CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[jtechkid]

usa kids that go to chl will find out soon they are secondary to the canada kids - not the top 10-20 but the rest of usa kids that are forced by this rule to move to canada . it actually gives usa kids worse choice for the college options - ridiculous.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

This isn’t going to force much movement of American kids to the CHL. Did anyone see what Will Smith alluded to about Quentin Musty like two months ago? And that was before the ridiculous trade saga.

Most American kids are still going to eventually go the NCAA route and the USHL is competitive with the CHL leagues for competition (better than some, worse than others). USHL also doesn’t have limitations for them such as no AHL before two years, no NCAA before overage year (theoretically this could be negotiated and changed), and I think if you’re an American it’s the same thing as the Canadians that grow up wanting to play CHL. You ideally want to develop where you grew up. That’s just natural.

This might keep a few extra Canadians in the CHL over USHL, but likely not the top kids, unless they will agree to release them from their CHL agreements whenever the player wants. The whole reason these Canadian players play USHL to begin with is to play NCAA at 17-19. If this can’t be guaranteed, I’m not sure what would change.

When speaking of players who aren’t from North America, that’ll be the interesting group they’re competing for. Still to be determined how that goes I think. They are still going to have the same factors (going to NCAA before OA year or not, being able to play AHL before OA year or not). This stuff will have to be negotiated. I don’t see much early movement from any top prospects. And USHL has really gained traction and is widely viewed as better than some CHL leagues, so the idea that CHL will wipe it out now with this is outdated, in the most generous interpretation.

 

[Bonin21]

usa kids that go to chl will find out soon they are secondary to the canada kids - not the top 10-20 but the rest of usa kids that are forced by this rule to move to canada . it actually gives usa kids worse choice for the college options - ridiculous.

mix in a capital letter some time

 

[Corso]

This isn’t going to force much movement of American kids to the CHL. Did anyone see what Will Smith alluded to about Quentin Musty like two months ago? And that was before the ridiculous trade saga.

Most American kids are still going to eventually go the NCAA route and the USHL is competitive with the CHL leagues for competition (better than some, worse than others). USHL also doesn’t have limitations for them such as no AHL before two years, no NCAA before overage year (theoretically this could be negotiated and changed), and I think if you’re an American it’s the same thing as the Canadians that grow up wanting to play CHL. You ideally want to develop where you grew up. That’s just natural.

This might keep a few extra Canadians in the CHL over USHL, but likely not the top kids, unless they will agree to release them from their CHL agreements whenever the player wants. The whole reason these Canadian players play USHL to begin with is to play NCAA at 17-19. If this can’t be guaranteed, I’m not sure what would change.

When speaking of players who aren’t from North America, that’ll be the interesting group they’re competing for. Still to be determined how that goes I think. They are still going to have the same factors (going to NCAA before OA year or not, being able to play AHL before OA year or not). This stuff will have to be negotiated. I don’t see much early movement from any top prospects. And USHL has really gained traction and is widely viewed as better than some CHL leagues, so the idea that CHL will wipe it out now with this is outdated, in the most generous interpretation.

I did a deep dive with a few that work at some advisory agencies. Here is what they told me.

Everyone knew this was coming well over a year ago. By everyone, I mean player agents and the various hockey leagues that were to be affected. Some leagues just wanted to bury their head in the sand and pretend that this would go away. Other leagues, however, began to prepare.

The college hockey community (mainly coaches, but conference commissioners and some ADs) were split on this issue between the smaller programs and the bigger blue bloods. Most schools in the CCHA for instance, were advocating for this rule change. Schools such as Michigan and B.U. were adamantly opposed.

The CHL, in anticipation of this rule change, is working with the NHL to change their transfer agreement that will allow for players to play in the AHL during their 18 and 19 year old seasons but they want it under a sort of hybrid agreement. If the players are not re-assigned to their respective NHL club by a certain date, then that player would be returned to finish his season with the CHL club. So theoretically, a player could play 35 games in the AHL then be transferred back to the CHL if the parent club feels he is not ready for the NHL. The PA is looking at this proposal. They are also trying to decide the length of time player rights will be held by NHL clubs. They want a uniform timeline no matter where they were drafted from.

