CHL/NCAA

[OMG67]

It was "recreational hockey" that really caught my eye.

What I meant by that was they aren’t going there to play hockey as the primary purpose. They are there to get their education “and” play some hockey. That hockey is not what you would consider an investment in their future at that point.

I think if they were to go NCAA, it is likely the same but the level of play is higher and I could see more meaningful eyes on them which may open more doors than CIS. Speculation on my part though.

 

[MJ5]

Reports: NCAA Hockey Eligibility Rules Could See Big Changes Ahead

The NCAA has gained prominence as a development path to the NHL. Will we soon see a change to the rules that prohibit CHL players from pursuing college hockey?

www.forbes.com

 

[HockeyPops]

Potential timeline indicated in the article:

Marek added that he expected the NCAA vote to go down early this summer, with an eye toward beginning implementation of the new rules by 2025.

 

[OMG67]

I’m given this one a little thought. There are three scenario’s that play into this.

#1 - How does this affect the younger Canadians?
Current state is the young Canadians that want to play NCAA, play either JrA or USHL. The better ones typically play USHL but most play JrA. There are a small handful every year that have the skill/talent to play CHL as 16 and 17 year olds. But, that actual number is tough to pin down. I would think it more likely that those players would play CHL hockey instead of playing in lower leagues. I don’t think the group of impact young players is significant enough to help fuel CHL rosters in a meaningful way. Maybe it adds up to one player per team per year at best?

#2 - How does it affect the younger Americans?
Current state has Americans mostly playing USHL. Some come to play CHL but would more Americans play CHL? Potentially, over time, I could see that number increase as the impact of USA Hockey increases. But, in the short term, I don’t think there will be a significant impact. I think the impact would be very minimal. The quality of the USHL has grown. It is competitive. American players are likely to play there as opposed to the CHL. The elite Americans play USNDTP and that won’t change.

#3 - How does it affect the older players that choose to play CHL hockey?
Current state is no player that suits up for a CHL team is eligible. CHL players, if they choose to chase an education, use their scholarship and try to hook up with a CIS program and play hockey. I think the change will dramatically change player flow in this group the most by far. There are a significant number of players that are drafted rather high but don’t pan out that would be on NCAA program watch lists. I could see some 18 year olds leave CHL programs if offered a full ride scholarship to an NCAA school. But, if a player underachieved and isn’t’ producing, would the player be offered a full ride? Maybe to Division 2 schools. I think where we will see the exodus is in the older players that are choosing to play an OA season or not. If a player is not offered a full ride scholarship at a younger age, I could see the players leverage their CHL scholarship to bridge the gap in funding with their partial ride scholarship to an NCAA program. If they want to go to a four year program, they will need four years in the CHL.

How does each league benefit and how could they lose?

I think we will see the elite Canadian players like Hughes play CHL hockey. I don’t think they will play USHL. The elite Americans will remain with the USNTDP. Those players are so few and far between that it won’t impact the leagues/schools significantly. Adding five or six high end players per league annually won’t be a huge impact. It will be an impact to the team that lands them but averaged out over the whole league? Not as much. So, I don‘t see tremendous impact at the 16/17 year old level. The players will need to view the CHL as the proper development league for them regardless.

Where I think the impact will come is in the older players. I think some guys that are set to play OA years that don’t feel their pro prospects are very good would potentially leave to play NCAA hockey at 19 or 20. It could be used as leverage to force some player movement. For example, a player on the Ice Dogs not in a good situation (Roobroek for example), could demand a trade this summer and if he isn’t traded during the June trade window, follows through with his threat and accepts a scholarship to an NCAA program. To me, this is likely where we wills ee the biggest impact. It puts more power int he hands of players provided they are quality enough to gain a full ride scholarship at an earlier age. Potentially the same with the 19 year olds that don’t want to stick around on a projected rebuilding team. We may see a little more player movement in the summer because the players have more leverage. They won’t need to wait until the deadline.

Overall?

I think you will see the CHL teams get a little younger and the NCAA teams get a little older on average.

 

[nelli27]

Mike Tomlak (from UWO to NHL, Hartford Whalers)
Joel Ward (from UPEI to NHL)

Who else?

 

[EvenSteven]

Mike Tomlak (from UWO to NHL, Hartford Whalers)
Joel Ward (from UPEI to NHL)

Who else?

Joel Ward graduated from CIS in 2005. Branch always pointed to him when citing the CHL to CIS as a good option / path to pro hockey. He always points to Ward because I don’t think there’s anyone else since.

If there was, wouldn’t he cite that player as well.


Pre Joel Ward, Mike Ridley and Stu Grimson come to mind.

 

[Otto]

Mike Tomlak (from UWO to NHL, Hartford Whalers)
Joel Ward (from UPEI to NHL)

Who else?

