The NCAA could put a lid on things by saying you play NCAA after CHL, but you forfeit a year of eligibility for every year you played CHL. I believe USports allows guys who played some professional to play under similar conditions.
CHL Players into NCAA... What happens?
- Thread starter hockeyguy0022
- Start date
but why? These players make the NCAA better... it's the NCAA chance to really get a higher tier of player they don't get now. Why
They should just make the CHL like the USHL, NAHL, because that's indeed what it is.
While they could do that, it would be more likely that the penalty would be front-loaded. Play one year in the CHL, sit out one year, play three NCAA, and adjust the numbers for each year played. Telling a player to sit out a year will probably keep many away, so doing that for three years would be a great way that nobody goes from the CHL to NCAA.
That is, assuming this is allowed...which it won't be.
Because they don't care to. Doing away with the initial eligibility clearinghouse would also do that, and that's not going anywhere either. College hockey as a whole would have benefited from having players like Keith Yandle, Kevin Labanc, Jared Boll, etc., go through the NCAA ranks, but none of them was allowed to play college hockey.
mouser
Business of Hockey
Not disagreeing with your premise, just wanted to note that Yandle is a bad example. He was all set to attend college, but changed his mind very late to play in the QMJHL at age 19. It's also the reason he was drafted in 2005 instead of 2004. Back then 19 year old players were automatically eligible for the draft but 18 year old players had to declare for the draft. Yandle didn't declare in 2004 because doing so would have voided his NCAA eligibility.
The NCAA would drop that rule shortly afterward and the 2005 CBA changed the draft to all 18 year old players being automatically eligible.
That's if they're good enough, more likely the case is CHL players that jump over to the NCAA if they eventually come to that consensus will be mid-tier players going to programmes like LIU, Union, Robert Morris, Minn. State, etc. The top tier players that programmes like Denver, BC, and Big Ten want will probably stay in the CHL since they're already getting top minutes.
E: And has the NCAA even approved any of this sponsorship money to pay its athletes? I haven't seen any sources claiming this to be true?
Last edited:
It's been put into law by some states, so it's it's kinda "for sure" but the NCAA still is ironing out the details. So the news says.
I agree, If those mid-low ranking teams suddenly compete with the top end teams, that's a huge change. Schools with be ALL OVER that if you told those lower end schools they could easily compete for frozen four/championship etc... there's too much money and ego not to do that.
Fair enough. I don't remember when the "opt in" rule was stricken (you could very easily be correct with the time line,) but I mentioned Yandle simply because I remember he was denied by clearinghouse. He was hoping to play with his brother at UNH, but that pesky "academic" part of college hockey got in the way.
There are rumblings, but those are about likeness rights, not having players go from pro hockey to college hockey. Big difference.
mouser
Business of Hockey
NCAA eliminated the age 18 opt-in disqualifying a player in the fall of 2004 (after the summer 2004 draft) and the NHL formally removed the age 18 opt-in with the new 2005 CBA and 2005 draft.
I will confess I don’t know exactly why Yandle choose to play in the QMJHL instead of New Hampshire in 2005-06, nor what might have happened with the NCAA clearinghouse? Was Yandle denied for academic reasons, or because he had signed a QMJHL deal before he was scheduled to attend UNH in 05-06?
old thread discussing the 18 year old NCAA opt-in change:
NCAA players NHL draft eligibility - when did the rules change?
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,314
- 20,654
The CHL isn’t really pro hockey. It’s kind is silly those kids, who want to and are good enough, shouldn’t get to play on top US college teams when their CHL careers are done. Lots and lots of players go to US colleges from the provincial junior leagues.
I remember it was some time around then and the NCAA did some bizarre half-way removal before removing it outright. Thanks for the clarification.
Without getting into too many specifics for a variety of reasons, his clearinghouse issues were 100% academic. He was given the thumbs-down by UNH, so arch-rival Maine had recruited him before the NCAA declared him a non-qualifier. After that, he went to the Q.
No, but when the league consists of many players who are signed to NHL contracts, that would be considered a professional league. It's happened with players coming over from Europe as well.
