CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[Oak]

You said American kids are going to be screwed out of NCAA roster spots by CHL overagers who are Canadians who 'dont go pro anyways'. Thats not true whatsoever lol and most hockey players from both CHL & NCAA dont go pro anyways so truthfully its not a relevant big deal you make it out to be.

Canadian students still need to meet the academic and athletic requirements to go to US schools and NCAA D1 commitments are non-binding. Whether or not they are trying to play pro hockey going forward has no bearing on that.

New path will consistently be CHL > NCAA > AHL. Since the vote happened today and its not limited to overagers like some thought, kids will go NCAA at 18 to play against older competition. Worst case some kids do 3 years and off to NCAA at 19.

USHL is really going to suffer from this ruling.

 

[LeProspector]

BCHL is now dead, they did it to themselves. Expect every major prospect to go to the CHL now.

 

[Oak]

BCHL is now dead, they did it to themselves. Expect every major prospect to go to the CHL now.

Yea but nobody could have expected this to happen. BCHL was a good option for kids, especially Americans who werent going to get playing time in the USHL but had college commitments.

Next few years will be interesting in the junior landscape.

 

[Dempsey]

BCHL is now dead, they did it to themselves. Expect every major prospect to go to the CHL now.

I thought this too, but is it really that impactful? BCHL has maybe one or two draft eligible players in the entire league each year who could play more than a depth role in the CHL and then they're gone in their D+1 year anyway.

Maybe a few older BCHL players will move up to the CHL each year now before heading to the NCAA but players coming up from the USHL and taking spots could make it minimal or actually push CHLers down to the BCHL.

I'm not sure how it actually plays out but I'm not overly worried. Maybe I should be, who knows. I really enjoy the BCHL.

 

[Leviathan899]

Any kid without an NHL ELC or being a draft pick (sometimes teams park later round picks with AHL Contracts but with the expectation that they're just pushing off their ELC if they continue to progress) would be best served playing in the NCAA. Even for the guys that get AHL Contracts, it can be pretty brutal for them, they're usually the first one out in any roster re-shuffling and even if they play pretty well for their age, any sent down players on NHL ELCs will bump them down. In terms of making/sticking on an AHL roster and in the AHL lineup, players that are older, more experienced, can set a good example on and off the ice for the 20 year old second and third round picks, and more plug and play are usually prioritized for AHL deals over some 21 year old "bonus" prospect (that was already passed over in the Draft three times and then all 32 teams decided not to offer an NHL Contract to). You basically have one year [in a year you'll likely be on the 4th line, frequently in and out of the lineup and a candidate to get sent to the ECHL] to make a good enough impression to warrant an AHL future or it's off to the ECHL long-term.

Well said, the current system of 20-21 year old mid round picks going to the AHL and then put in a role where it’s very difficult to shine is crushing a lot of potential talent. These kids need to continue playing in roles where they have a chance to contribute and be important pieces to a team. I think this could result in a lot more players with top 6 skill at 24-25 rather than bottom 6 guys in the coast or ahl where their skill and confidence has been zapped.

 

[Leviathan899]

Some months back, when this issue first surfaced, Chris Peters had a debate with UND beat writer Brad Schlossman and pretty well much said everything you just posted. Scholssman was of the opinion that the NCAA would now be the top of the pyramid in terms of amateur development and first round CHLers would flock to the NCAA to play against older competition but Peters was having none of that. His claim, as yours, was that in no way would the NHL give up the way their prospects are developed and would in fact heavily influence the top end elite players to stay in the CHL.

I don't know how this is going to shake itself out but I'm kind of the opinion that you and Chris Peters are right. I have talked to some connected people and they are telling me that the CHL has long prepared for this eventuality, hence their willingness to change the NHL-CHL transfer agreement. I also was told that some pretty prominent college programs have already approached some CHL franchises in order to work out a development recruitment strategy (similar to what they currently have with all the USHL franchises) but were flatly rebuffed. It seems that the CHL stance is that you can have our 20 and 21 year old players but our top prospects will remain in the CHL.

