MeHateHe
Registered User
- Dec 24, 2006
- 2,724
- 3,119
NCAA to allow CHL players to play hockey?
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,930
- 3,964
This is probably outdated as the article is from 2017, but by the CHLs own admission on their own site (citing their research in response to a litigation suit, sadly attached file links with research and sources seem to be lost):
"KMPG found that if you removed the two most profitable franchises as outliers, the remaining 40 OHL and WHL clubs lose, on average, $75,000"
&
"The majority of our member clubs either break even or lose money on an annual basis"
Canadian Hockey League responds to Court Order - Tri-City Americans
In response to a recent Court Order, the Ontario Hockey League (OHL) and Western Hockey League (WHL) produced financial records for all 42 OHL and WHL member Clubs.
staging.chl.ca
Since that time, weve faced a global pandemic and a bunch of other crazy shit that absolutely wrecked the international economy everywhere and thats before even bringing up the rises in costs of facilitating ice hockey. Equipment, facilities, utility bills and ice time have all increased in costs and are only getting more expensive.
Last edited:
Voight
#winning
The NHL actively subsidizes all 3 CHL leagues and their teams with millions of dollars annually, Muskegon and Youngstown will recieve those payments under the CHL umbrella. The vast majority of CHL teams lose hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars annually and are not profitable, this isnt an issue unique to either of those 2 teams.
McDavids Erie Otters lost nearly $1mil the year after he was drafted, and even filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Pennsylvania during his draft year in 2015: Owner: Otters lost $831K last season
Erie Otters' ex-owner to get nearly $1.5 million from sale
The former owner of the Erie Otters will get a hefty sum from the sale of the team in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Erie. \n Sherry Bassin, who sold the Ontario Hockey League franchise on July 17, is expec…www.goerie.com
Last figure I heard was a 15 million dollar transfer fee to the CHL. That equates to about 250K a team; enough to cover the salary of some of your coaching staff. I would imagine that broadcast rights are not worth all that much (no real idea, I will ask those who have a more intimate knowledge of the financials of the league). The lion share of revenue comes from the gate and local sponsorship. The vast majority of teams most likely just break even on their operating budget of 2.5 to 3 million a year. USHL operating budgets are probably 1 to 1.5 million dollars less, so you would have to ask how either Muskegon or Youngstown could afford the extra expense when their gate revenues are much lower than your typical OHL franchise. Youngstown is currently averaging 1037 fans a game through four games played while Muskegon barely averaged over 2000 a game last season. The Otters are averaging over 3300 a game so far this season, and yet are probably still just breaking even. The transfer money from the NHL and broadcast/media rights would simply not be enough to keep Muskegon and especially Youngstown viable.
Beyond players having an option to continue their playing careers at a high level, that's possibly the most interesting part of this whole thing for me.
I would assume that the rules would change for players taken in the CHL so that they somewhat mirror the rules for players taken in the USHL / BCHL.
Select a player in the CHL, you have two years to sign him to an ELC. If the player chooses to play in the NCAA, the window that a team can keep his right is extended by four years.
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,930
- 3,964
The majority of CHL teams do not make money, I even linked three articles with one being the CHL themselves on their own website saying that the average annual loss for CHL clubs in the OHL & WHL are $75k~, and how Erie filed for bankruptcy during McDavids draft year and lost over $800k in the 2 years after. That was all in 2017 and it has undoubtedly gotten worse with the rising costs in ice hockey and a global economic recession that has weakened buying power everywhere. Not every team has the support that teams like Halfiax, QC, or London, or NHL owner/co-ownership like Calgary, Edmonton and Kamloops. Junior hockey is just not as lucrative as its made out to be by anyone. Without NHL subsidies the CHL as a whole doesnt function nor develop prospects the way its been doing for decades now.
Any CHL team relying solely on the NHL subsidy is not a viable market and will not survive over the long term, it just isn't enough money to keep a franchise solvent. Muskegon and most certainly Youngtown would not survive on what the NHL doles out and what they bring in through gate receipts. Both franchises would need a very deep pocketed ownership group that will able to absorb hundreds of thousands in losses per year in the hope that both attendance and corporate sponsorship would eventually increase.
Looks like its unlikely that rights would be extended by a further four years if they enter college after the two year CHL window.
BadgerBruce
Registered User
- Aug 8, 2013
- 1,632
- 2,412
You are of course free to believe KPMG and the CHL. Many do.
Myself, I’m partial to the reports produced on the WHL and the OHL by one of the top forensic accountants in North America, Ronald Smith.
https://www.charneylawyers.com/docs...ensics-report-ohl-final.pdf?sfvrsn=ad60a788_2
You might have a modified opinion after reviewing Smith’s analysis. You can also review his work on the WHL, available here:
https://www.charneylawyers.com/docs...-forensics-report-final.pdf?sfvrsn=a04c48b7_2
These days, mid-tier CHL teams like the Niagara IceDogs are selling for $20 million. Very few people are willing to put up that kind of big coin so they can lose money, though the big payoff is in the eventual resale of the franchise.
Not that any of this is particularly germane to this thread’s topic.
