Fergus31
Registered User
- Jul 17, 2021
- 753
- 1,461
CHL/NCAA
- Thread starter Otto
- Start date
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,966
- 7,764
The NCAA is increasing the number of full ride hockey scholarship that D1 schools can offer. Previously the number of full ride scholarships was capped at 18 but is increasing to 26 for next season. In a lot of cases, it won’t matter if an OHL player leaves the OHL before their career is done and loses their scholarship money since they will get a full ride NCAA scholarship anyways.
An Advisers Life - NCAA Roster Size Limits And Scholarships Increased For 2025-2026 In Landmark Settlement
In a landmark settlement agreement, the NCAA has increased college scholarship ice hockey numbers, and put strict limits on NCAA roster sizes beginning in the 2thejuniorhockeynews.com
“Beginning in 2025-2026 NCAA ice hockey programs will be allowed to provide for twenty six full scholarships for each team. That is twenty six full rides which dramatically improves conditions for player who earn the opportunity to play Division One hockey.
With that increase in scholarships, comes strict roster limits for each team that will be set at twenty six player as well. This is important to note because teams have at times been known to roster as many as thirty players who may or may not have been active at any point during a season.”
It still does actually matter in some respects:
1> NCAA athletic scholarships cover tuition, room, and board. They do not cover any ancillary costs like books, clothing, transportation etc. This is where the OHL GOLD PACKAGE Scholarships can help bridge that gap even for full ride scholarships.
2> The players have 18 months after their OA year to access their scholarship. If a player leaves at 19, then they have that additional 12 months making it 30 months. In that circumstance, a player can hold off accessing funds, play 5 semesters in the NCAA and take a few summer courses to complete a three year program. Then come to Canada and access their scholarship for a post-grad Certificate type program if they wish. Or, they can transfer their credits from their NCAA school to Canada and finish their education in here. This would be rare, I admit, but there are a lot of cases where a student completes a University level Degree in 3 or 4 years and then takes a one or two year College level program that includes some form of specialized work program. The player could do it that way and get it all covered whereas they wouldn’t be able to under a four year scholarship.
EDIT:
I received a note and I did a quick search. Point #1 is not accurate. If it is a full 100% scholarship, funds “may” be applied for certain eligible expenses that include books and transportation etc. However, there is a difference between the two scholarships so there is a possibility that the GOLD Packages would cover some excluded expenses. Additionally, I think hey are also working on combining multiple scholarships with athletic scholarships. There is something about competitiveness that doesn’t’ allow multiple scholarships when applied to athletic scholarships. MAybe someone with more knowledge can chime in on that. For example, Player X is offered a 75% Athletic Scholarship and they use their CHL Scholarship to cover the remaining 25%.
Last edited:
Something I haven't seen mentioned in this is how this ruling may potentially impact trades in the future within the OHL. Going to need a lot more conditional picks traded on deals that don't include NHL drafted players or non oas because what would stop a team from trading a player with multiple years left who they may know intends to go NCAA after that season. Could bite a team not paying attention in the ass real quick
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
If teams are not paying attention they deserve to get bitten in the ass
The issue becomes any kid who's not signed to an NHL deal could potentially walk at any point, so unless your trading for one of those it becomes a risk for an OHL club. Trade your stud 19 year old for a 16 year old rookie? he could go NCAA as soon as 18. Even more so if he doesnt like his new landing spot after a year. Lots a variables
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,966
- 7,764
I really think people are making a mountain out of a mole hill here. It is like we are automatically calling the OHL a 16-18 year old league as if players are going to bolt in mass numbers.
Players will make their intentions known. Maybe you will see the odd disgruntled player say F-It, I am leaving and taking another route. But, this doom and gloom approach where we need to change rules or massively change trading to account for early graduation seems silly to me.
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
I get that.. doesn't change the fact that if management isn't smart enough to do their homework they deserved to have their asses bitten
ohloutsider
Registered User
Just a thought but I wonder how much this new ruling will impact the OHL draft in April? I'm not sure how players will be able to threaten the NCCA route to manipulate their way onto a team of their choice? Maybe we see the first true draft in years? Thoughts?
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
Maybe a little less manipulation but the USHL still exists. Guys can still play in a decent enough league while they wait for their rights to get traded to someone else. As a GM you still want to do your homework and be sure a player is going to show up. But i'd guess a few more Americans get picked in the first 2 rounds from now on.
coolhandluc44
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2024
- 110
- 100
I would give this a listen. Andy is the dad of Guelph Storm Charlie Paquette and runs Power Tech Hockey. I would give his opinion more weight than media pundits who have not watched or followed major junior hockey or ncaa in their lives but yet have now become experts
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,966
- 7,764
I think the last segment provides the best perspective. Where they say 5 of 20 are Pro’s and don’t give a damn about school, five others don’t give a crap about school because they aren’t really students and have no interest in education, that leaves 10 guys on each roster. Of those ten guys, they have to have the combination of ability to play NCAA AND have to have the grades to qualify.
