NCAA to allow CHL players to play hockey?
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
jigglysquishy
Registered User
There's going to be at least one team that will end up in the WHL. But a more humble league similar to a wealthier SJHL is the most likely future.
I could see a second island team being attractive just with travel.
I could see a second island team being attractive just with travel.
LadyStanley
Registered User
jetsmooseice
Up Yours Robison
- Feb 20, 2020
- 1,954
- 2,537
Who would end up in the WHL other than Penticton? Penticton is the only place in the BCHL that arguably has all the ingredients making them pretty much a slam dunk... good market size, big modern building, good track record, not infringing on another market.
Every place else is missing at least one piece. Chilliwack is very close to Langley, is a second Lower Mainland team going to be allowed to fly? Cranbrook has the building, but it is on the smaller size and the WHL has struggled there in the past. Brooks, Vernon and Nanaimo don't have sufficient buildings - if they get WHL teams, then bring back the Winnipeg ICE with an apology from the league.
The WHL could probably stand to add a couple of teams given that the talent pool will expand with the NCAA's changes, but they aren't adding an entire division. At least not yet.
MeHateHe
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2006
- 2,724
- 3,119
Penticton is too close to Kelowna; again, they will have too much crossover on corporate sponsors and Kelowna's owner is strong enough to have a virtual - if not literal - veto on another team in the south Okanagan. There never zero chance of anything (outside of the Leafs winning a second round) but the likelihood of Penticton coming to the WHL is very low.
Chilliwack remains a viable option. Its proximity to Langley is less of a barrier than Penticton's proximity to Kelowna, because there isn't the same interconnectedness between the two cities. Chilliwack sees itself as separate from Vancouver entirely, where as Langley, while still in the valley, is more drawn to the rest of the lower mainland. Nanaimo remains an option if they can find someone willing to risk their own money on a rink. Frank Crane is too small (still 50% bigger than that Winnipeg rink), although one suspects the league would gladly bend their rules on a promise of that a new rink was coming, especially if they could drive a knife into the BCHL in the process - and eliminating the Clippers franchise would sting the Junior A league.
jetsmooseice
Up Yours Robison
- Feb 20, 2020
- 1,954
- 2,537
I suppose the strongest argument for Penticton is the Vees' existence as a thriving entity... they already have sponsors, ticket buyers and an overall fanbase. That more or less proves their viability, it would not be a huge step up from where they are now to the WHL.
I guess Chilliwack could work but it seems harder for junior hockey to break through in urban areas which tend to have much more crowded sports and entertainment markets. The Giants don't really have it easy, adding another team to the mix could be a recipe for trouble, especially when you consider that the Giants, Abbotsford Canucks and Chilliwack would be competing for basically much of the same fanbase.
Nanaimo would be in the same situation that Winnipeg was in... a desirable market without a proper junior arena. I guess the big difference is that the ICE couldn't really get anyone to build them an arena because they were so far down the sports pecking order here. But it's easy to imagine Nanaimo building a new arena as a major civic amenity that the WHL could use. I wonder if the WHL would be prepared to let a team play at Frank Crane for several years until that happens, though.
MeHateHe
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2006
- 2,724
- 3,119
It isn't that Penticton couldn't support the team. It's that Bruce Holland, who owns the Rockets, is also the WHL board chair, and he would never let someone come in and carve out something from what he sees as his territory.
I meant to add in that Chiefs have a stranglehold on the market, and the building. I don't think they're terribly interested in another foray in the WHL.
Frank Crane is a decent rink that seats about 2,300, just a touch smaller than Prince Albert's barn, but Nanaimo could absolutely support a larger facility, one that could attract shows (aside from hockey). Keep in mind that the population from Duncan to the north end of the island - which would be the market for arena concerts and other shows - is in the range of 400,000, so while that might not be where hockey fans come from, it would certainly factor into the economics of building an events facility that includes a hockey arena. Voters resoundingly rejected a referendum on a new arena, so any new building will have to be built with private money. But if the WHL Clippers or Islanders or whatever could survive a couple of years in Frank Crane while someone was rounding up private funding for a new facility, it could turn into a real draw for the mid- and north-Island.
jetsmooseice
Up Yours Robison
- Feb 20, 2020
- 1,954
- 2,537
Takuto Maruki
Ideal and the real
As someone who has lived in the GVRD, I doubt that the Giants, Abby Canucks and Chilliwack WHL team would be fighting *that* much for space if it came to fruition. Langley is rapidly growing (especially the area around the LEC, as my friend would attest) and for most people, Abbotsford is simply a far flung place that's better served driven through on the way to Cultus Lake, or towards the interior. Even with the big club downtown, most people in Surrey, Richmond, Delta, etc. aren't at all making the trip down Highway 1 to watch Abby Canucks hockey, and that's being generous. The same can be said for Chilliwack, tbh.
