CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[Pavel Buchnevich]

The Wenatchee Wild jumped from the BCHL to the WHL. They didn't bring any of those players to the WHL.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that was the Winnipeg Ice team and they just adapted the Wenatchee Wild name?

Not exactly the same thing, right?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Landon Dupont isn't playing at BC at 16 no matter how good he is. He hasn't graduated HS. How in the world would he play NCAA hockey? McKenna might be able to. Will he have the academic requirements at such a young age? If he has that down, then he can leave if he wants. Probably doesn't have the requirements atm. But we don't know that for sure.

If it wasn't clear, I'm not actually saying Dupont will ask to go play BC next season. It would be the season after. I'm making a philosophical point that they want to eventually have that control to decide where to play what year based on how each season is going. If you want an example of what it could be for next season, McKenna is the pertinent example. But there are likely going to be more examples in future years after next year, which is why I mention Dupont.

 

[Juniorhockeyguru]

If it wasn't clear, I'm not actually saying Dupont will ask to go play BC next season. It would be the season after. I'm making a philosophical point that they want to eventually have that control to decide where to play what year based on how each season is going. If you want an example of what it could be for next season, McKenna is the pertinent example. But there are likely going to be more examples in future years after next year, which is why I mention Dupont.

Not everyone cares about the NCAA. He chose the WHL for a reason. If he wanted to go that route, he would of chosen it. He's getting the absolute best development from a quality franchise and league that has produced more NHL players than anyone.

 

[Corso]

If the CHL is going to concede all those concerns to the players, I guess that will move the needle in their direction. Then again, it hasn’t been done, and no one seems sure when it’ll occur. That should theoretically help them keep Canadian players and would also be helpful towards European imports.

The idea that the USHL might fold because of it, well I’m still not sure how that logic works. I simply don’t buy that there are a lot of American players who are jumping at the idea to join the CHL as soon as they fix these issues.

And frankly, no one has also explained to me yet (I asked you multiple times, but maybe you don’t know) how logistically a team jumping from one league to a rival league will work. Will they get to keep their players? Which rules will apply to the team? Will there be a lawsuit? That seems like an absolute nightmare to make work, if there was even the appetite for it by all sides.

The opt out clause is already a done deal. I never suggested that the USHL will fold, what I said was that there are some teams that want to join the OHL but I have questioned whether they have the financial ability to play in the OHL. I also said that the USHL in time will resemble what the NAHL is today. A decent league that still produces a lot of D-1 talent but lacks the NHL track talent.

The AJHL had five teams simply leave and merge with the BCHL. They were allowed to retain their rosters. If say Youngstown and Muskegon (two teams that have already approached the OHL for membership) are allowed to join, they would (from what I was told...and this is credible source...believe what you want Pavel) be considered an expansion franchise, and not able to protect any of their current players. Also, which I repeated, the CHL is not interested in any type of merger with the USHL and the USHL will not be a 4th league under their umbrella. As for a lawsuit, what will they sue for, no court will grant them the ability to join a league that does not want them.

 

[Bonin21]

Can't wait for the percentage of NHLers that played NCAA to climb to and hopefully match the CHL now that they can double up in both.

 

[Corso]

Can't wait for the percentage of NHLers that played NCAA to climb to and hopefully match the CHL now that they can double up in both.

Pretty well much. I think that pretty well all players drafted in say rounds three to seven (or six depending on how they restructure the draft) will end up playing in the NCAA. The real top end elite ones may bypass college (the fear of the Michigans and B.U.s of college hockey and hence their opposition to this rule change) but I figure that a decent percentage of those drafted in say the latter half of the first and second rounds will play college hockey. So in time, well over 50 percent of the NHL will be made up of college alums.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Not everyone cares about the NCAA. He chose the WHL for a reason. If he wanted to go that route, he would have chosen it. He's getting the absolute best development from a quality franchise and league that has produced more NHL players than anyone.

Okay, I get that. It’s not directly related to any one player. It’s a philosophical point using potential examples.

 

[qc14]

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.

There definitely will, and it won't be the best option for everyone. For your top drafted prospects though, it is much better developmentally to play against adults in a better league that is closer to a pro style of game than to spend another year racking up points on 17yos.

