CHL can now play NCAA - change everything !

[coooldude]

I check in here every once in a while, and I'm consistently shocked at people who think that since nothing major has happened yet, nothing major will happen.

Players make decisions on a year-long cycle. We're still just months past a mid-season announcement. We won't really know how this fully plays out until we see 2-3 cycles of seasons - where do the very top prospects go, what about the next tier, what about guys who aren't ready for NHL but don't want to go to AHL, what about all the various scenarios that happen? We absolutely cannot know and should not expect to have "seen the changes" yet.

 

[MS]

If we're talking about guys who joined the CHL under the prior ineligibility situation, obviously they're less likely on the whole to move because they were initially willing to forego it in order to play in CHL. Going forward, there will be a substantial number of guys, including a fair number of Canadians, who wouldn't have joined the CHL if the NCAA hadn't made the eligibility change. Now they'll be drafted out of the CHL instead of a different junior league but they still want to play in D1.

For Canadians, I don't think many 'want' to play NCAA hockey, like it's a dream or something. The NCAA has gotten kids because it's considered the best/most prestigious educational opportunity and families (wealthier families in particular) have decided that getting that education was a better fallback if the NHL didn't work out. But now you can have that fallback going the CHL route.

There might be some US players who go CHL->NCAA instead of USHL->NCAA but in most cases I'd expect the NCAA jump to happen at age 20 or 21, not at age 18 or 19. And this is what we've seen so far - exactly 0 18/19 year old US-born CHL players have announced an NCAA commitment for next year. Once you're in the CHL pipeline if you're not a draft->NHL contract tracking player, the best way to stay on the prospect radar for the longest time is to play CHL until age 20-21 and then NCAA until age 24-25.

As a third-round draft choice, Mynio very likely could've joined a good D1 conference at age 18, had he been both eligible and interested.

This is my point. Of course he *could* have. But why on earth *would* he have? What exactly would there be to gain? What's the incentive?

For a guy like Mynio (or whatever 2025 draft equivalent) to move to the NCAA would mean delaying their ELC and the signing bonus $$$ that comes with that, not getting to go to NHL training camps and prospect tourneys, not getting AHL games at the end of last year, and likely not making the 2025 WJC team (Hockey Canada basically pulls from the CHL aside from the odd elite Celebrini). If I was Mynio's agent, why would I be advising that he do this?

The only drafted players I could really see doing this are guys who are not happy with their CHL team or situation or not happy with the NHL team that drafted them and who have no intention of immediately signing. And, like, I'm sure it will happen occasionally. But I simply can't see it being a big regular thing or something that the CHL would be concerned about as a talent drain.

 

[Corso]

Monitoring developments such as which leagues players commit to and the actions taken by the various leagues/franchises is understandable. But using those premises to make sweeping conclusions does not follow because this is a brand new change, there are competing interests/considerations, and there is no precedent for it.

Exactly, there is no precedent for this and you do recognize the massive change this is going to bring about. Where I disagree with you is that we cannot nor should not make any conclusions that may result because of this change.

I believe that it is safe to conclude that the domestic junior leagues will suffer a massive talent drain to the CHL. We have already seen this with the BCHL and we will soon see it with the USHL. If you disbelieve it, well understand that the only reason why there haven't been more defections from the USHL this season is because of the exorbitant transfer fees levied by respective USHL teams. (BTW...USHL commissioner all but admitted this fact today on a podcast with Cohen).

I believe that it is also safe to conclude that this large influx of American talent into the CHL will in time, begin to change the views of those Americans as to what road they will take to the pros.

You may disagree with those conclusions and I appreciate that you do not act like a child and call me fake or dork or whatever but all I ask is that you at least entertain the possibility that this change may bring about a NCAA that is different and perhaps not something that you are comfortable with.

As I've said ad nauseum....the next NHL-CHL agreement and the CBA will go a long way in how this plays out. Do not be shocked if the end result is a drastically altered landscape.

 

[Blue and Green]

This is my point. Of course he *could* have. But why on earth *would* he have? What exactly would there be to gain? What's the incentive?

For a guy like Mynio (or whatever 2025 draft equivalent) to move to the NCAA would mean delaying their ELC and the signing bonus $$$ that comes with that, not getting to go to NHL training camps and prospect tourneys, not getting AHL games at the end of last year, and likely not making the 2025 WJC team (Hockey Canada basically pulls from the CHL aside from the odd elite Celebrini). If I was Mynio's agent, why would I be advising that he do this?

Why is 18YO John Mustard, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round last year, playing in the NCAA this season? Why did Jayden Perron, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round in 2023, join North Dakota at age 18? Why did Adam Ingram, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round in 2022, go to the NCAA in his D+1? And Nick Moldenhauer, also a 2022 Canadian 3rd-rounder at age 18, go to the NCAA a year later? Because that's what they wanted to do, and they were good enough to do it. That is the path that they chose to take. And the NCAA has no problems churning out good pros, so what's the big deal if a guy decides that he'd rather delay his signing bonuses in order to play D1?

Now, the Mustards and Perrons and such can play in the CHL and then move to NCAA.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Why is 18YO John Mustard, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round last year, playing in the NCAA this season? Why did Jayden Perron, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round in 2023, join North Dakota at age 18? Why did Adam Ingram, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round in 2022, go to the NCAA in his D+1? And Nick Moldenhauer, also a 2022 Canadian 3rd-rounder at age 18, go to the NCAA a year later? Because that's what they wanted to do, and they were good enough to do it. That is the path that they chose to take. And the NCAA has no problems churning out good pros, so what's the big deal if a guy decides that he'd rather delay his signing bonuses in order to play D1?

Now, the Mustards and Perrons and such can play in the CHL and then move to NCAA.

Yeah, it's the Most A are B and most B are C so most A are C logical fallacy. There is no reason to think a player that always could have foregone the NCAA will now suddenly not just because their feeder league changed. The most common reasons cited appear to be thay they will either fall in love with the "atmosphere" of major junior hockey or be bullied by their agents into signing an ELC. I suppose anything is possible, but all I ask is that people at least entertain the possibility that this change may bring about a Major Junior landscape that is different and perhaps not something that they are comfortable with.

 

[MS]

Why is 18YO John Mustard, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round last year, playing in the NCAA this season? Why did Jayden Perron, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round in 2023, join North Dakota at age 18? Why did Adam Ingram, a Canadian drafted in the 3rd round in 2022, go to the NCAA in his D+1? And Nick Moldenhauer, also a 2022 Canadian 3rd-rounder at age 18, go to the NCAA a year later? Because that's what they wanted to do, and they were good enough to do it. That is the path that they chose to take. And the NCAA has no problems churning out good pros, so what's the big deal if a guy decides that he'd rather delay his signing bonuses in order to play D1?

I'm confused.

1) I never said that no Canadians ever would play NCAA hockey.

2) All your examples are pre-change. Of course those guys are still playing NCAA hockey.

3) As I said, the prospect of an NCAA education has been a big draw for some Canadian players. This applies to that list of guys. A guy like Mustard went undrafted in the OHL draft, so this was also pretty much his only option at the time.

With the change, I would expect that fewer Canadian players will take this path, since the biggest draws for taking this path (the better educational option and the fact you remain on the prospect radar longer) still apply if you go CHL and then go NCAA at age 20.

Now, the Mustards and Perrons and such can play in the CHL and then move to NCAA.

Yes, but you have yet to provide an argument as to *why* this would happen in any great numbers.

For Canadian guys, if they pick CHL at age 16-17, they're probably staying there until age 20. They'll settle in. They'll make friends. They'll become emotionally invested in their team/league. If they get drafted, they're incentivized to stay in the CHL. There might be more of a thing culturally with US guys to play in the CHL instead of the USHL at age 17 and then hop back to the Big US School, but even then I don't see where this is something the CHL would be concerned about as you're just losing guys you never had to begin with.

 

[Blue and Green]

Exactly, there is no precedent for this and you do recognize the massive change this is going to bring about. Where I disagree with you is that we cannot nor should not make any conclusions that may result because of this change.

I believe that it is safe to conclude that the domestic junior leagues will suffer a massive talent drain to the CHL. We have already seen this with the BCHL and we will soon see it with the USHL. If you disbelieve it, well understand that the only reason why there haven't been more defections from the USHL this season is because of the exorbitant transfer fees levied by respective USHL teams. (BTW...USHL commissioner all but admitted this fact today on a podcast with Cohen).

I believe that it is also safe to conclude that this large influx of American talent into the CHL will in time, begin to change the views of those Americans as to what road they will take to the pros.

You may disagree with those conclusions and I appreciate that you do not act like a child and call me fake or dork or whatever but all I ask is that you at least entertain the possibility that this change may bring about a NCAA that is different and perhaps not something that you are comfortable with.

As I've said ad nauseum....the next NHL-CHL agreement and the CBA will go a long way in how this plays out. Do not be shocked if the end result is a drastically altered landscape.

I pretty much agree with this... although noting that, if there could be some effect on the mindset of Americans by coming to the CHL, there could also be an effect on the Canadian mindset by watching players leave CHL early to play in NCAA.

One other thing: NCAA programs might have to up their offers a little if they want some of these CHLers to leave before their eligibility is finished. They won't be taking players away only from willing participants (USHL) or weaker leagues (BCHL, Junior A) but also from CHL which has the quality of competition and the scholarship funding to at least make guys think a little more before leaving. Some 19YO Canadians might be looking for a little more security than just a year-by-year NCAA offer to leave instead of staying for one more season and securing that four-year CHL scholarship as a fallback.

 

[Corso]

I pretty much agree with this... although noting that, if there could be some effect on the mindset of Americans by coming to the CHL, there could also be an effect on the Canadian mindset by watching players leave CHL early to play in NCAA.

One other thing: NCAA programs might have to up their offers a little if they want some of these CHLers to leave before their eligibility is finished. They won't be taking players away only from willing participants (USHL) or weaker leagues (BCHL, Junior A) but also from CHL which has the quality of competition and the scholarship funding to at least make guys think a little more before leaving. Some 19YO Canadians might be looking for a little more security than just a year-by-year NCAA offer to leave instead of staying for one more season and securing that four-year CHL scholarship as a fallback.

It's not really what the CHL can offer that scares me. Yes I understand their mindset is different and I've been told that as a collective they are adamant about NOT being the new USHL. So I also understand that the culture will be different and that will have an effect on players. With all that, I don't suspect that a top end American kid will opt out of the college route because of the soft pressures employed by the CHL club. Rather, I fear the new CHL-NHL agreement and the next CBA. Coupled with what the CHL can offer, that may very well be the massive negative for the NCAA.

 

[Blue and Green]

I'm confused.

1) I never said that no Canadians ever would play NCAA hockey.

2) All your examples are pre-change. Of course those guys are still playing NCAA hockey.

3) As I said, the prospect of an NCAA education has been a big draw for some Canadian players. This applies to that list of guys. A guy like Mustard went undrafted in the OHL draft, so this was also pretty much his only option at the time.

With the change, I would expect that fewer Canadian players will take this path, since the biggest draws for taking this path (the better educational option and the fact you remain on the prospect radar longer) still apply if you go CHL and then go NCAA at age 20.



Yes, but you have yet to provide an argument as to *why* this would happen in any great numbers.

For Canadian guys, if they pick CHL at age 16-17, they're probably staying there until age 20. They'll settle in. They'll make friends. They'll become emotionally invested in their team/league. If they get drafted, they're incentivized to stay in the CHL. There might be more of a thing culturally with US guys to play in the CHL instead of the USHL at age 17 and then hop back to the Big US School, but even then I don't see where this is something the CHL would be concerned about as you're just losing guys you never had to begin with.

I'm a bit confused, too, and I don't know how else I can explain it. There's at least one other person here who understands what I mean. I think it's reached time that we just shrug and move on.

It's not really what the CHL can offer that scares me. Yes I understand their mindset is different and I've been told that as a collective they are adamant about NOT being the new USHL. So I also understand that the culture will be different and that will have an effect on players. With all that, I don't suspect that a top end American kid will opt out of the college route because of the soft pressures employed by the CHL club. Rather, I fear the new CHL-NHL agreement and the next CBA. Coupled with what the CHL can offer, that may very well be the massive negative for the NCAA.

I can't see a terrible outcome for NCAA. Nor for CHL. I don't think that NHL has any interest in creating a bad situation for either of them, and likes having sort of a balance of power between them, although I do think that NHL and CHL are a little more aligned in their interests. Agencies have clients from each, the PA gets its members from each, so I expect that the next CBA and the next CHL-NHL agreement will be worked out to assure the well-being of all parties, as much as possible.

 

[MS]

I'm a bit confused, too, and I don't know how else I can explain it. There's at least one other person here who understands what I mean. I think it's reached time that we just shrug and move on.


I can't see a terrible outcome for NCAA. Nor for CHL. I don't think that NHL has any interest in creating a bad situation for either of them, and likes having sort of a balance of power between them, although I do think that NHL and CHL are a little more aligned in their interests. Agencies have clients from each, the PA gets its members from each, so I expect that the next CBA and the next CHL-NHL agreement will be worked out to assure the well-being of all parties, as much as possible.

To be clear, I'm not foreseeing a terrible outcome for the NCAA. At all.

I think that generally speaking this is fantastic for the NCAA. The influx of 150+ age 20-21 ex-CHL players every year will give a massive boost to the talent pool, level of play, and overall parity for the NCAA. I just think it will take a bit of a hit (though probably not extreme) in terms of U20 Canadian talent and U20 drafted talent, which is what most posters here are most interested in talking about.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Of course it's a thing. And it's a thing where it's trending that 2nd and 3rd round picks are signing their ELCs earlier and earlier. Agents and players want their ELCs and they want to get it locked in as soon as possible.

And it's not just the ELC. It's going to NHL training camps and development camps, playing preseason games, being in the 'pipeline' for an NHL team instead of an outsider.

A guy like Sawyer Mynio who the Canucks took in the 3rd round in 2023 was signed to an ELC almost immediately. He's now had two full NHL training camps, two prospect tourneys, played AHL games and NHL preseason games, and is getting $95k/year in signing bonus money. What possible incentivization would he have had to forfeit all of that to play NCAA hockey?

If you see no incentive, why do many players forfeit that yearly to play NCAA? Obviously it's not as important to some as you think it should be.

My personal opinion is that going to NHL training camp and playing in preseason games is the thing that the players lose. That's real. Most development camps are way before the college season starts and most college players attend that. Isn't the signing bonus there eventually? Seems like it's just about getting the bonus now vs. in the future.

And while I agree with you that players are signing ELC's earlier and of course their agents would push them to sign earlier (earlier cut for them), I don't see how that matters. It seems like just the obvious thing to do to want to get your money upfront if you're sure that you are going to be deciding to sign a professional hockey contract. There hasn't been another real variable into the equation before now, so we'll see what happens (if they want to sign earlier) when signing earlier gets in the way with what might be a better developmental environment.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I mean, pretty small sample size. There are plenty of examples of 1st round picks from the USHL/NDTP who got smoked as NCAA freshmen and would have had their stock fall in a massive way if it was their draft year. Alex Turcotte is a recent example who was a 3rd overall pick. It's happening to Hagens to a limited extent this year, even.

You are really grasping at straws here.

First of all, how is Hagens seeing his stock smoked? If the worst case scenario happens and he moves from 1st overall to 2nd overall, are you serious in suggesting that furthers your point? Surely you aren't suggesting Hagens isn't having a good season at BC?

And second of all, Turcotte wasn't the third overall. He was the fifth overall. Regardless, that average year at Wisconsin in the end (and further injuries) haven't derailed him as he's now on course and playing really well. Almost like it's stupid to hold one year against a player, especially given what you say about players playing their draft year in the NCAA.

For a recent example, Charlie Stramel played his draft year in the NCAA, it didn't go well (another Wisconsin guy, go figure), and he dropped maybe 10 spots. Not exactly some huge fall. And it didn't derail him further either as he's now on track at MSU. Almost like teams recognize that playing in the NCAA in your draft year is hard and there's a lot of variables to consider, not just PPG in your draft year.

 

[bigdog16]

It's not really what the CHL can offer that scares me. Yes I understand their mindset is different and I've been told that as a collective they are adamant about NOT being the new USHL. So I also understand that the culture will be different and that will have an effect on players. With all that, I don't suspect that a top end American kid will opt out of the college route because of the soft pressures employed by the CHL club. Rather, I fear the new CHL-NHL agreement and the next CBA. Coupled with what the CHL can offer, that may very well be the massive negative for the NCAA.

What will the CHL offer over the NCAA other than more games at a worse level

 

[Hockeyville USA]

What will the CHL offer over the NCAA other than more games at a worse level

More games, more opportunity to score, stay closer to home, more media exposure in their home country

 

[Corso]

What will the CHL offer over the NCAA other than more games at a worse level

As I said, it's not really what the CHL can offer but the combination of the CHL route with a new model of playing up and down in the pro ranks.

I think I mentioned my theory as to what could happen (and of course the usual suspects misinterpreted and or misread it) once the NHL-CHL agreement changes. My concern focuses on the (now widely accepted) conclusion that most of the top end Americans will choose the CHL over the USHL/BCHL/NAHL path (still think the NTDP gets the lion share of their targets...though lots of buzz right now as to changes within the NTDP) and that path will bring about a different type of progression.

The CHL business model centers on holding their top prospects until the age of 20 for obvious (market) reasons. This recent NCAA eligibility change has thrown that model into doubt. From what I was told, the CHL was anticipating this change and began to formulate how they could keep their top drafted prospects when they now had the option of leaving and enrolling in school while playing D-1 hockey. The current CHL standard agreement could hold players until the end of that eligibility, but the CHL (wisely) decided that the optics of such an enforcement would be quite detrimental and would never withstand the scrutiny of a lawsuit. They also realized that it would prevent them from recruiting players who wanted the option of the NCAA route on the timeline that they could decide on as opposed to what a contract might state. So, the CHL is (has) realizing that their current business model is no longer sustainable and a new way of conducting business is in order.

Enter a new NHL-CHL agreement and potentially a new draft system. The CHL would love to have the NHL institute new policy that allows for drafted CHL players to play a portion of the season in either the NHL or AHL and then be re-assigned back to their respective junior clubs at a specific date. I'm not sure if the NHL will implement such a change but it's pretty certain that CHL players will be allowed to play pro hockey. The only question is how many and with what conditions.

Even if the NHL doesn't agree to the CHL proposal of a partial season in the pros then junior, the NHL and CHL will still allow for the free flow of prospects between the two. This could be very problematic for the NCAA. One thing that I know of for sure is that a good chuck of player agents always liked the ability of their clients having the option of playing college and then signing when they felt ready to do so. The CHL restriction was off putting, even to a growing number of Canadian players. Many players, on the advice of their agents, coaches (both minor and junior) and of course college recruiters were being sold on the virtue of the longer runway that the college path offered. The CHL path, while still good, they argued simply didn't give you the proper time needed to develop. Why take the risk in having your aspirations of playing pro hockey at a high-level end by the time you were 20 (apologies to U-Sport fans). That risk has now been mitigated with this new rule change and now the dynamics have considerably changed.

Take a player like Chase Reid. He committed to the Spartans last summer and was on the NAHL/USHL track towards college but now is playing for the Soo Greyhounds of the OHL and playing well enough that the scouting community is talking about him being a potential first rounder. So, he returns back to the OHL next year (as opposed to the USHL), is drafted fairly high and now has a decision to make. Does he enter campus in the fall of 26 as originally planned or does he begin to listen to what the Hounds are telling him (college is there waiting for you, why not go to both the summer and fall development camp then jump to the main camp.) The allure of signing (or not) and having the option of going back to the familiar confines of your CHL club has to be taken into account. He could sign, feeling that the number of games that he would be allowed to play in the AHL would be better for his development and the money earned is icing on the cake.

Will he simply defer or simply abandon the college path. One can't say but what we can say is that it is now more of a distinct possibility.

Sorry for the long post.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

As I said, it's not really what the CHL can offer but the combination of the CHL route with a new model of playing up and down in the pro ranks.

I think I mentioned my theory as to what could happen (and of course the usual suspects misinterpreted and or misread it) once the NHL-CHL agreement changes. My concern focuses on the (now widely accepted) conclusion that most of the top end Americans will choose the CHL over the USHL/BCHL/NAHL path (still think the NTDP gets the lion share of their targets...though lots of buzz right now as to changes within the NTDP) and that path will bring about a different type of progression.

The CHL business model centers on holding their top prospects until the age of 20 for obvious (market) reasons. This recent NCAA eligibility change has thrown that model into doubt. From what I was told, the CHL was anticipating this change and began to formulate how they could keep their top drafted prospects when they now had the option of leaving and enrolling in school while playing D-1 hockey. The current CHL standard agreement could hold players until the end of that eligibility, but the CHL (wisely) decided that the optics of such an enforcement would be quite detrimental and would never withstand the scrutiny of a lawsuit. They also realized that it would prevent them from recruiting players who wanted the option of the NCAA route on the timeline that they could decide on as opposed to what a contract might state. So, the CHL is (has) realizing that their current business model is no longer sustainable and new way of conducting business is in order.

Enter a new NHL-CHL agreement and potentially a new draft system. The CHL would love to have the NHL institute new policy that allows for drafted CHL players to play a portion of the season in either the NHL or AHL and then be re-assigned back to their respective junior clubs at a specific date. I'm not sure if the NHL will implement such a change but it's pretty certain that CHL players will be allowed to play pro hockey. The only question is how many and with what conditions.

Even if the NHL doesn't agree to the CHL proposal of a partial season in the pros then junior, the NHL and CHL will still allow for the free flow of prospects between the two. This could be very problematic for the NCAA. One thing that I know of for sure is that a good chuck of player agents always liked the ability of their clients having the option of playing college and then signing when they felt ready to do so. The CHL restriction was off putting, even to a growing number of Canadian players. Many players, on the advice of their agents, coaches (both minor and junior) and of course college recruiters were being sold on the virtue of the longer runway that the college path offered. The CHL path, while still good, they argued simply didn't give you the proper time needed to develop. Why take the risk in having your aspirations of playing pro hockey at a high-level end by the time you were 20 (apologies to U-Sport fans). That risk has now been mitigated with this new rule change and now the dynamics have considerably changed.

Take a player like Chase Reid. He committed to the Spartans last summer and was on the NAHL/USHL track towards college but now is playing for the Soo Greyhounds of the OHL and playing well enough that the scouting community is talking about him being a potential first rounder. So, he returns back to the OHL next year (as opposed to the USHL), is drafted fairly high and now has a decision to make. Does he enter campus in the fall of 26 as originally planned or does he begin to listen to what the Hounds are telling him (college is there waiting for you, why not go to both the summer and fall development camp then jump to the main camp.) The allure of signing (or not) and having the option of going back to the familiar confines of your CHL club has to be taking into account. He could sign, feeling that the number of games that he would be allowed to play in the AHL would be better for his development and the money earned is icing on the cake.

Will he simply defer or simply abandon the college path. One can't say but what we can say is that it is now more of a distinct possibility.

Sorry for the long post.

I think Chase Reid is much more likely to end up at State considering he's from Chesterfield Township Michigan, so he might not be the best example of a guy who would abandon the NCAA route, but your overall premise is interesting.

I do think the developmental plans will vary by NHL team: Boston has a serious NCAA route bias now, Edmonton has generally had a major junior bias, etc, etc. And the European Pro route will remain intact and teams like Detroit & Vancouver will continue to draft their Swedes who will continue to go through the J20 to SHL standard progression. The European junior to NCAA route group has been growing quite a bit lately and we will see how much that continues in our new developmental path world.

 

[bigdog16]

As I said, it's not really what the CHL can offer but the combination of the CHL route with a new model of playing up and down in the pro ranks.

I think I mentioned my theory as to what could happen (and of course the usual suspects misinterpreted and or misread it) once the NHL-CHL agreement changes. My concern focuses on the (now widely accepted) conclusion that most of the top end Americans will choose the CHL over the USHL/BCHL/NAHL path (still think the NTDP gets the lion share of their targets...though lots of buzz right now as to changes within the NTDP) and that path will bring about a different type of progression.

The CHL business model centers on holding their top prospects until the age of 20 for obvious (market) reasons. This recent NCAA eligibility change has thrown that model into doubt. From what I was told, the CHL was anticipating this change and began to formulate how they could keep their top drafted prospects when they now had the option of leaving and enrolling in school while playing D-1 hockey. The current CHL standard agreement could hold players until the end of that eligibility, but the CHL (wisely) decided that the optics of such an enforcement would be quite detrimental and would never withstand the scrutiny of a lawsuit. They also realized that it would prevent them from recruiting players who wanted the option of the NCAA route on the timeline that they could decide on as opposed to what a contract might state. So, the CHL is (has) realizing that their current business model is no longer sustainable and new way of conducting business is in order.

