CHL/NCAA

[Strummer53]

I'd expect this to be addressed in the next CBA. It expires in 2026, but Bettman wants it settled by June 15th next year, which would be perfect timing.

It's this a CBA thing? I thought the CHL/NHL agreement was a seperate deal between the leagues.

 

[OHL4Life]

It's this a CBA thing? I thought the CHL/NHL agreement was a seperate deal between the leagues.

no, the ahl/ eligibility and player transfer payments, standards, etc are part of the transfer agreement.

cba covers prospect rights . Rumour has it they already have an amendment worked out

 

[Kingpin794]

So some interesting things from the league's FAQ regarding the rule change

Frequently Asked Questions Pertaining to NCAA Player Eligibility Changes - Ontario Hockey League

1. What NCAA eligibility change has taken place? Canadian Hockey League players have been deemed eligible for NCAA Division I hockey programs following a decision ratified November 7, 2024 by the NCAA’s Division I Council. The language that outlines the specific NCAA eligibility change that goes...

chl.ca

"If a player were to leave the OHL to play NCAA hockey prior to completion of the terms of their OHL Scholarship and Development Agreement (through the end of their 19-year-old season), the player would no longer be eligible for the OHL Scholarship."

So yes, there is the out for teams. If someone leaves before their OA year, the OHL team is not on the hook for school costs.

"If a player were to go to the NCAA to play hockey following the completion of the terms of their OHL Scholarship and Development Agreement (following their 19-year-old season), the player would be entitled to their OHL Scholarship benefits...Student athletes can use their scholarship at any post-secondary institution of their choice, even if they receive financial support from other sources."

If you leave in your OA year, you still get your education package EVEN IF you get a NCAA scholarship. Quite the incentive to stay through 19 years old. OA's are certainly going to be taking advantage of this.

"Players of eligible age not included on an OHL member team protected list may sign with any OHL team in accordance with the release transfer process governing their jurisdiction."

So door's open for FA's too. Wonder if we see any come to the OHL.

 

[BarberPole9]

How many 17/18/19 year olds do you expect will leave the CHL for the NCAA annually?

I am thinking that OA’s and 19 year olds will be the recruiting targets for next year.

 

[Leviathan899]

Tell me again how the OHL will suffer from this?

https://x.com/i/web/status/1853205540572209255

Yep. He’s also 19, so should quell some fears the OHL is going to lose all its good 18-19 year olds. The thing i dislike about this move so much is the amount of unanswered questions. Seems like the entire CHL and even NCAA teams don’t know how this is going to go. I read a quote from a coach I from the Hockey East conference and he said unless this results in the ncaa expanding, than he doesn’t see this as good for USA hockey overall. It just seems like these days it’s popular to crap on the CHL and wax poetic about the NCAA. The NHL relies on a strong CHL and would be foolish to see it weakened.

There would be zero reason for them to come to the OHL. The USHL is a better league for 16 year olds and in many cases 17 year olds as well. The argument against the USHL is the lack of development for 19 year olds.

If a player is committed to play NCAA as an 18 year old, they won’t come to the OHL. There is zero reason to do so.

I fail to see a reason why players would come to the OHL for 3 years, get to the point where they are ready to make an impact and then go to the NCAA and be a rookie all over again. They are better off staying that one extra year, play their proverbial “Senior” year and then play for four years in the NCAA.

Why do you think it’s a better league for 16-17 year olds? I think it’s a good spot for them, but better? You’re telling me a guy like Sennecke, or Dickinson would have been better off in say, Sioux Falls or Youngstown over oshawa and London?

 

[Kingpin794]

How many 17/18/19 year olds do you expect will leave the CHL for the NCAA annually?

I am thinking that OA’s and 19 year olds will be the recruiting targets for next year.

17? None unless they are some generational talent.
18? Almost none. Maybe 1 late birthday every year in the whole CHL.
19? Not a ton. Either they are already signed or not good enough to play NCAA. Not a ton of in between

 

[OMG67]

Yep. He’s also 19, so should quell some fears the OHL is going to lose all its good 18-19 year olds. The thing i dislike about this move so much is the amount of unanswered questions. Seems like the entire CHL and even NCAA teams don’t know how this is going to go. I read a quote from a coach I from the Hockey East conference and he said unless this results in the ncaa expanding, than he doesn’t see this as good for USA hockey overall. It just seems like these days it’s popular to crap on the CHL and wax poetic about the NCAA. The NHL relies on a strong CHL and would be foolish to see it weakened.


Why do you think it’s a better league for 16-17 year olds? I think it’s a good spot for them, but better? You’re telling me a guy like Sennecke, or Dickinson would have been better off in say, Sioux Falls or Youngstown over oshawa and London?

