CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[wetcoast]

Of course, and that's exactly what I said. Not many D+1 guys would play in the AHL. D+2 19YO's, still not a ton of them but there would be more. This season there is one '06er plus 10 from '05 playing in the AHL, so 11 in total who would still be non-overage if they played in the CHL. It would be a viable option for the high-end CHLers.

I have watched the Canucks' AHL team almost continuously for the past six years, except for the short little 2021 Covid AHL season. I'm quite aware of the jump.

That's all fair but you and I both know that many fan bases are going to be pushing for guys to be in the AHL when they are "statistically" too good for the CHL and not really ready.

I'm a big believer in development and playing time and it's too bad that we didn't have a Swedish type of system where players could play up or down their home club at most levels on the way up as it's a very good developmental model.


Danila Klimovich was "ready" to play in the AHL but hasn't developed but he was a bit of a reach pick IMO anyways and that's more to the other poster who suggested that the first 3 round guys going to the NCAA right away would be productive.

For some sure but many others they need a year to mature but the NCAA is one thing, that AHL is another but I don't disagree with the thought process on your post, it more that many fans will want to push it too far.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Possibly eventually. There's still going to be an NDTP and the 5 biggest programs that most of those guys go to will still primarily be recruiting from there. The NDTP will probably just get a little bit weaker and they won't be able to supplement with Kent Johnsons and Adam Fantillis who will probably now go the CHL route.

It will be interesting to see if there's a stigma around 'sloppy seconds' for programs like Michigan/BU/BC. A guy like Tulk is going to be an elite NCAA talent and should probably be going somewhere bigger than Wisconsin. But bringing in freshman talent who are high draft picks and likely future NHLers is going to have a lot more prestige than bringing in undrafted CHL overagers who would have been playing Usports previously, no matter how good those guys will be at the NCAA level.

The portal will play into this as well, but that's kind of a separate issue moving talent around.

Wisconsin is still a blueblood, problem is they've been down for most of the past 10-15 years. Still a great program with rich tradition

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Yeah, the way this is shaking out will be poor for the higher-profile NCAA programs and good for the mid-lower level programs.

This is why it should change. The programs that generate nothing for the product have the majority say and those that generate virtually everything for the product have a disproportionately small say.

 

[Corso]

Possibly eventually. There's still going to be an NDTP and the 5 biggest programs that most of those guys go to will still primarily be recruiting from there. The NDTP will probably just get a little bit weaker and they won't be able to supplement with Kent Johnsons and Adam Fantillis who will probably now go the CHL route.

It will be interesting to see if there's a stigma around 'sloppy seconds' for programs like Michigan/BU/BC. A guy like Tulk is going to be an elite NCAA talent and should probably be going somewhere bigger than Wisconsin. But bringing in freshman talent who are high draft picks and likely future NHLers is going to have a lot more prestige than bringing in undrafted CHL overagers who would have been playing Usports previously, no matter how good those guys will be at the NCAA level.

The portal will play into this as well, but that's kind of a separate issue moving talent around.

Well, I'm sure there are plenty of Badger fans here that will disagree with you about who or who is not prestigious

If we are talking about really high end players, like a Smith or a Hagens then sure, those programs will absolutely make room for them but if we are talking about a NHL 3rd or even a 2nd rounder, those programs may ask those players to defer a year or maybe even two because they will want the ready to play and instantly contribute 20/21 year old ex CHLer. At the end of the day, even for those programs, winning will mean a lot more than how many 1st rounders they have on the rosters.

You know my opinion as to the success those programs will have in actually getting the really high end CHL draft picks to commit to a year of college.

 

[MS]

Why wouldn't the next Kent Johnson and Adam Fantili still go play NCAA Hockey when they are 18, like the prior Kent Johnson and Adam Fantilli? The CHL Route only effects where they would have played at 16-17, but they can still play college at 18 same as before.

I suspect that players leaving the CHL before age 20 will be pretty rare, for several reasons : 1) changing leagues pre-draft to an unknown represents a significant risk, 2) changing leagues post-draft prevents you from signing an ELC or going to NHL training camps, and 3) the stigma around leaving your team and just the general fact that players will get comfortable where they are and with their friends/teammates/billets/coaches. Also (4) the NCAA will still be there as a fallback when you're 20 so the incentive to move early will be lowered.

