Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: Current NPL Structure

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    343
    Has anyone heard of any proposed structure change? I know that 11 teams in NPL with a bye is not a popular decision with most clubs but looks like we will be stuck with it for at least a year. At what point does NNSWF look to creating two tiers? You would think to be feasible you would want at least 8 teams in each tier. Also, what about Youth NPL? With Cooks Hill joining that would take the number of teams to 13 next year, also including a bye. I think there is a big need for a two tier system in youth to prevent some blowout score lines and have similar ability level kids grouped together. My mate at the pub reckons that most of the club TDs are in favour of a two tiered system but there has been no comment from NNSWF about this yet. Does anyone have any updates?

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Posts
    54
    A bye in top grade is stupid. Only displays governing incompetence.

  3. #23
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain_Carl View Post
    You would think to be feasible you would want at least 8 teams in each tier.

    It seems to be common sense to everyone except NNSWF. I am sure if you asked the perennial NPL strugglers they would want to stay in NPL, but to me the two tiers of 8 with promotion and relegation would be better for the clubs long term and certainly better for football in NNSW. Promotion and relegation specifically, even if it means dropping the NPL badge. As someone who spent a lot of time around NL1, my impression is the players didn't seem to be enjoying their football (with some exceptions of course) or very engaged. The little activity in the NL1 thread in this forum demonstrates the lack of interest in the competition.
    It is a nothing league as it stands. It's not like its full of players that are pushing for NPL, most players either at the back end of their careers or young guys that became too old for U20's and couldn't crack first grade in the NPL.

    EDIT: I Should clarify I am only discussing Senior NL1
    Last edited by ExWhistleMan; 12-08-2021 at 08:53 PM.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2020
    Posts
    102
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain_Carl View Post
    Has anyone heard of any proposed structure change? I know that 11 teams in NPL with a bye is not a popular decision with most clubs but looks like we will be stuck with it for at least a year. At what point does NNSWF look to creating two tiers? You would think to be feasible you would want at least 8 teams in each tier. Also, what about Youth NPL? With Cooks Hill joining that would take the number of teams to 13 next year, also including a bye. I think there is a big need for a two tier system in youth to prevent some blowout score lines and have similar ability level kids grouped together. My mate at the pub reckons that most of the club TDs are in favour of a two tiered system but there has been no comment from NNSWF about this yet. Does anyone have any updates?
    Hi Skipper,

    I am involved with a NEWFM club in the younger age groups and we have heard diddly squat on the proposed changes to Youth in Northern. Yes, Cooks Hill will join NPL Youth, but what happens with the rest of the comp is unknown. It's infuriating.

    A

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    3,545
    If we work on a model of 16 clubs, being split into NPL1 and NPL2 with promotion and relegation between them.
    - play teams 3 times. 21 rounds
    -finals series

    For youth, I’d love to see them all under the same banner of NPL Youth. Working on a 16 team model, can easily add in a few more if wanted.
    - 2 x groups split into pool A and Pool B based on some kind of grading of even just NPL1 and NPL2 initially.
    - option a: play your own group twice (14 games) and the other group once (8games) - 22 rounds plus finals (finals are top
    4 In each pool)
    Gives clubs in pool B an opportunity to play those better teams, but not have their whole season dedicated to it. Also may expose some of the better teams to different tactics Eg maybe a pool b teams fancies playing physical or long ball ball, something Pool a team isn’t used to.
    Also have some kind of unofficial promotion relegation between the two pools. Eg maybe 3 up 3 down if the results skew that way.

    -option b: 16 teams all play eachother in phase 1. (15 rounds). Then split top 8 and bottom 8 each season into pools for a final rounds (7 games) before finals.
    - 23 games plus finals.

    The downside. Is it really elite if there’s 16 teams? And does it just mask any issues? Logistically unless it’s a club championship, separating age groups from clubs could be challenging to organise. Does it defeat the point if each age is not graded in some way.