The CHL does not want to see itself as a feeder program to the NCAA but rather use the NCAA as an option for undrafted or unsigned players to fall back on. The CHL will actively encourage drafted players to sign E.L.C's in order to lose NCAA eligibility.

Agents and see this as an opportunity for their clients to have a little bit more runway for development and will suggest that players, especially those drafted in the latter rounds use the NCAA option and not immediately sign.

The USHL and the BCHL are in a complete state of fear. As has been already reported, some USHL clubs are actively looking at joining the CHL. Many owners are pushing for some type of affiliation with the CHL or outright merger. The CHL, however, is very cool to the idea and instead is looking at poaching the better programs. The CHL is looking to further expand into the U.S. markets and the poaching of USHL teams might play into that.

USA Hockey is in an enraged state and feel betrayed by the NCAA. They launched several appeals to the NCAA governing body to delay or modify the ruling but were rebuffed. Some of the conference commissioners and coaches appealed to the NHL to get involved. The NHL basically said sorry but not our problem.

The various Canadian Junior A leagues are working on a new development model. The feeling is that they will mainly work with CHL teams while trying to develop the rest of the players for either U-Sports or D-III hockey.

Many expect a lot of movement of yes American born players to the CHL. They will, however, be given opt out clauses if they choose to leave for the NCAA before aging out of the CHL. The general feeling is that most will want to go the NCAA route.

The future of the NTDP remains an open question.

The big unknown right now is what the NHL future drafts are going to look like, regarding age and how long will player rights be retained.

 

[Leviathan899]

NCAA hockey is obviously a step up in calibre from CHL but "a much, much better developmental league" is hyperbolic. CHL plays a lot more games, that's one of the draws. Also, there will be some kids who aren't interested in going to university, and/or don't have the grades.

It’s only a step up in terms of the strength of the players, not skill.

I did a deep dive with a few that work at some advisory agencies. Here is what they told me.

Everyone knew this was coming well over a year ago. By everyone, I mean player agents and the various hockey leagues that were to be affected. Some leagues just wanted to bury their head in the sand and pretend that this would go away. Other leagues, however, began to prepare.

The college hockey community (mainly coaches, but conference commissioners and some ADs) were split on this issue between the smaller programs and the bigger blue bloods. Most schools in the CCHA for instance, were advocating for this rule change. Schools such as Michigan and B.U. were adamantly opposed.

The CHL, in anticipation of this rule change, is working with the NHL to change their transfer agreement that will allow for players to play in the AHL during their 18 and 19 year old seasons but they want it under a sort of hybrid agreement. If the players are not re-assigned to their respective NHL club by a certain date, then that player would be returned to finish his season with the CHL club. So theoretically, a player could play 35 games in the AHL then be transferred back to the CHL if the parent club feels he is not ready for the NHL. The PA is looking at this proposal. They are also trying to decide the length of time player rights will be held by NHL clubs. They want a uniform timeline no matter where they were drafted from.

The CHL does not want to see itself as a feeder program to the NCAA but rather use the NCAA as an option for undrafted or unsigned players to fall back on. The CHL will actively encourage drafted players to sign E.L.C's in order to lose NCAA eligibility.

Agents and see this as an opportunity for their clients to have a little bit more runway for development and will suggest that players, especially those drafted in the latter rounds use the NCAA option and not immediately sign.

The USHL and the BCHL are in a complete state of fear. As has been already reported, some USHL clubs are actively looking at joining the CHL. Many owners are pushing for some type of affiliation with the CHL or outright merger. The CHL, however, is very cool to the idea and instead is looking at poaching the better programs. The CHL is looking to further expand into the U.S. markets and the poaching of USHL teams might play into that.

