CHL/NCAA

[OMG67]

It's hard to say but I could see around 20. But I also see some 18 and 19 year old's leaving.

How many players debate whether they are going the CHL or NCAA route before signing in the CHL. Many sign in the CHL because the option of playing Tier 2 Jr. A for two seasons doesn't appeal to them. Now those players can sign in the CHL and then bolt to the NCAA at 18 or 19. Best of both worlds for them.

The NCAA has no draft. It's essentially a free for all when it comes to recruiting. Do you not think these schools will hire additional scouts who will scout OHL players and make a pitch for them to come to their school?

The odds of an elite 18 or 19 year old leaving the OHL are slim. Those players l have been NHL drafted. It is Moore likely they will remain in the CHL. The second tier players that are solid CHLers but not NHL prospects will have to make a decision but there is no clock on their decision. Most enter the NCAA at 19. Some of the elite players enter at 18 but I think we’ve already established that the elite players that start in the CHL will likely remain in the CHL. So, those 2nd tier players that aren’t elite only start NCAA at 19 anyway. The CHL players that want to play NCAA are more likely to remain in the CHL for their 19 year old season, then delay their NCAA start one year and jump at 20.

So, then it comes down to the question of what the OA’s would do. I think you already have that answer. Most OA’s have played 3-4 years in the CHL. They have accumulated 3-4 years of scholarship credits. There is nothing stopping the OA’s from bolting for the CIS option. But, what do they typically do? If they don’t turn pro at 20, they play an OA year in an effort to prove to the Pro ranks they are capable. They use that extra year available to them. I don’t see why they would approach the NCAA vs CIS vs Pro any different.

How I see it is there is another option for CHL players once their CHL eligibility is complete. We may see some 20 year olds leave early but not in droves. We may see a 3rd tier CHL player in a bad situation leave at 19. You know that early CHL pick that never really panned out that is still good but finds himself behind a few younger players on the depth chart? That kid may leave early but that isn’t a huge loss.

 

[Donnie740]

Let’s be honest - - the goal of every 15yr old with some talent is to play in the NHL, not to get a college education in the States.

And every teenager in the CHL with enough talent is focused on making the NHL, not getting an NCAA scholarship. Even the OAs are still trying to earn an NHL contract.

No CHL players are going to leave for the NCAA if they have a realistic shot at getting an NHL contract. Their focus is on going pro and getting paid - - NOT going to school.

What players are actually going to focus on getting an NCAA education? The fringe players who don’t have enough talent to play at the NHL level.

 

[Otto]

It's hard to say but I could see around 20. But I also see some 18 and 19 year old's leaving.

How many players debate whether they are going the CHL or NCAA route before signing in the CHL. Many sign in the CHL because the option of playing Tier 2 Jr. A for two seasons doesn't appeal to them. Now those players can sign in the CHL and then bolt to the NCAA at 18 or 19. Best of both worlds for them.

The NCAA has no draft. It's essentially a free for all when it comes to recruiting. Do you not think these schools will hire additional scouts who will scout OHL players and make a pitch for them to come to their school?

Why would an 18/19 year old leave the CHL? I just don't buy it. If 18/19 year old leaves it will be because they were a marginal player. Otherwise, they will play in the CHL, get in their 60+ games and, the NCAA option is still there when they turn 20.

I also don't believe that 1/3 of the overagers will play NCAA.

 

[digicamo]

Let’s be honest - - the goal of every 15yr old with some talent is to play in the NHL, not to get a college education in the States.

And every teenager in the CHL with enough talent is focused on making the NHL, not getting an NCAA scholarship. Even the OAs are still trying to earn an NHL contract.

No CHL players are going to leave for the NCAA if they have a realistic shot at getting an NHL contract. Their focus is on going pro and getting paid - - NOT going to school.

What players are actually going to focus on getting an NCAA education? The fringe players who don’t have enough talent to play at the NHL level.