Where the CHL Scholarship makes more sense for a lot of players is it is valid for a wide range of education opportunities, not jsut the traditional College/University route. So, the CHL Scholarship is still very valuable for a lot of players.
coolhandluc44
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2024
- 110
- 100
And of those ten guys when would they want to make that jump? Most guys (not elite NHL projected 1st or 2nd rounders) are finally getting top 4 D minutes or top 6 forward minutes in their 3rd year of eligibility in the league if not the 4th. Why would you leave the league rate as your going prime minutes to be freshman that either a) does get minutes or b) scratched all together.
I still am of the belief most players wont make that wont move until their OA year a the earliest, after their age 19 season. Plus if you new path is going to be CHL then NCAA, I would think your value would be higher after your 4th season of eligibility as you are older, more mature etc. I'm sure there will be lower end schools recruiting players to jump leagues earlier, but what would be the point? Those same schools and more will still likely be recruiting you after your 4th or OA season of eligibility.
For the high end players (1st or 2nd round NHL draft pick players) I still do not see the upside of going NCAA for a year. Even if the Cowan's, Musty's and Barlows of the world where eligible to play NCAA hockey this year, why would you want to go play half a schedule and have the burden of taking university level courses. Unless you have had this dream to play at Michigan or Boston College for a year, it just does not make any sense to me.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,966
- 7,764
To be fair, only rare circumstances for true elite players will they go NCAA at 18. If they do, they likely Red Shirt as Freshmen. The question really comes down to their 19 year old season. I could see a few players decide it snot worth it to stay in a stagnant situation. So, if a team is unable to offer a solid opportunity to either compete or maybe the franchise itself is stagnant or poor, maybe a player could jump early. However, that is on the franchise, not the player.
coolhandluc44
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2024
- 110
- 100
What will be interesting to see is how many of the players that have jumped to the OHL after the rule changes and we’re going to go to College for the 25/26 a season end of delaying going to NCAA for the 26/27 season. If the player was going to be red shirted and not play a year, wouldn’t the NCAA team get more value if the player stayed in the OHL and got another yearof experience before jumping ship? And again im not talking the elites of the elites who the NCAA will want ASAP. The possibilities are endless…
Kingpin794
Smart A** In A Jersey
Trade market is going to be absolutely tanked. Teams will bring in outside talent before handing over picks and players. Prices are going to fall off a cliff. If you need to rebuild, you might be SOL this year. Once the market evens back out after next offseason, we should see trades go back to normal. But for now, big name players might go for pennies on the dollar.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,966
- 7,764
That is an interesting view. I dont’ share it but the possibility does exist depending on what level of players decide to jump to the OHL.
Most of the impact OHL players are 19 and 20 years old. Many of the quality 19 and 20 year olds outside the OHL are playing NCAA. There are a handful that have delayed their College start to 20 years old but not many do that which is why the USHL skews younger.
I think there are seven clear buyers (London, Windsor, Erie, Brampton, Oshawa, Barrie, and Kingston). There are a few that are somewhat on the fence right now that may present as buyers (Saginaw, SSM, Sudbury, and Brantford). I think the four teams in the “maybe buying” zone are probably going to remain status quo teams. Kitchener may be too good right now to be a seller and since they have already recouped some picks in the Rehkopf deal, they may jsut roll with what they have and not cut deeper.
That leaves only a few identified seller teams and those teams may not sell big. Ottawa may make Pinelli available. There is chatter that NB won’t sell Romani because they plan to run him back as a potential OA, same with Ride. Sudbury was predicted to be a seller but they are playing well and sit there with a lot of picks. The Petes have nothing to sell. Niagara has done well and may try to tinker in the buyer market as opposed to sellers market. I am not sure what Flint and sarnia will do which leaves Guelph and Owen Sound as the likely sellers in the West.
I think the supply of players for sale coupled with the number of potential buyers may create a market that truly favours the sellers, not the buyers.
BCHL are sure losing lot players to CHL
Can a chl drafted player join their drafted team after trade deadline?
Can a chl drafted player join their drafted team after trade deadline?
HockeyPops
Registered User
- Aug 20, 2018
- 7,828
- 6,911
Yes I think they have an extra month or so to sign someone after trade deadline
If OHL players getting top 4 D minutes or top 6 forward minutes would get limited minutes in the NCAA, that must mean the NCAA is a higher caliber league compared to the OHL.