    The benefits, imo. In theory allows clubs to develop players from SAP into their NPL Youth set ups more seemlessly. Eg players may not leave say Magic SAP to go join NPL1 club Belswans NPL youth program cause they wanna play NPL1. When in4-5 years belswans may be in NPL2 and Magic into NPL1 etc. other than coaching there’s no real benefit to switching between clubs. Or some aspects are negated.
    Also think it exposes teams to a bigger variety of opponents.
    Theoretically, allows clubs and teams to focus on development of players. it’s all a dickwaving contest in some ways. Players wanting to play in the best comp. this somewhat rebrands it all into the same comp.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by Bremsstrahlung View Post
    If we work on a model of 16 clubs, being split into NPL1 and NPL2 with promotion and relegation between them.
    - play teams 3 times. 21 rounds
    -finals series

    For youth, I’d love to see them all under the same banner of NPL Youth. Working on a 16 team model, can easily add in a few more if wanted.
    - 2 x groups split into pool A and Pool B based on some kind of grading of even just NPL1 and NPL2 initially.
    - option a: play your own group twice (14 games) and the other group once (8games) - 22 rounds plus finals (finals are top
    4 In each pool)
    Gives clubs in pool B an opportunity to play those better teams, but not have their whole season dedicated to it. Also may expose some of the better teams to different tactics Eg maybe a pool b teams fancies playing physical or long ball ball, something Pool a team isn¬’t used to.
    Also have some kind of unofficial promotion relegation between the two pools. Eg maybe 3 up 3 down if the results skew that way.

    -option b: 16 teams all play eachother in phase 1. (15 rounds). Then split top 8 and bottom 8 each season into pools for a final rounds (7 games) before finals.
    - 23 games plus finals.

    The downside. Is it really elite if there¬’s 16 teams? And does it just mask any issues? Logistically unless it¬’s a club championship, separating age groups from clubs could be challenging to organise. Does it defeat the point if each age is not graded in some way.

    The benefits, imo. In theory allows clubs to develop players from SAP into their NPL Youth set ups more seemlessly. Eg players may not leave say Magic SAP to go join NPL1 club Belswans NPL youth program cause they wanna play NPL1. When in4-5 years belswans may be in NPL2 and Magic into NPL1 etc. other than coaching there¬’s no real benefit to switching between clubs. Or some aspects are negated.
    Also think it exposes teams to a bigger variety of opponents.
    Theoretically, allows clubs and teams to focus on development of players. it¬’s all a dickwaving contest in some ways. Players wanting to play in the best comp. this somewhat rebrands it all into the same comp.

    I agree with many of your ideas but here is where I differ a little. Under Football Australia¬’s ¬‘XI Principles¬’, principle V is “More football, more often: increasing match minutes for youth players”. https://www.footballaustralia.com.au...al_Edition.pdf

    I agree there should be 2 tiers of 8 teams and these tiers called NPL 1 and NPL 2. Importantly, there should be a separation of seniors and youth. If a club has their senior and youth teams all in NPL1 and senior team is relegated but their youth are performing well, the youth teams should not be punished for this and should remain in the top tier.

    For seniors the 8 teams could play each other 3 times like you said for a 21 game season or perhaps 4 times for a 28 game season (if the appetite is there).
    For youth the 8 teams must play each other 4 times for 28 games. The downside of this is the monotony of playing the same teams so many times. It would have to be based on a club championship model such as that used in NSW NPL. Does 28 games + finals mean an extended season? Not necessarily. A mid week game could be scheduled once every few weeks to fit the extra games in. Then comes the next problem. North Coast and Mid Coast. Not practical to do mid week games there.

    I don’t think there is an easy fix but I think as long as we come up with a model where the best are playing the best, more games are played and we have a separation between seniors and youth (with promotion and relegation an absolute must) we are headed in the right direction.
    Last edited by Captain_Carl; 13-08-2021 at 08:29 AM.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by Aegon View Post
    My post is on a slightly different tangent but probably appropriate under the thread:

    What do people think the ideal NNSWF NPL structure should look like?