Wisconsin is still a blueblood, problem is they've been down for most of the past 10-15 years. Still a great program with rich tradition

No argument, and possibly they're heading on the up again. But right now they aren't a top-10 program and a guy like Tulk in terms of impact would probably be the odds-on favourite to be the best freshman in the NCAA next year. This is a guy who could probably hang in the AHL but is only available to the NCAA because he's 5'8. He's going to be an elite NCAA scorer.

 

[jtechkid]

The pipeline from D1 athlete -> juicy first job offer is fairly robust. I've never met a hiring manager who thought high level athletic achievement was a -ve soft skill.

I also know dozens of ppl who have gone down this route - mostly to banking & consulting. So don't feel too bad - provided they have a functional brain, they'll land on their feet.

I think everybody likes talking about the success stories of kids playing div 1 and graduating college at age 25 then it’s easy getting a job because your a stud . However , The Nahl, Bchl , ncdc probably have 500-600 kids 21 year old not playing div 1 hockey . The only reason most are still playing for a small chance of playing div 1 and the age rule keeps that dream alive . In addition , their huge difference starting your job , saving for retirement the younger you are then starting working at age 26 verse age 22-23. Start the bashing lol. Granted CHL and USHL have a limit of 20 year old of 3 per team while Bchl is at 6. However , NAHL has no age limit and this year had around 350 total 20 year olds .

 

[Corso]

I suspect that players leaving the CHL before age 20 will be pretty rare, for several reasons : 1) changing leagues pre-draft to an unknown represents a significant risk, 2) changing leagues post-draft prevents you from signing an ELC or going to NHL training camps, and 3) the stigma around leaving your team and just the general fact that players will get comfortable where they are and with their friends/teammates/billets/coaches. Also (4) the NCAA will still be there as a fallback when you're 20 so the incentive to move early will be lowered.

Agree with pretty much everything you said here but understand there are 54 pages already devoted to this argument and if you continue it, well feelings will get hurt.

But yes, don't expect a lot of high end CHLers to be jumping ship to the NCAA at 18 or even 19.

That's all fair but you and I both know that many fan bases are going to be pushing for guys to be in the AHL when they are "statistically" too good for the CHL and not really ready.

I'm a big believer in development and playing time and it's too bad that we didn't have a Swedish type of system where players could play up or down their home club at most levels on the way up as it's a very good developmental model.

That is exactly what the CHL wants. There was a so-called meeting of the minds last October where all CHL owners attended along with Garry Bettman. The CHL proposed a system where drafted players could move freely between the AHL and CHL with the stipulation that they be permanently returned back to their respective junior clubs by a set date.

I think everybody likes talking about the success stories of kids playing div 1 and graduating college at age 25 then it’s easy getting a job because your a stud . However , The Nahl, Bchl , ncdc probably have 500-600 kids 21 year old not playing div 1 hockey . The only reason most are still playing for a small chance of playing div 1 and the age rule keeps that dream alive . In addition , their huge difference starting your job , saving for retirement the younger you are then starting working at age 26 verse age 22-23. Start the bashing lol

That is the argument the Big10 made some years ago, far too many players toiling away in various junior leagues and delaying their education when they should be getting on with their lives.

 

[WarriorofTime]

If we are talking about really high end players, like a Smith or a Hagens then sure, those programs will absolutely make room for them but if we are talking about a NHL 3rd or even a 2nd rounder, those programs may ask those players to defer a year or maybe even two because they will want the ready to play and instantly contribute 20/21 year old ex CHLer. At the end of the day, even for those programs, winning will mean a lot more than how many 1st rounders they have on the rosters.

This is a myth.

Boisvert, Connelly, Eiserman, Hage, Plante, Stiga, Bednarik, Mustard, Ziemer, Sawyer, these are 1st, 2nd, 3rd round forwards from last year playing NCAA, none of whom are "a Smith or a Hagens". Why would ANY of those players get told to defer because some thrice undrafted players are going to Bowling Green?

 

[WarriorofTime]

Agree with pretty much everything you said here but understand there are 54 pages already devoted to this argument and if you continue it, well feeling will get hurt.

But yes, don't expect a lot of high end CHLers to be jumping ship to the NCAA at 18 or even 19.

Please give me your over/under on how many players on the 2029 United States U20 World Junior Ice Hockey roster will be NCAA players? "bookmark it" I recall.