This is the perfect move for 20-21 year olds who graduate from the CHL and are going to be good pro’s, but aren’t really ready for the AHL yet. The ECHL is ok, but I really don’t think it’s the proper environment for a young guy like that to develop. They need 2-3 more years, and the ncaa provides better competition than the Canadian University landscape does, overall. I agree that although the ncaa will likely try hard to poach the top guys, I don’t see it making sense for the first and second round guys, not to mention teams often sign these guys right after being drafted or development camp. But that becomes tricky because as of now you’re not able to play College hockey with a contract.

 

[Leviathan899]

Okay, the point I'm trying to make is can a CHL player leave while they are still eligible to play in CHL (age 17, 18, 19) to go play in NCAA?

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.

Read today that the CHL will honour the CHL scholarship for the NCAA provided the player plays out their eligibility. If they decide to leave before that, they lose their education package. You’re eligible to go to ncaa in your OA year though if you choose, which incentives players to fulfill their contracts even more. Plus you can’t as of now go to the NCAA if you’ve signed your ELC, which a lot of the high picks in the CHL have already done.

 

[Leviathan899]

I don't see what Landon Dupont will have to gain playing a third year in the CHL over going and getting in a year as the most famous person on a big college campus and adding a Hobey Baker and hopefully natty to the collection.

For most high enders though (1st and 2nd rounders), they'll do their two years in the CHL and the drafting team will push a little harder to get them signed right away in that summer to control them not going the college route and the potential to go free agency.

I’d eat my hat if a guy like DuPont ever steps foot on a college campus for hockey.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Read today that the CHL will honour the CHL scholarship for the NCAA provided the player plays out their eligibility. If they decide to leave before that, they lose their education package. You’re eligible to go to ncaa in your OA year though if you choose, which incentives players to fulfill their contracts even more. Plus you can’t as of now go to the NCAA if you’ve signed your ELC, which a lot of the high picks in the CHL have already done.

If you’re good enough to enter a decent ncaa team before your junior eligibility expires you’re likely a fully or at least 75 % anyways. Honestly if the CHL is paying the way for 20 year olds so the ncaa school itself doesn’t have to, I imagine the top teams are going to be even more stacked. Imagine third and fourth line players that take up zero of the scholarship allocation that aren’t paying a dime to go there.

 

[Oak]

One thing I think a lot of you guys are missing is you are only evaluating this through the lense of first round draft picks. There are a lot of kids who get drafted who go nowhere, or very good players who dont get drafted.

This will have a bigger effect on them than any first round kid.

Now some of you might say who cares! But if you're involved in the game these kids are people too and some of them are damn fine hockey players who will excel in College.

This change is hurting a lot of kids.

 

[landy92mack29]

Well, this decision really sees the death of Junior A hockey in Canada. Literally the only reason why anyone pursuing a hockey career with Junior A hockey is to secure a college scholarship.

I'm going to guess that there will be discussions between the BCHL (and other Junior A leagues) to either merge the top teams into the CHL or go back down to Junior B.

Kinda sucks with the rich history of Junior A clubs but it is what is.

It honestly isn't that bad for any Junior A league other than the USHL, other Junior A leagues will just be a stepping stone to the CHL-NCAA. The BCHL will be hurt by only having kids for one year but that was kinda the case for most of the eastern canadians/americans that came anyway who would go USHL after 1 BCHL year. Now it'll just be older players pushed out of the CHL by US kids and younger fairly high chl picks who will go for 1 year instead of playing another year Midget AAA or limited CHL minutes, basically becoming the WHLs AHL. We'll see how many CHLers go NCAA before they turn 20 but not sure it'll actually be that many as for the WHL at least most kids like playing close to home(relatively speaking), don't care about school(a good chunk won't be academically eligible for NCAA) or will have signed ELCs. Leagues like the SJHL/MJHL won't be effected at all really, might even benefit from the trickle down. USports will be hit hard but now players in the AJHL/SJHL/MJHL will just replace them while the Major Junior guys go NCAA(assuming grades are good enough). Another benefit of the CHL package is players don't have to use it on just University they can also use it for trade schools which quite a few do. Lots of unknowns how things will shake out but ultimately I think it's a win-win for most leagues, we'll see. Only thing is smaller population teams like a PA/PG/SC won't be able to get many of the top US kids who will mainly go to the Saskatoons/Cal/EDM/Van/Kel/Port/Seattles

 

[WarriorofTime]

It honestly isn't that bad for any Junior A league other than the USHL, other Junior A leagues will just be a stepping stone to the CHL-NCAA.