    My opinion is the below (all based on current 1st grade standings and nothing to do with the clubs themselves)

    NPL 1
    8 teams
    Edgeworth - Magic - Olympic - Azzurri - Maitland - Jaffas - Weston - Valentine

    NPL 2
    8 teams
    Adamstown - Lakes - New Lambton - Singleton - Kahibah - Belswans - Cooks Hill - West Wallsend

    NPL 3
    8 teams
    Toronto - Cessnock - South Cardiff - Thornton - Wallsend + 3(E.g. Cardiff, Swansea, Hamilton Azzurri, Mayfield, etc or any of Northern Inland, Mid Coast or Far Nth Coast)


    The plan could be to achieve this within a few seasons.

    Season 1 (2021 for example only)
    1. Competitions maintain current structure
    2. 9th, 10th & 11th at the end of the season in NPL 1 are relegated to NPL 2/NL1 for 2022
    3. Expressions of interest called upon for the NPL 3 extra clubs required for Season 2023


    2022
    1. NPL 1 is 8 teams in a 21 or ideally 28 game season
    2. NPL 2/NL1 is 13 teams in a 24 game season
    3. Promotion/Relegation and Play off games occur between NPL 1 & NPL 2
    4. Positions 9-13 in NPL 2 are relegated to NPL 3 for season 2023


    2023 & onwards
    1. The clubs selected as part of the EOI's in 2021 are added to NPL 3
    2. NPL 1, 2 & 3 run as 8 team competitions
    3. 4 team finals
    4. Last in NPL 1 & 2 auto relegate
    5. Play off games between second last NPL 1 & 2 home and away play off with second place in NPL 2 & 3
    6. First in NPL 2 & 3 auto promote


    The main caveats would be that all clubs move towards certain goals, for example financial, playing field, etc.
    Must have teams in all competitions - 1sts, reserves, 18's (Seniors) 16's, 15's, 14's & 13's (Youth) & 12's, 11's, 10's & 9's (SAP)
    For the new 3 teams they could receive dispensation that they need:
    • All seniors teams by 2023
    • All youth & SAP teams by 2025


    Changes would be required to the player points system to enforce stricter controls on player retention & recruitment as mentioned in the earlier posts in this thread.
    Implement PPS or limitations on movement between clubs at the Youth & SAP level.

    I think the main point of discussion would be around promotion/relegation criteria and whether it would be based on:
    Regular season standings?
    GF Winner/Runner Ups promote?
    Senior club championship?
    Senior + Youth club championship?

    Interested to hear others thoughts on this. Is there a better way forward? Is it pie in the sky?
    Aegon your definitely not Dave Eland, that for sure nor work at NNSWF...lol
    only change for me is remove valentine as well to 2nd tier, and put Cooks Hill up, i believe Valo, Buds and Lakes have had more then enough chances to get there shit together, and every year provide absolute shit to the competition,
    basically finishing in bottom 3, across most of all there grades
    just my opinion

  8. #28
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Zico View Post
    If people donít agree with promotion and relegation then why not have a play off for the spot that the last placed NPL team plays of against the premiers of the 1st Div at the home ground of the 1st Div premiers? This would attract huge interest and be a big cash injection for both clubs but even more so for the home side and double as a leg up to compete financial for both sides the following season.
    I'd like to see NL1 Premiers (top of the table after season) get automatic promotion and then the grand final winner (or grand finalist if winner is Premier) play a home and away series against 10th. 11th is automatically relegated.

  9. #29
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    1,206
    Quote Originally Posted by Aegon View Post
    The main caveats would be that all clubs move towards certain goals, for example financial, playing field, etc.
    The issue sits here, the big problem is that most clubs if any own their grounds, there are many clubs who have complete control of their grounds but quite a few in NL1 don't and have to share with other clubs/sports and then don't get the approval from council to upgrade these council fields.

