New Junior Structure 2014

[BOING BOING]

Does anyone have it to post on here?

[Steve#4]

To: FFSA Affiliated Clubs
CC: FFSA Junior Advisory Group Stephen Toth – Junior Football Coordinator Wendy Carter – Operations Manager
From: Michael Carter – Chief Executive Officer
Date: Thursday, 19 September 2013
Re: 2014 Junior Competition Structure
Dear All
As you would be aware, Football Federation SA presented a discussion paper to all clubs and other relevant stakeholders in August that resulted in a large number of written submissions being received by FFSA. These written submissions were provided to the Board along with recommendations based on the information provided.
The Board has resolved the following:
1. Based on the feedback received in the written submissions and also provided at a recent Junior Club Meeting, the Junior Competition Structure will remain unchanged for 2014.
2. To undertake further consultation on the restructure of the Junior Competitions with all clubs and other relevant stakeholders with a view to implement changes in 2015.
Kind regards,
Michael Carter Chief Executive Officer Football Federation SA
MEMO
FOOTBALL FEDERATION SA INC

[GaylyColouredStumps]

Being an Amateur league club with FFSA juniors I can assure you we do...This is why I think it is unfair....Clubs should be judged on their junior structure, not what their seniors do....After all it is about developing the kids isn't it.

Accredit clubs on their coaching and development structure...This system allows clubs to be lazy, just because their seniors play in the PL they can attract the best juniors but rest on their laurels...

here, go through each junior A league

http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page ... nID=419603

tell me which clubs predominantly fill these positions

now tell me how you would "fairly" structure the comp to reward good junior development. Where would your club fit?

I can't help you anymore

[BOING BOING]

What about the clubs that might have got relegated this year to a C division, who will now lose players, but next year if it goes ahead will be expected to compete back in the top league as their seniors are in the top league.....Another well thought out FFSA idea.

[Steve#4]

Being an Amateur league club with FFSA juniors I can assure you we do...This is why I think it is unfair....Clubs should be judged on their junior structure, not what their seniors do....After all it is about developing the kids isn't it.

Accredit clubs on their coaching and development structure...This system allows clubs to be lazy, just because their seniors play in the PL they can attract the best juniors but rest on their laurels...

here, go through each junior A league

http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page ... nID=419603

tell me which clubs predominantly fill these positions

now tell me how you would "fairly" structure the comp to reward good junior development. Where would your club fit?

I can't help you anymore

That is not a fair indication on junior development...That is focusing on results...I thought your club was development focused above results, obviously I was wrong in that....

Just because you top the ladder doesn't mean you are getting the best coaching....Let's see how many socceroos these clubs on top of your ladder produce over the next 10 years....

[GiancarloRed]

A substantive change to a competition structure or operations usually has pros and cons. What needs to be considered is the net benefit of the proposal and whether it can be made to work, ie if the issues can be overcome in a constructive way, without sustained disadvantage. An example of an offset is a points system for every club in the PL (and also SL) that takes into account their junior program, number of own juniors playing in the senior teams, players selected for STIC etc. Each club needs to meet (or exceed) specific points in order to compete again in the PL irrespective of performance in the prior season (ie even if ended up in a relegation spot), and can be given bonus points based on junior development outcomes. In that way all clubs have a vested interest in an integrated whole of club approach with demonstrable results, not simply match points tally.

The major argument against the proposal is the umbilical cord between seniors and juniors within clubs, that may well vary in performance/results, with good junior development being affected by poor senior performance and hence relegation to a lesser competition irrespective of junior outcomes, which then leads to top juniors leaving en-masse, de-motivated coaches etc. This perspective (and worry) is predicated though on the A or PL division being the desired target rather than a focus on the primary goal, player development, which does not require a specific division. Quality coaching and training (and supportive environments) is actually more important for juniors than games but the prevailing mindset about competition will take time to change via education and experience.