The USHL is not "Junior A", a term referring to the Hockey Canada system junior leagues that exist below Major Juniors. The USHL is the Tier I Junior League in the U.S. Hockey Amateur system.

 

[pgfan66]

One thing I think a lot of you guys are missing is you are only evaluating this through the lense of first round draft picks. There are a lot of kids who get drafted who go nowhere, or very good players who dont get drafted.

This will have a bigger effect on them than any first round kid.

Now some of you might say who cares! But if you're involved in the game these kids are people too and some of them are damn fine hockey players who will excel in College.

This change is hurting a lot of kids.

I was going to agree with you but then I read the final sentence and I really don't get where you're coming from anymore.

Yes, this change will impact way more non-NHL prospects than NHL prospects let alone first-rounders. But I don't see it hurting those kids.

First things first:

• USHL kids can still go the NCAA route
• CHL kids can go the NCAA route
• Jr. A kids can choose between NCAA and USports

What will happen is that CHL and NCAA quality will likely go up because more high-end players will take that route. The "lower-end" American (and some Canadian) prospects (who will still be high end in the grand scheme of things) will still have great development options in the USHL.

The only "problem" is that more high-end players will want to play for the high-end NCAA programs, but I don't see that as a problem. There are 64 D1 schools, 6 D2 and 84 D3 – and then there's ACHA etc. All of these schools will benefit from better players, all players who are good enough to play but not good enough to turn pro will find a place to play while going to school if they choose to. Lower-end college kids may be pushed out, but if we're being completely honest, if you aren't good enough to stick with an ACHA school, you probably weren't looking at a pro career anymore anyway and can simply go to school and play club hockey or whatever.

To me, this change is great for everyone involved – except perhaps those players who don't get a CHL scholarship because they didn't stick for the full 4 years and can't afford school without a full hockey scholarship.

 

[Oak]

I was going to agree with you but then I read the final sentence and I really don't get where you're coming from anymore.

Problem is that you are assuming the USHL will continue to exist. So far we have one rumor of USHL and CHL merging which would be good but the more likely scenario is that it withers away little by little every season.

Yes there will still be an option for the 5 and 4 star level prospect in the OHL but if you are considering the above average American player who would be a role player well those kids will be kicking rocks.

I coach Prep hockey in the New England district. Even though it has become a less popular route every single one of these kids wants to play NCAA d1. Maybe my lense is skewed or slightly liberal. 50% will play NAHL, the other 50% USHL. I can think of multiple kids who are in the USHL/BCHL this year who would never get a sniff if the scenario we are talking about was in play already.

Does it make me feel bad for American kids? Yes.

I do agree it will raise the bar, but at what cost? NCAA used to be the place for the student athlete. Seems like they want to be feeder systems for pro teams but if you look at the history of college hockey that is not what they have been or should be. I guess money talks.

Also the paragraph I wrote that you are disagreeing with, after reading it again I should have replaced excel with "do well" because yes they most likely wont excel.

 

[Oak]

The only "problem" is that more high-end players will want to play for the high-end NCAA programs, but I don't see that as a problem. There are 64 D1 schools, 6 D2 and 84 D3 – and then there's ACHA etc. All of these schools will benefit from better players, all players who are good enough to play but not good enough to turn pro will find a place to play while going to school if they choose to. Lower-end college kids may be pushed out, but if we're being completely honest, if you aren't good enough to stick with an ACHA school, you probably weren't looking at a pro career anymore anyway and can simply go to school and play club hockey or whatever.

One more topic to touch, I'd say your concept of college hockey is kind of skewed if you compare it to what it has always been. It was never a place for first round draft picks to hone their game, and prepare for the NHL. And although it has been happening in pockets the past 5-10 years, it's not what the goal was. Plan was for student athletes to succeed and do well in life after hockey, and if the creme de la creme rises and moves on well theres nothing wrong with that.

If this change goes as planned. The 10% who were elite and destined for the NHL will become 50% at the minimum. I cant help feel like NCAA is going the wrong way but hey we can always looks at D1 football and see that the NCAA has never been anything more than a money hungry organization.

This is the world we live in and unfortunately money and status talks.

 

[Corso]

I’d eat my hat if a guy like DuPont ever steps foot on a college campus for hockey.