 

[MS]

Well, I'm sure there are plenty of Badger fans here that will disagree with you about who or who is not prestigious

If we are talking about really high end players, like a Smith or a Hagens then sure, those programs will absolutely make room for them but if we are talking about a NHL 3rd or even a 2nd rounder, those programs may ask those players to defer a year or maybe even two because they will want the ready to play and instantly contribute 20/21 year old ex CHLer. At the end of the day, even for those programs, winning will mean a lot more than how many 1st rounders they have on the rosters.

You know my opinion as to the success those programs will have in actually getting the really high end CHL draft picks to commit to a year of college.

It's possible, but as I said above it isn't always a straight line and these teams aren't necessarily behaving logically in a perfect economy.

There is prestige in being a school that has a pile of NDTP/high-drafted NHL prospects and moving away from that to CHL sloppy seconds might not be something that programs are willing to do. Some of these programs (Minnesota, Boston College) already have pretty closed recruitment policies and could have stronger teams if they opened things up more.

So far these teams (Michigan, Minnesota, BU, BC, ND, etc) aren't jumping on the CHL train while the pool they recruit from appears to be set to shrink. We'll see if it changes.

 

[Corso]

It's possible, but as I said above it isn't always a straight line and these teams aren't necessarily behaving logically in a perfect economy.

There is prestige in being a school that has a pile of NDTP/high-drafted NHL prospects and moving away from that to CHL sloppy seconds might not be something that programs are willing to do. Some of these programs (Minnesota, Boston College) already have pretty closed recruitment policies and could have stronger teams if they opened things up more.

So far these teams (Michigan, Minnesota, BU, BC, ND, etc) aren't jumping on the CHL train. We'll see if it changes.

Teams feasting on CHL players right now, like Bowling Green, will be demonstrably better than they were. As they, and teams like them continue to beef up with those type of players (older, stronger and more talented than the previous ex BCHL/NAHL and even some USHLers) , they will be more and more competitive against those blueblood programs and beating them on more than just the rare occasion. This, I suspect, will force those bluebloods to also dip into that market in order to maintain their edge.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I suspect that players leaving the CHL before age 20 will be pretty rare, for several reasons : 1) changing leagues pre-draft to an unknown represents a significant risk, 2) changing leagues post-draft prevents you from signing an ELC or going to NHL training camps, and 3) the stigma around leaving your team and just the general fact that players will get comfortable where they are and with their friends/teammates/billets/coaches. Also (4) the NCAA will still be there as a fallback when you're 20 so the incentive to move early will be lowered.

The problem is the level of bad logic, and "most A do B and most B do C so then most A will do C"

It can both be true that

1) Many high-end players, particuarly Canadian, that went the NCAA route, would have gone to the CHL, if, as of now, CHL players retain eligibility

2) Most CHL players sign ELCs, particularly, if, as of before now, playing in the CHL already made you NCAA ineligible, so being... double NCAA ineligible by signing an ELC wasn't some drawback

What that doesn't mean is the group in 1 will now sign ELC, get double slid and never play NCAA. This is a common logical fallacy.

If you want to play NCAA, you will play NCAA. It may have been a 'backup' for kids that went undrafted three times and never landed a pro contract, but it's not a backup for everyone. If the CHL were to "trap" these kids until they're 21 if not playing pro by then, they just wouldn't go to CHL, as they didn't before. Likely the CHL team will want them but just accept that they may leave 'early' for college because two years of Adam Fantilli is better than no years. And now you have guys that were maybe on the fence before, but opted for CHL, with a possible incentive to jump as well.

 

[MS]

Teams feasting on CHL players right now, like Bowling Green, will be demonstrably better than they were. As they, and teams like them continue to beef up with those type of players (older, stronger and more talented than the previous ex BCHL/NAHL and even some USHLers) , they will be more and more competitive against those blueblood programs and beating them on more than just the rare occasion. This, I suspect, will force those bluebloods to also dip into that market in order to maintain their edge.

Like I said, this may happen 2-3 years down the road. Or it may not. Minnesota could be icing a better team if they opened up their recruitment policies more than near-Minnesota exclusivity, but they don't and haven't. It will be a huge leap for a program that considers themselves a high-standards 'superior' NHL feeder to eat shit and start recruiting Shea Van Olms.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

It's possible, but as I said above it isn't always a straight line and these teams aren't necessarily behaving logically in a perfect economy.

There is prestige in being a school that has a pile of NDTP/high-drafted NHL prospects and moving away from that to CHL sloppy seconds might not be something that programs are willing to do. Some of these programs (Minnesota, Boston College) already have pretty closed recruitment policies and could have stronger teams if they opened things up more.