Steve Rucchin UWO

 

[donjohnson]

I wonder if it will be retroactive? Let's look at the current #1 goalie in the OHL Michael Simpson. He is an undrafted OA and let's say, for illustrative purposes, he does not get drafted and is not signed by an NHL team in the offseason and the NCAA does not change the rule until Spring 2025 (after the 24/25 hockey season).

Could Simpson sit out a year or go to usports and then transfer to the University of Michigan? NCAA teams I'm sure would love to have a goalie of his ability but would he be eligible? It will be interesting to see how that all works out but I know Notre Dame's goalie is turning 25 this year so it's not that crazy to think about someone of that age.

 

[SarniaStingFan]

Mike Tomlak (from UWO to NHL, Hartford Whalers)
Joel Ward (from UPEI to NHL)

Who else?

Logan Thompson (from Brock to Vegas)

 

[Spits1963]

Mike Tomlak (from UWO to NHL, Hartford Whalers)
Joel Ward (from UPEI to NHL)

Who else?

Dr. Randy Gregg
U of Alberta-Edmonton Oilers

 

[MJ5]

I wonder if it will be retroactive? Let's look at the current #1 goalie in the OHL Michael Simpson. He is an undrafted OA and let's say, for illustrative purposes, he does not get drafted and is not signed by an NHL team in the offseason and the NCAA does not change the rule until Spring 2025 (after the 24/25 hockey season).

Could Simpson sit out a year or go to usports and then transfer to the University of Michigan? NCAA teams I'm sure would love to have a goalie of his ability but would he be eligible? It will be interesting to see how that all works out but I know Notre Dame's goalie is turning 25 this year so it's not that crazy to think about someone of that age.

Your B1G starting goalies.

Minnesota - Justen Close - Turns 26 in May
Michigan - Jake Barczewski - Turned 25 in Jan
Penn State - Liam Soulière - Turns 25 in March
Notre Dame - Ryan Bischel - Turns 25 in July
Wisconsin - Kyle McClellan - Turns 25 in March
Ohio State - Logan Terness - Turns 22 in Sept
Michigan State - Trey Augustine - Turns 19 in Feb

 

[BadgerBruce]

I’m given this one a little thought. There are three scenario’s that play into this.

#1 - How does this affect the younger Canadians?
Current state is the young Canadians that want to play NCAA, play either JrA or USHL. The better ones typically play USHL but most play JrA. There are a small handful every year that have the skill/talent to play CHL as 16 and 17 year olds. But, that actual number is tough to pin down. I would think it more likely that those players would play CHL hockey instead of playing in lower leagues. I don’t think the group of impact young players is significant enough to help fuel CHL rosters in a meaningful way. Maybe it adds up to one player per team per year at best?

#2 - How does it affect the younger Americans?
Current state has Americans mostly playing USHL. Some come to play CHL but would more Americans play CHL? Potentially, over time, I could see that number increase as the impact of USA Hockey increases. But, in the short term, I don’t think there will be a significant impact. I think the impact would be very minimal. The quality of the USHL has grown. It is competitive. American players are likely to play there as opposed to the CHL. The elite Americans play USNDTP and that won’t change.

#3 - How does it affect the older players that choose to play CHL hockey?
Current state is no player that suits up for a CHL team is eligible. CHL players, if they choose to chase an education, use their scholarship and try to hook up with a CIS program and play hockey. I think the change will dramatically change player flow in this group the most by far. There are a significant number of players that are drafted rather high but don’t pan out that would be on NCAA program watch lists. I could see some 18 year olds leave CHL programs if offered a full ride scholarship to an NCAA school. But, if a player underachieved and isn’t’ producing, would the player be offered a full ride? Maybe to Division 2 schools. I think where we will see the exodus is in the older players that are choosing to play an OA season or not. If a player is not offered a full ride scholarship at a younger age, I could see the players leverage their CHL scholarship to bridge the gap in funding with their partial ride scholarship to an NCAA program. If they want to go to a four year program, they will need four years in the CHL.

How does each league benefit and how could they lose?

I think we will see the elite Canadian players like Hughes play CHL hockey. I don’t think they will play USHL. The elite Americans will remain with the USNTDP. Those players are so few and far between that it won’t impact the leagues/schools significantly. Adding five or six high end players per league annually won’t be a huge impact. It will be an impact to the team that lands them but averaged out over the whole league? Not as much. So, I don‘t see tremendous impact at the 16/17 year old level. The players will need to view the CHL as the proper development league for them regardless.