Have you ever been to an NCAA game? I think your view on the NCAA is a little outdated. Most schools have far better facilities than the small-market CHL teams and the players are not washouts like you're saying. Most D1 divisions are the same as the CHL with teams filled with elite draft picks and teams filled with future ECHL players at best, just like the bottom half of the O every year.

I believe the CHL is still the best path to become a high-end player but the NCAA is no longer very far behind. Very few, if any, 18/19 year-olds would leave right but now but if the NIL issue for Canadians gets solved we should be concerned we will lose elite players to big programs. I'm sure the CHL has considered this though and there is probably something in place.

 

[Donnie740]

Why would an 18/19 year old leave the CHL? I just don't buy it. If 18/19 year old leaves it will be because they were a marginal player. Otherwise, they will play in the CHL, get in their 60+ games and, the NCAA option is still there when they turn 20.

I also don't believe that 1/3 of the overagers will play NCAA.

Exactly.

Everyone in the CHL is focused on playing in the NHL. Most do not give a shit about post secondary school because they want to be professional hockey players, even if it’s just minor pro or in a Euro league.

Only when they age out and don’t have any pro contract offers will they maybe think about joining all the other burn outs in the NCAA. Assuming they have the grades to get in and the desire to sit in a classroom.

 

[Donnie740]

Have you ever been to an NCAA game? I think your view on the NCAA is a little outdated. Most schools have far better facilities than the small-market CHL teams and the players are not washouts like you're saying. Most D1 divisions are the same as the CHL with teams filled with elite draft picks and teams filled with future ECHL players at best, just like the bottom half of the O every year.

I believe the CHL is still the best path to become a high-end player but the NCAA is no longer very far behind. Very few, if any, 18/19 year-olds would leave right but now but if the NIL issue for Canadians gets solved we should be concerned we will lose elite players to big programs. I'm sure the CHL has considered this though and there is probably something in place.

It’s wonderful that some NCAA schools with endowments in the tens of BILLIONS are building cute little hockey rinks on campus.

Nobody playing NCAA hockey is getting an NIL deal worth hundreds of thousands of dollars because there’s little to no interest in the sport. Because the reality is that outside of a handful of schools in the north east, nobody cares about NCAA hockey in America. It’s about as irrelevant as women’s softball.

As I explained earlier, the majority of “drafted players” in the NCAA are late round afterthoughts.

There’s only EIGHT (8) schools that have a 1st round pick playing for them. And there’s just SIX (6) other schools that have a 2nd round pick playing for them.

 

[OMG67]

Have you ever been to an NCAA game? I think your view on the NCAA is a little outdated. Most schools have far better facilities than the small-market CHL teams and the players are not washouts like you're saying. Most D1 divisions are the same as the CHL with teams filled with elite draft picks and teams filled with future ECHL players at best, just like the bottom half of the O every year.

I believe the CHL is still the best path to become a high-end player but the NCAA is no longer very far behind. Very few, if any, 18/19 year-olds would leave right but now but if the NIL issue for Canadians gets solved we should be concerned we will lose elite players to big programs. I'm sure the CHL has considered this though and there is probably something in place.

Almost all NCAA Athletes that are International (not American) are on F-1 Student VISAs. That VISA designation does not allow them to engage in off campus work or something that doesn’t further their career path like an Internship or Co-op type employment. This precludes them from taking advantage of the NIL $$$.

Technically, the athlete could return to Canada to participate in Commercial shoots or post to Social Media etc as part of a NIL deal but those companies are shying away from those types of deals because they simply don’t have the flexibility in the same manner as the American athletes that can post right away at the drop of a hat.

I could see some athletes maybe signing with schools on or close to the Canadian Border. They can simply hop in a car and cross into Canada, do their business and come back if it makes sense but there is still the issue related to flexibility and timing.