How many teams will be willing to take the risk of telling their 1st round picks to not sign and go to college next year instead? I don't know, and as I said I think a lot depends on how the NHL changes/clarifies its rules on the length of draft rights.

 

[Bubbles]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that was the Winnipeg Ice team and they just adapted the Wenatchee Wild name?

Not exactly the same thing, right?

Yes, the owners of the Wenatchee Wild (BCHL) bought the Winnipeg Ice franchise, and moved the team to Wenatchee where they just took the name. The Junior A franchise ceased to operate.

 

[Wieters]

Pretty well much. I think that pretty well all players drafted in say rounds three to seven (or six depending on how they restructure the draft) will end up playing in the NCAA. The real top end elite ones may bypass college (the fear of the Michigans and B.U.s of college hockey and hence their opposition to this rule change) but I figure that a decent percentage of those drafted in say the latter half of the first and second rounds will play college hockey. So in time, well over 50 percent of the NHL will be made up of college alums.

I wonder if all of the elite programs were aligned on opposing this change or if it was split between the blue bloods. Do you have any sense for that?

From a cynical perspective, I can understand the elite college programs opposing the change because it will increase the quality of players available to non-elite college programs and narrow the gap between the haves and have nots.

But the rationale for opposing the change because it will cause fewer elite players to come through the NCAA doesn't make much sense to me. As you're suggesting, the NCAA will become a rite of passage for the majority of NHL players. And if that's the case, why would that decrease the number of elite players wanting to play in the NCAA?

I've heard multiple NCAA coaches at the elite programs say recently how their pitch to kids to choose the NCAA sells itself. College already has a lot of appeal due to the social and education aspects. And now the players can get paid through NIL. So how would this change in addition increasing the quality and quantity of future NHL talent in the NCAA make it more difficult for programs to recruit elite prospects?

 

[qc14]

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.

I don't agree at all that it will increase the number of D1 programs in the long-term. The biggest barrier to entry/expansion isn't a lack of talent, it's schools willing to foot the bill for an expensive (probably the most expensive!) non-revenue generating athletic program. With revenue sharing almost certain to happen in football and basketball, the complete gravity those two sports have at every level of NCAA D1, and Title IX rules still in place, it's much more likely that schools will begin cutting programs rather than starting new ones.

We'll see where the money with football ends up settling as I have a hard time believing the current NIL spout can flow forever, but until that happens OR you have an alumni donor willing to shell out $100M to start a team a-la ASU I doubt we will see any new D1 programs and most certainly not from P4 or high-level FBS schools

 

[Bubbles]

This is kind of crazy talk to think suddenly the floodgates are open and a bunch of players are going to the NCAA. For sure, yes there will be an increase, especially for Americans wanting to play in the CHL and move on to college but for Canadians? Remains to be seen.

NIL by the way, is only for US Citizens. All others are on student visas, which would restrict what sort of income they would have in the States. Celebrini did not have any NIL deals, nor did basketball star Edey.

Also do people think they just walk into college? You have to maintain a scholastic average even for the most easy programs. And only in special cases like Power/Celebrini/Wood they have accelerated their schooling so they can enter at 17.

IMO, if there are CBA changes so that CHLers that are 19 can play in the AHL, what's the point of one and done in college when you can remain with your CHL and than go off in the AHL? Or if you're good enough for the NHL at 18, it's not even a point.

 

[Leviathan899]

Maybe the mistake is on my part, but your post makes no sense. They wouldn't have been penalized coming back to the NCAA? I don't know what that means.

The current new deal doesn't seem to allow for CHL players to play in the NCAA in their draft year. I don't see what has changed in relation to this point if that isn't addressed.

I could be wrong, but I believe it does. You just will have no access to any education package. But how many would realistically do that? Can’t see many doing it. But if you’re Fantilli, you don’t need the education package, Michigan is paying for it. But he was a unique situation and I think he’d take the same route all over again. He wanted to play with his brother, Luca, and he was playing at Thayer Academy IIRC, and he left there after the titans tournament with jrc. Then went to Chicago which is a very good program and I think it’ll remain so. So I doubt he’d have chosen the OHL, as he got to play with his brother at Thayer, Chicago and then Michigan.