[Steve#4]

A substantive change to a competition structure or operations usually has pros and cons. What needs to be considered is the net benefit of the proposal and whether it can be made to work, ie if the issues can be overcome in a constructive way, without sustained disadvantage. An example of an offset is a points system for every club in the PL (and also SL) that takes into account their junior program, number of own juniors playing in the senior teams, players selected for STIC etc. Each club needs to meet (or exceed) specific points in order to compete again in the PL irrespective of performance in the prior season (ie even if ended up in a relegation spot), and can be given bonus points based on junior development outcomes. In that way all clubs have a vested interest in an integrated whole of club approach with demonstrable results, not simply match points tally.

The major argument against the proposal is the umbilical cord between seniors and juniors within clubs, that may well vary in performance/results, with good junior development being affected by poor senior performance and hence relegation to a lesser competition irrespective of junior outcomes, which then leads to top juniors leaving en-masse, de-motivated coaches etc. This perspective (and worry) is predicated though on the A or PL division being the desired target rather than a focus on the primary goal, player development, which does not require a specific division. Quality coaching and training (and supportive environments) is actually more important for juniors than games but the prevailing mindset about competition will take time to change via education and experience.

Bravo....Eloquently put and I agree 100%...Judge the Junior systems on their own merit, Senior results should have no bearing on Junior grading.

[themessenger]

A substantive change to a competition structure or operations usually has pros and cons. What needs to be considered is the net benefit of the proposal and whether it can be made to work, ie if the issues can be overcome in a constructive way, without sustained disadvantage. An example of an offset is a points system for every club in the PL (and also SL) that takes into account their junior program, number of own juniors playing in the senior teams, players selected for STIC etc. Each club needs to meet (or exceed) specific points in order to compete again in the PL irrespective of performance in the prior season (ie even if ended up in a relegation spot), and can be given bonus points based on junior development outcomes. In that way all clubs have a vested interest in an integrated whole of club approach with demonstrable results, not simply match points tally.

The major argument against the proposal is the umbilical cord between seniors and juniors within clubs, that may well vary in performance/results, with good junior development being affected by poor senior performance and hence relegation to a lesser competition irrespective of junior outcomes, which then leads to top juniors leaving en-masse, de-motivated coaches etc. This perspective (and worry) is predicated though on the A or PL division being the desired target rather than a focus on the primary goal, player development, which does not require a specific division. Quality coaching and training (and supportive environments) is actually more important for juniors than games but the prevailing mindset about competition will take time to change via education and experience.

Bravo....Eloquently put and I agree 100%...Judge the Junior systems on their own merit, Senior results should have no bearing on Junior grading.

ditto

[GaylyColouredStumps]

A substantive change to a competition structure or operations usually has pros and cons. What needs to be considered is the net benefit of the proposal and whether it can be made to work, ie if the issues can be overcome in a constructive way, without sustained disadvantage. An example of an offset is a points system for every club in the PL (and also SL) that takes into account their junior program, number of own juniors playing in the senior teams, players selected for STIC etc. Each club needs to meet (or exceed) specific points in order to compete again in the PL irrespective of performance in the prior season (ie even if ended up in a relegation spot), and can be given bonus points based on junior development outcomes. In that way all clubs have a vested interest in an integrated whole of club approach with demonstrable results, not simply match points tally.

The major argument against the proposal is the umbilical cord between seniors and juniors within clubs, that may well vary in performance/results, with good junior development being affected by poor senior performance and hence relegation to a lesser competition irrespective of junior outcomes, which then leads to top juniors leaving en-masse, de-motivated coaches etc. This perspective (and worry) is predicated though on the A or PL division being the desired target rather than a focus on the primary goal, player development, which does not require a specific division. Quality coaching and training (and supportive environments) is actually more important for juniors than games but the prevailing mindset about competition will take time to change via education and experience.

doesn't the new structure address your issues?

ie currently juniors are results driven due to promotion/relegation, trying to attain that A position.

wouldn't taking that away promote junior development instead?

players leaving en masse...where they going to go exactly?

