I guess if the CHL says, forget it, D1 is going to 26 scholarships from 18, nobody age 20 that they don't take will be worth keeping, that would negate the idea. But it must surely be worth studying.
Between allowing CHLers and the additional scholarships, D1 will be getting strong enough that it might be able to afford to let a lot of decent 20YO's get another year of maturation before taking them. Might as well be CHL where they play instead of CIS or D3. Better for CHL to have solid 20YO's who can outplay some of the less talented younger options, and better for those guys and for D1 programs if they can play junior instead of CIS or D3 to save a year of D1 eligibility.
Possibly but I am not sure that this will help with the overall skill level of the league. I can see if they keep the limit at 3, that an older deeper NCAA would afford the CHL decent over agers but expanding it to say 6 probably would not. A player that cannot enter the NCAA may very well give up that option, take his CHL scholarship package, play pro for a year and then go and play U-Sports, rather than wait and play for a mid tier or lower D-1 program.
The reality is that no one knows exactly how this will shake out as between the NCAA and CHL specifically. Making declarative statements about this league retaining/gaining certain players vis a vis the other league is just conjecture. This is a message board so speculation is par for the course, but any definitiveness should be treated skeptically.
No, no one does but we can make some very educated guesses as to the trajectory this rule change will take.
There are some here (and I think I discussed this previously on this thread) that believe that the CHL will become the new USHL and the NCAA will become the top of the pyramid in amateur development for the NHL.
There are others that feel that this will minimally impact the CHL or the USHL or the current structure of amateur hockey. They feel that most NCAA bound players, especially if they are American will continue to go and play in the USHL or the BCHL.
Some others believe that the CHL will keep all of its 18 and 19 year old players and only those that have filled their contractual obligations to the league will leave for the NCAA.
Having talked to enough people that are close to the situation and reading some excellent reporting, I'm pretty confident in stating that scenarios two and three are highly unlikely and the end result will be some type of synthesis of scenarios one and four.
The CHL does not want to be the new USHL, nor does it want to be seen as feeder to the NCAA first and foremost. The three commissioners of each league, and the ownership groups are aware, however, that a full scholarship offer from a "blue blood" institution is a very enticing proposition to a recently drafted 18 YO and even more so to a 19YO. The NCAA offers a very unique lifestyle, coupled with excellent personal and athletic development. There is simply no way that some of these players spurn offers from a Michigan or a B.U. The CHL will lose players to the NCAA before they age out and I would bet money on it!
The question is, what percentage of these player will they lose, and the answer will determine as to who will be seen as the proverbial top of the pyramid. What some here may not understand or be aware of is that the CHL and NHL are quite close (and I mean close) much more so than the NCAA or even the American coaches association. This allows the CHL to lobby for their interests directly to the NHL. The new three commissioners have also become acutely aware of the power of agents and agencies in helping players make decisions and are cozying up the more prominent ones. What the CHL will do is encourage players that are drafted to sign ELCs in order to negate NCAA eligibility (and I will bet money on this also!).
The job of the NCAA, through their own lobbying of agents and through college hockey inc will be to convince these players to delay signing their ELCs and play college hockey for at least a couple of seasons.
How the NHL and the PA come down on player retention rights, the CHL-NHL agreement and the path they want their prospects to take will be the ultimate decision maker on how this plays out. Know this though, the NHL (and particularly NHL GMs) like to have a direct hand with player development. They like to see their prospects at rookie orientation camps and then the main development camps. Agents, due to the nature of their business, want to see their clients sign NHL ELCs sooner rather than later.
My sense in all of this is that the NHL will really like the ability to give its later round picks or players not quite ready for the AHL/NHL the longer runway that the NCAA route offers but that the majority of the high-end talents will sign and forgo the NCAA route