Yeah, I feel like this is the best case scenario for Nanaimo as a WHL expansion team, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's what the WHL ultimately demands for any team to begin to prevent another Winnipeg fiasco.
LadyStanley
Registered User
oldunclehue
Registered User
- Jun 16, 2010
- 1,255
- 1,372
After a few weeks of this, been talking to quite a few of those involved in the Junior A landscape in the prairies. Some major cause for concern but lots of unknowns:
- Staff/Managers are of the belief that MJHL/SJHL/AJHL will have to do a MAJOR change on wha their leagues will be to survive.
- Leagues will have to as a whole lower the average age of teams to 16-17-18
- Try and develop some of the better younger players and advance them to WHL teams
- Otherwise they will simply turn in to Junior B leagues with players not having any chance at advancement.
- NCAA teams are already trying to align themselves with CHL teams as feeders. (NCAA has 10 kids committed to scholarships, now WHL/OHL/QMJHL teams will be asked to give roster spots to those kids for development)
- Top 6 Junior A players from most teams will go to CHL while bottom 6 players from CHL teams will be bumped down to Junior A
- Junior A hockey will need to find a new selling point to survive and only way to do so is to sell it as a development league.
- U18AAA leagues will be decimated and trickle down affect to other leagues.
Many Junior A teams will end up folding as its hard to pay bills with costs going up and if the on ice product suffers then sponsors and fans won't support as much.
Going to be a challenging decade for Junior A leagues in Canada, likely the NAHL as well.
USHL/BCHL and CHL will be the popular routes and only options for lots of players moving forward.
- Staff/Managers are of the belief that MJHL/SJHL/AJHL will have to do a MAJOR change on wha their leagues will be to survive.
- Leagues will have to as a whole lower the average age of teams to 16-17-18
- Try and develop some of the better younger players and advance them to WHL teams
- Otherwise they will simply turn in to Junior B leagues with players not having any chance at advancement.
- NCAA teams are already trying to align themselves with CHL teams as feeders. (NCAA has 10 kids committed to scholarships, now WHL/OHL/QMJHL teams will be asked to give roster spots to those kids for development)
- Top 6 Junior A players from most teams will go to CHL while bottom 6 players from CHL teams will be bumped down to Junior A
- Junior A hockey will need to find a new selling point to survive and only way to do so is to sell it as a development league.
- U18AAA leagues will be decimated and trickle down affect to other leagues.
Many Junior A teams will end up folding as its hard to pay bills with costs going up and if the on ice product suffers then sponsors and fans won't support as much.
Going to be a challenging decade for Junior A leagues in Canada, likely the NAHL as well.
USHL/BCHL and CHL will be the popular routes and only options for lots of players moving forward.
Yes, the implication for those downstream will be profound. In the U.S., there almost seems to be a sense of paralysis among the tier II and below Junior leagues. They really do not know how this will shake out, but they know the impact on them will be mostly negative.
Many in the USHL are somewhat hopeful that some type of affiliation can be reached with the CHL.
Those I know that have connections within the CHL are adamant that the CHL will not want to become a feeder league to the NCAA like the USHL and I have been told that certain CHL(OHL) franchises were approached by a very prominent NCAA program to work out a development agreement to hold players until 18 or 19 before sending them off to college. Those clubs basically told the NCAA school to go and pound sand.
The CHL seems to believe that those who go on to play college will only be those who have exhausted their junior eligibility.
We will see how this all plays out and the next CBA will give us clear indications as to which way this goes.
Last edited:
No offense, but BCHL has no selling points at all if it is trying to compare to the USHL and CHL.
Takuto Maruki
Ideal and the real
It's funny how once upon a time, the junior hockey system within Canada was essentially farm teams for the development of teenagers by NHL teams, and with this, there's a circular return to sponsorships and major junior farm teams, except focused on putting kids towards D1 hockey.
Truthfully, that idea seems predicated on exponential growth of D1 hockey, especially in the south and west, that is completely out of line with what is actually happening in educational institution offices across the US, and that's cutting non-revenue or revenue losing sports in order to feed the beast of CFB and CBB to a lesser extent, and trying to justify conference TV revenue with hare-brained realignment ideas.
