ASB Premiership: Changes Needed Next Season

Good chat here lads.

The thing that worries me the most is how it will or won't work alongside the Phoenix's proposed Academy expansion, and how that might play out for the players.

I think that is a whole different (and equally interesting) discussion Stretford.

If you compare with the UK the national body does no player development - it's all done by the clubs. If you look at France and some of the Scando countries, the reverse is true.

I don't think there is a perfect system, and each setup has its subtleties and pros/cons. But what I do think is that it would be hugely negative if NZF and WPX competed with each other for the attention and time of elite teenagers.

The NZF FTC/NTC system isn't brilliant, and its quality is variable across the country, but I'd be distressed if the Phoenix came in and tried to run their own thing over top or in parallel with what NZF have had in place (more or less) for ten years.

As you say, that system is for players aged 11-16. I think the Phoenix have commercial desires to be in that space, but I hope they tread carefully. The size of the cake of elite youngsters in NZ is not large, and I don't think there is enough market for both to coexist.

My view is that collaboration will be key in NZ. Between NZF, Federations and the Phoenix (and other private providers). Otherwise we'll end up in a shitfight where young players aren't sure what to do.

I thought the Phoenix were starting up "youth academies" in Auck and Chch?

these are run through a "host club" but are open to all players. 

there is already competion from 3 providers here in Chch , each of whom pretty much want the same players. 

Just watched 30 minute airline vid on Liverpool FC. Melwood training ground copes with 100 registered Under-12's in regular training, i.e. vying for progress to next level of the L'pool Academy.

I think that is a whole different (and equally interesting) discussion Stretford.

If you compare with the UK the national body does no player development - it's all done by the clubs. If you look at France and some of the Scando countries, the reverse is true.

I don't think there is a perfect system, and each setup has its subtleties and pros/cons. But what I do think is that it would be hugely negative if NZF and WPX competed with each other for the attention and time of elite teenagers.

The NZF FTC/NTC system isn't brilliant, and its quality is variable across the country, but I'd be distressed if the Phoenix came in and tried to run their own thing over top or in parallel with what NZF have had in place (more or less) for ten years.

As you say, that system is for players aged 11-16. I think the Phoenix have commercial desires to be in that space, but I hope they tread carefully. The size of the cake of elite youngsters in NZ is not large, and I don't think there is enough market for both to coexist.

My view is that collaboration will be key in NZ. Between NZF, Federations and the Phoenix (and other private providers). Otherwise we'll end up in a shitfight where young players aren't sure what to do.

A good question for Andy Smith would be: "It seems apparent that the Nix are aligning with private academies and that NZF's NTC/FTC pathway is geared towards national teams, with neither dovetailing towards the other very much. Should we not be working towards having the best compete with the best from an earlier age; instead of the either/or approach; eg why can't APFA and Mainland FTC work together more closely?

Would love to hear the same question posed to whoever from the Nix will have an eye on these academies - has that been determined yet by the way; and Andy Hedge for that matter.

It's a good question for all concerned. Sadly, in my opinion, nobody is taking much notice of the overall issue here which is, as you point out, getting the best with the best.

Private providers in NZ generally have the best coaches and facilities, but caters only to kids who can afford it. NZF's pathway caters to all the best kids but generally doesn't have the best coaches or facilities.

That disparity needs to be bridged so that we have the best players, with the best coaches, and the best facilities. At the moment what we have is a number of parties trying to "compete" for the same players, and players feeling enormous pressure to spend money to keep up with the other good players.

Witrh a small player pool it is concerning to have "competing pathways" and your point  that "Private providers in NZ generally have the best coaches and facilities, but caters only to kids who can afford it. NZF's pathway caters to all the best kids but generally doesn't have the best coaches or facilities." is onr of the major issues.

It is a concern if competitiion breeds ill feeling/ill will towards the "opposition", the fear I have is that selection (either for the Nix, club or NZ teams) will based on what programme you are in omre than ability.

That said I see multiple pathways as positive, the more kids getting better and more focused training the better. In years gone by I have seen in many sports rep sides picked before the season has started and based on reputation, virtually excluding kids who weren't in the team before.

It's a good question for all concerned. Sadly, in my opinion, nobody is taking much notice of the overall issue here which is, as you point out, getting the best with the best.

Private providers in NZ generally have the best coaches and facilities, but caters only to kids who can afford it. NZF's pathway caters to all the best kids but generally doesn't have the best coaches or facilities.

That disparity needs to be bridged so that we have the best players, with the best coaches, and the best facilities. At the moment what we have is a number of parties trying to "compete" for the same players, and players feeling enormous pressure to spend money to keep up with the other good players.

[/quote]

Shouldn't it be the role of NZF to focus all the different paths developing young players? These private academies serve a purpose but they're there to make money and will pick and choose and I'm not sure will necessarily do the best for the player.

Most of the academy set-ups will have players in teams playing in Napier. So comes the (suspected) reason for a Nix game in Napier. 

Shouldn't it be the role of NZF to focus all the different paths developing young players? These private academies serve a purpose but they're there to make money and will pick and choose and I'm not sure will necessarily do the best for the player.

It's a good question for all concerned. Sadly, in my opinion, nobody is taking much notice of the overall issue here which is, as you point out, getting the best with the best.

Private providers in NZ generally have the best coaches and facilities, but caters only to kids who can afford it. NZF's pathway caters to all the best kids but generally doesn't have the best coaches or facilities.

That disparity needs to be bridged so that we have the best players, with the best coaches, and the best facilities. At the moment what we have is a number of parties trying to "compete" for the same players, and players feeling enormous pressure to spend money to keep up with the other good players.