Tynan Lawerance is off to Chicoutimi apparently. Wasn't there another one that went to St. John? It's not just 3rd/4th liners. And we're just starting, Agree that moving mid season if tougher but this summer should be very busy.

morin was the one. Hayden Reid left for Flint, Montgomery and Noah Kosick left earlier for Calgary Hitmen. I’m sure more are coming, Lawrence would be elite. He’s going to be a first round pick imo.

 

[jtechkid]

You are asking why many Americans will choose the CHL now over the USHL? Well I believe I answered that in my post. I believe I gave you some solid reasons as to why a lot of elite American talent will elect to play in the CHL. You can tray and refute them if you would like.

Why wouldn't a Mass kid go to Halifax, Moncton, Cape Brenton or even Rimouski over Muskegon or Youngstown or DesMoins? American players have played in the Q. If dozens upon dozens are willing to travel across a continent to play in the BCHL, why not to a team just an 8 hour car drive away????

Funny that you think Im so biased for the CHL that on the OHL board I'm being questioned as to why I'm so crazy to believe that some high end OHL talent will choose the NCAA and not remain in the league until their 20 year old season.

I've talked to a lot of people and they were pretty adamant when they stated that the CHL doesn't have any plans at a merger, affiliation or association with the USHL. If you believe otherwise, so be it. I know you have a very great sense of importance about yourself, but honestly, no one hear really cares all that much. You can take what I posted and simply ignore it, especially if you think I'm some blowhard.

Time will prove who is right.....I wonder why though, Blake Montgomery, a Wisconsin commit and a point per game first line player for Lincoln just jumped ship to the OHL today? I suspect that he will not be the only one, even though, USHL teams (in a state of panic) are asking for the maximum in transfer fees for any player leaving for the CHL. That may help to staunch a bit of the bleeding this year but not so much for next year (where what you can ask for in transfer fees is based on a set firm amount after the ice is removed).

USHL is a state of panic from all my sources i’ve talked too . They will continue lose kids to CHL as it already happened so far this year . I’m an American but USHL will turn into NAHL going forward .

 

[Corso]

I wonder if all of the elite programs were aligned on opposing this change or if it was split between the blue bloods. Do you have any sense for that?

From a cynical perspective, I can understand the elite college programs opposing the change because it will increase the quality of players available to non-elite college programs and narrow the gap between the haves and have nots.

But the rationale for opposing the change because it will cause fewer elite players to come through the NCAA doesn't make much sense to me. As you're suggesting, the NCAA will become a rite of passage for the majority of NHL players. And if that's the case, why would that decrease the number of elite players wanting to play in the NCAA?

I've heard multiple NCAA coaches at the elite programs say recently how their pitch to kids to choose the NCAA sells itself. College already has a lot of appeal due to the social and education aspects. And now the players can get paid through NIL. So how would this change in addition increasing the quality and quantity of future NHL talent in the NCAA make it more difficult for programs to recruit elite prospects?

Pretty well all the blueblood programs were very much opposed to this rule change. For one, they really do not want to see the NCAA get any older than it already is. In today's D-1 hockey, true 18 year old freshman are rare, comprising less than 8% of all incoming freshman. Even 19 year old players are only about a quarter of all recruits. The bulk of players entering college hockey are 20 and 21 year old. This change will pretty well much solidify this trend.

I don't think many here understand the power that agents (or "advisors in NCAA speak) have. These agents weigh really heavy on the decisions that young players make. The advice for most high end prospects will be to sign an ELC as soon as possible. The very best players in the NCAA are usually two and done. A lot of these players will, in the coming years, choose to play in the CHL and the advise most will be given is to sign early, go to development camp, progress to the main camp and then back to the CHL (or if what I am hearing comes to pass, split the year between the AHL and CHL) all the while collecting your signing bonus and earning a pay check if you stick at the pro level.

