U18s JSL competition

[James007]

With the amount of young talented players that's out there and the lack of clubs that aren't to filling U17's teams, why doesn't the FFSA have an U18s JSL competition?

[The Offside Trap]

I think you will be surprised how many teams field Under 17's teams in 2016.
If you see how many had trials there should be over 20 Clubs.

[themessenger]

With the amount of young talented players that's out there and the lack of clubs that aren't to filling U17's teams, why doesn't the FFSA have an U18s JSL competition?

Simple really. Under 18s is classed as Seniors, therefore JSL does not apply.
It's not viewed as a junior competition and with 30+ FFSA clubs to choose from, would have thought most players would find a club/team to play in.

[Invincible]

If you take the approach of some clubs U17s are in fact a 18s JSL with movement between the two squads. Biggest hurdle is that most parents think the kids have to play 18s at 16 ...

[James007]

Some peoples opinions are if you are not playing 18's, after 16's, the player is going to struggle to make senior, reserves and so on.
This is not mine, I have my thoughts and opinions, I'm just seeing what you all think.

[geoff9559]

FFSA have offered a U18s (Like a JSL) on a SUnday.......for several years but not many takers so they havent run a competition

[redfred]

SAASL should take up 18s league, fees aprox $150

[ThundaChucka]

Don't E&D have a Colt U17/18 Comp already. E&D wouldn't be happy if SAASL took over with U18s Comp I would of thought!

[redfred]

SAASL cover the whole of Adelaide not just the north. Long way if Sthn Knights were able to field 18s in a SAASL comp. Compromise E&D Colts = U17, SAASL U18s

[ThundaChucka]

E&D didn't like the idea of SSF either when it was introduced and now E&D and FFSA are further apart in regards to football in this State.

[Ibelieve]

Some peoples opinions are if you are not playing 18's, after 16's, the player is going to struggle to make senior, reserves and so on.
This is not mine, I have my thoughts and opinions, I'm just seeing what you all think.

This is correct! Including A/league clubs, AIS and the coaches all involved.
This is why Oz will NEVER be a true football nation.
NEVER! It's not in their blood, and we have morons driving it

[RowePark]

saasl are taking numbers for a U19 Leauge, maybe that will help this situation?

[God is an Englishman]

An Under 19 league, hustbokaybeith the men it will make a man of them and make them better footballers

[God is an Englishman]

Some peoples opinions are if you are not playing 18's, after 16's, the player is going to struggle to make senior, reserves and so on.
This is not mine, I have my thoughts and opinions, I'm just seeing what you all think.

Completely agree.

[matty2323]

Some peoples opinions are if you are not playing 18's, after 16's, the player is going to struggle to make senior, reserves and so on.
This is not mine, I have my thoughts and opinions, I'm just seeing what you all think.

IF kids are coached properly between the ages of 11-16, then i believe this is correct. But given most players in South Australia make it to 16 years of age without at least 2 seasons of genuine coaching, i have to agree. They say it takes 10,000 hours of quality training to master something to an elite level. If kids are training 2 times per week and playing 1 game (lets say 6 hours in total) for 40 weeks a season (being generous) between the ages of 11-16, then they have completed 1440 hours. Even if they started in SSGs at U6s (lets say 4 hours per week for 40 weeks a season) between ages 5-11, they they have completed 1120 hours. Totalled that's 2560 hours. Advanced players in good environments have possibly been exposed to something closer to 3500 hours.

That's still nowhere near enough (considering most European youth players acquire 10,000 hours by 18 to 21). Therefore even our best youth products wont be reaching full potential until they're 24-26. By then they have 4-8 seasons of senior football under their belt and we call them "experienced". Its simply they have finally acquired 7000+ hours and are getting close to mastering the sport to an elite level. We're extremely limited in the opportunities we can offer players once they reach 16, with most coachings picking what they perceive as the best 15-20 players between 15-18 to play u18s. Thats not easy. If we can broaden this, and start providing opportunities to 30-40 players per club, then you allow more players to develop (and give the 'slow developers' who need the hours more opportunity to reach their potential).

This correlates to A-League. How many 18 year olds are 'breaking onto the scene'? Infact, most 18 year olds get released, then go back to play local league and then managed to get signed around 21. People kick up a stink stating "how did we let this one slip through our fingers etc".. simply put they weren't good enough at 18, and with the age restrictions of youth teams and the limited number of youth contracts available, players miss out. They then go back, develop at local level for 3 seasons and get to where they should have been at 18, and get signed. Kitto is probably a prime example of this happening recently.