Unless the USA changes the laws regarding employment on F-1 Student VISAs or creates a specific class of VISA for student athletes, I cannot see the NIL issue being resolved.

 

[OMG67]

It’s wonderful that some NCAA schools with endowments in the tens of BILLIONS are building cute little hockey rinks on campus.

Nobody playing NCAA hockey is getting an NIL deal worth hundreds of thousands of dollars because there’s little to no interest in the sport. Because the reality is that outside of a handful of schools in the north east, nobody cares about NCAA hockey in America. It’s about as irrelevant as women’s softball.

As I explained earlier, the majority of “drafted players” in the NCAA are late round afterthoughts.

There’s only EIGHT (8) schools that have a 1st round pick playing for them. And there’s just SIX (6) other schools that have a 2nd round pick playing for them.

Nothing has been confirmed because the deals are private but the rumours are that the top NHL prospects are getting low-6 figure deals and not just one deal, multiple. So, even if a specific deal is maybe $25k, it doesn’t mean that is the only deal. The aggregate can be pretty huge. But, again, mostly for the high profile prospects. The middlings are making some coin but not as much because they don’t have the same level of followers.

Social Media activity is the key to many of these deals, not commercials. Those with active Social Media and loads of followers are getting paid. Social Media Influencing is a big thing and is growing. The NIL Allowance for the athletes have allowed them to take advantage of that revenue stream.

 

[ScoutLife4]

Let’s be honest - - the goal of every 15yr old with some talent is to play in the NHL, not to get a college education in the States.

And every teenager in the CHL with enough talent is focused on making the NHL, not getting an NCAA scholarship. Even the OAs are still trying to earn an NHL contract.

No CHL players are going to leave for the NCAA if they have a realistic shot at getting an NHL contract. Their focus is on going pro and getting paid - - NOT going to school.

What players are actually going to focus on getting an NCAA education? The fringe players who don’t have enough talent to play at the NHL level.

Not exactly.
Some families put a lot of pressure on the kid to get the schooling first so they have a back up plan later in life.

This is especially true now that typically development happens through the AHL.
Some kids rather get their schooling done instead of sitting in the AHL for 2-3 years especially now with NIL.
Some kids have different priorities then others and that's okay. -Everyone has their own path.

 

[OMG67]

Not exactly.
Some families put a lot of pressure on the kid to get the schooling first so they have a back up plan later in life.

This is especially true now that typically development happens through the AHL.
Some kids rather get their schooling done instead of sitting in the AHL for 2-3 years especially now with NIL.
Some kids have different priorities then others and that's okay. -Everyone has their own path.

I think the big thing now is the kids will have four/five years to make a decision. Currently they have to make the decision at 15. This new proposed rule change delays their decision requirement and no matter what path they take for development, they will not kill their NCAA eligibility (barring the signing of a pro contract). A 15 year old kid that prefers to go the NCAA route would be able to expand their development path to the CHL.

That same 15 year old kid (Malhotra for example), can elect to play in the OHL instead of the BCHL, keep his NCAA eligibility open, continue to develop and make a decision after his NHL Draft year at 18 which way he wants to go. That is two full seasons before he needs to do anything other than play hockey and continue to develop. Even after the draft, he likely will not be offered an ELC. T hat would likely come a year or two later which even further delays his need to make a decision.

If a kid gets an ELC valued at $450k minimum over three years, they can then decide if they want to forego the education. The kids that are only offered AHL or ECHL deals can then potentially go to a high profile NCAA institution with strong Alumni Associations and leverage that and their education to further themselves in their chosen career path. They can make that decision when they are far more mature than they were at 15.

 

[BadgerBruce]

For American players, the CHL scholarship package becomes much more valuable in a world where the players have NCAA hockey eligibility.

Today, very few American CHLers return stateside, give up hockey, and attend college. They can’t play NCAA hockey, so even though the CHL scholarship money is there for them to become full-time post-secondary students in their home country, they rarely take advantage of this. Once a hockey player, always a hockey player, which is why some even register at Canadian universities to play USports hockey.