So far these teams (Michigan, Minnesota, BU, BC, ND, etc) aren't jumping on the CHL train while the pool they recruit from appears to be set to shrink. We'll see if it changes.

The top programs that recruit Canadians hard (Michigan, Boston University, Boston College, North Dakota, Denver) appear to be big game hunting for the top tier CHLers and will wait on the depth CHLers until they know if the Misa, McQueen, Martone, Gavin, Smith, Lakovic, Kindel, Roobroeck, McKenna, Carbonneau, etc tier guys aren't going to the NCAA.

Until the offseason, we won't know if the big game hunting will be successful or not. Need clarity on rights holding period changes, CHL-NHL Agreement changes, recruiting strategies/partnerships, NHL teams' development strategies with CHLers, etc.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Like I said, this may happen 2-3 years down the road. Or it may not. Minnesota could be icing a better team if they opened up their recruitment policies more than near-Minnesota exclusivity, but they don't and haven't. It will be a huge leap for a program that considers themselves a high-standards 'superior' NHL feeder to eat shit and start recruiting Shea Van Olms.

The big boy schools will likely just be going after more of the high-end 17/18 year old CHLers to jump into NCAA, more than looking for a huge influx of the also rans that got passed up by Pro Hockey. A player or two, sure, but likely not going to fundamentally alter the landscape as these players aren't that good. They're floor raisers, hence why right now they're mostly getting recruited by the schools that don't recruit the big names, as all the best 04s are already pros or playing college hockey. It's not like a USports team of a bunch of ex CHL guys is presently better today than the big boy schools with like 10-12 NHL Draft Picks on the roster.

 

[Blue and Green]

I suspect that players leaving the CHL before age 20 will be pretty rare, for several reasons : 1) changing leagues pre-draft to an unknown represents a significant risk, 2) changing leagues post-draft prevents you from signing an ELC or going to NHL training camps, and 3) the stigma around leaving your team and just the general fact that players will get comfortable where they are and with their friends/teammates/billets/coaches. Also (4) the NCAA will still be there as a fallback when you're 20 so the incentive to move early will be lowered.

Among players who started this season in CHL, I don't foresee many leaving early for NCAA. But from upcoming groups, plenty will. From now on there's going to be a lot of guys coming to CHL with D1 commitments already in hand and as soon as they get the green light, away they'll go.

 

[Corso]

Like I said, this may happen 2-3 years down the road. Or it may not. Minnesota could be icing a better team if they opened up their recruitment policies more than near-Minnesota exclusivity, but they don't and haven't. It will be a huge leap for a program that considers themselves a high-standards 'superior' NHL feeder to eat shit and start recruiting Shea Van Olms.

Give them time

The top programs that recruit Canadians hard (Michigan, Boston University, Boston College, North Dakota, Denver) appear to be big game hunting for the top tier CHLers and will wait on the depth CHLers until they know if the Misa, McQueen, Martone, Gavin, Smith, Lakovic, Kindel, Roobroeck, McKenna, Carbonneau, etc tier guys aren't going to the NCAA.

Until the offseason, we won't know if the big game hunting will be successful or not. Need clarity on rights holding period changes, CHL-NHL Agreement changes, recruiting strategies/partnerships, NHL teams' development strategies with CHLers, etc.

Absolutely, they are trying and trying and trying.....a few nibbles but no bites yet.

 

[MS]

The problem is the level of bad logic, and "most A do B and most B do C so then most A will do C"

It can both be true that

1) Many high-end players, particuarly Canadian, that went the NCAA route, would have gone to the CHL, if, as of now, CHL players retain eligibility

2) Most CHL players sign ELCs, particularly, if, as of before now, playing in the CHL already made you NCAA ineligible, so being... double NCAA ineligible by signing an ELC wasn't some drawback

What that doesn't mean is the group in 1 will now sign ELC, get double slid and never play NCAA. This is a common logical fallacy.

If you want to play NCAA, you will play NCAA. It may have been a 'backup' for kids that went undrafted three times and never landed a pro contract, but it's not a backup for everyone. If the CHL were to "trap" these kids until they're 21 if not playing pro by then, they just wouldn't go to CHL, as they didn't before. Likely the CHL team will want them but just accept that they may leave 'early' for college because two years of Adam Fantilli is better than no years. And now you have guys that were maybe on the fence before, but opted for CHL, with a possible incentive to jump as well.

