CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[Wieters]

Theoretically like only 1/8 kids can opt hockey in USA and it would pass Canada if the logistics were the same.

I think your point about rinks is a good one, but I would disagree that the US could theoretically catch up to Canada even if the same amount of kids played hockey in the US as play hockey in Canada (which would only take a fraction of the American population relative to Canada given the difference in populations).

There is a difference in the quality of athlete who chooses to play hockey in the US versus Canada. As I mentioned before, Lamar Jackson/Bobby Witt Jr./Anthony Edwards types--world-class athletes who would be able to turn pro at any number of sports--wouldn't be that one out of eight kid choosing to play hockey. Beyond the access/logistics and then popularity/culture, there is much more money in the big three American sports; not just in contract value, but also in sponsorships/endorsements/brand deals. So even in places where hockey is very much an option for a kid to play like in MN/MA, the types of American athletes with the best chance of making the NHL still aren't incentivized to choose hockey, although you do likely have more exceptions here since they might just love the sport due to its cultural roots in those regions.

 

[Oak]

There seems to be this recurrent expectation that USA Hockey should continue to increase the percentage of American-born NHL players beyond what it has already done, and that the recent draft classes indicate some failure for not having done that. I just don't think that's a realistic expectation given the realities I mentioned above about hockey's place in the pecking order of American sports. If anything, the more realistic goal is to improve the quality of the players that haven chosen to play hockey, which is what the NTDP endeavors to do.

The percentage will decrease going forward with the skyrocketing costs of hockey.

What cost 6-7k 10 years ago to play the highest level of travel AAA is now more than double that. Hotel prices are double what they were, and travel schedules are way crazier as well. Families are flying 3-5 times a year to play other teams.

It will be a game for the wealthy and hockey bloodlines people. Yes you will have some exceptions that make it through the cracks but you will not see many blue collar kids who are just great athletes making the NHL like you did 20 years ago. Maybe from the extreme cold climates where ice is easier to get but from the USA no way.

 

[Wieters]

The percentage will decrease going forward with the skyrocketing costs of hockey.

What cost 6-7k 10 years ago to play the highest level of travel AAA is now more than double that. Hotel prices are double what they were, and travel schedules are way crazier as well. Families are flying 3-5 times a year to play other teams.

It will be a game for the wealthy and hockey bloodlines people. Yes you will have some exceptions that make it through the cracks but you will not see many blue collar kids who are just great athletes making the NHL like you did 20 years ago. Maybe from the extreme cold climates where ice is easier to get but from the USA no way.

And amongst families who do have the means to do all of this, one of the typical motivations for getting their kids into youth sports is to give them a leg-up in college admissions. But there are plenty of sports out there that are much less of a grind and less competitive than youth hockey (eg lacrosse) that can still lead to a scholarship or relaxed admissions standards, so the appeal even to them is lessened.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Yeah I know this, thanks for the info… this is the result of there being growth in NHL expansion into untapped markets and the fact other European nations are pulling their weight more than in the past. Doesn’t negate anything I said though. I’m not shitting on USA hockey, it’s done a good job over the years to try and close the gap, but 20 years later and it’s still not closed. Demographic changes in Canada may help them even more, but USA hockey has also plateaud. Worst draft in recent memory last year and this years draft might be worse for them. This CHL-NCAA agreement may in the end benefit the middle to lower end ncaa programs, but for USA hockey, it’s not exactly a great thing. Already we’ve seen 30 or so Canadian kids commit to ncaa schools who otherwise wouldn’t have and likely would have gone to an American player. Now a lot of those spots will be given to 20 year old Canadians.

But if you grant that point about the percentage of Canadians compared to Americans in the NHL, and let’s not forget either how close the Four Nations Rosters are, maybe some of those USHL players are better than you credit them for being. Not all the American players in the NHL played at the NTDP. Take out NTDP players and the USHL is still putting out more picks each year in the NHL than the Q. And the gap to the OHL isn’t a 6-7 goal victory, as you suggest.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Owen Van Steensel (2004, OHL, North Bay Battalion) to Clarkson

 

[Corso]

The percentage will decrease going forward with the skyrocketing costs of hockey.

What cost 6-7k 10 years ago to play the highest level of travel AAA is now more than double that. Hotel prices are double what they were, and travel schedules are way crazier as well. Families are flying 3-5 times a year to play other teams.