But think about a US player with, say, 3 years of CHL scholarship entitlement already banked. The domicile rule, which dictates the dollar value of the CHL scholarship, essentially means that he could choose from a fairly wide variety of US colleges and would not even cost the institution he chooses a scholarship. He’s essentially a “free (or nearly free) NCAA player,” with his tuition and books paid by the CHL. He doesn’t even need to worry about losing his scholarship, provided he maintains academic eligibility, because it is external, not internal.

For Canadians in a similar situation who explore NCAA options, they’ll have (roughly) $10K per year in CHL scholarship to shall we say “help” the schools/hockey programs they are looking at. Remember, Canadians who attend US colleges are subject to international student fees, and even full-ride scholarship recipients have the international student fee cost “booked” by the school. Every dollar in external scholarship funding matters.

The irony to me is that the CHL introduced the scholarship program specifically to entice Americans to join the league. The results over the years have been mixed. But if Americans can join the CHL, earn scholarship coin and play NCAA hockey, I can see a world where they flock to the CHL. That’s good for the quality of play in the CHL, but it is going to be frighteningly expensive for CHL teams when they eventually have to pay out those scholarship dollars. God help them if American players begin using their gold packages instead of playing minor pro.

 

[OMG67]

For American players, the CHL scholarship package becomes much more valuable in a world where the players have NCAA hockey eligibility.

Today, very few American CHLers return stateside, give up hockey, and attend college. They can’t play NCAA hockey, so even though the CHL scholarship money is there for them to become full-time post-secondary students in their home country, they rarely take advantage of this. Once a hockey player, always a hockey player, which is why some even register at Canadian universities to play USports hockey.

But think about a US player with, say, 3 years of CHL scholarship entitlement already banked. The domicile rule, which dictates the dollar value of the CHL scholarship, essentially means that he could choose from a fairly wide variety of US colleges and would not even cost the institution he chooses a scholarship. He’s essentially a “free (or nearly free) NCAA player,” with his tuition and books paid by the CHL. He doesn’t even need to worry about losing his scholarship, provided he maintains academic eligibility, because it is external, not internal.

For Canadians in a similar situation who explore NCAA options, they’ll have (roughly) $10K per year in CHL scholarship to shall we say “help” the schools/hockey programs they are looking at. Remember, Canadians who attend US colleges are subject to international student fees, and even full-ride scholarship recipients have the international student fee cost “booked” by the school. Every dollar in external scholarship funding matters.

The irony to me is that the CHL introduced the scholarship program specifically to entice Americans to join the league. The results over the years have been mixed. But if Americans can join the CHL, earn scholarship coin and play NCAA hockey, I can see a world where they flock to the CHL. That’s good for the quality of play in the CHL, but it is going to be frighteningly expensive for CHL teams when they eventually have to pay out those scholarship dollars. God help them if American players begin using their gold packages instead of playing minor pro.

But, the offset could be increased revenue with the increase in quality players, especially the elite players. Imagine the OHL with Cooley, Cutter Gauthier, Nazar, Fantilli, William Smith etc.

The only issue is the players would be bound by the CHL rule so it is CHL or NHL through their 19 year old eligibility is complete. Maybe a player thinking they are going to play pro hockey sooner wants to stay in the USA route to protect against having to play CHL longer.

 

[GoKnightsGo44]

But, the offset could be increased revenue with the increase in quality players, especially the elite players. Imagine the OHL with Cooley, Cutter Gauthier, Nazar, Fantilli, William Smith etc.

The only issue is the players would be bound by the CHL rule so it is CHL or NHL through their 19 year old eligibility is complete. Maybe a player thinking they are going to play pro hockey sooner wants to stay in the USA route to protect against having to play CHL longer.

I think they should change the rule and allow graduation at any time, I also feel like there is no problem for a 19 year old to play an extra year in the O depending on the team.

