CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[BadgerBruce]

Probably the CHL will re-write its educational benefits program to ensure that it is not subsidizing NCAA hockey.

How might that work? The scholarship is academic, meaning a kid who leaves the CHL and pursues a post-secondary education virtually anywhere in the world has his
tuition costs defrayed via the earned CHL scholarship. Gonna take away an earned academic scholarship because the kid plays school hockey? On what basis?

Not saying the scholarship package will remain as-is, but I really can’t fathom how the terms can be altered to disqualify kids after they’ve left the league just because they play a sport.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

How might that work? The scholarship is academic, meaning a kid who leaves the CHL and pursues a post-secondary education virtually anywhere in the world has his
tuition costs defrayed via the earned CHL scholarship. Gonna take away an earned academic scholarship because the kid plays school hockey? On what basis?

Not saying the scholarship package will remain as-is, but I really can’t fathom how the terms can be altered to disqualify kids after they’ve left the league just because they play a sport.

They already do. Unless it's changed recently. I'm not sure exactly how it's worded but players who go pro, even if they're only playing in the ECHL or 2cnd tier Euro league for peanuts, forfeit their scholarship credits. I believe it used to be they had a 1 year grace period. Maybe somebody who knows the exact details (of how that worked) will post them.
Either way, putting it in writing that players who accept an NCAA scholarship forfeit their CHL scholarship is very very likely.

EDIT: Copied directly from the whl website:
"The WHL Scholarship is guaranteed to the player through him and his parent or guardian signing a WHL Scholarship & Development Agreement, provided he does not sign a professional hockey contract in the NHL. Players are allowed to play minor professional hockey (AHL, ECHL, etc.) before he must activate his scholarship, within 18 months of his junior eligibility ending"

 

[BadgerBruce]

They already do. Unless it's changed recently. I'm not sure exactly how it's worded but players who go pro, even if they're only playing in the ECHL or 2cnd tier Euro league for peanuts, forfeit their scholarship credits. I believe it used to be they had a 1 year grace period. Maybe somebody who knows the exact details (of how that worked) will post them.
Either way, putting it in writing that players who accept an NCAA scholarship forfeit their CHL scholarship is very very likely.

Nope — the scholarship eligibility remains intact unless the former CHL player signs an NHL deal. He has until age 23 to begin using the scholarship.

 

[BadgerBruce]

@AndyDufresne, the attached link should provide the information you seek. It’s a 2024-25 document, so up to date.

https://media.chl.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2024/05/31113908/FAQ-2.pdf

 

[HawksDub89]

House Settlement pegs revenue sharing at 22% of all income but part of that equation also includes tuition, stipends and other cost of attendance related items. NIL appears to be excluded from those revenue calculations, but the NCAA will attempt to rein in third party collectives. 85% of revenue sharing is expected to go exclusively to football and basketball (the sports actually driving in the revenue), so that doesn't really leave much for non-revenue sports like hockey.

Oh it’ll be a very small percentage for sure. But the number floated around this summer was schools being able to share up to 20M. (Based on percentage of current annual rev)

Let’s say a hockey powerhouse like Michigan or any other B1G team gives 5% rev to hockey, that’s a million bucks. That’s not nothing.

All I’m saying is it could be a factor at some point.

 

[Corso]

@AndyDufresne, the attached link should provide the information you seek. It’s a 2024-25 document, so up to date.

https://media.chl.ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2024/05/31113908/FAQ-2.pdf

Thank you for that info BadgerBruce (you have always been a wealth of solid information on this topic). I did find number 17 interesting when it stated "As per Article 5.01 (a) of the SPA, at no time shall the payment for room and board exceed the dollar amount charged by the school they are attending."

So we can take this to mean that if an OHL player decides to play at Michigan on a full ride, the OHL will not have to cover his room and board due to the fact that the school is already paying for it. I wonder if they will then do the same with tuition?

 

[BadgerBruce]

Thank you for that info BadgerBruce (you have always been a wealth of solid information on this topic). I did find number 17 interesting when it stated "As per Article 5.01 (a) of the SPA, at no time shall the payment for room and board exceed the dollar amount charged by the school they are attending."

So we can take this to mean that if an OHL player decides to play at Michigan on a full ride, the OHL will not have to cover his room and board due to the fact that the school is already paying for it. I wonder if they will then do the same with tuition?

The former player in FAQ #17 had the University of Toronto designated as his Home School under the domicile rule when he signed the CHL Standard Player Agreement. He is also a “full ride” scholarship recipient, which means he’s receiving the so-called CHL Gold Package, which covers room and board in addition to tuition/compulsory fees/books. “Full ride” does not refer to what the university is giving him. It refers to what the CHL gold package scholarship is giving him.

Anyway, in the hypothetical scenario he has chosen to attend Brock University in St. Catharines. That’s his right. But Brock University charges significantly less than U of T for a residence room and meal plan. The player wants to receive the higher amount charged by U of T, but the league is saying “No, we won’t give you the higher U of T amount because Brock doesn’t charge that much. We won’t give you MORE than you are actually charged by Brock.” For clarity, if he chose to attend a university that charged more than U of T for a residence room and meal plan, the CHL would only pay the amount charged by U of T, since that’s the kid’s home school under the domicile rule.

If the kid decided to attend, say, the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, his CHL Gold Package scholarship would cover his residence room and meal plan (“room and board”) up to the amount charged by the University of Toronto, which is his domicile rule dictated home school.

Obviously, the American players in the CHL are entitled to WAY more scholarship funding because the domicile rule also applies to them, and US college tuition is so much more. Americans on Gold Packages … yikes! A 4-year gold package at an American university could easily run $250K.

 

[Corso]

Obviously, the American players in the CHL are entitled to WAY more scholarship funding because the domicile rule also applies to them, and US college tuition is so much more. Americans on Gold Packages … yikes! A 4-year gold package at an American university could easily run $250K.

How ironic will it be if the CHL begins subsidizing NCAA hockey. On the flip side, why would any college recruit from outside the CHL?

I would think that the CHL will somehow have to either change the scholastic packages to exclude U.S. college hockey or actively discourage players from playing in the NCAA for cost saving purposes.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

How might that work? The scholarship is academic, meaning a kid who leaves the CHL and pursues a post-secondary education virtually anywhere in the world has his
tuition costs defrayed via the earned CHL scholarship. Gonna take away an earned academic scholarship because the kid plays school hockey? On what basis?

Not saying the scholarship package will remain as-is, but I really can’t fathom how the terms can be altered to disqualify kids after they’ve left the league just because they play a sport.

The agreement is that for every year played in the CHL,1 years worth of tuition is paid that's it period no ifs ands or buts...otherwise it's a renege on a agreement