It will be a game for the wealthy and hockey bloodlines people. Yes you will have some exceptions that make it through the cracks but you will not see many blue collar kids who are just great athletes making the NHL like you did 20 years ago. Maybe from the extreme cold climates where ice is easier to get but from the USA no way.

Most AAA programs in the N.E. will cost parents north of 20k per season.

I imagine costs are similar in the Mid-West and even higher on the W.Coast. They tell me that in W. Canada the new model generating both talent and hype is based on private hockey academies that charge well over 20K per season.

How is this sustainable?? Obviously, it is not. I am not sure if I mentioned it in this thread or another, but the main focus of the NHL going forward is going to be on youth development and not centered on the Junior-College age group but the far younger minor hockey. The NHL is aware that a demographic crisis is at its doorstep, driven by both a declining birth rate and an exponential increase in costs to play.

I really believe that in 10 years, the entire landscape of amateur hockey will look far different than what it is today.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Keaton Dowhaniuk (2004, WHL, Moose Jaw Warriors) commits to Alaska Fairbanks

Additionally, Brady Flynn leaves the BCHL for the Victoriaville Tigres in the Q.

 

[jtechkid]

Most AAA programs in the N.E. will cost parents north of 20k per season.

I imagine costs are similar in the Mid-West and even higher on the W.Coast. They tell me that in W. Canada the new model generating both talent and hype is based on private hockey academies that charge well over 20K per season.

How is this sustainable?? Obviously, it is not. I am not sure if I mentioned it in this thread or another, but the main focus of the NHL going forward is going to be on youth development and not centered on the Junior-College age group but the far younger minor hockey. The NHL is aware that a demographic crisis is at its doorstep, driven by both a declining birth rate and an exponential increase in costs to play.

I really believe that in 10 years, the entire landscape of amateur hockey will look far different than what it is today.

I coach tier one hockey on the east coast played div 3 hockey growing up . I tell people growing up i played tier one and both my parents were teachers . The big difference is Mass and lot of states had the same community and town model as minny which was affordable with lot of voluteers . The new model “ profit center “ has made it like a private equity model where you raise prices every year at the tier one model . Hence , you are seeing private equity guys gets into owning hockey clubs . in addition private equity model at CCM best illustrates this as they bought it for around 90 mill and sold to another private equity firm for like 475 mill or huge profifs . Its same model as youth hockey , market amd hype product then raise prices 5-10% every year( few industry have that pricing power) and just keep doing it to where we are today -20-25k play tier one hockey . very sad ! on the topic boys numbers are down and i expect larger decline next 5-10 years . the only growth was girls hockey from a low base and mens hockey

 

[WarriorofTime]

In 20 years, about 70 % of NHL players will have a father or uncle that played in the NHL previously because those will be the only ones that are able and willing to pay the absurd prices for elite youth hockey.

 

[Bonin21]

2008 born Alexandre Taillefer commits to UMass.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

2008 born Alexandre Taillefer commits to UMass.

QMJHL, Quebec Remparts

 

[Rabid Ranger]

In 20 years, about 70 % of NHL players will have a father or uncle that played in the NHL previously because those will be the only ones that are able and willing to pay the absurd prices for elite youth hockey.

I think you are 100% right. This is notable in hockey, but other sports as well. The hardscrabble, pull yourself up by your bootstraps stories will come from outside NA.

 

[Bonin21]

2008 born Enzo Lottin commits to UNO.

I think now we can say... It's happening. Two 2008s in a day.

 

[WarriorofTime]

2008 born Enzo Lottin commits to UNO.

I think now we can say... It's happening. Two 2008s in a day.

It’ll be interesting to see when big schools start adding players

 

[Kingpin794]

Did the 08's give an expected freshman year?

 

[WarriorofTime]

Did the 08's give an expected freshman year?

Nobody has any reason to know. The one kid isn't even a QMJHL regular based on his GP breakdown. The other is a recent BCHL defect.

They'll likely go whenever they're ready and their NCAA team wants them.

 

[SergeConstantin74]

Nobody has any reason to know. The one kid isn't even a QMJHL regular based on his GP breakdown. The other is a recent BCHL defect.

They'll likely go whenever they're ready and their NCAA team wants them.

Taillefer joined the Remparts after the rule change, hence the low number of games played. He has been a regular since then. He would have been a top 5 pick at the last QMJHL Draft without his NCAA aspirations. He committed to the Remparts for 4 seasons and will head to UMass for the 28-29 season.

Lottin has also committed to UNO for 28-29. They’ll both be 20.

