NCAA to allow CHL players to play hockey?

[KevFu]

What KevFu means, and that I also agree with, is that the ever-increasing arms race in football will crowd out revenue streams for the other sports.

Hockey will still exist of course but the amount of money the schools will direct towards it will be reduced as more and more revenue streams will flow towards football and, to a lesser extent basketball.

Correct. Kinda. I'd say "Budget" more than revenue streams.

The biggest deciding factors in "What sports schools sponsor" are the facilities cost and Title IX.

Everyone has to have men's and women's basketball. So ALMOST everyone has women's volleyball because they don't need their own venue, they can play in the basketball arena. One facility, three sports.

Hardly anyone has men's volleyball because if you have football, you've got to get like 85 scholarships and 110 roster spots to women on top of every sport that has a M/W equivalency. That's why a ton of P5 schools don't have men's soccer.

And in some sports, the same kids can double-count: Beach Volleyball is growing massively. The athletes are the same kids as the indoor volleyball team. They just compete in the spring in a pit of sand (a really cheap facility). So you pay for 15 kids to go to school and they count as 30 women for Title IX.

Running is the same way. Tons of schools have cross country (no facility needed) and those 10 kids are also the indoor track team and the outdoor track team; and they only do distance events in track. That's 10 kids counting as 30 athletes and zero facilities.


College Hockey's biggest challenge is that a hockey arena costs a lot more than any other non-football facility, and the only other team who could use it would be a women's hockey team.

It's hockey first, baseball second in terms of cutting programs.

 

[razor ray]

College Hockey's biggest challenge is that a hockey arena costs a lot more than any other non-football facility, and the only other team who could use it would be a women's hockey team.

It's hockey first, baseball second in terms of cutting programs.

Late to the party here and we might not be talking the same thing. I was involved with ASU going D1 in hockey and the arena was actually look at a money maker when it was built. Unlike most of the other sports facilities on campus, the ice arena and practice sheet are rented out constantly. Even with the Yotes not playing in Mullet, ASU hockey is a revenue sport for the Athletic Department and the arena is the only revenue sports facility on campus. Even ASU baseball, which is a great program, is a money loser as is the baseball facility.

 

[KevFu]

Late to the party here and we might not be talking the same thing. I was involved with ASU going D1 in hockey and the arena was actually look at a money maker when it was built. Unlike most of the other sports facilities on campus, the ice arena and practice sheet are rented out constantly. Even with the Yotes not playing in Mullet, ASU hockey is a revenue sport for the Athletic Department and the arena is the only revenue sports facility on campus. Even ASU baseball, which is a great program, is a money loser as is the baseball facility.

I mean, yes, great points although I'm also not sure we're quite talking about the same thing.

The revenue generation is obviously going to depend on who your program is.

Facilities are going to vary at each school based on how old other facilities are. In ASU's case, the basketball arena (which I knew as Wells Fargo) is so old, that the new venue at that size can bring in more revenue because there's far more 5000-seat events than there are 14,000-seat events.

And of course, weather is a factor on baseball revenue in PHX, where the weather is the opposite of everywhere else: Early games have good weather, after that it's too damned hot to go to an outdoor baseball game in Phoenix (unlike, say, my alma mater, who is basically terrible cold rainy weather until about April 20th).

Decisions on what to do with a sports menu also depend on the age/state of the existing venues. It's like "What do we need to be successful in THIS sport?" Okay, is it worth pumping in $5m to the facilities of the Field Hockey program.... or just cut the program?

 

[GKJ]

 

[Voight]

I get his point, he played two exhibition games which I'm not even sure guys get paid for.

 

[DaveG]

I get his point, he played two exhibition games which I'm not even sure guys get paid for.

yeeeesh yeah that's... that's something. It was ridiculous when the NCAA made Deniz Kilicli and others sit out half a season for playing in some exhibition basketball games back in Europe before taking the NCAA route. This is worse by a good margin.

