Season 2016 - early days

[andreww1]

Season 2016 - early days

Should be a new thread but who do you think will be the big improver's over the next, say 10 years.
My "significant" changes will be;

* Maroubra - could be Prems with arguable Sydney's best juniors
* Camden - could be in Prems - off and onfield everything right
* Penrith - Prems, so much going for them
* St George (Div 1) / Southern Power (Prems) swap due no Powers new ground
* Magic Div 4 or folded. Only strong now because of Ex Baulko, Penno Juniors with AFL staff. P.S. I actually think Magic are a great club, but cant see a future for them in 10 years.

Although my guess is that you are just trying to be provocative to generate some debate, which is good, the reality is that it is very hard to predict 10 years ahead. As a strategist in my working life, I know that 10 years out all you can really predict with reasonable confidence are demographic trends and some societal trends.
So predicting Camden to grow is reasonable based on the known population growth in that area, Penrith probably likewise but not to the same extent.
At a club operational level it is next to impossible given that in 10 years time most clubs would have changed Presidents at least twice and likewise head coaches at least twice. So just because a club has good leaders now does not mean it will last 10 years. There have been plenty of examples of good organisations with good leaders and good structures that are now nowhere. Likewise we know how quickly clubs can fall in a hole with a bad coach or a bad president.
And to think that a good ground will mean a club rise to Prems is also very flimsy. There are clubs with good grounds now that don't play Prems.
Plus of course there is the impact of factors outside of AFL clubs control such as changing local govt policy as well as how effectively other sporting clubs that compete with AFL clubs for players operate. Not to mention how the rise or fall of junior clubs will impact the senior clubs. Or how losing or gaining a big sponsor can change fortunes dramatically.
So enjoy the wishful thinking, but that is about all it is.

[Mug Punter]

Although my guess is that you are just trying to be provocative to generate some debate, which is good, the reality is that it is very hard to predict 10 years ahead. As a strategist in my working life, I know that 10 years out all you can really predict with reasonable confidence are demographic trends and some societal trends.
So predicting Camden to grow is reasonable based on the known population growth in that area, Penrith probably likewise but not to the same extent.
At a club operational level it is next to impossible given that in 10 years time most clubs would have changed Presidents at least twice and likewise head coaches at least twice. So just because a club has good leaders now does not mean it will last 10 years. There have been plenty of examples of good organisations with good leaders and good structures that are now nowhere. Likewise we know how quickly clubs can fall in a hole with a bad coach or a bad president.
And to think that a good ground will mean a club rise to Prems is also very flimsy. There are clubs with good grounds now that don't play Prems.
Plus of course there is the impact of factors outside of AFL clubs control such as changing local govt policy as well as how effectively other sporting clubs that compete with AFL clubs for players operate. Not to mention how the rise or fall of junior clubs will impact the senior clubs. Or how losing or gaining a big sponsor can change fortunes dramatically.
So enjoy the wishful thinking, but that is about all it is.

Penrith for mine is the club that could become a SFL club and a strong one if it was handled properly.

The biggest thing they have is a strong junior base - with Penrith Giants (HATE that re-branding), Blue Mountains Roos, Emu Plains Lions, Katoomba Wolves, Rooty Hill Power and St Clair Crows they have a potential six team junior comp feeding into their U19s.

But to make it happen they need some investment by the AFL

(1) Some serious funding to get an AFL program in a couple of the bigger private schools out there to make it a an 8 team junior comp
(2) A GWS Centre of Excellence that runs a talented player prosdgram along side all the club programmes. Lots of scholarships to keep kids in the game through to the end of U19s
(3) Coaching and admin support and mentoring
(4) Infrastructure (i.e. a top class venue purpose built for AFL and the academy - yep , expensive)

I reckon if they put their mind to it then to do it properly, I mean really properly, that you'd be saying that it is an eight year project, with the SFL promotion coinciding with the first batch of academy kids coming out of the U19s. It would take a lot of cash but if you did it properly with the right amount of community engagement then you'd be able to wean them of the funding teat

[andreww1]

Ok, here is a discussion topic: what should the NSW AFL do to help struggling local AFL clubs, and what should be left to the clubs to take responsibility for?

[tara]

Ok, here is a discussion topic: what should the NSW AFL do to help struggling local AFL clubs, and what should be left to the clubs to take responsibility for?

The only thing i would expect is for them to be open and honest in their dealings with all clubs. Unfortunately they work to an agenda set by people with no understanding of the market they compete in.

[Pekay]

Top of the list has to be engaging with local schools on a clubs behalf WITHOUT having an agenda to send said kids to a stronger club. We've had instances of development officers recommending prospective players travel to Kellyville or Baulko instead of Hawkesbury or Quakers for more opportunities.