It’s interesting that two top 2008 born players from Quebec who only reported to the QMJHL after the rule change will play their 4 years of junior hockey like most CHL prospects do.

 

[jtechkid]

Lovell bchl commits to arizona state - another kid bchl committed to minny state - so still getting commits . Bchl kids that have left doing well in CHL too . Bchl kids picking up all really young 2007 -2008 mostly . bchl needs clean house on teams or have a top or bottom division - 21 teams is too many now - then would should just go really young like sherwood park - lot of ice time - special teams then at head to chl .

 

[Wieters]

It’s interesting that two top 2008 born players from Quebec who only reported to the QMJHL after the rule change will play their 4 years of junior hockey like most CHL prospects do.

Is there anything binding them to playing in the CHL for four years? If not, then I'm not sure we should be taking it as a given that they "will play" in the CHL beyond the point when they're eligible to move to the NCAA. If these kids were previously willing to forego the CHL altogether to play in the NCAA if it meant one or the other, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the NCAA is a priority for them as compared to the CHL. The fact is that they can't play NCAA now but can play in the CHL, but they will be able to play in the NCAA within a couple of years. We don't know what will happen at that point.

 

[Boonk]

Is there anything binding them to playing in the CHL for four years? If not, then I'm not sure we should be taking it as a given that they "will play" in the CHL beyond the point when they're eligible to move to the NCAA. If these kids were previously willing to forego the CHL altogether to play in the NCAA, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the NCAA is a priority for them as compared to the CHL. The fact is that they can't play NCAA now but can play in the CHL, but they will be able to play in the NCAA within a couple of years. We don't know what will happen at that point.

CHL teams cant bar their players from persuing an education if theyve graduated high school and meet academic requirements to play at a D1 institution at any point. They can however strip their full scholarship package which is levied on their 4-5 year commitment to the team I think, if they leave before completing their full 4 years.

 

[Kingpin794]

Is there anything binding them to playing in the CHL for four years? If not, then I'm not sure we should be taking it as a given that they "will play" in the CHL beyond the point when they're eligible to move to the NCAA. If these kids were previously willing to forego the CHL altogether to play in the NCAA if it meant one or the other, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the NCAA is a priority for them as compared to the CHL. The fact is that they can't play NCAA now but can play in the CHL, but they will be able to play in the NCAA within a couple of years. We don't know what will happen at that point.

There's nothing barring them from leaving early. It's just lines up well that most kids aren't ready to play NCAA hockey until they are 20.

 

[Wieters]

CHL teams cant bar their players from persuing an education if theyve graduated high school and meet academic requirements to play at a D1 institution at any point. They can however strip their full scholarship package which is levied on their 4-5 year commitment to the team I think, if they leave before completing their full 4 years.

Right, but given that in the case of NCAA commits they would be leaving for universities, I'm not sure pulling a USports tuition stipend would matter very much since the NCAA is, in many/most cases, offering them a full ride.

There's nothing barring them from leaving early. It's just lines up well that most kids aren't ready to play NCAA hockey until they are 20.

That's fair. But if a kid excels in the CHL for two years and is already committed to an NCAA school, I'm not sure they would stay in the CHL if the NCAA team has a spot for them. There would seem to be a very good chance that they leave then rather than waiting for two more years.

I'm not making any general predictions here but rather just pushing back on the idea that we can pencil in these commits for four years in the CHL simply because they have said/implied a rough timeline barring a change in circumstances.

 

[Kingpin794]

That's fair. But if a kid excels in the CHL for two years and is already committed to an NCAA school, I'm not sure they would stay in the CHL if the NCAA team has a spot for them. There would seem to be a very good chance that they leave then rather than waiting for two more years.

I'm not making any general predictions here but rather just pushing back on the idea that we can pencil in these commits for four years in the CHL simply because they have said/implied a rough timeline barring a change in circumstances.

True enough that it will be a case by case basis. Might see it become the norm that guys commit but leave the arrival date open ended.

 

[WarriorofTime]

That's why it'll be most interesting when the better programs start taking in guys. The NHL Draft caliber players aren't usually waiting around until age 20/21, while the lower end programs don't take anybody before then because they aren't chasing ceilings.

 

[wickedwitch]

UMass isn't quite the very top tier of the NCAA, but they have some very recent titles. And I think Carvel does a better job with developing defenseman than arguably anyone. So if I were a defenseman, like Taillefer, UMass would be one of my top choices.