PL league clubs will be to en masse junior movement what Tony Abbott is to boat people....go back to where you came from, we have no room for you.

[Željko Jurin]

A substantive change to a competition structure or operations usually has pros and cons. What needs to be considered is the net benefit of the proposal and whether it can be made to work, ie if the issues can be overcome in a constructive way, without sustained disadvantage. An example of an offset is a points system for every club in the PL (and also SL) that takes into account their junior program, number of own juniors playing in the senior teams, players selected for STIC etc. Each club needs to meet (or exceed) specific points in order to compete again in the PL irrespective of performance in the prior season (ie even if ended up in a relegation spot), and can be given bonus points based on junior development outcomes. In that way all clubs have a vested interest in an integrated whole of club approach with demonstrable results, not simply match points tally.

The major argument against the proposal is the umbilical cord between seniors and juniors within clubs, that may well vary in performance/results, with good junior development being affected by poor senior performance and hence relegation to a lesser competition irrespective of junior outcomes, which then leads to top juniors leaving en-masse, de-motivated coaches etc. This perspective (and worry) is predicated though on the A or PL division being the desired target rather than a focus on the primary goal, player development, which does not require a specific division. Quality coaching and training (and supportive environments) is actually more important for juniors than games but the prevailing mindset about competition will take time to change via education and experience.

Bravo....Eloquently put and I agree 100%...Judge the Junior systems on their own merit, Senior results should have no bearing on Junior grading.

ditto

So by your theory, if Modbury remain in SL this year, but then get promoted to PL in 2014 while we get relegated down to SL, all our juniors will come flocking to you, correct ?

[Željko Jurin]

What about the clubs that might have got relegated this year to a C division, who will now lose players, but next year if it goes ahead will be expected to compete back in the top league as their seniors are in the top league.....Another well thought out FFSA idea.

Out of all the teams and leagues you are talking about 2 x u12 teams, correct ?

[Željko Jurin]

[That is not a fair indication on junior development...That is focusing on results...I thought your club was development focused above results, obviously I was wrong in that....

Just because you top the ladder doesn't mean you are getting the best coaching....Let's see how many socceroos these clubs on top of your ladder produce over the next 10 years....

All of those Raiders coaches that came top in their leagues have been at the club from 3-6 years

With development, comes results, if people want to look at the tables to make judgements
And yes, we do pride ourselves on good coaching ..... parents are not dumb, they will leave at the drop of a hat if clubs dont provide good coaching, which they are entitled to do

And please dont bring the 'Socceroo' argument into it ..... as junior coaches at our club, we want to produce loyal players that will hopefully be Senior players for our club in years to come, anything above that is up to the individual child to work even harder

[The Kings Jesta]

So looks like a results based business is what the masses want. All this talk about "player development" is exactly that... talk.
The Federation finally come up with an idea that will benefit junior teams in so many ways other than just on the pitch (financially 13/15 home games with multiple games generates far better chances of revenue than a random one or 2 games with no continuity between times), coaches could finally get a regular look at players in lower age groups to see if they can move up... etc...

All this worry of players jumping ship is c.rap. That just shows you have no faith in your clubs ability to provide adequate coaching / facilities / club environment+atmosphere that would encourage your players to stay. There are only so many places to fill in each team, if your players aren't at another club now, why would they leave if they were still kept in the same environment they have so far grown up in.
I stayed at the same club team from 8-18 playing in most junior ages before moving to the ressies/seniors. I didn't stay cause we were in the top division, we never won a junior league. We had 8 players in the state system and myself and one other went to SASI. We stayed together as a team as we enjoyed playing together, we had a great coach that stayed with us from 11s to 15s and the club made us feel like there was a future in the seniors for us. There was a financial package put aside for each player payable upon signing of their first seniors contract, and for those wondering the amount, it was $500.00. may not seem like much to most senior players, but when you're signing on as a 16 year old it's a small fortune (and paid for my Datto 120Y )
A little forward thinking, and a whole lot less whinging, is all that is required to be a successful junior set up, regardless of the seniors.

