Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
He's trying to change the rules for the betterment of everyone, he's doing the legwork, he's paying the lawyers, it's not a class-action. In my opinion, he deserves to get paid if he wins.
100%
CHL/NCAA
- Thread starter Otto
- Start date
I agree with this. Every player pretty much knows what the rule is. We don't know the whole story but where were his parents/advisor in this situation? Maybe it gets settled out of court but I can see the NCAA standing by this rule because this has always been the rule.
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
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
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
Just because it's always been a rule doesn't make it right or legal. Especially when as previously stated, professionals overseas have been permitted to join the NCAA, and, the NCAA itself basically washed its hands of the rule and left it up to the teams to decide if they want to change it.
If we are going to be sticking by " it's always been a rule" women wouldn't be voting and blacks wouldn't be playing major league baseball.
I'm curious what the NCAA defence will be. Tough to argue that Windsor Spitfires are a professional team but Rogle isn't. They will probably delay for a while and then settle, like they did in other cases. One difference here is that there won't be the same political pressure that there was with football and basketball athletes.
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
New domino falling. Seems like the barrier will be gone by next season.
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
Additional important notes. Seems like head guys are looking forward to this rule changing. Monetary burden of educational packages could shift as well which would be big for smaller market teams.
NCAA hockey programs are already allocating recruiting budgets to this. With that will also be NIL packages as well I imagine.
I hope it can be win-win for everyone involved. I think the big question from a CHL player retention is what is better for development: playing 68 regular seasons games plus playoffs or the greater reduced NCAA schedule but older competition? Also would signed NHL entry level player still be considered pro and thus not NCAA eligible?
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
This is absolutely beneficial to both the CHL and the NCAA. Who this will hurt is possibly Canadian Universities and the ECHL, if an undrafted player feels that he may still have a shot at the pros, but wants to get his education then NCAA would be a better choice than both of those leagues.
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
The NCAA isn't a junior aged league. there are a smattering of junior aged players but if this rule changes, the choice will be CHL or USHL/BCHL etc and draft histories have shown which one get better exposure for players looking to get drafted.
While I think this is great for the players, it won't be good for OHL/CHL fans for several reasons.
- A big advantage of going the CHL route is you get to play high level hockey at the age of 16. Players had to choose between waiting until they are 18 for the NCAA or playing CHL at 16. Now players who have committed to the NCAA will be able to play in the CHL for 2 years before switching to the NCAA. Get ready for the CHL to lose some of their best players after two seasons.
- NCAA recruitment is fiercely competitive. You can bet NCAA scouts will be attending CHL games looking to recruit top players who haven't committed to the NCAA.
- People complain about the draft manipulation where players demand to be drafted by a certain team or they won't report. Now they will demand to be traded to a certain team or they will threaten to leave for the NCAA.
- The quality of overagers will decrease substantially as 20 year olds will look to make the jump to the NCAA.
- In 2016 (the only study I could find), over 30% of NCAA Div 1 freshman were either 18 or 19 years old. So roughly one third of NCAA players play their first season while they are still junior aged. If you include 20 year old freshman, that number increases to 67%.
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
On your last point. You are quite a bit off. For the 2023-24 season, NCAA hockey (64 teams) had 1,288 players that got regular ice time (skaters min 20 GP, goalies min 10 GP). That works out neatly to about 20 players per teams in a league roughly the same size as the entire CHL. So we have a similar player pool to compare. Of those 1,288 players, 111 were in the 17-19 age group (birth year 2006-2004). That’s about 1.7 per team. There were 159 20 year olds. About 2.5 per team. Ages 21-24 had 1,018 players. 15.9 per team. Junior aged players made up about 21% of regulars. 79% were 21-24. It’s not a junior league. Especially not if you’re not already a super high end 18/19 year old. I agree we may see a few more OA’s than normal take the NCAA option. But if they do, guess who’s spot they take now? Those 17-19 year old’s spot. I’d bet how many ever OA’s decide to go NCAA will roughly equal the number of new 17-19 year olds the CHL will get. It will balance. NCAA is just going to keep getting older. The recruiting battles will shift from kids that are 16 to OA’s.
I think the CHL and NCAA will come to some kind of agreement on when guys can leave the CHL etc. I don't think you will have a massive influx of guys playing 2 years in the CHL and leaving for the NCAA.
I do think your point in #4 is true. I think the overagers quality will absolutely take a dip.