USA Hockey is in an enraged state and feel betrayed by the NCAA. They launched several appeals to the NCAA governing body to delay or modify the ruling but were rebuffed. Some of the conference commissioners and coaches appealed to the NHL to get involved. The NHL basically said sorry but not our problem.

The various Canadian Junior A leagues are working on a new development model. The feeling is that they will mainly work with CHL teams while trying to develop the rest of the players for either U-Sports or D-III hockey.

Many expect a lot of movement of yes American born players to the CHL. They will, however, be given opt out clauses if they choose to leave for the NCAA before aging out of the CHL. The general feeling is that most will want to go the NCAA route.

The future of the NTDP remains an open question.

The big unknown right now is what the NHL future drafts are going to look like, regarding age and how long will player rights be retained.

great post. I can see why the big boys are opposed to it, as it’s not likely they’ll be taking advantage of this as much as those CCHA teams will. Clarkson just got Jackson Parsons, Kitcheners starting goalie to commit for next year, and he’s going to be good. This move will strengthen the mid pack college teams and create harder competition for the Michigan and BU’s of the world. I can see a school like Arizona St or Penn State really benefiting from this move.

 

[Bonin21]

It’s only a step up in terms of the strength of the players, not skill.

The hockey is better and closer to what they'll get in the pros, and it's not a question. Top NCAA teams would absolutely work top CHL teams. Mid tier NCAA teams would work mid tier CHL teams. And so on.

 

[Leviathan899]

The hockey is better and closer to what they'll get in the pros, and it's not a question. Top NCAA teams would absolutely work top CHL teams. Mid tier NCAA teams would work mid tier CHL teams. And so on.

The style of play is not similar to pro hockey though. I watch a lot of both leagues, outside of 3-4 ncaa programs, the talent level just isn’t very good. London last year would have been a top 5 ncaa team. The skill level in the CHL is just better. For example I’d say oshawa this year would beat Michigan in a 7 game series. Michael Hage is their best player, and while he’s very good, Sennecke and Ritchie are both better. Oshawa has a lot talent than a Michigan does. I think BC would beat everyone, for sure. But there’s not many programs outside of that who can throw out, Ritchie, Sennecke, Barlow, Danford and Marrelli, or for London a Cowan, Barkey, Bonk, Dickinson, Nurmi, O’Rielly. The ncaa’s only real advantage is playing against older guys. But Wes Clark stated he thinks that advantage is wildly overrated, good players are good players and it’s more important to play in a more skilled environment. Outside of BC, are there any programs right now that can even say they have two forwards as good as Martone and Rehkopf?

 

[Bonin21]

The style of play is not similar to pro hockey though. I watch a lot of both leagues, outside of 3-4 ncaa programs, the talent level just isn’t very good. London last year would have been a top 5 ncaa team. The skill level in the CHL is just better. For example I’d say oshawa this year would beat Michigan in a 7 game series. Michael Hage is their best player, and while he’s very good, Sennecke and Ritchie are both better. Oshawa has a lot talent than a Michigan does. I think BC would beat everyone, for sure. But there’s not many programs outside of that who can throw out, Ritchie, Sennecke, Barlow, Danford and Marrelli, or for London a Cowan, Barkey, Bonk, Dickinson, Nurmi, O’Rielly. The ncaa’s only real advantage is playing against older guys. But Wes Clark stated he thinks that advantage is wildly overrated, good players are good players and it’s more important to play in a more skilled environment. Outside of BC, are there any programs right now that can even say they have two forwards as good as Martone and Rehkopf?

CHL teams used to play against USHL teams in pre-season...

It's not about how many first rounders they have. Like you said, they're younger and the kids are weaker. Any top ten team (including Michigan) would win any seven game series against the CHL teams.

 

[Blue and Green]

It’s only a step up in terms of the strength of the players, not skill.

I think you're confusing "skill" with inherent talent relative to age. CHL has more young guys with high end talent but the NCAA guys are on average a few years older and that makes a big difference in terms of both skill and strength.

