Season 2016 - early days

[andreww1]

Do that and you will have the AFL reintroduce pathways as UTS will go outside of their area and recruit kids will will in turn have a flow on effect to the clubs they would normally have gravitated towards. I keep hearing that the approach towards growing the game which hasnt worked for the past 20 years is in the process of change for the better however am yet to see any evidence of this nor the alleged contact I was supposed to receive.

Really want to grow the game be 100 open and transparent about where the resources are being used and what KPIs are used to measure success.

I can't see kids from Western Sydney, some of whom don't drive, travelling to the eastern suburbs to train and play for UTS every week. It would though create more competition amongst those clubs drawing from the inner city areas to do more to support and engage with the local junior clubs, which would be a good thing.

Agree totally about the need for more resources, especially in western Sydney, to work with junior and senior clubs to grow the game out that way.

[andreww1]

UTS tried hard for 4+ years to get an U/19 side (18s back then) but were denied year after year because the view was there aren't enough local players and they would simply be taking players from existing clubs in the area (UNSW & Sydney Uni).

).

That was also the reason they rejected St. George's request for a 2nd U19 team. Trouble is that there has been no growth in U19s for a few years now, in fact the number of teams has declined.

If it was me, and I am biased on this matter, I'd be allowing it to happen to create more competition between clubs to attract more ex-U17s up to U19s. Because of what St. George has done in this respect in the last few seasons I have already seen other local senior clubs improve their engagement with local junior clubs.

[tara]

That was also the reason they rejected St. George's request for a 2nd U19 team. Trouble is that there has been no growth in U19s for a few years now, in fact the number of teams has declined.

If it was me, and I am biased on this matter, I'd be allowing it to happen to create more competition between clubs to attract more ex-U17s up to U19s. Because of what St. George has done in this respect in the last few seasons I have already seen other local senior clubs improve their engagement with local junior clubs.

Actually Andrew is could be argued that it was due to the manner we interacted with the local junior clubs in our region back in that made St George sit up and take notice and pick up their act. I would argue that it was a combination of our work and a changing of the management at St George around the same time.

I will argue long and hard about allowing a second under 19's team in the present environment. Pennant Hills had no problems dropping PD quality players to div 2 19's when it suited, can you make the guarantee St George wont? As for kids travelling to town to play 19's why dont you ask Craig and Derek their thoughts and see if there is precedence. You may find they also support my first point.

[andreww1]

Season 2016 - early days

Actually Andrew is could be argued that it was due to the manner we interacted with the local junior clubs in our region back in that made St George sit up and take notice and pick up their act. I would argue that it was a combination of our work and a changing of the management at St George around the same time.

I will argue long and hard about allowing a second under 19's team in the present environment. Pennant Hills had no problems dropping PD quality players to div 2 19's when it suited, can you make the guarantee St George wont? As for kids travelling to town to play 19's why dont you ask Craig and Derek their thoughts and see if there is precedence. You may find they also support my first point.

Hi Mark. I thought I might get a response from yourself on this.

The good news for you is that St. George won't be pursuing a 2nd U19 team next season.

As the person who came up with the idea to create the current St.George U19 strategy I can assure you that Moorebank was not a consideration. It was actually more motivated by some strategies Power were doing to attract U19s. But whatever Power or Moorebank do in this respect is all good. If all 3 clubs continue to challenge each other to raise the bar on junior club engagement then in the long run more junior players will transition to senior footy.

The main issue for your U19s as I understand it is mostly due to Bankstown folding. All our clubs have lost out from that.

[tara]

Actually it is a combination of the Bankstown issue, no junior at Liverpool and the SW tigers situation. SW tigers did not field a 17s last year a lean year the previous season in 16's. The club couldnt put the kids thru another similar year of the age group was raised from 16's to 17s. This created a massive gap year only compounded by the Bankstown scenario. The good news is they have 35 17s registered for 2016 so we finally have some light at the end of the tunnel. Our prelim final saw us only have 20 players available of which 2 were under 17's and 6 under 16s. All of those kids performed extremely well for us.

[andreww1]

Season 2016 - early days

Glad to hear there's some light at the end of the tunnel for the club. Although many view other clubs as competitors, and obviously in so many areas we do, I also believe that a strong local competition helps all clubs in the long run. The more people playing the game and enjoying their involvement, will generate more players and more sponsorship opportunities for all of us in to the future.

[Mug Punter]

I find it staggering that despite all the investment of the AFL in recent years that the game at a junior level has remained stagnant for 30 years. In the 1980s and early 1990s all SFA sides had Under 20s teams and naturally all SFL sides has U19s.