It is, and there are plenty of NCAA rules that are sillier than that. But if you play in a league that provides financial compensation to players and allows them to play after signing NHL contracts, it's hard to argue that you don't play in a "professional" league.
I do want to clarify this: I am not cheerleading for the NCAA nor am I saying that they don't have some rules that are beyond silly, but I'm just explaining their reasoning.
Fatass
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 25,314
- 20,654
Those are very good points. Maybe the guys who have signed with their NHL teams move on (from the CHL) to their pro careers, while those who are not signed can continue hockey in US college? Doesn’t that seem more fair to the kids?
I would very much support looser restrictions on former CHL players to become eligible for NCAA competition. Off the top of my bleary-eyed head: Obviously, no players who signed NHL contracts. Perhaps one year suspension (attend classes, allowed to practice, but not play) plus loss of one season of eligibility for players who did not play in the CHL the season after high school graduation.
The CHL is a junior league for student athletes. It is not a professional league.
Players signed to NHL, AHL, KHL etc contracts are pros, no doubt, and any NCAA ineligibility could easily flow from that alone without reference to participation in a junior league.
Most junior and college players never make it to the NHL. It would be good to allow junior players to migrate to the NCAA if they have not yet signed a pro contract. They could then earn a scholarship and a university degree that would be much more valuable for most players than a minor-league pro career.
The real stars would probably continue along the same path -- college or junior -- that they might have otherwise chosen.
One size does not fit all.
Players signed to NHL, AHL, KHL etc contracts are pros, no doubt, and any NCAA ineligibility could easily flow from that alone without reference to participation in a junior league.
Most junior and college players never make it to the NHL. It would be good to allow junior players to migrate to the NCAA if they have not yet signed a pro contract. They could then earn a scholarship and a university degree that would be much more valuable for most players than a minor-league pro career.
The real stars would probably continue along the same path -- college or junior -- that they might have otherwise chosen.
One size does not fit all.
I don't follow your reasoning for periods of ineligibility.
I don't see any reason for that.
Bjorn Le
Hobocop
Well the good players in the CHL who would be candidates for D1 NCAA scholarships post-CHL were likely also good enough to get education packages from their CHL team for Canadian university. Many would have already started to take classes at a local uni before their CHL career finished. All this would do is give those players another showcase to get a pro contract after the NCAA.
I honestly don’t see why this makes business sense for NCAA. It would be an absolutely massive power creep; an arms race for undrafted top CHL talent and lower-tier drafted players who don’t want to go to a pro league yet.
The level of hockey gets better with the influx of experienced kids but does that actually make your brand better? I’m not sure it does. I think it also will significantly disrupt American junior leagues like the USHL and US high school, as top tier players can choose the CHL without fearing eligibility issues. A player like Jack Eichel might have gone to the CHL instead of the NCAA as well, stripping the NCAA of at least some of their top tier draft-eligible talent.
The CHL and young players would benefit, surely, but it’s a huge risk for the NCAA. As stupid as it is that they consider CHL pros, to protect their brand they should not allow this.
^ If it's good for the players then I'm for it.
A good friend of mine, long since retired and now deceased, played college hockey on a scholarship for Cornell not long before Ken Dryden's era. He earned a degree in business and built a highly successful career in marketing and advertising off his education, which was the real value of his hockey experience.
Most junior and college players never make it to the NHL. If they are good enough to earn a full hockey scholarship then I don't see why 16-19 year-old junior players still attending high school should be disqualified from that.
Canadian universities don't offer full athletic scholarships in the same way as American colleges. Junior hockey is available to Canadian and American players alike, and I think it would be good for NCAA competition to be available to any Juniors who have not yet signed a pro contract.
The present restrictions are bafflegab that have nothing to with the best interests of the players.
A good friend of mine, long since retired and now deceased, played college hockey on a scholarship for Cornell not long before Ken Dryden's era. He earned a degree in business and built a highly successful career in marketing and advertising off his education, which was the real value of his hockey experience.
Most junior and college players never make it to the NHL. If they are good enough to earn a full hockey scholarship then I don't see why 16-19 year-old junior players still attending high school should be disqualified from that.