NCAA teams would thump CHL teams. CIS is better than CHL and CIS teams lose the large majority of exhibition games vs NCAA. CIS is loaded with guys in their early-mid 20's who were good enough to play 4-5 years of CHL and some of them played minor pro for a year or two before going to CIS.

 

[Leviathan899]

CHL teams used to play against USHL teams in pre-season...

It's not about how many first rounders they have. Like you said, they're younger and the kids are weaker. Any top ten team (including Michigan) would win any seven game series against the CHL teams.

When did the leagues play pre season games? I just don’t agree. Talent reigns supreme at the end of the day. Michigan last year I’d agree; this year not so much. Michigan just struggled against the U18’s, which is a weak team overall and all 17-18 years old.

 

[Leviathan899]

I think you're confusing "skill" with inherent talent relative to age. CHL has more young guys with high end talent but the NCAA guys are on average a few years older and that makes a big difference in terms of both skill and strength.

NCAA teams would thump CHL teams. CIS is better than CHL and CIS teams lose the large majority of exhibition games vs NCAA. CIS is loaded with guys in their early-mid 20's who were good enough to play 4-5 years of CHL and some of them played minor pro for a year or two before going to CIS.

The CIS isn’t better than the CHL lol the NTDP often beats ncaa teams and they’re 17-18 years old. To me better hockey entails skill, even if the players are older and stronger, they don’t have as much talent. That’s why you’ll see a big time college scorer sign with an NHL team at 23-24 years old and still look avg compared to a CHL prospect at 19. I agree the top ncaa programs are stacked and would run roughshod over chl teams, but usually their best players are junior aged still. Look at BC, all their best players are the same age as guys in the OHL. Michael Hage is an 06 and leading Michigan in scoring, same with Sascha Boisvert at NoDak. There’s not a single CiS team that has the talent I’d say an oshawa or London this year. Plus a lot of CHL guys have experience playing at NHL camps against men and pro’s. End of the day, both routes are good for players and have their pro’s and con’s. But the ncaa gets wildly overrated as a means to crap on the CHL. The CHL is hated for the similar reason London is hated around the OHL, because it’s so successful.

 

[Bonin21]

When did the leagues play pre season games? I just don’t agree. Talent reigns supreme at the end of the day. Michigan last year I’d agree; this year not so much. Michigan just struggled against the U18’s, which is a weak team overall and all 17-18 years old.

Guessing you haven't been around long. Those USHL games were in 2007 or 2008ish.

As far as NTDP vs top college teams, the college teams treat those games as an exhibition. Play everybody, play all the goalies, etc. NTDP would not win actual best of seven series against the top 10-15 teams. I could see some good series against teams 16-25 or so.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

The USHL and the BCHL are in a complete state of fear. As has been already reported, some USHL clubs are actively looking at joining the CHL. Many owners are pushing for some type of affiliation with the CHL or outright merger. The CHL, however, is very cool to the idea and instead is looking at poaching the better programs. The CHL is looking to further expand into the U.S. markets and the poaching of USHL teams might play into that.

I think you're probably right about some points, but this one doesn't compute. Saying that with no inside info.

Why would the USHL be viewed similarly to the BCHL? It's a completely different tier of hockey league, to begin with.

I don't see how USHL merging with CHL would actually be bad for the USHL in any way. They probably keep everything they currently have, and then also get to compete in the Memorial Cup. Maybe they have to make slight concessions with whatever re-negotiated CHL-NHL agreement ends up happening and they fall under that, but it would likely still be overall beneficial. Of course, if a few USHL teams broke off and left the league for the CHL, that would be bad for the USHL as a league, but how could that even realistically occur? That makes no sense. That would be like saying the Brooks Bandits are going to join the WHL. Logically speaking, I think if there's any big shift with teams it starts with shifts with full leagues. If USHL teams are part of the same umbrella as CHL teams, I think it's because the two leagues have come together.