Where I think the impact will come is in the older players. I think some guys that are set to play OA years that don’t feel their pro prospects are very good would potentially leave to play NCAA hockey at 19 or 20. It could be used as leverage to force some player movement. For example, a player on the Ice Dogs not in a good situation (Roobroek for example), could demand a trade this summer and if he isn’t traded during the June trade window, follows through with his threat and accepts a scholarship to an NCAA program. To me, this is likely where we wills ee the biggest impact. It puts more power int he hands of players provided they are quality enough to gain a full ride scholarship at an earlier age. Potentially the same with the 19 year olds that don’t want to stick around on a projected rebuilding team. We may see a little more player movement in the summer because the players have more leverage. They won’t need to wait until the deadline.

Overall?

I think you will see the CHL teams get a little younger and the NCAA teams get a little older on average.

There’s a fourth possible scenario: changes to the NCAA whereby the student-athletes become employees, which seems to be the most likely (though not only) road, leave international students, such as non-American ex-CHLers, on the outside looking in.

Read this article for some general background on how international students on the Dartmouth men’s basketball team could find themselves totally screwed if the players are re-classified as employees.

Union Push Leaves Dartmouth International Players Up in the Air!

The issues are a bit complicated but come down to this: international students typically receive F-1 visas, which greatly limit their ability to legally work while in the US. To quote from the linked article, “immigration experts tell Sportico that they would advise foreign students like Neskovic [an international student on Dartmouth’s basketball team]to immediately stop playing if they are granted employee status.” The alternative (working as an employee) could lead to deportation.

All of which means that Americans who played in the CHL would be just fine if the NCAA removes the prohibition on ex-major junior hockey players. But non-Americans could easily find themselves ineligible because of visa rules and the position of the US Department of Homeland Security.

Fun times, no?

 

[bcspragu]

There’s a fourth possible scenario: changes to the NCAA whereby the student-athletes become employees, which seems to be the most likely (though not only) road, leave international students, such as non-American ex-CHLers, on the outside looking in.

Read this article for some general background on how international students on the Dartmouth men’s basketball team could find themselves totally screwed if the players are re-classified as employees.

Union Push Leaves Dartmouth International Players Up in the Air!

The issues are a bit complicated but come down to this: international students typically receive F-1 visas, which greatly limit their ability to legally work while in the US. To quote from the linked article, “immigration experts tell Sportico that they would advise foreign students like Neskovic [an international student on Dartmouth’s basketball team]to immediately stop playing if they are granted employee status.” The alternative (working as an employee) could lead to deportation.

All of which means that Americans who played in the CHL would be just fine if the NCAA removes the prohibition on ex-major junior hockey players. But non-Americans could easily find themselves ineligible because of visa rules and the position of the US Department of Homeland Security.

Fun times, no?

They will just get work visas. There is plenty of ways around it. There are already Canadian kids playing in the Chl on American teams that aren’t enrolled in school there there has to be a mechanism to make it work

 

[BadgerBruce]

They will just get work visas. There is plenty of ways around it. There are already Canadian kids playing in the Chl on American teams that aren’t enrolled in school there there has to be a mechanism to make it work

Maybe, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

Holders of the P1-A visa are allowed to attend post-secondary institutions, but their studies must be “incidental to their primary purpose [employment] for being in the United States.” You want to be the one to argue that being a full-time university student, with all that entails, is “incidental” to your employment as a fourth line left winger on the Canisius Golden Griffins? Go for it.

Further, to qualify for a P1-A, athletes need to meet the standard of “playing at an internationally recognized level of performance,” a status “bestowed upon professional athletes and elite level amateurs competing in US events.” Do you think this will apply to NCAA D1 hockey players? Maybe, but the Department of Homeland Security does not currently recognize NCAA basketball players as meeting this standard, and those string beans have March Madness.

Anyway, I’m not claiming non-Americans WILL be shut out if NCAA athletes are reclassified as employees. But it’s definitely a possibility.

 

[Otto]

Why College Athletes Will Not Become Employees Tomorrow

NCAA President Charlie Baker’s December 5, 2023 proposal would create a new "rich institutions" subdivision within Division I that would permit institutions to provide...

www.forbes.com

 

[BadgerBruce]

How a ruling that Dartmouth basketball players are school employees, can join union may change college sports

Monday's decision by the NLRB could lead to sweeping changes in the NCAA's amateurism model

www.cbssports.com

 

[ScoutLife4]

Class-action lawsuit says 'cartel' CHL system, NHL violates U.S. antitrust law

Class-action suit was filed in federal court in New York arguing that the junior hockey system in North America violates U.S. antitrust law

torontosun.com

 

[RayzorIsDull]

Class-action lawsuit says 'cartel' CHL system, NHL violates U.S. antitrust law

Class-action suit was filed in federal court in New York arguing that the junior hockey system in North America violates U.S. antitrust law

torontosun.com

 

[OMG67]

Class-action lawsuit says 'cartel' CHL system, NHL violates U.S. antitrust law

Class-action suit was filed in federal court in New York arguing that the junior hockey system in North America violates U.S. antitrust law

torontosun.com

Maybe it is time to let the players negotiate their own wages/contracts, let them pay for all of their living expenses and eliminate the scholarships. It would be a rude awakening when players have to pay for everything, even on $50,000 per year. If the leagues ever needed to compensate the players financially, the term “student athlete” would be gone and the teams would no longer be responsible for anything other than them as employees. I don’t see how that works for either side.