The NHL and the players should really be the ones deciding where the should play. In the English football league Premier players can play anywhere that suits them as seen with Chelsea lending players to Wrexham AFC (below the normal players level, but where they would play on a championship team and get the best development).

 

[OMG67]

I think they should change the rule and allow graduation at any time, I also feel like there is no problem for a 19 year old to play an extra year in the O depending on the team.

The NHL and the players should really be the ones deciding where the should play. In the English football league Premier players can play anywhere that suits them as seen with Chelsea lending players to Wrexham AFC (below the normal players level, but where they would play on a championship team and get the best development).

I’m not sure the players would choose the right development path and I am not sure the players would be the ones choosing. If a CHL player signs their ELC, the team owns their rights and can assign them where they want. The player may get some sort of say but in the end, it is the NHL teams prerogative to assign the players.

At least if there were some sort of restriction that makes some sense, I could get behind it. For example, the player needs to have been drafted in the first two rounds of the NHL draft to be eligible to play in the AHL as a 19 year old. Further, a team can only assign one underage player per year to the AHL. At least that would require some forethought of some kind. They would only be pulling out the players that truly are ready for pro hockey but not ready for the NHL.

 

[BadgerBruce]

But, the offset could be increased revenue with the increase in quality players, especially the elite players. Imagine the OHL with Cooley, Cutter Gauthier, Nazar, Fantilli, William Smith etc.

The only issue is the players would be bound by the CHL rule so it is CHL or NHL through their 19 year old eligibility is complete. Maybe a player thinking they are going to play pro hockey sooner wants to stay in the USA route to protect against having to play CHL longer.

Without question, the CHL could very well see a significant talent upgrade. Even the Q, which historically has an awful time recruiting Americans (I think there are just 5 or 6 this season in the whole league) should really see the quality of play increase. All good.

My only concern is that an expanded player pool for the CHL, when combined with (eventual) NCAA eligibility for departing players, is likely to greatly increase scholarship costs. Is the talent upgrade and (presumed) increased revenue worth that cost? Broadly speaking, the answer is probably yes, but we both know that there are more than a few teams today that essentially trade away their scholarship obligations, and these obligations are going to increase and become more difficult to dodge.

 

[OMG67]

Without question, the CHL could very well see a significant talent upgrade. Even the Q, which historically has an awful time recruiting Americans (I think there are just 5 or 6 this season in the whole league) should really see the quality of play increase. All good.

My only concern is that an expanded player pool for the CHL, when combined with (eventual) NCAA eligibility for departing players, is likely to greatly increase scholarship costs. Is the talent upgrade and (presumed) increased revenue worth that cost? Broadly speaking, the answer is probably yes, but we both know that there are more than a few teams today that essentially trade away their scholarship obligations, and these obligations are going to increase and become more difficult to dodge.

Time will tell. I’m not sure if we have hit the ticket price ceiling yet. You can always sell more tickets but at the same time, the packages with the highest value are the gold Packages which are less likely to be used regardless. So, I am not sure it will matter that much overall.

If we start to see a higher number of high profile US Born players, we will likely see an increase in sponsorship dollars as well as Teams benefiting from leveraging those players profiles at a higher rate.

I think there is significant room for hockey in general to raise its profile which likely also trickles down to the CHL Level. Teams will also get additional development fees for the players they develop instead of no fees granted because of players currently playing NCAA.

I think there is a lot of room for the CHL teams to exploit the situation financially. OF course, the teams that are better suited to do so and more savvy will exploit it bette than the ones that are inept.

 

[Otto]

For American players, the CHL scholarship package becomes much more valuable in a world where the players have NCAA hockey eligibility.

Today, very few American CHLers return stateside, give up hockey, and attend college. They can’t play NCAA hockey, so even though the CHL scholarship money is there for them to become full-time post-secondary students in their home country, they rarely take advantage of this. Once a hockey player, always a hockey player, which is why some even register at Canadian universities to play USports hockey.