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
The best players in the CHL would either be already drafted, or soon to be drafted. They will play where their NHL team, or agent/handler dictates. Unless they are in a really bad situation ( Recently Niagara) then they won't be leaving the CHL. And even if they are in a bad situation they are more than likely to be traded before jumping to the NCAA
The one benefit that NCAA has over CHL is older players. But to me the big draw back is way less games. So for highly touted NHL players(I.e Easton Cowan) the big question would be what is more beneficial: playing against older players but way less games or CHL with younger players but way more games. I’ll use Easton Cowan as an example. If he doesn’t make the leafs I think the OHL schedule is more beneficial than playing half as much in NCAA. If NCAA played more games then that would be a different story. I don’t know what the NCAA playoff format is like.
I also think the one thing people forget about NCAA is that you have to go to school. It’s not like these guys can just play hockey and skip class. I know there is a lot stories out there that student athlete don’t go to class but it’s still a requirement. So again if I was a high NHL prospect do I really want to go to school or just focus on hockey.
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
Also most players would like consistency. They don't enjoy getting traded. If they are in a decent spot in the CHL, I think they'd rather stick with the coaching/systems that got them drafted as opposed to picking up and going to a completely different system. It would make sense for OA's. They would be at a natural transition point. Anyone else would be a bit awkward to shift.
I think that could be a big plus too for the CHL. Maybe a guy like Maholtra would have reported to Kingston knowing he could still go to Boston College. He might have gone to Kingston like the city, coaches, team maybe gets drafted high to the NHL. Instead of going to Boston College after two years in Kingston he decides he wants to stay in Kingston for a few more years because he likes it especially knowing he can always go to Boston College.
I’m not as worried about the OA situation. You could only dress 3 anyways. Maybe you loose a few that would have stayed but the upside of getting guys playing that wouldn’t commit before is a better trade off in my opinion.
ohloutsider
Registered User
It will hurt the Q more. Not as many OA's to draw from the OHL.
I see this as a win-win for all junior players.
frontsfan67
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2022
- 2,408
- 1,233
This will 1000% screw over all the teams but especially the smaller market ones. Half the players in the league already want to play in London- imagine Michigan Or Boston College or Boston University recruiting some top tier player on a bottom feeder organization like Kingston. No chance that player stays on Kingston rather than going to any of those 3. In London they may stay- have a great coach, gm, winning culture, 9000 fans a night etc etc
I don’t know if this is a good example but you mentioned Kingston so let’s use Matthew Soto as an example. Let’s say one of those schools or you mentioned wanted him. You think they would want him now as a 19 year old freshman or next year as a 20 year old.l? And for Soto I assume he still has NHL aspirations despite not being drafted. What would be best for him to get noticed? Play top line minutes in Kingston this season or play a lesser role as a freshman?
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
Those high end teams you are mentioning are already packed with good players though. There’s only so many spots. Who’s spot are they taking? They aren’t going to cut the older players. People really over estimate how dominate CHLers at 18/19 would be in the NCAA. 9/10 of them would be getting 3rd line minutes. It’s just an age and physical maturity thing. The best CHL teams would not do well in the NCAA tourney.
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
Also NCAA players can’t be signed. So unless you go to one of 5 or 6 schools that really rake in the cash, you won’t be make more in NIL that your signing bonus. And that’s only for Americans. As far as I know Canadians can’t get NIL money. Someone can correct me if that’s changed.
frontsfan67
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2022
- 2,408
- 1,233
What’s the odds a guy like adam valentini comes over to Kitchener now?
We see how londons bottom half of their lineup gets drafted every year despite many players in the O being better.
Why do they get drafted?
More scouts watching the games and they’re coached by Dale hunter.
Would really have to rake in the points in kingston being undersized to get noticed
Or any good American born player goes back home at 18/19 for better competition and you’re closer to home?
personally I believe the place with the most amount of scouts.
We see how londons bottom half of their lineup gets drafted every year despite many players in the O being better.
Why do they get drafted?
More scouts watching the games and they’re coached by Dale hunter.
Would really have to rake in the points in kingston being undersized to get noticed
Would you not think guys like Quinton musty would be playing there this year if made available since they can’t play in the AHL?
Or any good American born player goes back home at 18/19 for better competition and you’re closer to home?
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
No I don’t think Musty would go to the NCAA. He’s signed. It’s wouldn’t even be an option. High end players want to be signed. NHL teams would much rather their prospects officially be part of their system as opposed to floating around the NCAA unsigned and possibly becoming FA’s.
As far as Americans going back at 18/19: 1) most of them aren’t going back. They haven’t even arrived yet. 2) for those that do go back, it’s cultural. Most Canadians want to stay in Canada and play CHL. Most Americans want to stay in America and play NCAA.
We’re getting worried about outliers.