USA Hockey is in an enraged state and feel betrayed by the NCAA. They launched several appeals to the NCAA governing body to delay or modify the ruling but were rebuffed. Some of the conference commissioners and coaches appealed to the NHL to get involved. The NHL basically said sorry but not our problem.

USA Hockey might be upset by this. I could see why it doesn't benefit American hockey in general, but we're talking about American hockey on the margins. The players who would be affected here are the players who don't get drafted into the NHL. So some future 4 year NCAA players, the best of which maybe reach the ECHL or AHL, lose their spot to some guy from Canada? Too bad. Should work that way. If you aren't good at hockey (and realistically we are talking about players who are not good at hockey if they would lose a scholarship), I don't see why the ecosystem should revolve around them. At the same time, this likely doesn't benefit Canadian hockey either. But again, who cares? Too bad. No one should care about if some 4th liner in the CHL hypothetically loses a spot they might otherwise get to some player who previously wouldn't play in the CHL.

Many expect a lot of movement of yes American born players to the CHL. They will, however, be given opt out clauses if they choose to leave for the NCAA before aging out of the CHL. The general feeling is that most will want to go the NCAA route.

You should press them on why. I suspect these people you are speaking to are ill-informed on this point. Again, no inside info, but it doesn't make logical sense if you think through it.

If you're a kid from Boston, why would you jump ship for the Q? The USHL is likely just as good (if not probably better) of a league overall at this point. You also wouldn't have to deal with the big cultural differences you'd encounter in most of the Q.

We can use another example of like a kid from Michigan joining the O as that might help the CHL argument more, but again I don't see what actual benefit there is to it. Unless the USHL's big development advantages (can join the NCAA at whatever age you want, can freely move around to other leagues pre 20) goes away, the main reason why players join the USHL over the CHL still exists.

Do you think that Sascha Boisvert, for instance, loves Muskegon, Ohio so much that he'd rather live there than home for a few years? Or did the guy want to take advantage of that he could go to the NCAA at whatever age he wanted?

If you're a Russian like Ivan Ryabkin, why are the rumors there that he'd come over to the USHL with Muskegon? Why not the CHL? It's obvious that the main reason is because he'd potentially be able to then play for the AHL team of whatever NHL organization drafts him in the first round the following year.

If you want specific American examples, why do players like Ben Kevan, Jacob Rombach, Trevor Connelly, Mac Swanson, Tory Pitner, Adam Kleber choose USHL? These are players that didn't make NTDP or declined it. Why does the USHL currently pull in more of these types of American players than CHL? It's not as restrictive in what it asks of their future movement. Probably lifestyle to a certain extent also, but mostly about restrictions.

So again, I don't see why these American players (and realistically all nationalities, but we can stick to Americans here) changes. If you are the level of a player who could be drafted into the NHL, what is the incentive to start going the CHL path that wasn't there prior?

 

[Leviathan899]

Guessing you haven't been around long. Those USHL games were in 2007 or 2008ish.

As far as NTDP vs top college teams, the college teams treat those games as an exhibition. Play everybody, play all the goalies, etc. NTDP would not win actual best of seven series against the top 10-15 teams. I could see some good series against teams 16-25 or so.

I remember Sudbury playing Waterloo over in Russia when Josh Leivo was with Sudbury, but I don’t remember OHL and ushl teams playing straight up pre season games against each other.

 

[Oak]

Is it really a less popular route? Being from Ontario, I don’t know a ton about the New England prep school scene, but I’ve always been enamoured by it and find it sort of fascinating. A lot of those schools have such deep history and roots, and the passion of the students is cool to see. I know it’s not the ideal route for the Zegras’ of the world, but I always thought it was a strong route for kids to earn D1 scholarships. Has it changed recently?

It's got more to do with the financial workings of the teams versus the popularity of the route, but you're not wrong with anything else you said. Still though most kids in the upper 25% of prospect status will be steered towards CHL.

