Benchmarking Document

[Strawb]

did anyone ever see the running sheet

[CK]

Tomorrow's Sportsbeat column (also available in the Independent Weekly) is an extensive analysis of the document, looking at some interesting trends apparent.

[bulldogproud2]

did anyone ever see the running sheet

No, I tried to but it ran too fast for me.

[smac]

Participation is very stagnant over the last five years, even in Auskick. Despite their assertions to the contrary, are SANFL doing all of the right things in junior development?

[Sojourner]

Participation is very stagnant over the last five years, even in Auskick. Despite their assertions to the contrary, are SANFL doing all of the right things in junior development?

This is a worrying stat IMO and clearly an area that needs to be focused on. One might wonder how its going in growing areas like Mt Barker where there isnt local SANFL football nearby as in the inner suburbs. I think that suburban areas that are disconnected by distance from the allocated SANFL club are always going to have this problem, especially when its in the outer areas of their zone that the growth is occuring.

On the upside, its interesting to look at the figures for West Adelaide and to consider how they might look on the following years sheet with the lights up and running at Richmond. Clearly its obvious that their investment into their home ground is going to boost them quite significantly on those figures which can only raise the bar in the SANFL which is a good thing if we are serious about actually moving forward.

[SANFLnut]

Concerning points as a Westies supporter:

Played in either 8 or 9 of the last 10 finals series of U18/U19 comps
Only 5 players drafted from West over last 5 years
% of 2009 league players from within SA is then lowest in the comp at 53% from memory

If our 17 & 18 year olds have consistently been the best in the comp for a decade and they are only getting drafted at a rate of one per year for 5 years, why are we recruiting so many mediocre league players?
We should be chock full of 18-28 year olds that are home grown and can play the game.

[on the rails]

Success at junior level has not always translated to many players going onto successful SANFL careers. North did a study a few years back and less than 5% of those kids playing 17's and 19's in a given year went onto play any or the oddd league game for club.

[sjt]

Success at junior level has not always translated to many players going onto successful SANFL careers. North did a study a few years back and less than 5% of those kids playing 17's and 19's in a given year went onto play any or the oddd league game for club.

True. Centrals have over the decade had 57 Premiership players. Basically this would translate to having to cover player turnover of about 3 to 4 players a year. This is probably pretty important, if a team/club can avoid large turnover.

[nickname]

Concerning points as a Westies supporter:

Played in either 8 or 9 of the last 10 finals series of U18/U19 comps
Only 5 players drafted from West over last 5 years
% of 2009 league players from within SA is then lowest in the comp at 53% from memory

If our 17 & 18 year olds have consistently been the best in the comp for a decade and they are only getting drafted at a rate of one per year for 5 years, why are we recruiting so many mediocre league players?
We should be chock full of 18-28 year olds that are home grown and can play the game.

Not only is there OTR's point about the traditionally small percentage of juniors who go on to play League footy, but in West's case, prior to the last boundary re-distribution, West had had the smallest number of young males in its zones for the last 15 years. Is it any wonder we've had to recruit so heavily. If there was a direct correlation between junior success and senior success, you would have expected Centrals to have won everything at junior level over the last ten years.

[am Bays]

Not only is there OTR's point about the traditionally small percentage of juniors who go on to play League footy, but in West's case, prior to the last boundary re-distribution, West had had the smallest number of young males in its zones for the last 15 years. Is it any wonder we've had to recruit so heavily. If there was a direct correlation between junior success and senior success, you would have expected Centrals to have won everything at junior level over the last ten years.

Lowest in absolute but was that with a reasonable "coefficient of variation". I mean it is impossible for all clubs to have the same amount of males at 15 years of age based on the previous census but as long as the varience is within say 3% of the mean that shouldn't make a 'lick of difference.

[nickname]

Not only is there OTR's point about the traditionally small percentage of juniors who go on to play League footy, but in West's case, prior to the last boundary re-distribution, West had had the smallest number of young males in its zones for the last 15 years. Is it any wonder we've had to recruit so heavily. If there was a direct correlation between junior success and senior success, you would have expected Centrals to have won everything at junior level over the last ten years.

Lowest in absolute but was that with a reasonable "coefficient of variation". I mean it is impossible for all clubs to have the same amount of males at 15 years of age based on the previous census but as long as the varience is within say 3% of the mean that shouldn't make a 'lick of difference.

The variance was more than 3%. And the point isn't that we should all have exactly the same numbers, but rather that it's grossly unfair to have one club having the smallest numbers for three censuses in a row. To even it out we should be put at the top of that table for the next fifteen years.

[am Bays]

The variance was more than 3%. And the point isn't that we should all have exactly the same numbers, but rather that it's grossly unfair to have one club having the smallest numbers for three censuses in a row. To even it out we should be put at the top of that table for the next fifteen years.

I was being conservative with the varience - I mean even 5% (95 % confident there is no difference) is an acceptable tolerence in social demographics.

Your last point is fair though, especially after the 2nd time - something should've been done then.

[smithy]

Participation is very stagnant over the last five years, even in Auskick. Despite their assertions to the contrary, are SANFL doing all of the right things in junior development?

This is a worrying stat IMO and clearly an area that needs to be focused on. One might wonder how its going in growing areas like Mt Barker where there isnt local SANFL football nearby as in the inner suburbs. .

Well maybe ask yourself how things are going at Noarlunga where there is massive growth in population and THERE IS SANFL football.