But think about a US player with, say, 3 years of CHL scholarship entitlement already banked. The domicile rule, which dictates the dollar value of the CHL scholarship, essentially means that he could choose from a fairly wide variety of US colleges and would not even cost the institution he chooses a scholarship. He’s essentially a “free (or nearly free) NCAA player,” with his tuition and books paid by the CHL. He doesn’t even need to worry about losing his scholarship, provided he maintains academic eligibility, because it is external, not internal.

For Canadians in a similar situation who explore NCAA options, they’ll have (roughly) $10K per year in CHL scholarship to shall we say “help” the schools/hockey programs they are looking at. Remember, Canadians who attend US colleges are subject to international student fees, and even full-ride scholarship recipients have the international student fee cost “booked” by the school. Every dollar in external scholarship funding matters.

The irony to me is that the CHL introduced the scholarship program specifically to entice Americans to join the league. The results over the years have been mixed. But if Americans can join the CHL, earn scholarship coin and play NCAA hockey, I can see a world where they flock to the CHL. That’s good for the quality of play in the CHL, but it is going to be frighteningly expensive for CHL teams when they eventually have to pay out those scholarship dollars. God help them if American players begin using their gold packages instead of playing minor pro.

I thought the league managed the scholarship program and teams paid into it... I could be very wrong though.

 

[BadgerBruce]

I thought the league managed the scholarship program and teams paid into it... I could be very wrong though.

Yes, the league does manage the program, and teams are essentially invoiced by the league after payments are made. But a team won’t get invoiced unless they are responsible for the amount paid out.

I thought the league managed the scholarship program and teams paid into it... I could be very wrong though.

 

[donjohnson]

I think they should change the rule and allow graduation at any time, I also feel like there is no problem for a 19 year old to play an extra year in the O depending on the team.

The NHL and the players should really be the ones deciding where the should play. In the English football league Premier players can play anywhere that suits them as seen with Chelsea lending players to Wrexham AFC (below the normal players level, but where they would play on a championship team and get the best development).

It is something that the NHL decides, it's a CHL-NHL agreement. I don't know the full text of the agreement but I'm sure if the NHL said they want it changed, it would get changed. I believe it's beneficial to the NHL because if a player went to the AHL when they were 18, it would start the clock on their contract. Sending them back to the CHL kicks the can another year which is important to Salary Cap people.

It's no different than the "one and done" rule in NBA/NCAA Hoops. It's the NBA dictating the minimum age to join the league...if they wanted to allow HS players to come directly to the pros, they could change that in an instant.

 

[BadgerBruce]

I posted this in another thread in the Prospects section, but I think it belongs here, too.

Well, consider this my public mea culpa.

I had assumed that former CHL hockey players could use their league scholarship packages and play NCAA hockey, once the regulations are changed and former major junior players are eligible to play.

Now, I’m not so sure.

@Pens2021 (with admirable good humour) let me know that NCAA Bylaw 15.2.6.2 in the financial aid portion of the NCAA Manual states the following: “No Relationship to Athletics Ability. A student-athlete may receive financial aid awarded solely on bases having no relationship to athletics ability.” The rule is in place to prevent schools from artificially exceeding the scholarship limits.

So, what do folks think? I suppose the NCAA could change the bylaw once former CHLers are granted eligibility to play, but as things currently stand, the answer would seem to be “No.”

As a brief aside, sometimes this (usually) wonderful site gets a little bit too “gotcha!” and becomes about the posters instead of the points being made. So I’d like to openly thank @Pens21 for being decent and privately informing me of the error of my ways. We all need way more of this.

 

[OMG67]

I posted this in another thread in the Prospects section, but I think it belongs here, too.

Well, consider this my public mea culpa.