And of course, one of Magic's better players, who is a teacher at a local school, convincing one of our gun juniors to play for them for more opportunities....only to sit in Div 4 for most of the year.

[andreww1]

Top of the list has to be engaging with local schools on a clubs behalf WITHOUT having an agenda to send said kids to a stronger club. We've had instances of development officers recommending prospective players travel to Kellyville or Baulko instead of Hawkesbury or Quakers for more opportunities.

And of course, one of Magic's better players, who is a teacher at a local school, convincing one of our gun juniors to play for them for more opportunities....only to sit in Div 4 for most of the year.

There is an argument that clubs should meet a minimum standard of operations before they should get anything more than fairly basic support. After all why help clubs that won't help themselves. And why give them a bucket load of support if they will just waste that support, whether that be financial, player support, coaching support, or admin support. What should be the core level of club operations or activities to earn good support from the AFL?

[Coastal Boy]

Remember back in the 90s when clubs received a yearly grant to employ a general manager with the idea that the position becomes self financial in 3 years. Clubs used the money to buy players and then say they were also the gm. Giving money does not work.

I would love to see a bucket of money thrown at schools to enter a team in the local competition. Say offer $2k of computer equipment for every team entered. Each school might get $10k. If 40 schools take up the offer that's $400k per annum. Money well spent I say.

[tara]

There is an argument that clubs should meet a minimum standard of operations before they should get anything more than fairly basic support. After all why help clubs that won't help themselves. And why give them a bucket load of support if they will just waste that support, whether that be financial, player support, coaching support, or admin support. What should be the core level of club operations or activities to earn good support from the AFL?

Sorry but the AFL would argue that they dont need to help clubs that are run well.

What do you think should be the minimum level?

For example should a club have say a minimum level of sponsorship?
Should they interact with juniors where their interaction is able to be gauged as positive?
Should they have adequate medical staff at both training and at games?
Should they have a business/strategic plan in place with clearly achievable goals in place to support their growth long term?

What if you tick all the boxes but your location is deemed not strategically important? Should you realistically expect anything? On the flip side what if you tick none of the boxes yet a deemed in a strategically important location? Do you think that you wont receive assistance?

The only thing I would like is a level playing field where each team receives the same sort of assistance and the next.

Im with Pekay here. We have plenty of examples of new players being directed to clubs such as Blacktown when they live in the Liverpool LGA. The AFL 9's site directs people living in Moorebank, Holsworthy, Warrick Farm and Liverpool to Campbelltown despite our request to correct this and direct them to Kelso which is in fact the closet venue. The AFLs plan for juniors in Western Sydney includes a youth girls team that is to represent Liverpool and Campbelltown, for the team to be called Campbelltown and play and train at Monarch. However we are told that those girls that reside around the Liverpool are will be direct to South West Sydney - really? Are they living in dream land?

[tara]

Remember back in the 90s when clubs received a yearly grant to employ a general manager with the idea that the position becomes self financial in 3 years. Clubs used the money to buy players and then say they were also the gm. Giving money does not work.

I would love to see a bucket of money thrown at schools to enter a team in the local competition. Say offer $2k of computer equipment for every team entered. Each school might get $10k. If 40 schools take up the offer that's $400k per annum. Money well spent I say.

The AFL charges schools a nominal fee to run their programs.

What if clubs were given a grant similar to the one like in the 90's however it was not to employ a GM but a development officer whose responsibility was to work with say 3 high schools in the area running weekly programs from yrs 7-12 (10 hrs per week at each school) directly aimed at kids who want to play AFL. It may be only 10-15 kids per year, but if they were to receive a quality program and receive assistance in find a local junior club to play then maybe with 5 years we would see a flourishing junior competition and one where those that were transitioning to senior (u19) level already have an affiliation with the club through the person running the program.

[Nuttsy]

Sorry but the AFL would argue that they dont need to help clubs that are run well.

What do you think should be the minimum level?

For example should a club have say a minimum level of sponsorship?
Should they interact with juniors where their interaction is able to be gauged as positive?
Should they have adequate medical staff at both training and at games?
Should they have a business/strategic plan in place with clearly achievable goals in place to support their growth long term?

What if you tick all the boxes but your location is deemed not strategically important? Should you realistically expect anything? On the flip side what if you tick none of the boxes yet a deemed in a strategically important location? Do you think that you wont receive assistance?

The only thing I would like is a level playing field where each team receives the same sort of assistance and the next.