It is people “looking” for ways for it to go wrong for the OHL. “What if this… What if that…”

The reality is, players that want to play NCAA only have one path. Now they have two paths. The CHL currently graduates approximately 250 players per year. What percentage of those players turn pro? About 30%? 40%? That leaves about 150 or so mature and ready to play as freshmen players that the NCAA can recruit.

IT is a win for the NCAA. IF it weren’t a win for the NCAA, they wouldn’t have lifted the ban. They’d have fought whatever battle they had to in an effort to protect their programs.

It is a win for the players because it gives them options. And, if it is a win for the players because they have options, all of a sudden, the CHL becomes a more viable option for players that didn’t really have that route as an option. By default, that option is a win for the CHL.

This is not a binary winner/loser situation. This is a winner/winner/winner situation. Everyone wins. The only losers are the lower tier players that will lose their roster spot/scholarship to the more talented graduating CHL players.

 

[MJ5]

"Players of eligible age not included on an OHL member team protected list may sign with any OHL team in accordance with the release transfer process governing their jurisdiction."

So door's open for FA's too. Wonder if we see any come to the OHL.

Protection list is currently 50? Right?
I wonder if we see that expanded at all.

 

[OMG67]

Yep. He’s also 19, so should quell some fears the OHL is going to lose all its good 18-19 year olds. The thing i dislike about this move so much is the amount of unanswered questions. Seems like the entire CHL and even NCAA teams don’t know how this is going to go. I read a quote from a coach I from the Hockey East conference and he said unless this results in the ncaa expanding, than he doesn’t see this as good for USA hockey overall. It just seems like these days it’s popular to crap on the CHL and wax poetic about the NCAA. The NHL relies on a strong CHL and would be foolish to see it weakened.


Why do you think it’s a better league for 16-17 year olds? I think it’s a good spot for them, but better? You’re telling me a guy like Sennecke, or Dickinson would have been better off in say, Sioux Falls or Youngstown over oshawa and London?

You are misinterpreting. I said clearly that “if a player is committed to playing NCAA at age 18, there is no reason or them to come play in the OHL.” The reason is because the OHL is a very tough league for 16 year olds. The same can be said about th eAHL for 19 year olds. Are there outliers? Absolutely. Try not to make an argument using an outlier. There will always be an exception.

If you were to interpret what I said accurately, the point was that a player that is basically 100% decided on playing NCAA as soon as they can (18 or 19), there is no reason for them to come to the OHL. Zero. The USHL is a better league for developing 16 and 17 year olds for the NCAA at 18. The OHL is a better league for developing Pro’s because they play in the league until 20. The USHL doesn't have quality 19 year olds. Any player worth a grain of salt in the USHL is playing College hockey by the time they reach 19. The mature talent is gone.

In light of that perspective, that cohort will not play OHL/CHL. They just won’t. The current path works better for them.

The more elite players that can play at a decent level as 16 year olds are typically blue chip NHL prospects. The NCAA shouldn’t even be on the radar for them as a Plan “A”.

the question is whether the Blue Chip American players will toss their hat into the CHL or not. I think the Blue Chip Canadian kids are likely to but I am not sure what the Blue Chip American kids will do.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1854617228601442509

 

[Leviathan899]

You are misinterpreting. I said clearly that “if a player is committed to playing NCAA at age 18, there is no reason or them to come play in the OHL.” The reason is because the OHL is a very tough league for 16 year olds. The same can be said about th eAHL for 19 year olds. Are there outliers? Absolutely. Try not to make an argument using an outlier. There will always be an exception.

If you were to interpret what I said accurately, the point was that a player that is basically 100% decided on playing NCAA as soon as they can (18 or 19), there is no reason for them to come to the OHL. Zero. The USHL is a better league for developing 16 and 17 year olds for the NCAA at 18. The OHL is a better league for developing Pro’s because they play in the league until 20. The USHL doesn't have quality 19 year olds. Any player worth a grain of salt in the USHL is playing College hockey by the time they reach 19. The mature talent is gone.

In light of that perspective, that cohort will not play OHL/CHL. They just won’t. The current path works better for them.

The more elite players that can play at a decent level as 16 year olds are typically blue chip NHL prospects. The NCAA shouldn’t even be on the radar for them as a Plan “A”.

the question is whether the Blue Chip American players will toss their hat into the CHL or not. I think the Blue Chip Canadian kids are likely to but I am not sure what the Blue Chip American kids will do.

My bad, I did misread that. As far as how many blue chip American kids will come now, I think more will, but not as many as some may think. American kids still really want to play for the NTDP, and to me that will still be their top priority. But I do think we’ll see more Americans coming like Andrew in the Soo, Ethan Garden, Brooks Rogowski, etc. More Americans of that caliber will come imo.

