I think that this model is really bad for player development. I don't even understand the theory behind it. If someone could explain it to me I'd be grateful. 

I think that the quality of these U20 teams is not even close reserve grade was. Before if you were a young player who was good enough you were promoted from U19s or whatever into reserve grade, which was of a high standard, full of players pushing to get into first grade and first graders coming back from injury etc. It was a real accomplishment as a 16 or 17 year old to get into reserve grade. And the players and the quality (and more than anything the intensity) prepared you for first grade. 

What I see is now that the quality between the U20s and first grade is so vast its ridiculous. Playing U20s is no accomplishment, its easy to do, its often poor. And it does not prepare young players for first grade. I would much rather a 17 year old with potential playing reserve grade back in the day than U20s of today.   

Thoughts?

Good question - also means that NPL clubs potentially lose a stable of players once they leave U20 level, but aren't quite good enough for the Seniors just yet.

For what it's worth, all the State Leagues still run a seniors and a reserves side, so it is curious that this doesn't follow through into NPL level.

Rumours are that up here in NSW clubs are discussing a change from the current 18s/20s/1st system to 17s/19s/23s 

You're spot on. The step up from 20s to 1st grade is huge and many players end up slipping through the cracks and falling down the pyramid as a result. 

Will be interesting to see if it happens and whether it's successful 

Not all of them.

Like others have said i think the u20's needs to be removed and replaced with an out and out reserve grade.

Once you are 18 you need to be playing seniors football 

Sorry, was referring to Victoria.

Should combine u18-u20 teams - if the best 16yr olds aren't good enough to play 19yr olds, then they need to play at a lower level than your club.

Great Post, could probably add to the question and ask can anyone explain this npl concept? Sterile, average, expensive are a few words that come to mind

I love that saying "..cause you can't handle the truth!"

The reason we have those age groups is because you have people at FFA HQ who make decisions without any expertise, research or knowledge.
Its a structure that you can thank Buckley (AFL) and his staff for and of course the seeds of the NPL from the FFV's former CEO Rendell (Lawn Bowls) for his creation of the Summer League concept on which much of the NPL was based.

In Melbourne the U20's is a glorified U17-18 competition while the U18 competition is for the 17 and 18 year olds deemed not good enough.
The 19 and 20 year olds are moved on pretty quickly cause according to the experts they are finished

Same scenario here in Melbourne 17s 19s 23s.
I believe the big man AP is supportive of this change.

I don't agree. Keep the U20s. Even more youth teams if they want. We just need a reserve grade in addition. We need to keep more players at top levels for selection not less.

In your system if you're older than 18 but not yet good enough for reserve grade you have to leave your club and find a lower division club (with a lower level of professionalism) to play for. How many kids would we lose from the system because of this? I mean you could be playing for that club your whole life, suddenly there isn't a spot for you because you're one year older...thats bullshit. theres a high chance you're going to quit the game altogether.

My philosophy is that you need to keep as many players in the system as possible. Playing at as high a level (in terms of both quality and professionalism) as possible. 

There is no reason, absolutely no reason not to have a reserve grade. Practically speaking what they are doing now makes no sense.

When teams had reserve grade basically when a first grade player got injured, the team could count on bringing in the reserve grade player in that position because they were legitimately the second best player in that position the club could get. 
Now if a first grade player gets injured the "reserve grade" player is sometimes just a young guy who only has his spot because he is fulfilling the youth quota, is in no position to play first grade, and the coach has to shuffle things around, play people in less than ideal positions etc. Meanwhile an older player who would be far better at filling in (AND with the goal obviously to get that spot!) is down playing second division and might never get the chance to come up to NPL.

Back in the day at my club our reserve grade side used to give first grade a red hot crack in practice matches, we would beat then maybe a quarter of the time. These days we demolish the "reserve grade" squad every.single.time, they don't stand a chance. How TF is this a good thing?

What a f-king disgrace. Makes my blood boil. 

Can you expand on this? what don't you like about the npl?