[spooky1972]

99.5% of any team above U16 is simply money making, if you are not playing 18s/reserves by the time you hit U17 you're chances are limited to never playing seniors at that club or while the current coaching staff are in power. Sure there are the odd examples of late bloomers or players needing a little bit more time, but not many. In fact it's prob better for some of these guys to join a saasl team, tuffen up play against men etc and then return to trials a year or so later, you'll know if you can cut it in the higher ffsa ages once you play saasl for a year or so, you may even get a call cos you tear it up.

[Old Redback]

Some peoples opinions are if you are not playing 18's, after 16's, the player is going to struggle to make senior, reserves and so on.
This is not mine, I have my thoughts and opinions, I'm just seeing what you all think.

IF kids are coached properly between the ages of 11-16, then i believe this is correct. But given most players in South Australia make it to 16 years of age without at least 2 seasons of genuine coaching, i have to agree. They say it takes 10,000 hours of quality training to master something to an elite level. If kids are training 2 times per week and playing 1 game (lets say 6 hours in total) for 40 weeks a season (being generous) between the ages of 11-16, then they have completed 1440 hours. Even if they started in SSGs at U6s (lets say 4 hours per week for 40 weeks a season) between ages 5-11, they they have completed 1120 hours. Totalled that's 2560 hours. Advanced players in good environments have possibly been exposed to something closer to 3500 hours.

That's still nowhere near enough (considering most European youth players acquire 10,000 hours by 18 to 21). Therefore even our best youth products wont be reaching full potential until they're 24-26. By then they have 4-8 seasons of senior football under their belt and we call them "experienced". Its simply they have finally acquired 7000+ hours and are getting close to mastering the sport to an elite level. We're extremely limited in the opportunities we can offer players once they reach 16, with most coachings picking what they perceive as the best 15-20 players between 15-18 to play u18s. Thats not easy. If we can broaden this, and start providing opportunities to 30-40 players per club, then you allow more players to develop (and give the 'slow developers' who need the hours more opportunity to reach their potential).

This correlates to A-League. How many 18 year olds are 'breaking onto the scene'? Infact, most 18 year olds get released, then go back to play local league and then managed to get signed around 21. People kick up a stink stating "how did we let this one slip through our fingers etc".. simply put they weren't good enough at 18, and with the age restrictions of youth teams and the limited number of youth contracts available, players miss out. They then go back, develop at local level for 3 seasons and get to where they should have been at 18, and get signed. Kitto is probably a prime example of this happening recently.

Applying formulas to coaching is another sure fire route to failure.

[redfred]

In fact it's prob better for some of these guys to join a saasl team, tuffen up play against men etc and then return to trials a year or so later, you'll know if you can cut it in the higher ffsa ages once you play saasl for a year or so, you may even get a call cos you tear it up.

They will probably realise once at a decent saasl club that their better off there, with a more enjoyable atmosphere (unless team getting thumped) and that everyone is wanted

[Slide Tackle]

Bringing this topic back.

I dont really agree with u18s JSL comp, however I do believe U17s should be an important competition and be the u18s reserve team. Im amazed that so many clubs treat this competition as a money maker and not a crucial part of development for the next group of 18s to come through the system.

Will be keen to hear other peoples thoughts

[magnet]

Bringing this topic back.

I dont really agree with u18s JSL comp, however I do believe U17s should be an important competition and be the u18s reserve team. Im amazed that so many clubs treat this competition as a money maker and not a crucial part of development for the next group of 18s to come through the system.

Will be keen to hear other peoples thoughts

U18's should be the best players but that's not always the case. It's year 11 and 12 for most so training 3 nights a week is not ideal. If you can't make three nights then your likely on the bench or missing out on gameday. I know plenty of kids preferring to playing 17's.

I watched some U18 games this year and the quality is terrible, especially state league 1/2 and the bottom of NPL.

[Slide Tackle]

Bringing this topic back.

I dont really agree with u18s JSL comp, however I do believe U17s should be an important competition and be the u18s reserve team. Im amazed that so many clubs treat this competition as a money maker and not a crucial part of development for the next group of 18s to come through the system.

Will be keen to hear other peoples thoughts

U18's should be the best players but that's not always the case. It's year 11 and 12 for most so training 3 nights a week is not ideal. If you can't make three nights then your likely on the bench or missing out on gameday. I know plenty of kids preferring to playing 17's.