Boonk
Registered User
- Oct 10, 2017
- 2,930
- 3,964
All the CHL teams take NHL subsidies and outside of the really big profitable markets like London, Halifax, and QC most of them still lose money or struggle to break even annually. Its literally outlined right there on the CHL website I linked. Without NHL subsidies the CHL and ALL of the organizations within their umbrella leagues cease to exist and develop NHL prospects how they currently do. Its not a problem unique to Muskegon or Youngstown.
Also Youngstown co-owner Murry Gunty has a near $2bil networth, and Muskegon owner Peter Herms owns other rinks like The Armory in NJ and a USPHL team. Clearly both ownerships feel that they have the financial capital to make the jump to the OHL in that case.
LadyStanley
Registered User
Voight
#winning
Well no sh*t. Clearly his plan is to play in college so if they for whatever reason dont change the rules, hes not going to kill his eligibility.
As expected, the proposal passes and CHL players are now eligible beginning in August of 25
www.collegehockeyinsider.com
CHL players will be NCAA eligible beginning in 2025-26 after approval from D-I Council
The NCAA Division I Council voted on Thursday to adopt proposal No.
www.collegehockeyinsider.com
We've seen a few players leave the USHL and sign with their respective OHL teams already. How long until we have a big-name player sign?
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 31,527
- 20,602
The Arizona Coyotes sold for $1.2 billion. It'd be a mistake to view owning a sports team like owning shares of a publicly traded company. It's a prestige, highly exclusive asset.
WarriorofTime
Registered User
- Jul 3, 2010
- 31,527
- 20,602
I HAVE READ THAT CHL (MAJOR JUNIOR PLAYERS IN THE WHL, OHL AND QMJHL) ARE NOW ELGIBILE FOR NCAA HOCKEY?
Yes, players who compete in the CHL are now eligible for NCAA DI hockey only and may participate on NCAA DI teams beginning August 1, 2025. The rule has not been changed at the NCAA DIII level. Playing for a CHL team will jeopardize your NCAA Division III eligibility. CHL players are eligible for DI provided that they did not receive above actual and necessary expenses to compete in the CHL.
WHEN CAN NCAA TEAMS BEGIN RECRUITING CHL PLAYERS?
Recruiting can begin immediately. CHL players are eligible to appear on NCAA Division I rosters beginning August 1, 2025.
WHAT ARE CONSIDERED ACTUAL AND NECESSARY EXPENSES?
Actual and necessary expenses are any expenses necessary or required for your participation in practice or competition, including but not limited to: meals, lodging, transportation, apparel, equipment, supplies, coaching, ice time, medical treatment (health insurance), and entry fees.
Yes, players who compete in the CHL are now eligible for NCAA DI hockey only and may participate on NCAA DI teams beginning August 1, 2025. The rule has not been changed at the NCAA DIII level. Playing for a CHL team will jeopardize your NCAA Division III eligibility. CHL players are eligible for DI provided that they did not receive above actual and necessary expenses to compete in the CHL.
WHEN CAN NCAA TEAMS BEGIN RECRUITING CHL PLAYERS?
Recruiting can begin immediately. CHL players are eligible to appear on NCAA Division I rosters beginning August 1, 2025.
WHAT ARE CONSIDERED ACTUAL AND NECESSARY EXPENSES?
Actual and necessary expenses are any expenses necessary or required for your participation in practice or competition, including but not limited to: meals, lodging, transportation, apparel, equipment, supplies, coaching, ice time, medical treatment (health insurance), and entry fees.
LadyStanley
Registered User
No. The Coyotes sold for $1B.
(The Utah Hockey Club, a "new" franchise with players, hockey ops from the now defunct Arizona franchise -- no equipment -- was purchased for $1.2B. So you might count that $200m as a relocation fee.)
So now this just delineates the difference of being paid by professional teams, of which the CHL is no longer categorized?As expected, the proposal passes and CHL players are now eligible beginning in August of 25
CHL players will be NCAA eligible beginning in 2025-26 after approval from D-I Council
The NCAA Division I Council voted on Thursday to adopt proposal No.
red devil
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2004
- 12,981
- 21,565
Correct. As long as they do not sign an ELC with a NHL club or play for pay in any other professional league. They can also attend NHL development camps with expenses paid for (but not exceeding expenses to attend and participate). This will also allow European Juniors who are "loaned" to pro teams to maintain their NCAA eligibility; as long as they are not paid, beyond necessary expenses to play and have not signed a pro contract with the European club.
Last edited:
They could, though, if there was no signing bonus. Correct? They could simply eliminate it in lieu of higher salary and receive only expenses. They just can't play in any pre-season or regular season games. But that's an issue only because of the way current contracts between the NHL/NHLPA are structured. I could easily see some kind of workaround be established for players who wished to maintain their eligibility with the coming CBA negotiation.
They cannot sign an ELC, even if they forgo the signing bonuses, because the new rules ban even the intent of future pay for play.
Interesting.
So basically this just allows NCAA players to participate in Rookie/Main Training camps with NHL teams.
And, of course, those who do not have NHL/AHL/ECHL/Euro contracts to be able to play in the NCAA for their age 20/21 years, depending on how they measure NCAA eligibility in respect to number of years played in the CHL.
Last edited:
LadyStanley
Registered User
LadyStanley
Registered User
That could be huge for a player's development.