    If we put in these sort of rules where is the incentive for these clubs? Particularly if you want to bring in new clubs.

  10. #30
    Moderator Aegon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    1,158
    Quote Originally Posted by W8 WATCHER View Post
    Aegon your definitely not Dave Eland, that for sure nor work at NNSWF...lol
    only change for me is remove valentine as well to 2nd tier, and put Cooks Hill up, i believe Valo, Buds and Lakes have had more then enough chances to get there shit together, and every year provide absolute shit to the competition,
    basically finishing in bottom 3, across most of all there grades
    just my opinion
    I'd definitely change things since I posted that originally.
    Main thing would be a complete decouple of Youth/SAP from the proposed NPL structure.
    All opinions expressed here are my own.

    "Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn." -Benjamin Franklin

  11. #31
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Posts
    26
    Quote Originally Posted by Goatscheese View Post
    ..... then the grand final winner (or grand finalist if winner is Premier) play a home and away series against 10th. 11th is automatically relegated.
    This would by far be the best games of the season in the whole NNSW. I'd take watching them over a grand final any day.

  12. #32
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    213
    Quote Originally Posted by ExWhistleMan View Post
    This would by far be the best games of the season in the whole NNSW. I'd take watching them over a grand final any day.
    totally agree

  13. #33
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2021
    Posts
    54
    Quote Originally Posted by ExWhistleMan View Post
    This would by far be the best games of the season in the whole NNSW. I'd take watching them over a grand final any day.
    Was suggest earlier somewhere.

    Last down, 1st up. Then 2nd last playoff with 2nd or Gfinalist. Like in Scotland.

    At least have some movement. This 3 to 5 yr Stalinist cycle hasnt helped anything.

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    245
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain_Carl View Post
    I agree with many of your ideas but here is where I differ a little. Under Football Australia¬’s ¬‘XI Principles¬’, principle V is “More football, more often: increasing match minutes for youth players”. https://www.footballaustralia.com.au...al_Edition.pdf

    I agree there should be 2 tiers of 8 teams and these tiers called NPL 1 and NPL 2. Importantly, there should be a separation of seniors and youth. If a club has their senior and youth teams all in NPL1 and senior team is relegated but their youth are performing well, the youth teams should not be punished for this and should remain in the top tier.
    Rather 10 in the top grade. 8 to 12 in NPL1.

  15. #35
    Senior Member Hunter403's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Everywhere
    Posts
    2,086
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain_Carl View Post
    I agree with many of your ideas but here is where I differ a little. Under Football Australia¬’s ¬‘XI Principles¬’, principle V is “More football, more often: increasing match minutes for youth players”. https://www.footballaustralia.com.au...al_Edition.pdf
    The more minutes the better is a great concept if the standard of those minutes is of a high enough standard. More minutes against significantly weaker opponents helps no one.

    Two tiers of 8 in Senior NPL 1 and 2
    Youth decoupled and with extra spaces for North Coast, Northern Inland and Far North Coast.

    Expand both senior and junior levels when the quality of all teams warrants it.

    Promo and relegation a must.
    Youth levels settled by club championship model.
    "It is not that I am afraid to die; its just that I don't want to be there when it happens" - Woody Allen

  16. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    343
    Goodness knows where this will end up. De-coupling is definitely on the cards.

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    1,206
    Easy idea,

    Youth teams play each other once. At the end on a club championship level split the competition up into two. All teams keep their points, and the two groups play each other twice. Get rid of finals, winner of the top group are declared Premiers.

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    343
    Who is listening to our ideas?

  19. #39

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    343
    Quote Originally Posted by matmoncrieff View Post
    Looks pretty good to me. They have definitely put a lot of thought into it. I wonder how it has worked for them? It would be good to see a similar approach here.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •