CHL Can Now Play NCAA - Changes Everything

[Kingpin794]

Wonder how hard the AHL is going to push back. They rely on those 20 year old CHL guys to fill out rosters/give fans a reason to show up. If those guys are staying in the NCAA til 22/23/24, that’s going to impact the product upstream. Currently they have a vet rule where you can only dress so many older players every night. This is meant to get ice time to a parent teams’ prospects. But perhaps that goes by wayside if 75% of every teams’ pool is in the NCAA? Are AHL clubs going to be ok with icing teams that are primarily older players, at least older than typically?

As a hockey fan I really hope Muskegon joins the OHL soon because watching AHL hockey is bad enough already.

 

[Corso]

Wonder how hard the AHL is going to push back. They rely on those 20 year old CHL guys to fill out rosters/give fans a reason to show up. If those guys are staying in the NCAA til 22/23/24, that’s going to impact the product upstream. Currently they have a vet rule where you can only dress so many older players every night. This is meant to get ice time to a parent teams’ prospects. But perhaps that goes by wayside if 75% of every teams’ pool is in the NCAA? Are AHL clubs going to be ok with icing teams that are primarily older players, at least older than typically?

As a hockey fan I really hope Muskegon joins the OHL soon because watching AHL hockey is bad enough already.

Doubtful those players that you are referring to stay in college until 22-24.
The AHL will have their say......scuttlebutt right now is 2 U-20 players on AHL rosters.

 

[Oak]

Correct. The USHL will need to upgrade many things to compete with the CHL.

That said, too many people are viewing the situation via a USA vs Canada prism. In actuality we're likely witnessing the beginning of an amalgamated and standard North American development path.

Local/regional youth leagues->CHL->NCAA

For the near future yes, but considering all CHL teams are subsidized by the NHL there is no reason why the NHL cant start giving the same support to USHL teams. I mean most CHL teams do not make money and only survive from the help they get.

If USA hockey and the NHL really want the USHL to stay relevant, and possibly become equal to the CHL, then they know what they have to do. I mean they keep saying they want a junior league in the USA so the ball is in their court.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Wonder how hard the AHL is going to push back. They rely on those 20 year old CHL guys to fill out rosters/give fans a reason to show up. If those guys are staying in the NCAA til 22/23/24, that’s going to impact the product upstream. Currently they have a vet rule where you can only dress so many older players every night. This is meant to get ice time to a parent teams’ prospects. But perhaps that goes by wayside if 75% of every teams’ pool is in the NCAA? Are AHL clubs going to be ok with icing teams that are primarily older players, at least older than typically?

Good prospects enter NCAA at 18 and leave ncaa by they time they are 20/21.

Notable future nhl stars don’t stay in the AHL that long as is.

 

[Kingpin794]

Good prospects enter NCAA at 18 and leave ncaa by they time they are 20/21.

Notable future nhl stars don’t stay in the AHL that long as is.

I’m not talking about future NHL stars. Those aren’t the guys that are filling up AHL rosters. Taking about mid 2nd-7th round guys that end up as AHL lifers. AHL teams are filled with those guys when they are fresh out of the CHL. Mid level prospects might stay til 21/22. Lower end guys will almost certainly play out their 4 years. Like I know they aren’t going to be NHL regulars. That doesn’t mean the AHL wouldn’t rather have them instead of some 30 something grinder.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I’m not talking about future NHL stars. Those aren’t the guys that are filling up AHL rosters. Taking about mid 2nd-7th round guys that end up as AHL lifers. AHL teams are filled with those guys when they are fresh out of the CHL. Mid level prospects might stay til 21/22. Lower end guys will almost certainly play out their 4 years. Like I know they aren’t going to be NHL regulars. That doesn’t mean the AHL wouldn’t rather have them instead of some 30 something grinder.

Average AHL age is around 25. Wouldn’t expect huge movement there. As far as busts that stick around long term, a longer development curve in amateurs is likely better for them anyways. They can remain under the veteran player threshold longer at that point. Players will sign ELCs when they’re ready and I would still expect a majority of the good prospects to turn pro by the time they’re 20.

 

[Boonk]

For the near future yes, but considering all CHL teams are subsidized by the NHL there is no reason why the NHL cant start giving the same support to USHL teams. I mean most CHL teams do not make money and only survive from the help they get.

If USA hockey and the NHL really want the USHL to stay relevant, and possibly become equal to the CHL, then they know what they have to do. I mean they keep saying they want a junior league in the USA so the ball is in their court.

The NHL and USHL already made a deal regarding this recently

NHL, USHL, USA Hockey Partner to Launch Declaration of Excellence

April 12, 2025 — New York, NY — The National Hockey League, United States Hockey League and USA Hockey today announced an elevated partnership built on a shared commitment to elite athlete development through the newly adopted Declaration of Excellence.

ushl.com

 

[Oak]

The NHL and USHL already made a deal regarding this recently

NHL, USHL, USA Hockey Partner to Launch Declaration of Excellence

April 12, 2025 — New York, NY — The National Hockey League, United States Hockey League and USA Hockey today announced an elevated partnership built on a shared commitment to elite athlete development through the newly adopted Declaration of Excellence.

ushl.com

We spoke about the "declaration of excellence" in this thread a few weeks ago. It sounds nice but the wording is kind of vague and almost feels like a bandaid but not a fix.

This in no way matches what the NHL gives to the CHL in my opinion and it would take years for the money to start reaching the players even if the NHL did match to the USHL.

 

[Blue and Green]

Doubtful those players that you are referring to stay in college until 22-24.
The AHL will have their say......scuttlebutt right now is 2 U-20 players on AHL rosters.

With D1 players now getting paid to play hockey, there is less reason for them to move to AHL. NHL has to respond with some carrots/sticks in the new CBA, otherwise hanging around in D1 for four years to free yourself from your drafting team is going to become a viable and appealing option to more players.

 

[wickedwitch]

With D1 players now getting paid to play hockey, there is less reason for them to move to AHL. NHL has to respond with some carrots/sticks in the new CBA, otherwise hanging around in D1 for four years to free yourself from your drafting team is going to become a viable and appealing option to more players.

Just increasing the allowed ELC salary in the AHL (say from $85k to ~$125k) would be peanuts to NHL teams and make a huge difference to the players.

 

[landy92mack29]

They also need to get rid of the contract burn year for NCAA signees

 

[Blue and Green]

Just increasing the allowed ELC salary in the AHL (say from $85k to ~$125k) would be peanuts to NHL teams and make a huge difference to the players.

Perhaps the NHL could change the ELC compensation structure so that the present base salary, signing bonus and AHL salary levels would be minimums that could be exceeded up to set maximums. Increase player % of revenue a little to achieve that purpose.

The flip side could be: if a drafted player were offered an ELC that was fully maximized on the base salary, signing bonuses and AHL salary and met certain criteria for performance bonuses, and the player refused it and became an unsigned UFA, he then would be subject to a 3-year ELC regardless of his signing age (except if he is 25 or 26, then the length would have to conform to the age 27 full UFA limit). Right now the 3-year ELC only extends to signees at age 21 or less. Also, perhaps the arbitration rights of such a player could be delayed by one year.

Something in that vein, I think might offer a balanced solution that would be amenable to players (more $ in the total player pool) and teams (reducing the incentive and therefore the likelihood of good prospects on teams' reserve lists choosing/threatening to wait out the rights-holding period).

 

[Corso]

Just increasing the allowed ELC salary in the AHL (say from $85k to ~$125k) would be peanuts to NHL teams and make a huge difference to the players.

I imagine that is what exactly will happen...minimum NHL and AHL salaries will increase as well as the monetary value of the ELC.

 

[Blue and Green]

A lot of the good AHL veterans have Guaranteed Minimum Salaries where they get a modest top-up (typically 25k-50k) to their AHL salary in case they get minimal or zero call-up time in a season. So a guy might sign for 400k AHL, 800k NHL, 450k guaranteed minimum. Probably wouldn't be a bad idea to migrate that basic concept to ELC's-- a kid might sign for an annual 100k signing bonus, 100k base AHL salary and then a guaranteed minimum top-up (not necessarily the same amount per season with this component) at the team's discretion up to an established maximum.

 

[frontsfan67]

Have been trying to keep a running list. Apologies if there are any errors or omissions. Please ping me if you see anything and I will correct for future updates. Here are some top-line stats.

Total #: 277

By Birth Year
2000: 1 (0.4%)
2002: 4 (1.4%)
2003: 6 (2.2%)
2004: 92 (33.2%)
2005: 64 (23.1%)
2006: 36 (13.0%)
2007: 48 (17.3%)
2008: 26 (9.4%)

Of the 277 approx 167 of them wouldn’t be back in the jr leagues. Over 60% ranging from 16-20 years old(2005-2009)

Will be interesting to see how many more of the 07’s, 08’s and next year the 09’s come to the CHL instead of staying in the BCHL/USHL

This chl and ncaa thing does nothing but benefit both the chl and ncaa lol. The other leagues are plain and simple: screwed. Especially BCHL. USHL atleast has the NTDP.

 

[Favin]

Of the 277 approx 167 of them wouldn’t be back in the jr leagues. Over 60% ranging from 16-20 years old(2005-2009)

Will be interesting to see how many more of the 07’s, 08’s and next year the 09’s come to the CHL instead of staying in the BCHL/USHL

This chl and ncaa thing does nothing but benefit both the chl and ncaa lol. The other leagues are plain and simple: screwed. Especially BCHL. USHL atleast has the NTDP.

Yeah, Junior A, especially BCHL is going to take the brunt of it. And tough for the NCAA kids getting bumped from their teams without a place to go.

Good news is that it may force some schools who have been dragging their heals to get involved. I spoke to a coach for big southern school 2 days ago. Currently a club team, just waiting on a quorum to jump to full NCAA program. But he said they expect D1 to expand by as many as 10 teams on 5 years.

 

[Fatass]

Yeah, Junior A, especially BCHL is going to take the brunt of it. And tough for the NCAA kids getting bumped from their teams without a place to go.

Good news is that it may force some schools who have been dragging their heals to get involved. I spoke to a coach for big southern school 2 days ago. Currently a club team, just waiting on a quorum to jump to full NCAA program. But he said they expect D1 to expand by as many as 10 teams on 5 years.

What happens to the ncaa kids who lose their spot? They’re too old for junior. ECHL? Canadian college hockey?
CHL offers a scholarship year for each year played. Parents need to understand how important that is for their boys.

 

[Favin]

What happens to the ncaa kids who lose their spot? They’re too old for junior. ECHL? Canadian college hockey?
CHL offers a scholarship year for each year played. Parents need to understand how important that is for their boys.

Who knows. The transfer portal alone has wreaked havoc. Many probably move down the ladder...D3, USports...Some back to juniors if eligible, some to Europe. Most the kids who get dinged will be told before they start, or asked to defer.

Its a dog-eat-dog world out there.

 

[Fatass]

Who knows. The transfer portal alone has wreaked havoc. Many probably move down the ladder...D3, USports...Some back to juniors if eligible, some to Europe. Most the kids who get dinged will be told before they start, or asked to defer.

Its a dog-eat-dog world out there.

And that dog eat dog world is why for those lower level college kids, who are not offered a full guaranteed scholarship, they should head to the CHL.

 

[Kingpin794]

Yeah, Junior A, especially BCHL is going to take the brunt of it. And tough for the NCAA kids getting bumped from their teams without a place to go.

Good news is that it may force some schools who have been dragging their heals to get involved. I spoke to a coach for big southern school 2 days ago. Currently a club team, just waiting on a quorum to jump to full NCAA program. But he said they expect D1 to expand by as many as 10 teams on 5 years.

There's no way that's sustainable. I could see 3 or 4 teams over 5 years but 10 over that time seems too aggressive.

 

[Hanji]

And that dog eat dog world is why for those lower level college kids, who are not offered a full guaranteed scholarship, they should head to the CHL.

Most players who play NCAA at 18-19 (CHL eligible) aren't lower level though. Or if they are, they still hold value because of their potential.

Generally speaking, the players deemed expendable are older walk-on types. These are the guys getting bumped off rosters. The portal is full of these players.

 

[Corso]

There's no way that's sustainable. I could see 3 or 4 teams over 5 years but 10 over that time seems too aggressive.

The costs associated with the House Settlement makes college hockey expansion (any sport for that matter) cost prohibitive for any P-4 college. I was hopeful that the CHL rule change would spur rapid expansion of D-1 hockey but my bean counter friends told me that it wasn't going to happen.

 

[kyle44]

I have nothing against this whatsoever (see many of my posts on this topic), but I do wonder why guys like Wassilyn and Verhoeff just didn't go NCAA in the first place?

 

[Hockeyville USA]

I have nothing against this whatsoever (see many of my posts on this topic), but I do wonder why guys like Wassilyn and Verhoeff just didn't go NCAA in the first place?

They probably thought the best way to develop for pro was through the CHL. Once the rules changed, they reassessed their options and realized that the NCAA would be the perfect intermediary between major junior and pro.

 

[landy92mack29]

I have nothing against this whatsoever (see many of my posts on this topic), but I do wonder why guys like Wassilyn and Verhoeff just didn't go NCAA in the first place?

It'd be very stupid of him to go next year because he wouldn't be ready and would hurt his draft stock. Even his D+1 is a stretch