You'd hope that the academy system will bear fruit but you just get the impression that it will be Penno, East Sydney, St George and North Shore that will be the big beneficiaries with Sydney Uni also grabbing their fair as kids from these areas go to Sydney Uni. Meanwhile the Western Sydney clubs struggle to field a side. There's a real divide there and unless GWS pull their finger our and start doing their job properly in developing their own backyard there it will get worse.

And the flow on to Senior level will reflect this.

I'm an unabashed fan of promotion and relegation but the game has gone backwards at the senior level in the last two seasons with Balmain and Campbelltown almost going out of business so I'd say keep it at 9 teams.

I'm also a traditionalist who says all SFL teams should have an U19s but it's hard to knock UTS either.

[Coastal Boy]

There's nothing stopping St George entering a div 4 or div 5 team and populating it with surplus u19s players.
Whether St George like it or not, Southern Power are in direct competition with them for access to players and particularly juniors from that area. Whilst Southern Power struggle in u19s it would be ringing a death knell for this under age team for St George to offer a second 19s team.

[Mug Punter]

There's nothing stopping St George entering a div 4 or div 5 team and populating it with surplus u19s players.
Whether St George like it or not, Southern Power are in direct competition with them for access to players and particularly juniors from that area. Whilst Southern Power struggle in u19s it would be ringing a death knell for this under age team for St George to offer a second 19s team.

There's only so many kids to go around, Penno's second U19 team effectively killed off the Mac Uni under age team which was really a Westbrook rebranded side.

You'd think the Shire and St George cover sufficiently large geographical areas to support their own teams independent of whether one has enough numbers to field a second team.

[andreww1]

There's only so many kids to go around, Penno's second U19 team effectively killed off the Mac Uni under age team which was really a Westbrook rebranded side.

You'd think the Shire and St George cover sufficiently large geographical areas to support their own teams independent of whether one has enough numbers to field a second team.

Before this season started we actually provided the AFL with a list of 70 ex-u17s that we wanted to target to cover 2 U19 teams. After we were told no to a second team we backed off following them all up. Subsequently 22 of them came to St.g, 11 to Power, and none to Moorebank. Which means about 40 of them probably are playing another sport. So there were enough to field a team for Power and 2 for St.G.

[Tom Wills]

There's only so many kids to go around, Penno's second U19 team effectively killed off the Mac Uni under age team which was really a Westbrook rebranded side. You'd think the Shire and St George cover sufficiently large geographical areas to support their own teams independent of whether one has enough numbers to field a second team.

Mug Punter .... I have stated before on RWO but Sydney players do not travel.... so for 95% of all players we don't compete with each other. When Mac Uni dropped their team I think less than 5 went to other teams (probably Balmain and Penno) and when Balmain pulled the pin after 5 rounds I think only 1 player moved. This combined with Andreww1's numbers are evidence, that we don't compete for players in Sydney. Players will play for their local / preferred club or not play at all. We all need to understand this, as well as those at Sydney AFL HQ, thinking we fight over players is wasted in energy in growing the game.
This also applies in Senior Grades - UTS and UNSW/ES both had a team of surplus players - but none of them went to play for Moorebank, or Balmain in Div 5 - who were short of players.

[Mug Punter]

Mug Punter .... I have stated before on RWO but Sydney players do not travel.... so for 95% of all players we don't compete with each other. When Mac Uni dropped their team I think less than 5 went to other teams (probably Balmain and Penno) and when Balmain pulled the pin after 5 rounds I think only 1 player moved. This combined with Andreww1's numbers are evidence, that we don't compete for players in Sydney. Players will play for their local / preferred club or not play at all. We all need to understand this, as well as those at Sydney AFL HQ, thinking we fight over players is wasted in energy in growing the game.
This also applies in Senior Grades - UTS and UNSW/ES both had a team of surplus players - but none of them went to play for Moorebank, or Balmain in Div 5 - who were short of players.

Yeah I think you are right there, the evidence when clubs go into recess is similar, when St Ives folded in the early 90s very few players went and played at other clubs. A couple to Manly and a couple to Mac Uni, the rest played other sports

[saviour01]

Im barely a div 1 player. Id rather fill in the 2 or 3 games im needed at st george then go play div 3 or what ever at southern power (which is 15 mins closer to home anyway).

[Pekay]

Im barely a div 1 player. Id rather fill in the 2 or 3 games im needed at st george then go play div 3 or what ever at southern power (which is 15 mins closer to home anyway).

I reckon you'd regret that call when your footy career winds up and you've played around 60 games.

[Offal]

Drop UTS from premier league and make it an 8 team league.