 

[Corso]

And now the worm turns.....I really do not expect the NCAA to defend against this suit but rather concede and open the door to the granting of NCAA eligibility to CHL players

 

[LadyStanley]

Further info from Westhead

https://x.com/i/web/status/1823351023877943545

 

[hockeykid87]

And now the worm turns.....I really do not expect the NCAA to defend against this suit but rather concede and open the door to the granting of NCAA eligibility to CHL players

My question has always been what are the "rules" going to be around CHL players going to NCAA teams? Do they have to play x number of seasons in the CHL before they can go? Are they free to leave whenever they want? Both sides are going to want some certainty. As happy as the CHL will be to bring in players who normally wouldn't have come, I can't imagine they'd be too happy to see them leave after one season.

 

[Tom ServoMST3K]

This has been hanging over junior hockey's structure for a while now - it's good it's filed and hopefully we'll get certainty pretty quickly.

 

[DaveG]

My question has always been what are the "rules" going to be around CHL players going to NCAA teams? Do they have to play x number of seasons in the CHL before they can go? Are they free to leave whenever they want? Both sides are going to want some certainty. As happy as the CHL will be to bring in players who normally wouldn't have come, I can't imagine they'd be too happy to see them leave after one season.

Most likely going to end up like the transfer portal in the NCAA for other sports, where the portal period is technically after the regular season but in practice it's a shit show of players leaving just about... whenever including in the middle of the season over playing time or simply a player being contacted by someone loosely associated with a school with an NIL offer that the school or team they're currently at isn't going to match which happened with Oscar Tshiebwe when he moved from WVU to Kentucky. The thing going in the CHL's favor there is that the NIL syndicates seem more focused on CFB and men's and women's CBB than hockey so it's not likely you're going to see crazy money thrown even at someone like Bedard to play at Northeastern or BU for a year before turning pro.

 

[LadyStanley]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1823434347157799316

 

[Voight]

And now the worm turns.....I really do not expect the NCAA to defend against this suit but rather concede and open the door to the granting of NCAA eligibility to CHL players

The NCAA has also been losing lawsuits left and right.

Their longstanding reasoning of "its a professional league because some of the players have contracts with NHL teams" is so stupid.

 

[tmg]

The NCAA has also been losing lawsuits left and right.

Their longstanding reasoning of "its a professional league because some of the players have contracts with NHL teams" is so stupid.

I thought their original reasoning that the chl’s stipend / per diem (now capped at $600 a month, big spenders!) made them professionals?

 

[WarriorofTime]

Their longstanding reasoning of "its a professional league because some of the players have contracts with NHL teams" is so stupid.

Their "longstanding reason" is that the NCAA Bylaws provision on amateurism specifically call the CHL a professional league.

 

[StreetHawk]

Most likely going to end up like the transfer portal in the NCAA for other sports, where the portal period is technically after the regular season but in practice it's a shit show of players leaving just about... whenever including in the middle of the season over playing time or simply a player being contacted by someone loosely associated with a school with an NIL offer that the school or team they're currently at isn't going to match which happened with Oscar Tshiebwe when he moved from WVU to Kentucky. The thing going in the CHL's favor there is that the NIL syndicates seem more focused on CFB and men's and women's CBB than hockey so it's not likely you're going to see crazy money thrown even at someone like Bedard to play at Northeastern or BU for a year before turning pro.

You're only going to land a Matthews, Eichel, Tavares, Laf who have late birthdays. Unless the kid is like Toews/Cellibrini who went to college a year early, you won't get Sid, Bedard unless they fast track their HS studies.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

Most likely going to end up like the transfer portal in the NCAA for other sports, where the portal period is technically after the regular season but in practice it's a shit show of players leaving just about... whenever including in the middle of the season over playing time or simply a player being contacted by someone loosely associated with a school with an NIL offer that the school or team they're currently at isn't going to match which happened with Oscar Tshiebwe when he moved from WVU to Kentucky. The thing going in the CHL's favor there is that the NIL syndicates seem more focused on CFB and men's and women's CBB than hockey so it's not likely you're going to see crazy money thrown even at someone like Bedard to play at Northeastern or BU for a year before turning pro.