I know that at least a couple of big name schools reached out to his agent and family to gauge interest in playing D-1 hockey, I am not sure how they were received, but yes, Dupont is on track to enter the NHL at 18 and it would be highly unlikely that he sets foot on any campus.

BCHL is now dead, they did it to themselves. Expect every major prospect to go to the CHL now.

The BCHL will have to get back under the good graces of Hockey Canada. Their model was based on plucking high end young Canadian talent that was bound for the NCAA and buttressing them with some good but older American and European players. Those young elite NCAA bound Canadian kids will now not choose to go to an unsanctioned league and many of those better American players will flock to the USHL.

The way I see it, most leagues that are not the CHL will take a step down in the pecking order from where they once were. The majority of NCAA programs will now devote the majority of their time to recruiting from the CHL and then the USHL.

The USHL was the elite primary feeder to the NCAA. The very best American born prospects and a few Canadian born players would flock to the league in their 16- or 17-year-olds seasons, spending a couple of years before jumping to the college ranks as 18- and 19-year-olds. The next "tier" of players, if you will, would enter the U at 18 and 19, then advance to D-1 as 20-year-olds (the majority of recruits/players). The U will now begin to lose a lot of those top end young players as they will increasingly choose the CHL route. They will be replaced by those players who would not have entered the league until their 18 or even 19-year-old seasons. Those players will play in the league a little longer than they normally would have and then enter the college ranks between the ages of 19-21. The USHL will still send a plethora of players on to the NCAA but will lack the high-end young players and you should not expect to see to many players drafted early from the league.

The NAHL has around 200ish D-1 commitments annually while another 100 or so filter into the D-III ranks. You can expect those numbers to flip in the near term and in time the NAHL will be seen primarily as a D-III feeder with a few dozen players garnering D-1 commitments from the lower end D-1 schools.

The BCHL will be comparable to the NAHL, with the majority of its players going to U-Sports and the rest D-III. There of course will still be some D-1 commitments but not many.

The various other Canadian Junior hockey leagues will become much younger and primarily serve as a feeder to the CHL. Those older players that don't end up in the CHL will filter to the NAHL/BCHL as they vie for D-III spots.

 

[kyle44]

I've yet to see any of the talking heads address current CHL contracts. Will players that already have a CHL contract (non-overagers) have the ability to break said contract and bolt for the NCAA without consent of the team? I fail to see why a CHL team would let a good player walk without compensation barring some legal impediment (not saying there aren't any; would just like to know).

 

[Corso]

I've yet to see any of the talking heads address current CHL contracts. Will players that already have a CHL contract (non-overagers) have the ability to break said contract and bolt for the NCAA without consent of the team? I fail to see why a CHL team would let a good player walk without compensation barring some legal impediment (not saying there aren't any; would just like to know).

As of now, contracts remain in effect, but I've heard from very reputable sources that, at least the OHL anyway, they will put opt out clauses allowing for players to leave for the NCAA before their O.A. season.

 

[Jacob]

The USHL should dissolve the USNTDP and become the 4th CHL league. Turning off notifications now.

 

[jtechkid]

Problem is that you are assuming the USHL will continue to exist. So far we have one rumor of USHL and CHL merging which would be good but the more likely scenario is that it withers away little by little every season.

Yes there will still be an option for the 5 and 4 star level prospect in the OHL but if you are considering the above average American player who would be a role player well those kids will be kicking rocks.

I coach Prep hockey in the New England district. Even though it has become a less popular route every single one of these kids wants to play NCAA d1. Maybe my lense is skewed or slightly liberal. 50% will play NAHL, the other 50% USHL. I can think of multiple kids who are in the USHL/BCHL this year who would never get a sniff if the scenario we are talking about was in play already.

Does it make me feel bad for American kids? Yes.

I do agree it will raise the bar, but at what cost? NCAA used to be the place for the student athlete. Seems like they want to be feeder systems for pro teams but if you look at the history of college hockey that is not what they have been or should be. I guess money talks.

Also the paragraph I wrote that you are disagreeing with, after reading it again I should have replaced excel with "do well" because yes they most likely wont excel.

i guess why is USA college team subsidizing Youth Canada hockey is big question . canada youth hockey got dramatically stronger with a lot more options for their kids . usa hockey kids will lose probably 100-250 spots for USA colleges .