But hey, let's go locate another sheep station to play for so all the results driven parents and coaches can stay happy.

[on-side]

So looks like a results based business is what the masses want. All this talk about "player development" is exactly that... talk.
The Federation finally come up with an idea that will benefit junior teams in so many ways other than just on the pitch (financially 13/15 home games with multiple games generates far better chances of revenue than a random one or 2 games with no continuity between times), coaches could finally get a regular look at players in lower age groups to see if they can move up... etc...

All this worry of players jumping ship is c.rap. That just shows you have no faith in your clubs ability to provide adequate coaching / facilities / club environment+atmosphere that would encourage your players to stay. There are only so many places to fill in each team, if your players aren't at another club now, why would they leave if they were still kept in the same environment they have so far grown up in.
I stayed at the same club team from 8-18 playing in most junior ages before moving to the ressies/seniors. I didn't stay cause we were in the top division, we never won a junior league. We had 8 players in the state system and myself and one other went to SASI. We stayed together as a team as we enjoyed playing together, we had a great coach that stayed with us from 11s to 15s and the club made us feel like there was a future in the seniors for us. There was a financial package put aside for each player payable upon signing of their first seniors contract, and for those wondering the amount, it was $500.00. may not seem like much to most senior players, but when you're signing on as a 16 year old it's a small fortune (and paid for my Datto 120Y )
A little forward thinking, and a whole lot less whinging, is all that is required to be a successful junior set up, regardless of the seniors.

But hey, let's go locate another sheep station to play for so all the results driven parents and coaches can stay happy.

Perhaps it is less about what the structure is and more about how the FFSA went about it. for example no consultation or last minute consultation and timing - just before trials are about to start.

Dont forget these are very similar complaints forum users are making about the AU/Enfield collaboration!

[Con M]

Within the last month the two subjects "New Junior Structure 2014" and "2014 Junior League" have had a combined total of 13,929 views and 543 replies - more than any other subject topic on FN.

IMO it shows people do care and want to express their views. They've had a lot to say because there's a lot of issues and angles to consider.

So, was it a fait accompli, or is consultation continuing and the decision not yet made?

[robinfriday10]

To undertake further consultation on the restructure of the Junior Competitions with all clubs and other relevant stakeholders with a view to implement changes in 2015.

Surely they have done taken the correct approach. If changes are to occur it should be 12 months in advance not at or after most clubs have trialled. Common sense for a change. Nothing wrong with the structure they want to go to but gives clubs time to adjust to it.

and

Zeljko, i thought you'd resigned from this topic?

[GaylyColouredStumps]

Zeljko, i thought you'd resigned from this topic?

[Željko Jurin]

Good point, thanks for reminding me ... I'll go find another topic

[johnydep]

.

[justmyopinion]

So looks like a results based business is what the masses want. All this talk about "player development" is exactly that... talk.
The Federation finally come up with an idea that will benefit junior teams in so many ways other than just on the pitch (financially 13/15 home games with multiple games generates far better chances of revenue than a random one or 2 games with no continuity between times), coaches could finally get a regular look at players in lower age groups to see if they can move up... etc...

All this worry of players jumping ship is c.rap. That just shows you have no faith in your clubs ability to provide adequate coaching / facilities / club environment+atmosphere that would encourage your players to stay. There are only so many places to fill in each team, if your players aren't at another club now, why would they leave if they were still kept in the same environment they have so far grown up in.
I stayed at the same club team from 8-18 playing in most junior ages before moving to the ressies/seniors. I didn't stay cause we were in the top division, we never won a junior league. We had 8 players in the state system and myself and one other went to SASI. We stayed together as a team as we enjoyed playing together, we had a great coach that stayed with us from 11s to 15s and the club made us feel like there was a future in the seniors for us. There was a financial package put aside for each player payable upon signing of their first seniors contract, and for those wondering the amount, it was $500.00. may not seem like much to most senior players, but when you're signing on as a 16 year old it's a small fortune (and paid for my Datto 120Y )
A little forward thinking, and a whole lot less whinging, is all that is required to be a successful junior set up, regardless of the seniors.