If that is the case, then elite players may want to go to the NCAA for the better competition.
But most of the posts on this forum argue that players playing in the OHL wouldn't get playing time in the NCAA but they wouldn't want to go to the NCAA anyway because the NCAA isn't as good as the OHL. That sounds like a very biased argument.
For the record, there are 233 NHL draft picks playing in the NCAA this season (NHL Draft Picks Playing College Hockey in 2024-25). Certainly some players think the NCAA is the best route to the NHL.
Otto
Lynch Syndrome. Know your families cancer history
I haven't seen much if any talk about playing time as it pertains to minutes per game. I've said they would play fewer games. Like more than half less, which is why for a top player, already playing in the CHL, they would be more inclined to stay.
And I am not saying that every player is going to leave for the NCAA at 18 or 19. My point has always been some will, and that will make it more difficult to build a team season to season. I think it will take a few years to figure out how many players will leave for the NCAA before their OHL graduation.
But to be honest. I am more concerned with them allowing 19 year olds in the AHL. That could really degrade the quality of the OHL if your top 19 year olds leave to play AHL.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,966
- 7,764
You gotta dominate the league you are in before you tackle a higher league. The NHL is the best league in the World. 18 year olds cannot just choose to play there. Same with the NCAA. You have to earn your spot.
On top of that, they have to earn it scholastically. We all know hockey players in the OHL aren’t all ready for dedicated schooling as the primary focus with hockey being the secondary focus.
The NCAA can be a great place to develop but not if you are there one or two years. The best players to come out of there that aren’t top NHL prospects signing ELC’s at 18 and 19 typically play the full four years.
As an NCAA athlete, you need to remain eligible by ensuring your grades are maintained. That takes a lot of time and discipline. So many people point to less games and more time for training. But, when you have an OHL player that doesn’t’ need to attend school, they have a hell of a lot more time for training.
Most players that choose the CHL route are specifically choosing it because they DON’T want to focus on school. That is evidenced by the lack of players that use their scholarships for traditional post secondary education.
I completely disagree with you on this. They choose the CHL because they get to play at a high level at 16 years old. Now they can play in the CHL at 16 year olds and still be eligible for the NCAA.
Your making it sound like players in the NCAA are concentrating on their studies and playing hockey as a side hobby. But NCAA hockey players put in just as much time as CHL players.
Take a look at this: Training in College Hockey
Many athletes are astonished what is asked and required of them when it comes to the off ice training demands at the college level.
At UMass Lowell for instance, our Hockey Performance Center is built just steps from our locker-room. Every single day the athletes begin and end practice and games in the Performance Center. Individual Injury Reduction Work, Movement Skills, Heart Rate Variability Testing and a Team Dynamic Warm Up start everyday. If it's not a “training day”, this is at least 20minutes of dedicated work before the team moves on for practice. If it is a training day, this 20minutes is followed up by 30-60minutes of Power Development, Strength Training, and Energy System Work. Once practice is over, the work is not done. The players will come back to the Performance Center for supplemental Energy System Work (as needed based on Heart Rate Monitoring during practice), and Recovery and Regeneration work such as foam rolling, static stretching, and the specific use of hot and cold tubs. All this is necessary to speed up the body's recovery processes, so that the players are as fresh as possible the next day, to begin the process all over again.
College players are consistently regarded as much more physically mature and developed as they enter the professional ranks than their Major Junior counterparts. This focus on practice and training vs. trying to mimic a professional schedule with upwards of 80 games a year at the younger levels is crucial in the development of hockey players.
Last edited:
coolhandluc44
Registered User
- Jan 29, 2024
- 110
- 100
Players make their decisions for multiple reasons. I would argue the improvement of NCAA hockey has more to do with more Americans playing hockey in general. Americans grow up on the NCAA and it would make sense that as more Americans play hockey the higher amount of quality players will go NCAA. Again thats just one factor. Has the NCAA increased their player outputs the past 10 years or so, yes cannot deny that. However I could say the OHL had the most drafted players last year so clearly that is the best route. And that despite the NCAA and European countries making vast improvements, the CHL still represents half the league so again clearly the CHL is the better way to go.
Based on the current CBA rules, many teams will use a late round pick on an NCAA player as they have 4 years to make a decision instead of only 2 for a CHL player. When you sort that list you will notice that the many of those players are in rounds 5 through 7. And no I’m not saying those late round picks are bad players. When/if the CBA changes that you also get 4 years control for a CHL player, I would argue you will see many more NHL teams using their late round picks on CHL players than what they would have before.