Previously, when a family is making a decision for their kid, the NCAA option at a prestigious school was the 'best education' thing on the table if hockey didn't work out. And it was gone once you went the other route.

Now you can go the CHL route and the 'best education' option is still on the table.

I'm not saying every kid is going to make a different decision but it's pretty clear that the incentivization for a Fantilli or a Johnson to play at lower levels through age 18 and hold off for a jump to the NCAA has decreased. And once those guys start playing in the CHL I'd expect most of them to stay in the CHL.

The big boy schools will likely just be going after more of the high-end 17/18 year old CHLers to jump into NCAA, more than looking for a huge influx of the also rans that got passed up by Pro Hockey. A player or two, sure, but likely not going to fundamentally alter the landscape as these players aren't that good. They're floor raisers, hence why right now they're mostly getting recruited by the schools that don't recruit the big names, as all the best 04s are already pros or playing college hockey. It's not like a USports team of a bunch of ex CHL guys is presently better today than the big boy schools with like 10-12 NHL Draft Picks on the roster.

I'll be stunned if 17/18 year old CHL players move to the NCAA in any significant numbers. There will obviously be individual cases here and there but, again, there are huge risks to changing leagues in your draft year and huge consequences to be moving to the NCAA after being drafted.

 

[Corso]

Among players who started this season in CHL, I don't foresee many leaving early for NCAA. But from upcoming groups, plenty will. From now on there's going to be a lot of guys coming to CHL with D1 commitments already in hand and as soon as they get the green light, away they'll go.

Really curious about a player like Chase Reid. He will most likely be a first-round draft pick next year. He is slated to start Michigan State the following fall.....he will be one of the harbingers as to what players who entered the CHL with a D-1 commitment already in hand will do.

As of now, I can tell you that he still intends to honor his commitment. Things on the hockey development path, however, have a way of changing things from time to time.

 

[jtechkid]

Really curious about a player like Chase Reid. He will most likely be a first-round draft pick next year. He is slated to start Michigan State the following fall.....he will be one of the harbingers as to what players who entered the CHL with a D-1 commitment already in hand will do.

As of now, I can tell you that he still intends to honor his commitment. Things on the hockey development path have a way of changing things from time to time.

will he go back to ushl next year lol

 

[Corso]

will he go back to ushl next year lol

Would be very surprised if he did

 

[WarriorofTime]

I'll be stunned if 17/18 year old CHL players move to the NCAA in any significant numbers. There will obviously be individual cases here and there but, again, there are huge risks to changing leagues in your draft year and huge consequences to be moving to the NCAA after being drafted.

Probably not right away as we still sort through both (a) players that had opted the "CHL" route when they went there to begin with and (b) players that are still subject to a 2-year "Must Sign" date.

Starting with say, 09s, who haven't made their junior hockey decisions yet, we'll see as that is where the longer term implications will be felt.

The only "huge risk" is that a player is a bust and not able to make an impact at the NCAA level when they are 18, at which point they'll be sent back to Junior in order to get more ready. I don't really see how it's a huge "risk". Did Fantilli take a "risk" to leave the Steel and play at Michigan for his draft year? He was good enough, and it only helped him.

 

[SergeConstantin74]

Côté should be a really good player in the NCAA.

 

[Corso]

And another...believe we passed the 70 mark in O/A commitments.

 

[Wieters]

The top programs that recruit Canadians hard (Michigan, Boston University, Boston College, North Dakota, Denver) appear to be big game hunting for the top tier CHLers and will wait on the depth CHLers until they know if the Misa, McQueen, Martone, Gavin, Smith, Lakovic, Kindel, Roobroeck, McKenna, Carbonneau, etc tier guys aren't going to the NCAA.

Until the offseason, we won't know if the big game hunting will be successful or not. Need clarity on rights holding period changes, CHL-NHL Agreement changes, recruiting strategies/partnerships, NHL teams' development strategies with CHLers, etc.

The fact that none of the programs with the most recruiting capital have announced a single CHL player of note implies that they're either a) in a wait-and-see mode and haven't made the offers yet or b) have commitments lined up that they're simply not announcing. The idea that this is the case:

Absolutely, they are trying and trying and trying.....a few nibbles but no bites yet.

Is yet again illogical. If they were "trying and trying and trying" and willing to announce the results of their efforts, we would have heard at least something by now given the programs we're talking about.