A few things .... definitely losing players at 18 or 19 as they are not deemed good enough to the lower state leagues. 
The fact that there are 3 to 4 good teams in every division and the quality drops of enormously after that. 
A lot of players that are worthy of playing this "elite competition" but are unable to due to financial contraints
The list goes on

I get what you're saying but the numbers of players of quality just arent there

Have 17 20 23's. With the possibility of 5 over age senior players able to play 23's or 21-22 year old can also play. This will give you the chance to blood a 19-20-21 year old that may not be quite ready physically at senior level. Currently all VIC NPL 20's team can have 4 over age players playing but then you have a 25- 30 year old playing  against 17-18 year old. not good for both players.

Yes you're correct and the danger is Football will become a middle class sport that does not produce talent.
What is also of concern is the National Director Abraam's comments that to become a 2 star NPL Academy will require an annual investment of $450-650K by the Club.
Well parents pay anyway; so that represents a cost of $3,000 to $4,400 per head that Abraam's and the FFA are expecting a 2 Star Academy to cost per head.

Its all about money, Why have just a reserve side when you can make money with U18/U20 etc. The day a NPL club cry's broke will be the end of days.

Under 18's and 20's don't pay the big rego fees that yoof pay

http://www.footballnsw.com.au/fileadmin/user_upload/Resources_and_Documents/Circulars_and_Memos/20161208_-_1614_-_2017_National_Premier_and_State_Leagues_Competition_Registration_Fees.pdf

But anyway I think 20's is the hardest team to coach, it's hard to be motivated when you're expected to train 3 times a week, not getting paid, having to train on a thursday or a friday night etc..

The cost depends on the club. There are clubs that charge just as much for 18's and 20's.

In the ACT most NPL clubs have reserves in either the Capital League or SL 1 either under the same banner or a feeder club banner.

The northern sides in the Tas NPL, possibly due to lack of clubs in the area and travel reasons, have to fill all grades in the northern championship as well as the NPL. So that's a side in the Championship 18s, Reserves and seniors with an NPL side sitting on top.

Makes me wonder what happens when pro/rel comes in if a championship club that gets promoted has to find numbers for a whole new side or if a current Northern NPL side gets relegated do they lose a whole grade, but that's obviously a different setup to most other states.

Yes, also heard that Arthur. Never going to happen, these guys are in fairy land

Great question and i love reading the replies. 

Yep. Having coached within this system and seeing how it works behind the scenes.

It's stupid. 

Doesn't hold up to scrutiny. But it is similar to European practices and we all love to harp on about those. 

However this highlights again how Australia and Europe are so different. In Europe everyone plays football and plays it well. If you're a 21 year old and haven't made pro you can drop down and the level isn't much different. Heck I'm in Italy at the moment and I played six on six in a caravan park with randoms and they all could have played NPL pretty easily. 

In Australia we need to hold onto average talent. And yes most importantly the youth need to play against men. It's a must and one of the few things we've gotten right lately with the NYL. The fact that the A League youth plays against men for points at state level is brilliant. And way, way better than what they do in England and Italy. Germany has the second team playing in a lower division and that works. We need to keep that policy up. And maybe expand it. 

But yeah one of those age groups shouldn't exist. U18s and then seconds for me but maybe have a set amount of players under 25 so it's not just a huge amount of 35+ year olds who don't want to hang up the boots and are too stubborn to play in a crapper league. 

Fair enough.

I don't think thats even worth worrying about. All things being equal if clubs have a choice between a younger or older player in reserve grade, they will aways pick the young players, they have incentive to. Theres always a couple of old experienced players but that helps the young ones it doesn't hinder them (usually). 

What bothers me the most is that some NPL's have different age groups. I think the Victorian NPL have under 21's and NSW have under 20's but want to change it to under 23's. Surely the FFA has worked out the best model for development and passed the message onto the state federations to implement a universal model.

I think they all have first grade-u20s-18s actually. The divisions underneath are all different though. Why would you want a universal model anyway?