NCAA / CHL Lawsuit

[MiamiHockeyII]

That's a relatively recent phenomenon. Junior A leagues were more a part of the ladder in days past. Junior C used to lead to Junior B which used to lead to Junior A which led to major junior. It was a bit different because you'd have 14-year-olds showing up to try out and Junior B and C camps, and that's thankfully not a thing anymore. But there are going to be players looking for places to play. This doesn't change the numbers of players, and Junior A teams will still be using their numbers of graduated players as marketing pitches to both fans and prospective players, so they might talk more about how many of their players moved along to major junior and then to NHL teams.

I'd suspect Junior A will get a lot younger - and maybe they get out of the 20-year-old business entirely. At the end of the day, this looks like a reset to a more streamlined and hierarchical development system.

Perhaps your definition of recent differs from mine, but it's been more than 25 years since that Jr C to Jr B to Jr A pathway existed, wherever it even did. Guys I recruited in the early 2000s went Midget AAA (18U, 16U) to Jr A, with some having a Jr B cup of coffee enroute.

 

[MeHateHe]

Perhaps your definition of recent differs from mine, but it's been more than 25 years since that Jr C to Jr B to Jr A pathway existed, wherever it even did. Guys I recruited in the early 2000s went Midget AAA (18U, 16U) to Jr A, with some having a Jr B cup of coffee enroute.

Yeah, I'm old and it's rude to point that out.

 

[AUS Fan]

In my opinion he is head and shoulders above both, but I might not the most neutral party.

To try to get away from this specific player and back to the overall topic of this thread, my point is that I think the biggest impacts of this will be on (the few) graduating American CHLers, with the rest generally coming out in the wash.

And at the end of the day I'm a DAL fan... so none of this will impact how much we perpetually suck in the slightest.

I used to be with the DAL team when Darrel was there. After he was "fired", I wandered the desert for 40 years until I found SMU. I still go to all the DAL games.

I do agree with your premise regarding the impact of this "merger".

Glad to see a DAL person on here. I hope you can be a regular.

 

[dm8895]

I used to be with the DAL team when Darrel was there. After he was "fired", I wandered the desert for 40 years until I found SMU. I still go to all the DAL games.

I do agree with your premise regarding the impact of this "merger".

Glad to see a DAL person on here. I hope you can be a regular.

You mean not everyone wants to watch people from Fredericton debate UNB’s 13th forward ?

 

[Campy]

Forget hockey, kids, lawyerin's where your fortunes is.

Of all the posts in this thread, this is still the only one that holds water

 

[EH7]

I used to be with the DAL team when Darrel was there. After he was "fired", I wandered the desert for 40 years until I found SMU. I still go to all the DAL games.

I do agree with your premise regarding the impact of this "merger".

Glad to see a DAL person on here. I hope you can be a regular.

Thanks for the warm welcome. I've been a very regular lurker of the AUS threads here but have never had too much to contribute over the years...

I rarely missed any home games in my time as a student spanning two degrees back in the early 2000s. That all changed when they tore down Memorial Arena in 2012 - I've kept loose tabs on the team from afar since then but swore I would never watch a home game that wasn't played on campus based on principle. Obviously, that will shortly change and I'm looking forward to getting back into it.

 

[EvilDead]

I wonder if the wave of players that could come over the northern border from the Major Juniors could result in a rapid expansion in the number of D1 programs. I mean...I would have to think that, with a deeper talent pool, it would open the door for many smaller universities or other colleges that had been non committal into finally adding a D1 Hockey program.

 

[MiamiHockeyII]

I wonder if the wave of players that could come over the northern border from the Major Juniors could result in a rapid expansion in the number of D1 programs. I mean...I would have to think that, with a deeper talent pool, it would open the door for many smaller universities or other colleges that had been non committal into finally adding a D1 Hockey program.

Wave?

I don't think this will have a positive effect on NCAA Div I hockey. In fact, I think in the long run we'll see a contraction of DI men's hockey because Major Junior will return to its predominant position as the NHL pipeline.

Two reasons:

1) The NCAA's appeal for top prospects (versus the CHL) is that they offer the opportunity to develop over a longer period of time while also providing an education. Now, top prospects will be better off going to the CHL while still retaining the NCAA option. The Macklin Celebrinis and Jack Eichels will play in the CHL moving forward.

2) You need a facility or ~$50M to build it, and then >$2M / year to run the program with scholarships. There are not many schools with that type of support.

You also have the issue of Title IX, where for every male athlete scholarship you need a female athlete scholarship. So, double the yearly costs.

All this with the likelihood of not getting the top prospects through your program?

 

[EH7]

You also have the issue of Title IX, where for every male athlete scholarship you need a female athlete scholarship. So, double the yearly costs.

One would hope that the growth of the PWHL and women's hockey as a whole will balance this out in the long term?

 

[Corso]

Wave?

I don't think this will have a positive effect on NCAA Div I hockey. In fact, I think in the long run we'll see a contraction of DI men's hockey because Major Junior will return to its predominant position as the NHL pipeline.

Two reasons:

1) The NCAA's appeal for top prospects (versus the CHL) is that they offer the opportunity to develop over a longer period of time while also providing an education. Now, top prospects will be better off going to the CHL while still retaining the NCAA option. The Macklin Celebrinis and Jack Eichels will play in the CHL moving forward.

2) You need a facility or ~$50M to build it, and then >$2M / year to run the program with scholarships. There are not many schools with that type of support.

You also have the issue of Title IX, where for every male athlete scholarship you need a female athlete scholarship. So, double the yearly costs.

All this with the likelihood of not getting the top prospects through your program?

Another factor to consider is the recent House settlement that provides revenue sharing to athletes. The vast amount of money that was once swishing around from football (and lesser extent basketball) revenue will soon be redirected towards the players and the ever-increasing NIL arms race currently happening in the FBS. Less and less money will be available for the non-revenue sports.