I watched some U18 games this year and the quality is terrible, especially state league 1/2 and the bottom of NPL.

Agreed, i noticed that lot of those players could still well be u15 and u16 eligible, perhaps players are moving up to quick.

[Pie and Bovril]

Bringing this topic back.

I dont really agree with u18s JSL comp, however I do believe U17s should be an important competition and be the u18s reserve team. Im amazed that so many clubs treat this competition as a money maker and not a crucial part of development for the next group of 18s to come through the system.

Will be keen to hear other peoples thoughts

U18's should be the best players but that's not always the case. It's year 11 and 12 for most so training 3 nights a week is not ideal. If you can't make three nights then your likely on the bench or missing out on gameday. I know plenty of kids preferring to playing 17's.

I watched some U18 games this year and the quality is terrible, especially state league 1/2 and the bottom of NPL.

exactly the same as what’s going on at my club. Too many logistics involved and the best 16’s will stay together in next years 17’s.

[Slide Tackle]

Bringing this topic back.

I dont really agree with u18s JSL comp, however I do believe U17s should be an important competition and be the u18s reserve team. Im amazed that so many clubs treat this competition as a money maker and not a crucial part of development for the next group of 18s to come through the system.

Will be keen to hear other peoples thoughts

U18's should be the best players but that's not always the case. It's year 11 and 12 for most so training 3 nights a week is not ideal. If you can't make three nights then your likely on the bench or missing out on gameday. I know plenty of kids preferring to playing 17's.

I watched some U18 games this year and the quality is terrible, especially state league 1/2 and the bottom of NPL.

exactly the same as what’s going on at my club. Too many logistics involved and the best 16’s will stay together in next years 17’s.

Thats fantastic, hopefully most clubs will do the same.

[Sacred Noodle]

In Europe think most clubs have U17 then U19 or U20 ..

[Pie and Bovril]

In Europe think most clubs have U17 then U19 or U20 ..

I know in England the Premier League changed from Under-21's to Under-23's

[simmo]

The biggest problem is the stigma with the u17’s. That is why the league is of a very low standard. I also think there should be u18’s under the junior banner and bring back U23’s. This would strengthen all leagues and in turn younger players will develop into better players.

[Pie and Bovril]

The biggest problem is the stigma with the u17’s. That is why the league is of a very low standard. I also think there should be u18’s under the junior banner and bring back U23’s. This would strengthen all leagues and in turn younger players will develop into better players.

the U18 league is pointless, so many kids leave teams mid season and leagues are unbalanced with big blowout scores. The U18 should be part of the juniors and an U21 or U23 league should be aligned to the seniors.

[simmo]

100%
It makes perfect sense but for some crazy reason no one at the ffsa can see this. If we want improvement and better development, changes need to be made.

[themessenger]

The biggest problem is the stigma with the u17’s. That is why the league is of a very low standard. I also think there should be u18’s under the junior banner and bring back U23’s. This would strengthen all leagues and in turn younger players will develop into better players.

the U18 league is pointless, so many kids leave teams mid season and leagues are unbalanced with big blowout scores. The U18 should be part of the juniors and an U21 or U23 league should be aligned to the seniors.

Some years back the FFSA changed Reserves to an under 23s league.

That proved unpopular with clubs as a lot of “over aged” experienced players left the competition. A couple of years later, the league was changed back to the Reserves league we have today, where there is no age restriction.

IMO age is no barrier, and a player in their mid 20s should not be rubbed out from playing for an FFSA club Reserves side. If anything their experience and maturity helps to balance a team that has a lot of up and coming younger players.

[limozeen]

The biggest problem is the stigma with the u17’s. That is why the league is of a very low standard. I also think there should be u18’s under the junior banner and bring back U23’s. This would strengthen all leagues and in turn younger players will develop into better players.

the U18 league is pointless, so many kids leave teams mid season and leagues are unbalanced with big blowout scores. The U18 should be part of the juniors and an U21 or U23 league should be aligned to the seniors.

Some years back the FFSA changed Reserves to an under 23s league.

That proved unpopular with clubs as a lot of “over aged” experienced players left the competition. A couple of years later, the league was changed back to the Reserves league we have today, where there is no age restriction.

IMO age is no barrier, and a player in their mid 20s should not be rubbed out from playing for an FFSA club Reserves side. If anything their experience and maturity helps to balance a team that has a lot of up and coming younger players.

100% agree with you