Canadian universities don't offer full athletic scholarships in the same way as American colleges. Junior hockey is available to Canadian and American players alike, and I think it would be good for NCAA competition to be available to any Juniors who have not yet signed a pro contract.
The present restrictions are bafflegab that have nothing to with the best interests of the players.
Good point. Instead of only giving them three years of eligibility to play NCAA hockey, it would make more sense to say "You played in the CHL and didn't make it, but that's a professional league, so you made your bed, now lie in it. Welcome to life after hockey." After all, isn't higher education supposed to be a passage into adulthood, which includes learning harsh lessons?
Being serious: As far as a penalty, this would be a lot lighter than the way it currently is. I'd be willing to bet that more than a handful of players would go for it.
So, what you're saying is that the CHL is an amateur league that is open to professionals? In the eyes of the NCAA, that makes it a professional league.
Isn't that the point of the education package that is dangled in front of the players by CHL teams? Those can be used at US colleges. Obviously, they can't play for the team, but I don't see much difference between the CHL education package and an NCAA scholarship. Given that very few players are on full-rides (4 years,) and that, as you say, most junior and college players never make it to the NHL," I don't see how a front-loaded two year CHL education package differs from a back-loaded two years of NCAA scholarship.
mouser
Business of Hockey
How much scholarship money are the CHL teams paying? Is there a fixed amount every CHL team is obligated to, or does it vary by league or team?
I’m curious for example if a 4 year CHL education package would cover the full four years of tuition at say Michigan or Boston U?
Part of the reason the NCAA considers the CHL a professional league is because there are players in the league who have signed professional contracts. The contracts are much more the reason for the ban on CHL players than the stipend. The NCAA has stated even without the stipend CHL players would still be ineligible
If a player takes their CHL education package and goes to a US school they could still end up spending thousands of dollars on their education
If a player gets a partial scholarship to play NCAA they could still be paying thousands of dollars on their education
If a player goes to juniors and earns an education package than when they are ready to go to school gets a partial scholarship to play hockey, they can continue to play hockey against their peers at the high skill level outside of a professional league while earning an education and needing substantially less of their own money
The % of NCAA players who earn a degree is close to 90% where the number of junior players that earn a degree is substantially lower than that
Obviously at this point its all hypothetical, but its reasonable to assume a player would be able to do this
If a player takes their CHL education package and goes to a US school they could still end up spending thousands of dollars on their education
If a player gets a partial scholarship to play NCAA they could still be paying thousands of dollars on their education
If a player goes to juniors and earns an education package than when they are ready to go to school gets a partial scholarship to play hockey, they can continue to play hockey against their peers at the high skill level outside of a professional league while earning an education and needing substantially less of their own money
The % of NCAA players who earn a degree is close to 90% where the number of junior players that earn a degree is substantially lower than that
Obviously at this point its all hypothetical, but its reasonable to assume a player would be able to do this
Last edited:
I still don't follow the reasoning of wanting to penalize teenagers for playing junior hockey. They aren't pros, and its not a disciplinary issue.
I dont follow that reasoning either.
The NCAA allows amateur collegiate golfers to play in professional tournaments such as the US Open, and other events where prize money is offered, as long as they enter as an amateur and renounce any right to prizes, while still keeping NCAA eligibility as an amateur athlete.
An NCAA-eligible golfer can play in tournaments like the US open with Tiger Woods -- tournaments that are dominated by the biggest money-winning pros -- without losing amateur status.
Why should amateur hockey players lose NCAA status for playing with other young players signed to professional contracts who, by the way, are not being paid under those contracts while they are still playing junior hockey?
There's an unfair inconsistency in that kind of rule.
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
2024-25 Jack Adams Award finalists: Scott Arniel, Spencer Carbery, Martin St. Louis | Winner: Spencer Carbery (4 Viewers)- Latest: Random schmoe
-
-
Series Talk: SCF: Florida Panthers vs Edmonton Oilers (Series tied 1-1) (95 Viewers)
- Latest: Duder54
-
-