But hey, let's go locate another sheep station to play for so all the results driven parents and coaches can stay happy.

So true +1

[themessenger]

].

Bravo....Eloquently put and I agree 100%...Judge the Junior systems on their own merit, Senior results should have no bearing on Junior grading.

ditto[/quote]

So by your theory, if Modbury remain in SL this year, but then get promoted to PL in 2014 while we get relegated down to SL, all our juniors will come flocking to you, correct ?[/quote]



Read my posts again, where have I suggested such a theory?

What I have consistently said is that junior players and teams deserve the right to determine their own future. If they perform well and have a successful season, and it earns the team the right to be promoted to a higher division, then that is the fairest way.

It is illogical for the success of a club's First Team to have any bearing on which level of competition their entire junior cohort play in. The maths just don't add up for me. You think it is fair for 11 first team players to dictate the future of 180 junior players? I don't agree with that.

IMO the FFSA has made the very sensible decision to defer any junior restructure until such time as other options have been considered and fully debated.

[GaylyColouredStumps]

So by your theory, if Modbury remain in SL this year, but then get promoted to PL in 2014 while we get relegated down to SL, all our juniors will come flocking to you, correct ?

Read my posts again, where have I suggested such a theory?

What I have consistently said is that junior players and teams deserve the right to determine their own future. If they perform well and have a successful season, and it earns the team the right to be promoted to a higher division, then that is the fairest way.

It is illogical for the success of a club's First Team to have any bearing on which level of competition their entire junior cohort play in. The maths just don't add up for me. You think it is fair for 11 first team players to dictate the future of 180 junior players? I don't agree with that.

IMO the FFSA has made the very sensible decision to defer any junior restructure until such time as other options have been considered and fully debated.

people from your club have said exactly that, and not just players moving but coaches as well

so what you are really saying is that results and status of teams are the primary focus at your club

[The moyesiah]

So by your theory, if Modbury remain in SL this year, but then get promoted to PL in 2014 while we get relegated down to SL, all our juniors will come flocking to you, correct ?

Read my posts again, where have I suggested such a theory?

What I have consistently said is that junior players and teams deserve the right to determine their own future. If they perform well and have a successful season, and it earns the team the right to be promoted to a higher division, then that is the fairest way.

It is illogical for the success of a club's First Team to have any bearing on which level of competition their entire junior cohort play in. The maths just don't add up for me. You think it is fair for 11 first team players to dictate the future of 180 junior players? I don't agree with that.

IMO the FFSA has made the very sensible decision to defer any junior restructure until such time as other options have been considered and fully debated.

people from your club have said exactly that, and not just players moving but coaches as well

so what you are really saying is that results and status of teams are the primary focus at your club

By the sounds of it, it is the primary focus of more parents, more clubs, possibly more coaches, and we could also say the ffsa, otherwise it would be changing. However it seems the ffsa went with what the majority want. Does this mean the ffsa have more concerns than the future of football in Australia?

I just don't get it, either it is the best way for football or it isn't.

[GaylyColouredStumps]

people from your club have said exactly that, and not just players moving but coaches as well

so what you are really saying is that results and status of teams are the primary focus at your club

By the sounds of it, it is the primary focus of more parents, more clubs, possibly more coaches, and we could also say the ffsa, otherwise it would be changing. However it seems the ffsa went with what the majority want. Does this mean the ffsa have more concerns than the future of football in Australia?

no. I still think that the finer details needed to be thought through...

ie does the junior SL season start aligned with the seniors making it a 30 game season

what happens at clubs that can't support 6 or 7 games on a Sunday etc

the FFSA hadn't addressed these issues and had no concrete answer.

get those finer details sorted and then set the date of implementation.

also, a month out from trials isnt great timing.

implementation for 2015 should be confirmed by June 1 2014 with full structure details. IMO.

lets get it done properly and give everyone confidence going forward.