No doubt. When the issue of CHL eligibility was first presented last winter, I immediately thought that this was going to be a boon for NCAA hockey. It was going to place D-1 at the top of the amateur development pyramid and greatly expand the talent pool to such an extent that college programs that were mulling adding hockey would now jump headlong into the vast player pool at their disposal. Then BadgerBruce informed me of the peculiarities of CHL contracts that would prevent CHL players from simply jumping into the D-1 ranks at 18 or 19 and my bean counter friends assured me that the new talent pool would have
almost zero bearing on college hockey expansion.
Key in on what Hefferan is saying at the end of the interview. This is what the NHL is laser focused on right now. The demographics are not looking good and the European style soccer model of development may well become a reality.
Takuto Maruki
Ideal and the real
I feel like there's a real disconnect between the Canadian view of college sports, and the American one, and it comes out in this topic, and subsequently with regards to NIL. Considering how relatively few Canadians have any sort of experience with high level NCAA sports (again, CFB and CBB) they have no idea on how NIL works (but then again, it's such a wild west at the moment that nobody really does) and believe it to be an effective free agency. Then they get told that most foreign students are by definition unable to benefit from it (as Zach Edey proved at Purdue) and yet...that viewpoint of NIL being free agency continues to cycle.
Funny then that dichotomy flips around in that scenario - likely European clubs being the main pipeline of young players being signed by vampiric professional clubs in North America.
This surprised me...a lot! From everything I heard, the USHL is trying its absolute best at becoming the 4th league under the CHL umbrella. The CHL hasn't been all that receptive to the idea, however. Now this explains as to why they wouldn't be. It appears that they may simply pick USHL franchises off team by team.
I have no idea as to how either Youngstown or Muskegon would be able to afford the expenses associated with playing in the OHL, as neither franchise draws all that well....but who knows???
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 193,229
- 43,629
Plus, what's going to be the expenses of everyone trying to get to/from Youngstown? Muskegon ain't that close either. That said, some of those trips would be shorter than those teams see in the USHL.
What's the saying in corporate speak? One person asks a question that 10 others are thinking?
The travel wouldn't be all that much of an issue. After all Youngstown to Green Bay is further than Youngstown to Sudbury Ontario. I'm thinking the extra costs associated with larger coaching staffs/scouts, player stipends and the CHL scholarship packages. How would either Youngstown or Muskegon afford that??
Also, is the Trinity Health Arena large enough for an OHL franchise?
This really only effects maybe 2-4 players per team per year, aging out as a 3-4 line players who are low draft picks, or aren't draft picks and want another X years of visibility.
No CHL teams is looking at it as development for D1, because when that player now plays in the CHL from 16-19 etc.. if there a top round pick, there going to the NHL/AHL anyway.
NCAA will never see that player anyway. I suspect the CHL will push the NHL/AHL to change the 19 year old rule, for. a guy like Zane Parekh for example this year
CHL gets better, top Americans come at 16, guys like Dayne Beuker will go back to CHL from USNTDP.
NCAA gets WAYYY Deeper, it can potentially deepen rosters across the whole D1 spectrum, now teams that aren't ND Denver, BU, BC, etc.. have a chance to compete. Makes the depth of the league much stronger.
Player wise. adds another possibly 4 years to an NHL visible window for guys who don't get a contract/AHL spot or would otherwise be in the ECHL at the pro level.
USPORT/JUNIOR A leagues shake out the 3-4 player difference, regionally this may have a substantial effect, wouldn't really have an effect in western Canada or Ontario for example. There's more aging out major junior and junior a players, then there are USport roster spots.
Guy like Quinton Ong (Yale last 3 years), Can't even get playing time at the U of S this year. He's on the roster, but hasn't played yet.
Like another poster said, you would see more 15 years olds on MAAA rosters and more 16/17 year olds on junior A rosters, which IMO is a good thing. A lot of this depends on physical maturity of the kid. I've noticed this is exactly what's already been happening.
I've even seen 19 year olds in USport, which is RARE. hasn't happened probably since the creation of the CHL.
No CHL teams is looking at it as development for D1, because when that player now plays in the CHL from 16-19 etc.. if there a top round pick, there going to the NHL/AHL anyway.
NCAA will never see that player anyway. I suspect the CHL will push the NHL/AHL to change the 19 year old rule, for. a guy like Zane Parekh for example this year
CHL gets better, top Americans come at 16, guys like Dayne Beuker will go back to CHL from USNTDP.