Enter a new NHL-CHL agreement and potentially a new draft system. The CHL would love to have the NHL institute new policy that allows for drafted CHL players to play a portion of the season in either the NHL or AHL and then be re-assigned back to their respective junior clubs at a specific date. I'm not sure if the NHL will implement such a change but it's pretty certain that CHL players will be allowed to play pro hockey. The only question is how many and with what conditions.

Even if the NHL doesn't agree to the CHL proposal of a partial season in the pros then junior, the NHL and CHL will still allow for the free flow of prospects between the two. This could be very problematic for the NCAA. One thing that I know of for sure is that a good chuck of player agents always liked the ability of their clients having the option of playing college and then signing when they felt ready to do so. The CHL restriction was off putting, even to a growing number of Canadian players. Many players, on the advice of their agents, coaches (both minor and junior) and of course college recruiters were being sold on the virtue of the longer runway that the college path offered. The CHL path, while still good, they argued simply didn't give you the proper time needed to develop. Why take the risk in having your aspirations of playing pro hockey at a high-level end by the time you were 20 (apologies to U-Sport fans). That risk has now been mitigated with this new rule change and now the dynamics have considerably changed.

Take a player like Chase Reid. He committed to the Spartans last summer and was on the NAHL/USHL track towards college but now is playing for the Soo Greyhounds of the OHL and playing well enough that the scouting community is talking about him being a potential first rounder. So, he returns back to the OHL next year (as opposed to the USHL), is drafted fairly high and now has a decision to make. Does he enter campus in the fall of 26 as originally planned or does he begin to listen to what the Hounds are telling him (college is there waiting for you, why not go to both the summer and fall development camp then jump to the main camp.) The allure of signing (or not) and having the option of going back to the familiar confines of your CHL club has to be taking into account. He could sign, feeling that the number of games that he would be allowed to play in the AHL would be better for his development and the money earned is icing on the cake.

Will he simply defer or simply abandon the college path. One can't say but what we can say is that it is now more of a distinct possibility.

Sorry for the long post.

I don’t disagree with you. I think the future of a lot of the top end Americans will depend on what the NTDP can provide moving forward. The evaluation camp roster normally comes out in the beginning of March and I think we will have and although we won’t know for sure, I think we will have a better understanding as to where the 09s heads are at. I am still not convinced the Q will be able to cherrypick the northeastern kids. The OHL and WHL kids are certainly up for grabs.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I don’t disagree with you. I think the future of a lot of the top end Americans will depend on what the NTDP can provide moving forward. The evaluation camp roster normally comes out in the beginning of March and I think we will have and although we won’t know for sure, I think we will have a better understanding as to where the 09s heads are at. I am still not convinced the Q will be able to cherrypick the northeastern kids. The OHL and WHL kids are certainly up for grabs.

Tough to say with WHL, unless you are from like Washington state itself, the travel and distance from home is tough. The biggest potential draw for WHL American region is by far Minnesota, which to date, the WHL has never made much in-roads in. Minnesota path (NTDP excluced) has always kinda generally been MN HS -> USHL -> College. Maybe they replace USHL with WHL for whatever kids the WHL would wait around for, but would they outright abandon MN HS or abandon college because they made friends or whatever? Harder sell.

Colorado, California, Texas, kids... certainly more possible. Outside of Minnesota, really aren't many traditional hockey hotbeds in WHL-America region, although some of those places have come a long way.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Chase Reid fell into Soo’s lap. He tried to play for Waterloo for two seasons, and they didn’t want him.

I wouldn’t suggest he’s some big recruiting win for the CHL. The USHL and NTDP screwed up, and the CHL didn’t fumble an elite prospect. Think we can distinguish that.

 

[Corso]

I don’t disagree with you. I think the future of a lot of the top end Americans will depend on what the NTDP can provide moving forward. The evaluation camp roster normally comes out in the beginning of March and I think we will have and although we won’t know for sure, I think we will have a better understanding as to where the 09s heads are at. I am still not convinced the Q will be able to cherrypick the northeastern kids. The OHL and WHL kids are certainly up for grabs.

I think it will take a bit of time for the Q to begin making serious inroads into the N.E. market, but they have some big programs (Halifax, Moncton, Quebec) that won't mind spending money on top American prospects.

