Club Basketball: The good the bad and the necessary
Even the best things in life have their flaws. The best tasting food comes with a waistline penalty, overseas travel is incredible but the dollar takes a hit against the euro and the best CD’s have at least one song we can do without. Generally speaking you have to weigh the positives against the negatives in any situation and decide if the return is worth your investment. The same goes for club basketball and participation in NCAA certified non-scholastic events. The main stage for colligate recruiting is not without its pitfalls but it’s difficult to condemn the entire setting.
The negatives are certainly there and the critics are quick to point them out. There is not enough skill development or teaching; too many games in a short period of time; recruiting by the clubs themselves from competing programs and the intensity of the year round component is too much for players of younger ages. Pick your poison.
There are those who will cite the risk of injury while conveniently overlooking the fact that a top tier player is most likely playing somewhere on a daily basis anyway. Often factors come into play that parents and coaches aren’t willing to openly admit such as a player control and the desire to limit outside influences in an athlete’s career and recruitment. For others, today’s economy dictates and limits choices as a result of increased travel and participation costs.
(photo by Kelly Kline)
Each of those issues, as well as others, have validity but can just as easily be countered with the positive aspects of club basketball. Few scholastic settings can offer the competitive level game in and game out that the right spring and summer events can deliver. Often a non-scholastic teams accommodate an athlete looking to get court time at a position they are hoping to play at the next level.
While club coaching itself can be a hit, miss or nonexistent facet, the chance to play in an organized setting in and of itself has a value that open gym and pick up ball seldom provides. Game time, both scholastic and club, adds an experience and basketball maturity element while giving players situational decision making, clock management and team chemistry that you can’t find in individual training.
The values and drawbacks of club basketball can be debated on many levels, but it’s hard not to evaluate it first and foremost from the vantage point of recruiting. The current NCAA non-scholastic schedule allows for a total of 26 days across a calendar year for Division I recruiters. Most collegiate staffs are going to make decisions on their needs, priorities and schedule based on who and what they see during the 23 days of spring and summer play.
While the spring period is essential, the three day fall time slot doesn’t factor into the recruiting equation to the same degree when you consider that the start of the high school season usually follows less than a month later. There are anticipated legislative changes on the horizon that most likely will alter that current model but the next two non-scholastic evaluation periods (April and July) will still follow suit with recent years.
Is it important that a prospect get out and be seen during these events? Absolutely. Is it the only way to get onto the radar screens of recruiters? Not necessarily, but catching the eye of college coaches is much easier if you’re at an event where an army of college coaches are on hand rather than trying to convince them to check you out for the first time in a single game, high school setting. The academic year has a limited number of NCAA permissible evaluation days as well and you can bet they’ll be very selective in how they choose to use them.
Just getting out and playing during those evaluation periods isn’t enough by itself either. Picking the right tournaments and being in the strongest divisions is a critical component to making the most of club basketball opportunities. If a team is playing in smaller tournaments or playing in the lower brackets of established events you lessen the odds of being seen or creating interest. Looking for tournaments with the deepest fields of talent as well as numerous participating established recruits increases the odds that there will be college coaches sitting courtside come tip off. It’s really not important why they’re in the gym. A good recruiter evaluates everyone on the floor no matter what team or individual they came to watch.
(photo by Kelly Kline)
Even a known and established prospect needs to get out and demonstrate that she’s still improving and advancing her game. Often players drop in rankings or lose stature in the eyes of recruiters not because they’ve done anything less but because other prospects have been seen more extensively and shown growth that can only be compared to another athlete’s past performances. Coaches may like you as a freshman or sophomore but you still need to give them validation to love you as an upperclassman. Additionally, college recruiters like to see prospects challenged in the most competitive setting possible. Watching a 6-4 post put up 30 points and pull down 15 rebounds against a 5-10 opponent in a high school game isn’t going to turn a coach off but doesn’t allow for the most accurate assessment of potential.
Is it a necessity to be playing every day during an evaluation period? Not at all. In fact playing two games a day for the duration of July can lead to some tired, uninspired and less than impressive performances before the month’s end. However, the recruiting calendar has a 10 day on, 5 day off, 10 day on format. Most events are three or four day tournaments and playing two events in each of the 10 day segments guarantees at least a five day break. That’s a maximum of 16 days on the floor over the course of 25 days and plenty of down time. That’s hardly a schedule that should be an issue for athletes with the legitimate potential to play at the next level.
However, issue should be taken with club organizers and coaches cramming three events into one of or both 10 day July evaluation periods. The same contention can be applied to those embracing the approach of competing in two tournaments simultaneously. These individuals aren’t connecting the dots between exposure, performance and common sense. This is where the risk of injury argument assumes legitimacy. Smart planning by a coach and club director can create a good opportunity for exposure without exhausting the players or breaking the bank of parents and sponsors.
Freeway rush hour traffic is seldom a good situation but serves as an illustration of how too much of anything can mess up even the best of options. The road through club basketball is often crowded and has more than its share of potholes. However, there are times that it’s still the best way to get to your destination. The non-scholastic basketball issues that most folks want to attribute to the NCAA and recruiting calendar are more likely the product of decisions made on the club level. Good choices by coaches, parents and the athletes themselves can make the trip productive and worth taking.