“We want to be paid, we want scholarships, we want room and board for free, we want all training covered and the ability to negotiate freely with any team we want.” We all know how that would go.

 

[donjohnson]

There's a lot of things I disagree with in that article...

(1) The CHL players have no Name/Image/Likeness rights. NIL became a big thing in college because players couldn't even get a bagel with cream cheese. Yes, a friend was a Director of BBall Ops for a Division 1 program and he told me that they could give the players a bagel and that was considered a snack. Once you give them (or put on) cream cheese, it now becomes a meal and it's an impermissible benefit.

The OHL players get all sorts of benefits that aren't included in their stipend. Sponsors provide free Coffee, Haircuts, Drycleaning and much more and none of those would be allowed in NCAA (prior to NIL).

Also, the players can have their own equipment deals like goalies and stuff like that. I'm guessing they can appear in commercials too but maybe they need team permission to do that...I've never seen a player's contract before.

(2) No Freedom of Movement. There's absolutely freedom of movement but it's done via trades and no-trade clauses. There also needs to be a salary cap or some sort of rules, otherwise it will end up being like the English Premier League and the London's of the world will get all the good players all the time and the smaller markets would just fold.

(3) While I don't know how much the players get paid (guessing it's not a ton), I could see that going up but the education program would need to be modified. I think the players get a year of tuition for every year they play and some of them have enhanced programs that they get 4 years automatically. This would translate to a $60,000ish benefit for one of Saginaw's players if they wanted to get a great education at the University of Michigan. That would go away (IMO) if they are going to pay the players more.

EDIT: Not long after posting, I see something on facebook that Michael Misa has some sort of deal with Upper Deck and is obviously making some bucks there:

Upper Deck Sports Memorabilia

The Upper Deck Company is the leading sports memorabilia company when it comes to Hockey, Golf, Basketball, Football, Soccer, Tennis and Wrestling super stars! Find authenticated autographed memorabilia collections from Jordan, LeBron, Gretzky, McDavid, Tiger and more!

upperdeckstore.com

 

[MJ5]

 

[donjohnson]

That's honestly a dumb comment... While he may be technically correct that there are no "formal" discussions there are certainly informal discussions that probably began the moment players started getting paid by NIL. The fact is that the NCAA product would get better if they allow chl players and they would be foolish to not discuss it "formally" as soon as the end of the Frozen Four if not sooner. Doesn't mean they have to take action on it but it's a bald faced lie that they won't be formally talking about it in the off season.

 

[MJ5]

That's honestly a dumb comment... While he may be technically correct that there are no "formal" discussions there are certainly informal discussions that probably began the moment players started getting paid by NIL. The fact is that the NCAA product would get better if they allow chl players and they would be foolish to not discuss it "formally" as soon as the end of the Frozen Four if not sooner. Doesn't mean they have to take action on it but it's a bald faced lie that they won't be formally talking about it in the off season.

Don't disagree with that at all, as someone with season tickets for the O and NCAA, Im eager to see if they come to some kind of resolution for it.

 

[OHL4Life]

That's honestly a dumb comment... While he may be technically correct that there are no "formal" discussions there are certainly informal discussions that probably began the moment players started getting paid by NIL. The fact is that the NCAA product would get better if they allow chl players and they would be foolish to not discuss it "formally" as soon as the end of the Frozen Four if not sooner. Doesn't mean they have to take action on it but it's a bald faced lie that they won't be formally talking about it in the off season.

elliott freedman was the first to report it, i would bet a large amount of money he was not just making it up. your right, dumb comment, dreger just took what he said at face value and didnt press. great journalism.

 

[bigsportsfan]

I don't see how this improves the quality of play in the CHL. Right now the main advantage of going the CHL route is you get to play in a higher level league at 16, rather than waiting until you are 18 to go the NCAA route. Under the proposed new rules, those players who choose the CHL route could transfer to the NCAA at 18 instead of playing in the CHL until they are 19 or 20. Won't this just lower the level of play in the CHL?

Plus teams will need to rethink the whole rebuild process. Right now most players stay in the CHL until they are 19 so the current rebuild process makes sense. But under the proposed rules, teams will need to worry about their first and second round picks transferring to the NCAA at 18. I can see NCAA scouts at the CHL games looking for players to recruit for their programs.

Will the CHL become like Junior A teams where they proudly list the players who have been recruited from their team to play in the NCAA. Will the CHL become the USHL of Canada?