I just don’t see this move impacting the top CHL guys much at all. Remember all of them would have had the chance to commit to a school of their choice before choosing the CHL, and while before they’d have to go to a league a step down than the CHL for a couple of years before going to school, they decided to go to the CHL. A big part of that choice for the top guys is the ability to sign a pro contract soon after being drafted. This move won’t allow them to do that, nor could they attend things like NHL rookie tournaments. Plus if they do decide they want to leave the CHL after 2-3 years and go ncaa, they lose access to their education fund. So to use DuPont as an example, he will still be in highschool during his NHL draft year, and although he could fast track his schooling to enter at 17, he’d have no education package to use, and based on how he’s trending, he’s likely to sign an NHL contract the minute he’s drafted. So at most he’d have one season in ncaa and that’s if he fast tracks his schooling. But since he was awarded exceptional status, and wanted to play CHL, I can’t see why a player like him would take advantage of this new rule. Like Ryan Kennedy from the Hockey News tweeted out, 05 Oliver Tulk seems like the type of player most likely to be impacted by this. Undrafted 19-20 year olds who may be undersized or needing more time before going pro.

Majority of the last page of discussion has been clearly NOT about the top guys being impacted. Myself and the few posters responding to me have been talking about the "rest."

 

[Oak]

This isn’t going to force much movement of American kids to the CHL. Did anyone see what Will Smith alluded to about Quentin Musty like two months ago? And that was before the ridiculous trade saga.

Most American kids are still going to eventually go the NCAA route and the USHL is competitive with the CHL leagues for competition (better than some, worse than others). USHL also doesn’t have limitations for them such as no AHL before two years, no NCAA before overage year (theoretically this could be negotiated and changed), and I think if you’re an American it’s the same thing as the Canadians that grow up wanting to play CHL. You ideally want to develop where you grew up. That’s just natural.

This might keep a few extra Canadians in the CHL over USHL, but likely not the top kids, unless they will agree to release them from their CHL agreements whenever the player wants. The whole reason these Canadian players play USHL to begin with is to play NCAA at 17-19. If this can’t be guaranteed, I’m not sure what would change.

When speaking of players who aren’t from North America, that’ll be the interesting group they’re competing for. Still to be determined how that goes I think. They are still going to have the same factors (going to NCAA before OA year or not, being able to play AHL before OA year or not). This stuff will have to be negotiated. I don’t see much early movement from any top prospects. And USHL has really gained traction and is widely viewed as better than some CHL leagues, so the idea that CHL will wipe it out now with this is outdated, in the most generous interpretation.

Pavel clearly you don't know the financial innerworkings of USHL teams and how they differ greatly from CHL teams. Maybe you should make friends with professional agents before you share your opinion on this forum on this topic.

I'll give you a hint though. It's not "competition" thats the problem.

Only thing that will save the USHL is a merger with CHL or a complete overhaul of their business practice. I haven't heard any other options thus far that would work.

 

[Oak]

usa kids that go to chl will find out soon they are secondary to the canada kids - not the top 10-20 but the rest of usa kids that are forced by this rule to move to canada . it actually gives usa kids worse choice for the college options - ridiculous.

I mentioned this earlier as a notable issue for Americans going CHL if USHL becomes a graveyard.

 

[Bonin21]

USHL will not become a graveyard lmao

 

[jtechkid]

I did a deep dive with a few that work at some advisory agencies. Here is what they told me.

Everyone knew this was coming well over a year ago. By everyone, I mean player agents and the various hockey leagues that were to be affected. Some leagues just wanted to bury their head in the sand and pretend that this would go away. Other leagues, however, began to prepare.

The college hockey community (mainly coaches, but conference commissioners and some ADs) were split on this issue between the smaller programs and the bigger blue bloods. Most schools in the CCHA for instance, were advocating for this rule change. Schools such as Michigan and B.U. were adamantly opposed.