[redfred]

+1

[themessenger]

So by your theory, if Modbury remain in SL this year, but then get promoted to PL in 2014 while we get relegated down to SL, all our juniors will come flocking to you, correct ?

Read my posts again, where have I suggested such a theory?

What I have consistently said is that junior players and teams deserve the right to determine their own future. If they perform well and have a successful season, and it earns the team the right to be promoted to a higher division, then that is the fairest way.

It is illogical for the success of a club's First Team to have any bearing on which level of competition their entire junior cohort play in. The maths just don't add up for me. You think it is fair for 11 first team players to dictate the future of 180 junior players? I don't agree with that.

IMO the FFSA has made the very sensible decision to defer any junior restructure until such time as other options have been considered and fully debated.

people from your club have said exactly that, and not just players moving but coaches as well

so what you are really saying is that results and status of teams are the primary focus at your club

You have lost me I'm afraid. What have people from my club being saying other than that which ever league a club's Senior team is in, should have no bearing on the league their juniors play in? Our position has never changed.

Results, status and bringing home the silverware are the focus of many junior coaches I have come across.

There are some junior coaches on this forum that claim to be in it to develop players. Yep sure they are, but equally how many of those coaches only want to coach the very best players?

Perhaps a better measure of a really good junior coach is by taking the not so talented players in a club and trying to develop them to reach their full potential.

[Željko Jurin]

I still don't get it, because what your senior team does determines what your Reserves and u18s do, so why can't it also determine junior teams where results and sheep stations shouldn't matter ?

[Black Hawk]

Junior football is about developing the individual, not team.

A "good" player at a State league club can be jumped through grades with assistance from good coaches and be playing first team football at 15. Surely comparable to playing PL U15 in a big club.

[doesmyheadin]

I still don't get it, because what your senior team does determines what your Reserves and u18s do, so why can't it also determine junior teams where results and sheep stations shouldn't matter ?

D'oh

[GiancarloRed]

Let me clarify my position. My suggestion is if we are to support the proposal to align the seniors and juniors, in line with FFA preference, then I think the senior teams need to be evaluated and play either PL or SL also based on junior outcomes, not simply their own season performance. Based on the current PL season Enfield would be relegated. But if their junior outcomes were considered better than say West Adelaide (who won SL) then they could retain their PL status. Clubs need to be evaluated as a whole, and not solely as a result of senior results. A fair example is Raiders. Their good results as I see it in junior development will enable seniors to remain in PL even if they ended up in a relegation place. Same applies to say a Campbelltown. Another example is perhaps a Modbury, South Adelaide or Pirates. Whilst their seniors may be close to securing promotion to PL they would only get it if junior performance is considered good enough, by an objective assessment of the criteria.

In this way we have a balanced approach where both senior and junior performance (not just league standings) confer either a PL or SL place for both seniors and juniors. Yes you will currently get some exceptions where a club has one or two (usually not more) good performing A or PL-level junior teams but seniors are struggling in the SL and hence a relegation for those good junior teams is seen as an insult to development and why some want to separate the two. But we need to see the bigger picture for the sport and not dwell on one or two supposedly disadvantaged teams here and there. As a contrast, Cobras seniors played PL this season but their juniors are mainly struggling to compete in the SL let alone play in the PL. This is also the case with White City, hence my view that White City could well be demoted from the PL given their overall weak junior performance (as I see it).

With respect to my comment about juniors leaving en-masse from a relegated side I don't think this need to happen if the club has a good support system, it is not my fear, more that of some other people, notably parents who just want their child to play in the top league. This is misguided as I mentioned, as parents/players should - by my formula - stick to clubs that have a strong junior program/performance as this will help them remain in the best competition even if seniors end up in a relegation position.