As for NIL, the deals most schools offer do not compare to the amount made from signing an ELC and the NCAA-House settlement will rein in the pay to play side of these massive NIL deals you are recently seeing. So, a school like B.C. will find it much harder now to offer a players like Leonard a 25k a year NIL deal for well not really doing much in the way of selling your name, likeness and image. All NIL deals above 600 dollars will be scrutinized by 3rd party arbitrators to see if they are legitimate. Now of course that doesn't mean that an up and coming generational talent wouldn't command a lot of money, his deals would just have to be legit.

We are only talking about high first round picks here, the rest, especially those drafted in say the 3rd/4th round or less will be steered towards the NCAA for a longer development time. Now of course some high end players will continue to choose the NCAA route after two years in the CHL, especially American born ones but there may be fewer of them. In the end the number of drafted prospects in the NCAA will really increase as will the number of NCAA NHL alums.

USHL is a state of panic from all my sources i’ve talked too . They will continue lose kids to CHL as it already happened so far this year . I’m an American but USHL will turn into NAHL going forward .

Heard that C.R. goalie Guimond may be the latest to bolt. Also that some USHL teams are demanding transfer fees in excess of 25k and in one case a 50k exit fee.

​

 

[jtechkid]

can you elaborate on USHL transfer fees ? thx

 

[Kingpin794]

I do find it a bit funny that the USHL is holding players for ransom now after so many people touted the USHL to NCAA path as the once with the most freedom of choice.

 

[Corso]

can you elaborate on USHL transfer fees ? thx

Transfer fees are agreements between the various associations and between Hockey Canada and USA Hockey. There are set amount transfer fees and rules before and after a season begins. During the season, however, teams negotiate directly with each other on the amount of monetary compensation for players. Sources have told me that some USHL teams are demanding payment in the range of 50k for the release of players.

I do find it a bit funny that the USHL is holding players for ransom now after so many people touted the USHL to NCAA path as the once with the most freedom of choice.

In the end, rhetoric means little and you will do what you can to protect your assets. But yes, the optics certainly do not look good and there will be blowback from agents/agencies that will further hurt certain teams in the USHL.

 

[Wieters]

Pretty well all the blueblood programs were very much opposed to this rule change. For one, they really do not want to see the NCAA get any older than it already is. In today's D-1 hockey, true 18 year old freshman are rare, comprising less than 8% of all incoming freshman. Even 19 year old players are only about a quarter of all recruits. The bulk of players entering college hockey are 20 and 21 year old. This change will pretty well much solidify this trend.

I don't think many here understand the power that agents (or "advisors in NCAA speak) have. These agents weigh really heavy of the decisions that young players make. The advice for most high end prospects will be to sign an ELC as soon as possible. The very best players in the NCAA are at usually two and done. A lot of these players will, in the coming years, choose to play in the CHL and the advise most will be given is to sign early, go to development camp, progress to the main camp and then back to the CHL (or if what I am hearing comes to pass, split the year between the AHL and CHL) all the while collecting your signing bonus and earning a pay check if you stick at the pro level.

As for NIL, the deals most schools offer do not compare to the amount made from signing an ELC and the NCAA-House settlement will rein in the pay to play side of these massive NIL deals you are recently seeing. So, a school like B.C. will find it much harder now to offer a players like Leonard a 25k year NIL deal for well not really doing much in the way of selling your name, likeness and image. All NIL deals above 600 dollars will be scrutinized by 3rd party arbitrators to see if they are legitimate. Now of course that doesn't mean that an up and coming generational talent wouldn't command a lot of money, his deals would just have to be legit.

We are only talking about high first round picks here, the rest, especially those drafted in say the 3rd/4th round or less will be steered towards the NCAA for a longer development time. Now of course some high end players will continue to choose the NCAA route after two years in the CHL, especially American born ones but there may be fewer of them. In the end the number of drafted prospects in the NCAA will really increase as will the number of NCAA NHL alums.

Thanks for the perspective. Sounds mostly like there is fear on all sides because the status quo is changing. Everyone involved, except for maybe the lower-tier college programs, is scared that they could be adversely affected by this.

From a directional standpoint, the NCAA stands to improve here. And a rising tide lifts all boats. If the NCAA becomes the testing ground for more NHL players than any other league, that should attract more elite talent. The NCAA boasts pretty much every advantage over other leagues at this point except that kids need to be academically qualified. I think this continues the upward trajectory for college hockey for all programs.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I do find it a bit funny that the USHL is holding players for ransom now after so many people touted the USHL to NCAA path as the once with the most freedom of choice.

