NPL Victoria, the impact on juniors

[Hetro Metro]

This is the impact the NPL is having on a progressive club in Victoria. 2013 fees were $600 now are $2000


On Friday evening at 5.30pm, FFA and FFV announced they would move forward and roll-out the NPLV for season 2014.

What does this mean for us and our club?

Northcote City FC is in the current VPL which gives it a front seat in attaining an NPLV licence for 2014. An NPLV licence will give our juniors the opportunity to test themselves against the best competition in our state – something most players would love to have the opportunity to do.

At the same time, with the new licence there will see strict demands placed on our club, and with all this we will need to make many difficult decisions and sacrifices to forge this new path.

Whilst the announcement has just been made, no new licenses have been issued as yet. However, we believe that our club is a perfect model of what the NPLV represents and are certain to acquire a license.

On that basis, be advised that our player numbers will be reduced significantly in this new structure and there will be no ‘B’ teams allowed - further details on the operational requirements will be released by the FFV & FFA in due course.

In summary, the team structures for our club will be as follows according to the new proposed parameters:

1 team only in boys - U12, U13, U14, U15, U16, U18, U20 age groups
Maximum 20 players per team
Must also field a Men’s First Team
In 2015, all NPL clubs must also field an U17 Boys
The maximum fee for boys 12-18 has been set by the FFV at $2,000 (+GST)
The season length is likely to be February - November
*PLEASE NOTE: We have not set any fee structure yet. Details of that and program will be released shortly.



Small Sided Football (SSF)

SSF U9, U10, U11, can have a maximum of 3 teams in each age group
Maximum 10 players per SSF team
No fee set by FFV. However, it's likely to be around the $990 mark.


Girls Teams – no restrictions given. Northcote still intends to field U12, U13/14, U15/16 and U18 or Seniors. However, we still need to clarify that this is the case with FFV.

*With regards to NPLV for girls, the discussion is that it's likely to begin in 2015-2016 and not a necessity of an NPLV men's license holder.

Trials:

Based on the above information and the restrictions placed on our club for squads, trials will be as follows:

1st Week all invited – open invitation
2nd Week – invitation only, based on short listing in week 1
Notification to come via email by Sunday evening following the 1st week of trials
Announcement of squads will be made after the 2nd week of trials.
In the event that we need to extend the cut-off date to announce certain age-groups, you will be directly notified.


What are your options if you don’t make a team?

With the NPLV model, this is an area that most clubs resisted. However, in the negotiations the clubs had to yield to the FFV stance on no B-teams for NPLV license holders.

Which leaves our club in a difficult position, considering that we have over 10 teams which would be classed as B or development squads.

Currently we're looking at options within the club and we want to seek clarification from FFV as to the impact of establishing a new club within our precinct.

The sister club may be called, Northcote United
Needs an independent board comprising of a President, Administrator, Secretary, Finance rep etc
Expressions of interest can be made ASAP
Will have the support of the current Northcote City FC committee
We cannot guarantee that we will be able to get a new club off the ground or in fact whether we would be allowed to under the new NPLV regime.

The other option of course is that you can seek a new club in your community.

Having grown so fast over the last three years, the Club is grateful to all players and families who have been part of the journey, and we hope that you will continue to support Northcote City.

Yours Sincerely,
Northcote City Junior Administration

[spooky1972]

[quote="Hetro Metro"]This is the impact the NPL is having on a progressive club in Victoria. 2013 fees were $600 now are $2000

On that basis, be advised that our player numbers will be reduced significantly in this new structure and there will be no ‘B’ teams allowed - further details on the operational requirements will be released by the FFV & FFA in due course.

In summary, the team structures for our club will be as follows according to the new proposed parameters:

1 team only in boys - U12, U13, U14, U15, U16, U18, U20 age groups
Maximum 20 players per team
Must also field a Men’s First Team
In 2015, all NPL clubs must also field an U17 Boys
The maximum fee for boys 12-18 has been set by the FFV at $2,000 (+GST)
The season length is likely to be February - November
*PLEASE NOTE: We have not set any fee structure yet. Details of that and program will be released shortly.


Does this mean the U20s with possibly x amount of over age will be the new reserves?
Where does junior football end U18?

[on-side]

I believe U 18 is the last year of Juniors.

U20 is under 20 only - I don think any overage players are allowed (I think this is the way it is structured in NSW as well)

[Cruie]

I worry that the drive to concentrate resources on a smaller and smaller pool of identified talent will (if it isn't already) restrict the opportunity for more kids to play football (and younger adults too).

Every initiative I read about seems to involve clubs being told to take in fewer kids.

Regardless of issues involved - when trying to select the U9s of this year, who will be world class in 2025 - it can't be good for the game. The fewer who play, the fewer who appreciate.