If NCAA was just a hockey league with no academic requirements and more importantly played more than 34 regular season games, I think there would be a stronger case for elite players to leave the the CHL.
OMG67
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2013
- 11,966
- 7,764
They are leaving out a lot of information in that description. First, there is no mention of what the OHL teams do. I remember last year talking specifically about things like this when it came to differences in OHL teams and what they offer. Teams like Ottawa have access to all of this type of training. Some teams offer less, of course, but as @Otto has stated previously, it is up to the teams individually to ensure they do what is necessary to attract and retain players.
The second issue I have with the statement is that obviously the NCAA graduates better and more mature athletes. They are at least 2 years older than CHL graduates.
The thing you conveniently keep ignoring or downplaying is the goal of the player. If the goal is to play NHL hockey, it is far better for the overwhelming majority of players to play CHL hockey through their 19 year old season. There are outliers but the outliers are typically players that are ready to play NHL at 19 and 20 so they already have their ELC’s signed. The majority of players who have signed ELC’s aren’t ready at 20 either to be honest. Most CHL graduates end up in the AHL for multiple years before they play NHL hockey. What this means is sort of simple really. The elite CHL players get drafted at 18. They sign ELC’s at 18 or 19. This makes them ineligible for NCAA. That means the tier you are referring to leaving the CHL for NCAA are the 2nd tier players or smaller elite players that don’t project as NHL prospects.
The first Tier of players that I have identified as signing ELC’s will not delay the ELC signing and defer it to after NCAA. It is way too much $$$ to leave on the table. Between signing bonus and AHL salary (assuming they don’t collect NHL salary) is close to $500k. If a player chooses to go NCAA and play their four years, that will effectively cost them $500k in lost earnings. In some cases, it also delays their free agency status by two years. And, if that player were to have played the 3rd year of that ELC in the NHL, that is an additional $800k (or more with bonuses) they will lose in earnings. There is no agent worth a grain of salt that would advise a player to not sign an ELC and go play NCAA hockey. The loss in earnings is too significant. I think we can agree this cohort of player is NOT going to leave the CHL for NCAA.
The second tier player is the cohort most likely to consider it. These are either undrafted or drafted and unsigned players. This is where it gets a little sticky. CHL players have wayyyy more free time than NCAA players. They don’t have to attend classes after they graduate high school. They need to be there for the morning skate, afternoon practise and games. The remainder of their time is free time to use as they see fit. Most of the more serious players will dedicate a lot of their time to training. As mentioned above, the individual teams may have better options than others. I know in Ottawa, they pretty much have access to all the same trainers as the NHL team. Clearly the non-student types will not leave for the NCAA. They quite simply wouldn’t qualify for entry scholastically. There are a lot more of those than people may think. So, you can cut that cohort in half at least. None of these players are strong enough at 18 to play NCAA hockey at any sort of meaningful level. IF they were stronger, they’d have been drafted. If they are undrafted because they are small, they will still be small for NCAA too. So, you can eliminate the 18 year olds. That leaves only the 19 year olds that are undrafted to the NHL after two eligible drafts that also meet the entrance criteria for NCAA. Then you need to factor in whether they are capable of playing NCAA based on their overall skill. If they aren’t going to play top half or so of their NCAA team roster, will they be offered a full ride? That’s questionable. I am not sure how many schools will offer full rides to the bottom half of their roster. Some of the bigger schools that generate more revenue may but I am not sure about the smaller schools. Someone that knows mare than me about that can chime in.
So, based on what I have outlined, only a very small subset of a specific cohort would be in a position to jump from the CHL early. IMO, that player is 19 years old, not NHL drafted or signed, quality enough from a skill perspective to be wanted by an NCAA team, that is scholastically eligible, is being offered a full ride scholarship, and is willing to void their CHL Scholarship for leaving the CHL early. To me, that player is the player that has given up on Professional hockey, wants a quality education and feels they can get a better education in the USA than Canada. Or, the player simply really wants to play NCAA hockey but I think that player will have decided to go the other route through the BCHL, Tier II Junior, and/or USHL anyway. Those leagues are way better for 16 year olds than the CHL. Just ask the London Knights since Tier II is their preferred landing spot for their 16 year old draft picks not drafted in the 1st round.
In theory, you could have an NHL team “recommend” a player they drafted to go the NCAA route. I’m not sure what the player agent would say about that though. The NHL team cannot have any official say in it since the player is not property of the team until signed and once they sign they are ineligible. It would be a really big leap of faith for the player to take the recommendation fromt he NHL team and walk away fromt he safety net of the CHL scholarship to leave the CHL early with no compensation for doing so. I’m not sure how that would be embraced by players.