Curious, any evidence of this?

 

[StreetHawk]

I've heard multiple NCAA coaches at the elite programs say recently how their pitch to kids to choose the NCAA sells itself. College already has a lot of appeal due to the social and education aspects. And now the players can get paid through NIL. So how would this change in addition increasing the quality and quantity of future NHL talent in the NCAA make it more difficult for programs to recruit elite prospects?

Once a player hits the age of draft eligiblity (or turn 18 for late birthdays), then NCAA is the more competitive route as a standard 4 year CHL kid, will be one of the younger players up to their draft year, then once drafted would be in the older group. Most drafted kids see a big upswing in production once they are drafted. Go from like 0.9 to 1.0 PPG pace to like 1.3 PPG pace.

But, having to remain in a tier II league like the BCHL, AJHL, OJHL, etc. in Canada or USHL, as a 16/17 year old, the competition isn't as strong as the CHL. That's been the trade off. But, since only a handful of kids are capable of playing in the NHL as a teenager, it kind of evens itself out for kids who play 2 years in NCAA.

Plus, NCAA programs, the quality of everything is higher. Hotels, practice facilities, travel, non hockey specialists (nutrition/conditioning).

The change is for kids who have completed their CHL eligibility. So, it's the kids that are 2 years past their first draft eligiblity.

 

[Kingpin794]

Curious, any evidence of this?

People who scout/scouted for the OHL have stated this. (No I don't have names, but who it's coming from it's credible). Feel free to not believe me.

 

[WarriorofTime]

IMO, if there are CBA changes so that CHLers that are 19 can play in the AHL, what's the point of one and done in college when you can remain with your CHL and than go off in the AHL? Or if you're good enough for the NHL at 18, it's not even a point.

If end result is NCAA level of play is raised, it makes it much harder to go from CHL -> Pro as most of the players they'll be going against will have played in College. Currently there are a lot of mediocre 2nd-5th round picks that are 20-22 playing in the AHL just because their CHL eligibility expired and they're not being entirely written off yet. Those guys will theoretically be in College now and coming into the AHL when they are Older/Better and NHL Orgs can be more picky about who they let on their AHL teams in terms of writing off busts if they aren't good NCAA players as they'd be more years removed from the Draft. It's also tricky for a 19 year old direct from CHL player if they aren't a wunderkind. Their fellow rookie class the AHL will be 2-3 year NCAA players that are older and went against more developed competition the last couple years. Could get messy if it's a bunch of kids now trying to accelerate schooling to play NCAA in their draft year.

Either way, Age 19 in the CHL will only be for kids who are probably not ready for College Hockey. That's basically how USHL demographics look right now. Final consideration is that if CHL is just an NCAA Feeder, there's no reason the USHL can't still exist in that space as the top American Junior league especially as the registered player numbers start to even out in terms of Junior-Aged players in about 7 or 8 years.

Have heard the "talks" about the Draft Age being moved to 19 for about a decade. I guess we'll see.

 

[Corso]

A great read, pulled it off the OHL board, posted originally by Otto...

The NCAA is lifting its longtime ban on major-junior players - now what?

Press releases from hockey teams tend to be pretty bland. The title and opening paragraph contain all of the news ("Player X has signed with Team Y"), leaving reporters and fans with no reason to read the rest of the release.Until now, anyway.On Sunday, the London Knights announced Ottawa...

www.thescore.com

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

If the NCAA recruits and makes a serious effort to sign or bring in 17,18 year olds from the CHL the players can get an "Education" right away and continue to play hockey...I think the College ranks is trying to do something about players leaving after a year being drafted or 2...hardly anyone finishes the 4 years anymore...So players will come out having a Degree in "Whatever"that won't be any better than the Education they will receive in Canada...cause when a players signs at 16 he's already missed or will miss so much time in school from the travel associated especially in the WHL where it can be brutal and stretch from Brandon(just east of Winnipeg and North of Minnesota) to Portland and that is on the buses...