The CHL, in anticipation of this rule change, is working with the NHL to change their transfer agreement that will allow for players to play in the AHL during their 18 and 19 year old seasons but they want it under a sort of hybrid agreement. If the players are not re-assigned to their respective NHL club by a certain date, then that player would be returned to finish his season with the CHL club. So theoretically, a player could play 35 games in the AHL then be transferred back to the CHL if the parent club feels he is not ready for the NHL. The PA is looking at this proposal. They are also trying to decide the length of time player rights will be held by NHL clubs. They want a uniform timeline no matter where they were drafted from.

The CHL does not want to see itself as a feeder program to the NCAA but rather use the NCAA as an option for undrafted or unsigned players to fall back on. The CHL will actively encourage drafted players to sign E.L.C's in order to lose NCAA eligibility.

Agents and see this as an opportunity for their clients to have a little bit more runway for development and will suggest that players, especially those drafted in the latter rounds use the NCAA option and not immediately sign.

The USHL and the BCHL are in a complete state of fear. As has been already reported, some USHL clubs are actively looking at joining the CHL. Many owners are pushing for some type of affiliation with the CHL or outright merger. The CHL, however, is very cool to the idea and instead is looking at poaching the better programs. The CHL is looking to further expand into the U.S. markets and the poaching of USHL teams might play into that.

USA Hockey is in an enraged state and feel betrayed by the NCAA. They launched several appeals to the NCAA governing body to delay or modify the ruling but were rebuffed. Some of the conference commissioners and coaches appealed to the NHL to get involved. The NHL basically said sorry but not our problem.

The various Canadian Junior A leagues are working on a new development model. The feeling is that they will mainly work with CHL teams while trying to develop the rest of the players for either U-Sports or D-III hockey.

Many expect a lot of movement of yes American born players to the CHL. They will, however, be given opt out clauses if they choose to leave for the NCAA before aging out of the CHL. The general feeling is that most will want to go the NCAA route.

The future of the NTDP remains an open question.

The big unknown right now is what the NHL future drafts are going to look like, regarding age and how long will player rights be retained.

this is best post on the subject and exactly what i’ve heard talking to a couple people in the industry .
The clear winner : 1, WHL - Canada youth hockey . The clear loser - BCHl - USHL- NAHL- USA hockey - American hockey players . You can argue what’s the margin of winners and losers will be . You will have 20-30 CHL kids commit to next year College in the next 2 weeks alone it was reported . You already had I think 6- 7 USHL kids bolt to CHL already this year but I think might have 20-40 more move this year to get use to CHL team next year so game is on .

 

[wickedwitch]

Short-term, a bunch of Americans are about to lose their slots. And that genuinely sucks. I don't know how much USA hockey cares about that though.

Medium-term, I'd imagine the issue for USA hockey is that fewer parents will put their kids in hockey programs to start with if a college scholarship isn't likely. Also, the NTDP will need to be altered if the USHL isn't adequate competition.

But long-term, I'd imagine this will increase the number of D1 programs, which will only help USA hockey.

 

[Blue and Green]

The CIS isn’t better than the CHL lol the NTDP often beats ncaa teams and they’re 17-18 years old. To me better hockey entails skill, even if the players are older and stronger, they don’t have as much talent. That’s why you’ll see a big time college scorer sign with an NHL team at 23-24 years old and still look avg compared to a CHL prospect at 19. I agree the top ncaa programs are stacked and would run roughshod over chl teams, but usually their best players are junior aged still. Look at BC, all their best players are the same age as guys in the OHL. Michael Hage is an 06 and leading Michigan in scoring, same with Sascha Boisvert at NoDak. There’s not a single CiS team that has the talent I’d say an oshawa or London this year. Plus a lot of CHL guys have experience playing at NHL camps against men and pro’s. End of the day, both routes are good for players and have their pro’s and con’s. But the ncaa gets wildly overrated as a means to crap on the CHL. The CHL is hated for the similar reason London is hated around the OHL, because it’s so successful.