And the OP highlights the issue with creating "split" clubs - Filling the (usually unpaid) roles required to make a club work, is hard enough; never mind (all but) doubling the requirements.

[spooky1972]

I worry that the drive to concentrate resources on a smaller and smaller pool of identified talent will (if it isn't already) restrict the opportunity for more kids to play football (and younger adults too).

Every initiative I read about seems to involve clubs being told to take in fewer kids.

Regardless of issues involved - when trying to select the U9s of this year, who will be world class in 2025 - it can't be good for the game. The fewer who play, the fewer who appreciate.

And the OP highlights the issue with creating "split" clubs - Filling the (usually unpaid) roles required to make a club work, is hard enough; never mind (all but) doubling the requirements.

Maybe it is about time we realise that the FFSA is the elite pathway (meaning it should contain only the elite players) we already have a system for the average to below average players, it's called E&D. No player will miss out, if they want to play football they have options, just like senior players have options if they don't make senior teams, they play SAASL.

[themessenger]

I worry that the drive to concentrate resources on a smaller and smaller pool of identified talent will (if it isn't already) restrict the opportunity for more kids to play football (and younger adults too).

Every initiative I read about seems to involve clubs being told to take in fewer kids.

Regardless of issues involved - when trying to select the U9s of this year, who will be world class in 2025 - it can't be good for the game. The fewer who play, the fewer who appreciate.

And the OP highlights the issue with creating "split" clubs - Filling the (usually unpaid) roles required to make a club work, is hard enough; never mind (all but) doubling the requirements.

Maybe it is about time we realise that the FFSA is the elite pathway (meaning it should contain only the elite players) we already have a system for the average to below average players, it's called E&D. No player will miss out, if they want to play football they have options, just like senior players have options if they don't make senior teams, they play SAASL.

Elite or elitism?

An elite pathway sounds good in principal, providing all aspiring young players are given the same opportunity to participate, develop, and compete. However, the intended structure where only 14 FFSA NPL clubs will have 1 team per age group playing in the JPL will see not only the most talented players getting selected, but only those talented players who have the ability to pay higher club fees.

Affordability of fees will be a major factor in the future if the FFV NPL is any indication, and if fees really do hit $1000-$2000 this will have a flow on effect, as the pool of junior players will get smaller.

The next generation of Cahills, Kewells and Vidukas could be in a South Australia club right now, but unless their parents have the finances to fund an 8-10 year junior pathway through E&D to FFSA state league clubs to FFSA NPL premier league clubs and into FFA state development programs and squads, then they will find it very difficult to reach their full potential.

[spooky1972]

I worry that the drive to concentrate resources on a smaller and smaller pool of identified talent will (if it isn't already) restrict the opportunity for more kids to play football (and younger adults too).

Every initiative I read about seems to involve clubs being told to take in fewer kids.

Regardless of issues involved - when trying to select the U9s of this year, who will be world class in 2025 - it can't be good for the game. The fewer who play, the fewer who appreciate.

And the OP highlights the issue with creating "split" clubs - Filling the (usually unpaid) roles required to make a club work, is hard enough; never mind (all but) doubling the requirements.

Maybe it is about time we realise that the FFSA is the elite pathway (meaning it should contain only the elite players) we already have a system for the average to below average players, it's called E&D. No player will miss out, if they want to play football they have options, just like senior players have options if they don't make senior teams, they play SAASL.

Elite or elitism?

An elite pathway sounds good in principal, providing all aspiring young players are given the same opportunity to participate, develop, and compete. However, the intended structure where only 14 FFSA NPL clubs will have 1 team per age group playing in the JPL will see not only the most talented players getting selected, but only those talented players who have the ability to pay higher club fees.

Affordability of fees will be a major factor in the future if the FFV NPL is any indication, and if fees really do hit $1000-$2000 this will have a flow on effect, as the pool of junior players will get smaller.

The next generation of Cahills, Kewells and Vidukas could be in a South Australia club right now, but unless their parents have the finances to fund an 8-10 year junior pathway through E&D to FFSA state league clubs to FFSA NPL premier league clubs and into FFA state development programs and squads, then they will find it very difficult to reach their full potential.

Well unfortunately the later in most cases, and even more unfortunate with most clubs!!

Spot on!! So many kids are not chosen for that very reason. Let's be honest, the talent with no money, no parent support and no transport vs the player at 75% of the skill, with money, parents to support the child, we all know who gets selected.

[Stitch This]

This is the impact the NPL is having on a progressive club in Victoria. 2013 fees were $600 now are $2000

*PLEASE NOTE: We have not set any fee structure yet. Details of that and program will be released shortly.

