely due to physical development. Meanwhile, the later developing kids who would have naturally overtaken them are long gone and off playing basketball or soccer or nothing. I personally think this is why we have so many first round busts, because many of these kids are hyped up during their junior footy years based on early development, but by draft age their physical dominance is diminished and their footy flaws are exposed. eg how many AFL players are running around these days who cant bloody kick? It blows my mind.

Anyway, they key is, our system does not fit the AFL landscape. Its still built on the SANFL model despite the SANFL not being the top rung of the ladder anymore. Couple that with an unrealistically low draft age and these are the reasons our representation at the draft is usually less than you'd expect from a traditional footy state. Dont blame the SANFL clubs - with limited resources and a tough market, they have to focus on winning, not developing kids they're going to lose. The trouble is, who drives the change that is so obviously needed? The SANFL are still the self appointed custodians of SA footy, but where is the incentive for those clubs to form a junior system designed to feed AFL clubs? The AFL have shown scant regard for grassroots footy (quoting Auskick numbers to illustrate junior strength is entirely disingenuous) and are far too Vic-centric. So how does the system change? What's the catalyst? I really dont know, but I fear the catalyst will be a severe drop in junior participation, at which time the horse will have probably already bolted.

The end

Excellent post mate!

So many variables involved and I think you have nailed a lot of them.

 

[ad victoriam]

I’m not comparing them to anyone. Central zone includes a population that is massively trending away from AFL to soccer. Don’t care if you doubt it or deny it, I see it daily. It’s about 10-1 boys playing soccer over AFL, and the growing African population in the northern suburbs is more like 100-1.

That only one issue, the biggest problem with Centrals zone their country zone, the Barossa, the juniors are on a good wicket if they stay in the Barossa.
Any Decent footballer ends up with a scholarship to the bigger schools, In the last 5 years have seen 5 kids leave the area for better education, and a dozen staying in the Barossa zone for money thru good employment. But I have also seen a dozen kids on the Crows Acadamy list that will be potential AFL players from 2019 onwards. A couple will be on scholarships next year. but still tied to the Crows.

Prediction - Centrals area may not turn out too many AFL players in the future but they will turn out a few Crows players, One of our future rucks is out that way.

 

[feenix67]

Yep and it's not an issue (if it is one) localised to SA

It's an issue insofar as our system isn't tailored to cater for it. That's an issue specific to SA and WA. The broader issue of draft age is probably beyond the scope of this thread.

 

[ad victoriam]

Bicks and any other Vic base supporter can you help me here,
Is the TAC comp class as a top-tier competition, therefore the Colleges have to release their kids to play.
And was there a change in game time between Colledge and TAC. with some kids playing both TAC and Colledge while others play TAC and VFL.

If so then SA needs to follow the same ruling and run a 6 team TAC like competition.
6 teams but having north, South East and west, along with 2 country area, North West and South East. 10 round plus finals.