 

[Leviathan899]

I was in Ptbo Tuesday for the game against Oshawa and was talking to a recruiter from RIT who was there to watch Chase Lefebvre. Too bad he was scratched that game, and I know RIT isn’t exactly a high end program. But he said that’s the type of player most schools will be looking at, as well as guys like Luke Torrance. Someone like Owen Allard he mentioned as well, who could play AHL this year or next, but who may be better off getting top 6 minutes at a good NCAA school vs 4th line in the AHL. One OHL GM quoted in Scott Wheeler’s article today also mentioned that a lot of people have this impression all players want to go the ncaa route but that’s just not true. Some do, sure, but many have no interest in taking the school route. It’s not for everyone.

 

[Kingpin794]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1854671742603493856

that didn't take long.

 

[OMG67]

My bad, I did misread that. As far as how many blue chip American kids will come now, I think more will, but not as many as some may think. American kids still really want to play for the NTDP, and to me that will still be their top priority. But I do think we’ll see more Americans coming like Andrew in the Soo, Ethan Garden, Brooks Rogowski, etc. More Americans of that caliber will come imo.

A lot of it may come down to politics. If you want to play for Team USA, you genuinely need to play USNTDP. Of course, some of the more pure elite players in the CHL do play for Team USA but if there ever is a “tie-breaker,” tie will go to the player that committed to their program.

IF more blue chip Americans bypass the USNTDP for 4 years int he CHL because it is a better route for NHL hockey, and less of a disruption having to play in the program for two years and then NCAA for two years etc, 4 years in the same league on one single development curve may be a better option for those kids than two leagues with two different development curves.

Imagine going into the USHL as a 16 year old. Rookie. Then two years later, you are a freshman in college going through that rookie experience only 2 years later? That is tough man.

 

[Slowpace]

How an NCAA-CHL rule change could impact elite hockey at many levels

There is no doubt that Thursday's NCAA Division I Council meeting could result in major ramifications for elite men's hockey, for players in their early teens right up to the NHL. What is far less clear is exactly how the hockey landscape will shift if the council votes to allow CHL players to...

www.sportsnet.ca

 

[Savard18]

I was in Ptbo Tuesday for the game against Oshawa and was talking to a recruiter from RIT who was there to watch Chase Lefebvre. Too bad he was scratched that game, and I know RIT isn’t exactly a high end program. But he said that’s the type of player most schools will be looking at, as well as guys like Luke Torrance. Someone like Owen Allard he mentioned as well, who could play AHL this year or next, but who may be better off getting top 6 minutes at a good NCAA school vs 4th line in the AHL. One OHL GM quoted in Scott Wheeler’s article today also mentioned that a lot of people have this impression all players want to go the ncaa route but that’s just not true. Some do, sure, but many have no interest in taking the school route. It’s not for everyone.

RIT won an NCAA National Championship not too long ago. They’re not BU but they ain’t bad.

 

[Leviathan899]

RIT won an NCAA National Championship not too long ago. They’re not BU but they ain’t bad.

Yeah I don’t mean to say they’re bad, but meant more in terms of producing NHL level talent. In that regard it’s not what I’d call one of the higher end programs. Quinnipiac is another program which has had considerable success while not really pumping out any NHL talent. The odd guy, but nothing considerable.

 

[MJ5]

I was in Ptbo Tuesday for the game against Oshawa and was talking to a recruiter from RIT who was there to watch Chase Lefebvre. Too bad he was scratched that game, and I know RIT isn’t exactly a high end program. But he said that’s the type of player most schools will be looking at, as well as guys like Luke Torrance. Someone like Owen Allard he mentioned as well, who could play AHL this year or next, but who may be better off getting top 6 minutes at a good NCAA school vs 4th line in the AHL. One OHL GM quoted in Scott Wheeler’s article today also mentioned that a lot of people have this impression all players want to go the ncaa route but that’s just not true. Some do, sure, but many have no interest in taking the school route. It’s not for everyone.

Owen Allard is signed by Utah, hes ineligible to go the NCAA route now.

 

[coolhandluc44]

In the Scott Wheeler article it was mentioned lowering the draft age for the league to be younger. I really don’t like this idea. I would rather they expand the number of under ages you can dress or lift the cap all together if they are thinking of getting younger. I think getting younger you loose the argument more for the older players and high end prospects that your league is better for development if your playing against younger competition.

The one thing that I am noticing that a lot of people are forgetting is that the NCAA is not just a hockey league, you are a student. If I were a high end 19 year old (Cowan, Musty. Barlow etc and lets pretend the rule eventually changes that etc signed players can join NCAA) wouldn’t I rather just devote all my time to hockey and training rather than enrolling in a university program I probably have no intention of completing once I start making life changing money in the pros? I think the school requirement aspect is getting lost here.