NCAA gets WAYYY Deeper, it can potentially deepen rosters across the whole D1 spectrum, now teams that aren't ND Denver, BU, BC, etc.. have a chance to compete. Makes the depth of the league much stronger.
Player wise. adds another possibly 4 years to an NHL visible window for guys who don't get a contract/AHL spot or would otherwise be in the ECHL at the pro level.
USPORT/JUNIOR A leagues shake out the 3-4 player difference, regionally this may have a substantial effect, wouldn't really have an effect in western Canada or Ontario for example. There's more aging out major junior and junior a players, then there are USport roster spots.
Guy like Quinton Ong (Yale last 3 years), Can't even get playing time at the U of S this year. He's on the roster, but hasn't played yet.
Like another poster said, you would see more 15 years olds on MAAA rosters and more 16/17 year olds on junior A rosters, which IMO is a good thing. A lot of this depends on physical maturity of the kid. I've noticed this is exactly what's already been happening.
I've even seen 19 year olds in USport, which is RARE. hasn't happened probably since the creation of the CHL.
Last edited:
USHL/BCHL wouldn't even exist, they're already jumping ship.
Bonk
Registered User
Yeah, does the CHL hold all of the cards now over those two leagues? I'm hoping the USHL becomes a fourth CHL arm.
I'm happy Youngstown has thrived but geographically it hasn't made sense for a long time.
I'm still very surprised by this, I honestly thought that the USHL, as a whole entity, would be moving heaven and earth in attempt to join the CHL. I knew that the CHL would hold the advantage in negotiations over territorial rights but felt that adding the USHL under the CHL umbrella would give the CHL a lot of leverage as to where players would develop after their draft year (meaning not the NCAA) and the USHL would be able to truly attract all the best American born players and eventually expand both south and west.
Now it appears that the OHL will simply poach a few of the better USHL teams (Youngstown, Muskegon, Chicago?)
Bonk
Registered User
I don't have nearly the expertise many on this board have on the subject, but yeah, it appears the USHL is behind the curve here.
Maybe they think they can survive because they believe Americans will want to play for U.S. teams and Canadian kids will want to remain in Canada? That's all I can come up with.
I've been to a number of the USHL rinks including Dubuque, Cedar Rapids and Lincoln, and they have great fanbases and tons of future NHLers develop in the USHL each year. I'd hate to see that eliminated, especially since we're starting to see D-1 players born in Nebraska and Iowa.
Last edited:
oldunclehue
Registered User
- Jun 16, 2010
- 1,255
- 1,372
I think the Junior A issue now will be recruiting/retention. I am tied in with a club and know almost every kid on the roster has a goal of getting to NCAA at some level. Agents and Advisors will now push for those players to get to the CHL level as thats the route to getting an NCAA scholarship now. Will it only affect 3-4 players off each Junior A team....likely you are right there. But the kids that dont have a shot at the CHL ranks, and knowing full well they will have a much smaller or almost no chance at an NCAA scholarship playing in Junior A leagues will just decide to get on with their lives and go to university/college instead.
Junior A is not cheap for players at all anymore, decades ago players got paid to play and provided with everything they needed throughout the year. Now with Player Development Fees, league fees and some teams charging billet/transportation fees most players are paying $3000-$10,000 a year to play and that doesn't include any additional expenses such as vehicles, spending money, trips home etc. So as a parent, I won't be spending thousands of dollars for a kid whos not CHL bound to play a few years and end up in college/university a few years behind their friends. That money can go towards their education....not hockey for fun.
Also you have to think along the lines of scouts/coaches from the NCAA, where are they going to look to find players. If you can now scout/recruit from the best league in North America, which also includes going to bigger cities, nicer places and have less travel/better accommodations, are you going to travel to Nipiwin Sask for a less talented league in hopes of finding a gem, or are you going to go to do a BC swing and hit Kelowna, Vancouver, Lethbridge and Calgary? I know NCAA coaches who's gone on recruiting trips, they very much already avoid going to prairies as much as they can because the product isn't as good as well as who wants to spend a week in a car going from small town to small town.
I foresee several Junior A clubs closing up shop once all this hits, many of the community owned teams struggle to make ends meet already, and if the on ice product diminishes....it will be harder.
Also....top end talent in the CHL will still go the pro route, but how many of the CHL top end talent walk right on to a NHL/AHL team at 20 years old. Not as many as we want to believe, if your 5th round draft pick isn't quite ready for the pros yet, most NHL clubs will say....hey we can get you on Michigan for a couple years. Then we can re-assess after some more development.