Watching the games, I've thought that the CIS was a bit better than CHL; perhaps not, but I don't think the level of play is below CHL and absolutely it is not far below. CIS at present is mostly guys who were mid-level CHLers and now they're on average a few years faster, stronger, smarter and farther along in skill development. Obviously the talent-to-age level is considerably higher in the CHL but the age matters just as it does when the US U18 National Team-- which has a lot of very talented kids, clearly higher in overall future potential than any CHL team-- plays against older squads.

I don't hate the CHL at all; my initial post defended it as a development route. I'm Canadian and I want the CHL (and CIS) to adapt to this change as successfully as possible. I was just making the point that the NCAA is a higher level of hockey than CHL; I don't think the gap is so large that a good 18/19YO CHLer who is a decent NHL prospect should feel that he must jump to the NCAA for a year or two.

 

[Wieters]

great post. I can see why the big boys are opposed to it, as it’s not likely they’ll be taking advantage of this as much as those CCHA teams will. Clarkson just got Jackson Parsons, Kitcheners starting goalie to commit for next year, and he’s going to be good. This move will strengthen the mid pack college teams and create harder competition for the Michigan and BU’s of the world. I can see a school like Arizona St or Penn State really benefiting from this move.

I think there's a reality where this helps all college hockey teams even at the top end. The NCAA has historically been an unknown to the top-tier Canadian kids. Celebrini talked about how as a kid from Vancouver, he knew next to nothing about BU/BC before he just so happened to be visiting Boston for an NBA game and decided to take a tour of the facilities. Those are two of the most storied programs in college hockey and they meant nothing to Celebrini because a west coast Canadian kid just doesn't see/know many of his contemporaries going the college route. But once he actually becamse aware of them, he was on board.

The NCAA has at least as good if not better of a pitch to the elite prospects as the CHL does, but it suffers from lack of name brand recognition to Canadians. There simply being more Canadians in general playing in the NCAA raises that awareness and so helps all of the NCAA programs.

 

[Lunatik]

this will be good for guys that age our of the CHL, I wonder if the CHL will change their scholarships to include NCAA schools

 

[Blue and Green]

I think there's a reality where this helps all college hockey teams even at the top end. The NCAA has historically been an unknown to the top-tier Canadian kids. Celebrini talked about how as a kid from Vancouver, he knew next to nothing about BU/BC before he just so happened to be visiting Boston for an NBA game and decided to take a tour of the facilities. Those are two of the most storied programs in college hockey and they meant nothing to Celebrini because a west coast Canadian kid just doesn't see/know many of his contemporaries going the college route. But once he actually becamse aware of them, he was on board.

The NCAA has at least as good if not better of a pitch to the elite prospects as the CHL does, but it suffers from lack of name brand recognition to Canadians. There simply being more Canadians in general playing in the NCAA raises that awareness and so helps all of the NCAA programs.

Canadian kids might not know the details or history of each NCAA program but they are quite aware of the NCAA's existence, no different than they know that the CHL exists but couldn't give you a detailed history of the London Knights or Kelowna Rockets.

Don't see why NCAA has a better pitch than CHL for elite prospects.

 

[Wieters]

Canadian kids might not know the details or history of each NCAA program but they are quite aware of the NCAA's existence, no different than they know that the CHL exists but couldn't give you a detailed history of the London Knights or Kelowna Rockets.

Celibrini made it out like he didn't know a single thing about BU/BC. I wouldn't expect even American kids to give a detailed history of the various programs, but they know their relative pedigree. I imagine that even beyond the pitch elite programs give in terms of their ability to develop players into professionals, they also market their history, tradition, etc. If a Canadian kid doesn't even have a basic level of familiarity, I think much of the appeal falls flat. Seeing their friends/siblings highlights from the NCAA puts those schools on the radar for more Canadian kids.

Don't see why NCAA has a better pitch than CHL for elite prospects.

Not necessarily better, but more so that they're on similar playing fields now with the introduction of NIL. Plus depending on the family, the education aspect doesn't hurt.

Most elite Canadian kids will continue to choose the CHL. But more now than before will be aware of the NCAA like they weren't before, and that will sway some.