The centralization model works well but I think until recently (when the USHL has started to become a lot stronger) players that didn’t make NTDP would slip through the cracks and didn’t have the chance to develop in a high level environment; I think this is one of the benefits of the CHL vs doing centralization in Canada is that players like Claude Giroux or Jamie Benn who would not have been in the top 25 players in their age group go to get and play in a high level environment that would not have been the case otherwise
There's also some logistical/practical issues with this approach for Canada as well:
1. Who would they play? Aside from international tournaments, the USA NTDP plays a mixture of USHL (similar age group) and NCAA (older and more developed players) through the year. If the Canadian team took the 50 best U17/18 players from the CHL, they could play more diluted (60 CHL teams vs. 16 USHL teams) CHL teams or maybe Canadian University teams. I'm not sure either would provide significant development advantages over their current situation.
2. Which "home" league would they play in? Unlike the USHL, the CHL is comprised of 3 different leagues. I suppose they could play games against all CHL teams, but that would be an awful lot of travel for young kids during the school year. For example, the distance between Victoria, B.C. and Sydney, Nova Scotia is nearly 5,000km.
3. The CHL is rooted in countless small markets across the country who already have difficulty attracting talent and, in some cases, fans. If you take the 50 best U-17/18 players from the "regular" teams, coupled with the players that are already NCAA bound, that could really harm some smaller markets who rely on their respective drafts to attract talent. Can you imagine how much worse the WHL would've been last year without Bedard, Benson, Cristall, Heidt, Yager, Howe, Catton, Gavin, Ritchie, etc.
I certainly don't think the above issues are insurmountable, but I do question the necessity of it. Canada has, and will continue to produce talent. I don't doubt that the NTDP has aided the development of the crop of current American superstars, but I am of the view that many of these recent players would've been stars without the NTDP as well. The USA has nearly 350 million people, hockey is growing in unconventional markets and, IMO, they will continue to produce great players with or without the NTDP. One could also argue the NTDP produced great players, which led to more American interest in hockey, which has led to the talent glut now.
This is not a knock on the program whatsoever; I just think there are too many good American hockey players these days for them to suddenly stagnate again if they disbanded the NTDP.