NIL groups at big time hockey schools are more focused on making their hockey program better, so I wouldn't doubt them making pushes to make sure they secure/keep a top guy

 

[hockeylegend11]

I get his point, he played two exhibition games which I'm not even sure guys get paid for.

They don't get paid for exhibition games.
Should note Masterson was actually 17 not 16 years old when played the 2 exhibition games as he was July born 05 dman,July birthday.

 

[Corso]

My question has always been what are the "rules" going to be around CHL players going to NCAA teams? Do they have to play x number of seasons in the CHL before they can go? Are they free to leave whenever they want? Both sides are going to want some certainty. As happy as the CHL will be to bring in players who normally wouldn't have come, I can't imagine they'd be too happy to see them leave after one season.

This is the million-dollar question. Currently, CHL players sign standard agreements that make them beholden to their respective club teams until the age of 20. As such, CHL players would be prevented from jumping into the NCAA as 18-year-old freshman. No one expects this current contract to withstand a legal challenge and the CHL will be forced to amend their standard contract agreement to allow for freedom of movement between the CHL and the NCAA.

The reality, however, is that the vast majority of players entering the NCAA are well over the age of 18 and the granting of eligibility to CHL players will not change this. The real question is what are the top end players going to do? Will they play in the CHL until their 18th year and then jump to the NCAA? Some players, particularly American born players will do exactly that but I'm not so sure about the top end Canadian ones that are currently on the NCAA track.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

This is the million-dollar question. Currently, CHL players sign standard agreements that make them beholden to their respective club teams until the age of 20. As such, CHL players would be prevented from jumping into the NCAA as 18-year-old freshman. No one expects this current contract to withstand a legal challenge and the CHL will be forced to amend their standard contract agreement to allow for freedom of movement between the CHL and the NCAA.

The reality, however, is that the vast majority of players entering the NCAA are well over the age of 18 and the granting of eligibility to CHL players will not change this. The real question is what are the top end players going to do? Will they play in the CHL until their 18th year and then jump to the NCAA? Some players, particularly American born players will do exactly that but I'm not so sure about the top end Canadian ones that are currently on the NCAA track.

Yep. Not only does this affect the CHL, NCAA, AHL, and NHL, but it would also have huge effects on the USHL, BCHL, AJHL, USports, and more.

If the reworking of the Standard Player Agreement isn't flexible, more talent could go to the USHL anyway because those players are free to go to the NCAA at any time (presuming they've graduated HS and the NCAA team wants to bring them in)

 

[Voight]

Their "longstanding reason" is that the NCAA Bylaws provision on amateurism specifically call the CHL a professional league.

Which is the dumbest thing ever.

 

[Corso]

Which is the dumbest thing ever.

Pretty well much but you can make the argument that the rule meant something when it was first implemented. The intent was to make college hockey younger by barring older Canadian players from U.S. college hockey. In time, however, the feeder leagues to NCAA hockey began to resemble the CHL more and more and players entering college became older and older. That is why the rule is so ridiculous today.

Yep. Not only does this affect the CHL, NCAA, AHL, and NHL, but it would also have huge effects on the USHL, BCHL, AJHL, USports, and more.

If the reworking of the Standard Player Agreement isn't flexible, more talent could go to the USHL anyway because those players are free to go to the NCAA at any time (presuming they've graduated HS and the NCAA team wants to bring them in)

I'm sure the CHL will do it's upmost to maintain the current standard agreement. They will not willingly change it. The USHL/NCAA and the various Canadian Junior A leagues also hope they will not change it as it will help somewhat maintain the status quo. As sure as night follows day, there will be a lawsuit challenging the standard player agreement and the CHL will be forced to change it.