I had assumed that former CHL hockey players could use their league scholarship packages and play NCAA hockey, once the regulations are changed and former major junior players are eligible to play.

Now, I’m not so sure.

@Pens2021 (with admirable good humour) let me know that NCAA Bylaw 15.2.6.2 in the financial aid portion of the NCAA Manual states the following: “No Relationship to Athletics Ability. A student-athlete may receive financial aid awarded solely on bases having no relationship to athletics ability.” The rule is in place to prevent schools from artificially exceeding the scholarship limits.

So, what do folks think? I suppose the NCAA could change the bylaw once former CHLers are granted eligibility to play, but as things currently stand, the answer would seem to be “No.”

As a brief aside, sometimes this (usually) wonderful site gets a little bit too “gotcha!” and becomes about the posters instead of the points being made. So I’d like to openly thank @Pens21 for being decent and privately informing me of the error of my ways. We all need way more of this.

With the scholarship allotment change for hockey increasing the number of allowed scholarships to 26, I imagine all of the Div1 schools will utilize the full allotment and will recruit the best players they can. I assume the Div2 schools will also do this.

So, if the vast majority of players are on full scholarship, it would come down to the difference between a full scholarship in the NCAA vs the CHL Full scholarship packages. Keep in mind that the standard scholarship is only tuition (I believe). This potential difference would only affect those with the Enhanced Packages in the CHL.

I cannot see this being that much of an issue unless the difference between those two packages are dramatic.

 

[Donnie740]

With the scholarship allotment change for hockey increasing the number of allowed scholarships to 26, I imagine all of the Div1 schools will utilize the full allotment and will recruit the best players they can. I assume the Div2 schools will also do this.

So, if the vast majority of players are on full scholarship, it would come down to the difference between a full scholarship in the NCAA vs the CHL Full scholarship packages. Keep in mind that the standard scholarship is only tuition (I believe). This potential difference would only affect those with the Enhanced Packages in the CHL.

I cannot see this being that much of an issue unless the difference between those two packages are dramatic.

Where it becomes an issue is that it allows NCAA schools to circumvent the scholarship limits. Instead of having traditional no-talent “walk-ons” they would be bringing in non scholarship CHL players instead of non scholarship walk-ons.

 

[coolhandluc44]

With the scholarship allotment change for hockey increasing the number of allowed scholarships to 26, I imagine all of the Div1 schools will utilize the full allotment and will recruit the best players they can. I assume the Div2 schools will also do this.

So, if the vast majority of players are on full scholarship, it would come down to the difference between a full scholarship in the NCAA vs the CHL Full scholarship packages. Keep in mind that the standard scholarship is only tuition (I believe). This potential difference would only affect those with the Enhanced Packages in the CHL.

I cannot see this being that much of an issue unless the difference between those two packages are dramatic.

I think to me the biggest difference is that CHL does not include housing expenses. Someone please correct me on this if not true. To me that is huge. Look at the cost of rent these days especially in university and college towns. Your housing cost for the year are more than tuition and books. Our universities and colleges dont really have the housing like the schools in the US. So I would think that would be a huge selling point going to play hockey in the NCAA vs CIS after you are done your CHL career.

 

[OMG67]

I think to me the biggest difference is that CHL does not include housing expenses. Someone please correct me on this if not true. To me that is huge. Look at the cost of rent these days especially in university and college towns. Your housing cost for the year are more than tuition and books. Our universities and colleges dont really have the housing like the schools in the US. So I would think that would be a huge selling point going to play hockey in the NCAA vs CIS after you are done your CHL career.

The standard package does not. The enhanced package for first rounders and a select few others does have this included.

 

[coolhandluc44]

The standard package does not. The enhanced package for first rounders and a select few others does have this included.

And you’re probably betting your 1st rounders or super elites will never use those packages. And would NCAA scholarships include housing? To me that is huge difference. But with the NCAA allowing CHL players in now I don’t know how much incentive there is to make changes to the education package