Im with Pekay here. We have plenty of examples of new players being directed to clubs such as Blacktown when they live in the Liverpool LGA. The AFL 9's site directs people living in Moorebank, Holsworthy, Warrick Farm and Liverpool to Campbelltown despite our request to correct this and direct them to Kelso which is in fact the closet venue. The AFLs plan for juniors in Western Sydney includes a youth girls team that is to represent Liverpool and Campbelltown, for the team to be called Campbelltown and play and train at Monarch. However we are told that those girls that reside around the Liverpool are will be direct to South West Sydney - really? Are they living in dream land?

Agree with a lot here mate but your info on the Girls youth team is incorrect. It is part of the Junior comp and will be with Campbelltown Swans club training and playing out of Clarke Oval. From what I understand C-Town is trying to get a woman's side out of Monarch.

- - - Updated - - -

The AFL charges schools a nominal fee to run their programs.

What if clubs were given a grant similar to the one like in the 90's however it was not to employ a GM but a development officer whose responsibility was to work with say 3 high schools in the area running weekly programs from yrs 7-12 (10 hrs per week at each school) directly aimed at kids who want to play AFL. It may be only 10-15 kids per year, but if they were to receive a quality program and receive assistance in find a local junior club to play then maybe with 5 years we would see a flourishing junior competition and one where those that were transitioning to senior (u19) level already have an affiliation with the club through the person running the program.

Sounds like a great idea. Wait a minute isn't that what the dev officers are supposed to be doing for their salaries. Actually your right let the clubs handle it and at least then they would be in the high schools not mucking around with 6-10 year olds only

[andreww1]

Agree with a lot here mate but your info on the Girls youth team is incorrect. It is part of the Junior comp and will be with Campbelltown Swans club training and playing out of Clarke Oval. From what I understand C-Town is trying to get a woman's side out of Monarch.

- - - Updated - - -



Sounds like a great idea. Wait a minute isn't that what the dev officers are supposed to be doing for their salaries. Actually your right let the clubs handle it and at least then they would be in the high schools not mucking around with 6-10 year olds only

I agree with this. Best idea I have seen in this blog. Local clubs would have plenty of capable uni students that after receiving and passing some training would have the time to run sessions at schools and then encourage the players to come to their club or a junior club in their area. This makes the clubs much more accountable for their future junior player transition, rather than having an AFL employee just ticking the box on how many schools they have trained at.

[saviour01]

As a primary school teacher I can really only comment on what I see at school. The afternoon auskick sessions are pretty much bull@@@@. The kids that go to them are kids who never play any sport and parents just use it as a childcare or something. Our school is probably 50% asian but these sessions are like 90% asian. Good they are getting in and having a go, but are any playing on the weekends now after 3 years of the program? No.

However, they set up AFL as a summer PSSA sport. 4 years ago 4 schools were playing, now there is 8. I know at our school all the league and soccer boys do it instead of cricket or softball. They set up the fields, umpire and coach at the same time. Runs really well. However, still a hard sell getting those kids who play league or soccer on the weekend to change over. We still haven't got any, despite there being a heap of kids who would kill it (both our sides went undefeated with f/a like 60 to 6 on average).

The PSSA stuff is worth while in primary schools, the other stuff is purely to boost participation numbers for a 6 week program.

[Mug Punter]

The AFL charges schools a nominal fee to run their programs.

What if clubs were given a grant similar to the one like in the 90's however it was not to employ a GM but a development officer whose responsibility was to work with say 3 high schools in the area running weekly programs from yrs 7-12 (10 hrs per week at each school) directly aimed at kids who want to play AFL. It may be only 10-15 kids per year, but if they were to receive a quality program and receive assistance in find a local junior club to play then maybe with 5 years we would see a flourishing junior competition and one where those that were transitioning to senior (u19) level already have an affiliation with the club through the person running the program.

This would be an absolutely brilliant initiative.

From my experience you'd probably need about 10 hours per school once you take in travel time - a couple of skills clinics in conjunction with the PE Program, a formal training session with the school's grade team plus a good three hours for the weekly match.

If you had 30 development officers with 3 schools each then that would be 90 teams (in excess of 2,000 kids) playing weekly that could hopefully then be pushed in the direction of the local team.

[Pekay]

A great idea in principle, but when the Development officers have a vested interest in adding numbers to their own home club, well, swiss cheese.

[andreww1]

A great idea in principle, but when the Development officers have a vested interest in adding numbers to their own home club, well, swiss cheese.

But as long as all clubs have the same opportunity to supply Development officers then that is fair. Why should the clubs that are prepared to work at transitioning school kids to their clubs be held back by those that don't?
It is better than the current system where far too few do transition.