 

[Kingpin794]

Tough to say with WHL, unless you are from like Washington state itself, the travel and distance from home is tough. The biggest potential draw for WHL American region is by far Minnesota, which to date, the WHL has never made much in-roads in. Minnesota path (NTDP excluced) has always kinda generally been MN HS -> USHL -> College. Maybe they replace USHL with WHL for whatever kids the WHL would wait around for, but would they outright abandon MN HS or abandon college because they made friends or whatever? Harder sell.

Colorado, California, Texas, kids... certainly more possible. Outside of Minnesota, really aren't many traditional hockey hotbeds in WHL-America region, although some of those places have come a long way.

The Dallas stars AAA program has pretty regularly been supplying players to the WHL. The Phoenix program has had a couple. Teams have tried the LA kings system but haven't got a ton of players from there yet.

 

[Mototik]

I will say personally is that I think a lot of people haven't really commented on the human aspect.

Going from the CHL to the NCAA isn't just switching leagues to play hockey, it's also enrolling in school and becoming a full-time international student too. Even if it's a course load of basket weaving and Rocks for Jocks, not everyone is going to want to go to school or uproot their life (even more so than junior hockey already has), especially if they feel they have a good situation with their CHL team/city and/or they feel they could be in the NHL in a year or so anyways. Then players who most likely aren't going to make the NHL, they will also have to weigh the options that any potential post-secondary student faces like cost and degree path.

Same with more Americans going to the CHL. Just because they can now, doesn't mean they automatically will. Some might just not want to move to a different country when they can still get to the NCAA through the established American pathways.

People online can talk about development runway and which is better hockey and all that jazz, but hockey's not the only factor (plus, the more of that development runway a player uses up, the less likely they are going to be in the NHL which is something else I don't think people are talking about either).

 

[Corso]

I will say personally is that I think a lot of people haven't really commented on the human aspect.

Going from the CHL to the NCAA isn't just switching leagues to play hockey, it's also enrolling in school and becoming a full-time international student too. Even if it's a course load of basket weaving and Rocks for Jocks, not everyone is going to want to go to school or uproot their life (even more so than junior hockey already has), especially if they feel they have a good situation with their CHL team/city and/or they feel they could be in the NHL in a year or so anyways. Then players who most likely aren't going to make the NHL, they will also have to weigh the options that any potential post-secondary student faces like cost and degree path.

Same with more Americans going to the CHL. Just because they can now, doesn't mean they automatically will. Some might just not want to move to a different country when they can still get to the NCAA through the established American pathways.

People online can talk about development runway and which is better hockey and all that jazz, but hockey's not the only factor (plus, the more of that development runway a player uses up, the less likely they are going to be in the NHL which is something else I don't think people are talking about either).

That's a fair comment. Keep in mind though that elite athletes are conditioned to go where ever they feel the best opportunity to develop is. Dozens and dozens of top young Mass kids (people forget that MN doesn't have a monopoly on elite H.S.-Prep programs) pack their bags and travel hundreds, if not thousands, of miles to play the game in what to them seems like a strange midwestern town with a completely different vibe than what they are used to. Dozens more travel to a foreign country on the opposite coast of a continent.
Players will always take the path that seems the best to them.

 

[4thline]

I don’t disagree with you. I think the future of a lot of the top end Americans will depend on what the NTDP can provide moving forward.

If the USHL sees significant defection to the CHL, what would the NTDP's options be to maintain competition quality?

Could you consider a full NCAA schedule for the U18's?

 

[WarriorofTime]

Chase Reid fell into Soo’s lap. He tried to play for Waterloo for two seasons, and they didn’t want him.

I wouldn’t suggest he’s some big recruiting win for the CHL. The USHL and NTDP screwed up, and the CHL didn’t fumble an elite prospect. Think we can distinguish that.

There's always going to be "misses". Pretty normal when talking about kids basically evaluated for NTDP/OHL when they are 15 years old. Sometimes just pure late bloomers as well. Reid has a December 30th birthday, so in all the hub of Birth Year based hockey, was probably easy to lose in the shuffle. My wife is a teacher of grades 6, 7 and 8 and says especially in boys you really notice a big difference in maturity/development between 6th grade boys who have birthdays at the beginning of the cycle and those who have them at the end. If you think about that from hockey, that's ages where kids are really starting the position themselves for the junior evaluation, so relative age effect can be massive. It's not a coincidence there are so many January birthdays in the OHL and NTDP every year.