Rational debate impossible as usual on this forum.

[The Kings Jesta]

For those arguing the "only kids with money get picked" side, it's been like that long before all these new "structures" were announced. In the mid 90's it was $2000 for my U/15 state team, which, due to money issues for my parents, I almost didn't go on, and I had 2 friends who pulled out at the last 20 stage as they knew they wouldn't be able to go.
Look at the career of "Il Phenomenon" Ronaldo. He couldn't afford the bus fair to get to trials with the bigger Brazilian clubs, played for the local team as a junior until Cruziero came in and paid his way. Messi, and his medical requirements as a 11-13 year old, is another case of the club picking up the slack where required and benefiting from it.
Local clubs should offer more "scholarship" like deals for their talented players, especially the ones who can't afford it. Problem with that though, is we see too often that other parents get wind of this and wonder why their child is not playing for free too.
FFA along with local federations and the A-League need to put in place a fair transfer system from local state league clubs to A-League teams to ensure a reasonable amount of revenue is available to the clubs that can produce gifted young players. This would encourage clubs to become feeder teams, and allow them to look after their juniors with greater incentives and allowances.

[Black Hawk]

Maximum fee set at $2000 ex gst. Add in tracksuit, training gear, playing strips.

[Cruie]

I worry that the drive to concentrate resources on a smaller and smaller pool of identified talent will (if it isn't already) restrict the opportunity for more kids to play football (and younger adults too).

Every initiative I read about seems to involve clubs being told to take in fewer kids.

Regardless of issues involved - when trying to select the U9s of this year, who will be world class in 2025 - it can't be good for the game. The fewer who play, the fewer who appreciate.

And the OP highlights the issue with creating "split" clubs - Filling the (usually unpaid) roles required to make a club work, is hard enough; never mind (all but) doubling the requirements.

Maybe it is about time we realise that the FFSA is the elite pathway (meaning it should contain only the elite players) we already have a system for the average to below average players, it's called E&D. No player will miss out, if they want to play football they have options, just like senior players have options if they don't make senior teams, they play SAASL.

* Is it telling that the adult system you're quoting is not run by the FFSA? And, indeed, the FFSA would - it appears - very much like it to disappear?
* Is it telling that the FFSA appears to have made no effort to devise a fully-fledged - state-wide - competition that would provide the same service, for something like the same price as the SAASL?
* Is it telling that the only similarly-priced FFSA backed competition (Colliegiate League), is restricted (well, semi-restricted) to university and ex-school teams and run - in their spare time - by a handful (of very dedicated) ex-players (with only very minimal involvement from the FFSA)?

If "FFSA Elite" clubs form lower level sub-clubs (splits), at Junior Level, to give those disgarded somewhere to play; is it likely - as is very often accused within the adult setup you refer to - that those lower standard clubs will be milked for fees which are then shared amongst sister clubs?

I would imagine that, if fees are capped as Black Hawk suggests, then there will be fewer routes to increased revenue for those elite clubs. Competition between those elite clubs will make that an issue over the short to medium term.

Would I be right to assume that scholarships (fee-reductions etc) will be provided to qualifying players by the governing body? Where will such money come from? (what will not be paid for, to compensate?)

How will any price difference between FFSA and E&D clubs be justified and then maintained? Will there be an incentive for E&D clubs to close the gap? (If not, why not?)

If split clubs, or just "more clubs" are required, as a result of this system, will more volunteer resources be needed to man the canteen, mark the pitches, coach some football, cut up the oranges and wash the kits? And if so, where will they come from?

Almost the entire raison d'etre of the SAASL, is to provide cheap football. Will that be the same for E&D clubs?

[swannsong]

Almost the entire raison d'etre of the SAASL, is to provide football. Will that be the same for E&D clubs?

Just a slight correction !
If you don't cater for the sport properly for those that might never make it, you will be decreasing the chances that those players might keep the 'dream' alive when they have children...the straightest pathway may not be the most enjoyable and fruitful journey.

[Nice One Cyril]

This is the impact the NPL is having on a progressive club in Victoria. 2013 fees were $600 now are $2000

*PLEASE NOTE: We have not set any fee structure yet. Details of that and program will be released shortly.

Rational debate impossible as usual on this forum.

To be fair, if SSF is going to be around a grand….

SSF U9, U10, U11, can have a maximum of 3 teams in each age group
Maximum 10 players per SSF team
No fee set by FFV. However, it's likely to be around the $990 mark.

…. it's hard to see how the juniors won't be considerably more.

There must be a way for the FFA, and subsidiaries, to allow clubs, within reason, to have as many teams and players as they want at each age so they all train together, limiting to 20 players those that can play in FFA comps, but allowing the rest to play in a subsidiary competition of some sort.