I have been trying to wrap my head around what this could mean for the CHL. I still can’t believe that a lot of “professional writers and analyst” still only think the benefit of the CHL is a monthly allowance and completely either ignore or are ignorant of the scholarship program. A couple of things that came to mind:
1) I think there is consensus that this benefits the CHL for any player not eligible to play in NCAA due to age. They would now have nothing to lose going the CHL route first before deciding go the NCAA if that is what they want. There are many examples but a player that comes to mind rate away is Caleb Maholtra. Why not play in Kingston for 2 years or more and then decide what direction to go after a few seasons?
2) My understanding is that only Americans can benefit from the NIL. So, if this is true and stays, no Canadian players will move to NCAA for this reason specifically. However, high end American born players certainly could. Again, not an expert on how NIL works, but are hockey players making a lot NIL money? Or, are the only ones making money mainly football and basketball players or high-profile Olympic athletes?
3) The whole NHL contract rights thing is confusing as heck. I get it that players drafted out of CHL have two years to sign with their NHL teams and players in the NCAA route have 4 years? It confuses me when I see comments that players will leave CHL after being drafted to have more control. Lets use Owen Protz of my hometown Brantford Bulldogs who was drafted by Montreal this past draft Without any changes to the NHL CBA, if Protz decided to move to NCAA for this season wouldn't Montreal still only have two years to sign him because he was drafted out of the CHL?
4) I have read on previous sites that NCAA teams only have 18 scholarship spots on their teams. What I would think could happen is NCAA teams would try and get the CHL players that move over to not be on scholarship through them but to use their CHL scholarship package to pay for their schooling. I would think the CHL scholarship package would be worded to say there not paying your tuition if your playing for an NCAA hockey team
5) With regards to Over agers (OA), my initial reaction is that there may not be as big if impact with these players. You can only have 3 OA's anyway, maybe you loose some high end OA's that you thought would player there OA with you but decide to start school early and go the NCAA route.
6) I think the biggest question is what happens to those 18- and 19-year-old players. One benefit CHL has is that they still don't have to make a commitment on what school and program they are going to. I would imagine many of them are still solely focused on their hockey careers and maybe have not given too much thought of other career aspirations outside of hockey as they are still chasing the dream. If you are not a high-end player especially a non-drafted NHL player, I would think making the best decision of where you want to go to school and the program you want to take is important. Also remember that not all players will necessarily want to go the university route. CHL scholarship package can be used for colleges and trade schools. So, if the player decides he wants to be an electrician, the educational pathway for that career is most likely a college or trade school and not a university.
7) I think the CHL would have to worry more about retention for 18/19-year-olds than recruitment. There could be some positives here for the CHL. Again, let’s use the Caleb Maholtra example. He has committed to Boston U. But let’s say he reports to Kingston because he can still go to Boston U if he so desires. He comes to Kingston and likes the city, likes his teammates and coaches, maybe gets drafted to the NHL and thinks its best just to stay in Kingston and not go to Boston U anymore. Or maybe he goes to Boston U in his OA year.
As a league I would ask myself what is the best way to keep 18/19 years old staying. I don’t understand the argument that NCAA is better for development because you only play 34 regular season games but more time for practice. CHL has 68 games with the vast majority between Friday to Sunday. That still gives you all week to practice.
I don’t know if the CHL has a rule that you have to be enrolled in some form of education even if you have completed your high school diploma. I believe the Petes had this rule back in the Roger Neilson days. If that’s true I change that. Give the graduated high school players a choice if they want to be enrolled in school. This way those 18/19-year high school graduated players who just want to focus on hockey can just focus on hockey. When there not playing games, they are training and practicing. This gives you the best of both worlds where you play a lot of games and practice all you want. I think what people forget is that if you go the NCAA route, you are in school and have to go to class.
The one advantage I could see the NCAA having for the high elite 18/19-year old’s is that you offer them the chance to play against older players. As a CHL/OHL fan, I would hope that our high end 18/19-year old’s decide to stay where they are and go the NCAA route later on if that is what they desire.
The other consideration is strengthening CHL scholarships. My understanding is that a standard CHL packages pay tuition or books. What about living expenses? With the way rents are in university towns, rent is more costly than tuition (in Ontario at least). Maybe you strengthen the package to that in addition to tuition and books, if you stay in the league until your OA season, you get $15,000 living allowance for each year you played in the league. My point is that as a league, I would look at any perceived weakness compared to my competition and if I can improve upon it I will.
I have more thoughts but thought I would end here