 

[Djp]

My question has always been what are the "rules" going to be around CHL players going to NCAA teams? Do they have to play x number of seasons in the CHL before they can go? Are they free to leave whenever they want? Both sides are going to want some certainty. As happy as the CHL will be to bring in players who normally wouldn't have come, I can't imagine they'd be too happy to see them leave after one season.

This is complicated.

This could be a driver in the long talked about draft age change to 19.

I can see teams being allowed to do sliding Cntracts with ncaa players. Or does it change to how baseball operates wh er e UF thry go ncas thrn thry re-enter draft 4 yr post HS like nfl draft rules?

CHL will get better players who might not think they will he pro but could lead to an NCAA scholarship

CHL could still have these players similar to the USHL players drafted who wait a year for ncaa

The canadian U18 leagues will lose players who were ncas bound. Similarly the USS U18 league's also could be hurt with talent loss

I dont see mcdavids go from CHL to ncaa. They go straight to NHL. I do see some of the top 50 drafted go ncas route.

As ncaa schools start to expand in hockey programs will affect CHL too with no changes.

With washington, oregon, USC, and UCLA go big 10, could they eventually create D1 hockey programs? Same true with mirr teams in the mountain west and big 12 conferences. In 10 years there are 25+ new D1 hockey schools can change things too

 

[Corso]

With washington, oregon, USC, and UCLA go big 10, could they eventually create D1 hockey programs? Same true with mirr teams in the mountain west and big 12 conferences. In 10 years there are 25+ new D1 hockey schools can change things too

Talked with enough "in the know" people that granting CHL players eligibility will have almost no bearing/impact on expansion. It does seem counter-intuitive to me, but my bean-counter friends have assured me that it is never about the available talent pool but rather the financial numbers. If the numbers do not add up, then they will not do it.

As Kevfu already stated, most of the big name (football and basketball) programs will soon be spending more and more of their revenue streams on the actual players themselves, leaving less and less money to fund other programs. USC and UCLA now find themselves smack dab in the middle of an arms race. All Big 10 programs will funnel what ever extra money they have into their football and to a lesser extent basketball programs. Those that do have hockey programs will let those teams fend for themselves. In short, all that extra money that was once swishing around and spent lavishly on the non-revenue (or break-even like hockey) programs will soon be directed elsewhere.

If there is to be expansion, look for it at the smaller schools.

 

[Hockeyville USA]

This is complicated.

This could be a driver in the long talked about draft age change to 19.

I can see teams being allowed to do sliding Cntracts with ncaa players. Or does it change to how baseball operates wh er e UF thry go ncas thrn thry re-enter draft 4 yr post HS like nfl draft rules?

CHL will get better players who might not think they will he pro but could lead to an NCAA scholarship

CHL could still have these players similar to the USHL players drafted who wait a year for ncaa

The canadian U18 leagues will lose players who were ncas bound. Similarly the USS U18 league's also could be hurt with talent loss

I dont see mcdavids go from CHL to ncaa. They go straight to NHL. I do see some of the top 50 drafted go ncas route.

As ncaa schools start to expand in hockey programs will affect CHL too with no changes.

With washington, oregon, USC, and UCLA go big 10, could they eventually create D1 hockey programs? Same true with mirr teams in the mountain west and big 12 conferences. In 10 years there are 25+ new D1 hockey schools can change things too

Washington, Oregon, USC, and UCLA don't have current interest in adding D1 hockey. They don't have the budget nor the donor to get it started. They're too invested in football and basketball.

We need to get Iowa and Illinois (or other universities in those states) to start D1 programs, before we worry about the former Pac 12 schools to start it. UNLV will likely elevate to D1 from their current club status over the next decade, but their problem is like Arizona State's old problem: the need for a suitable D1 arena.