Ottawa 67's 2023-2024 Off-Season Thread (Part 2)

[OHL4Life]

There goes Ottaws 5th round pick.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1826685685400846599

kinda knew that one was coming, just didnt know what school

 

[OMG67]

The 67’s have not been able to entice ANY NCAA bound players at all. They did get Boucher but that was more luck because he was a Sens pick. It is a little concerning to me we cannot nail down kids that are leaning the other way.

 

[BarberPole9]

There goes Ottaws 5th round pick.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1826685685400846599

And what becomes of most 5th round picks?!

He was ranked as a borderline first rounder and he’s a local Ottawa kid. Lots of time to change his mind and if he does, he will be a huge addition to the team.

With the looming NCAA rule change re: OHL players no longer being inadmissible, I can see a large number of these types of players alter course and come to the O before playing pro or NCAA.

 

[OMG67]

And what becomes of most 5th round picks?!

He was ranked as a borderline first rounder and he’s a local Ottawa kid. Lots of time to change his mind and if he does, he will be a huge addition to the team.

With the looming NCAA rule change re: OHL players no longer being inadmissible, I can see a large number of these types of players alter course and come to the O before playing pro or NCAA.

He’s not committed until the 2027-28 season. That is a long way away. Three full seasons between now and then. He is committed to Cedar Rapids in the USHL this season. Like you said, if something changes, he could always come to the OHL with Ottawa for three seasons and delay his NCAA route for one year. These sorts of options may start to come available at some point soon.

 

[beastintheeast]

He’s not committed until the 2027-28 season. That is a long way away. Three full seasons between now and then. He is committed to Cedar Rapids in the USHL this season. Like you said, if something changes, he could always come to the OHL with Ottawa for three seasons and delay his NCAA route for one year. These sorts of options may start to come available at some point soon.

I am sure that the 5th round was a flier that made sense.

I have to think that these guys are gone. As to the CHL/NCAA fight changing I really do not see it for a long time.


The challenge is that NCAA want athletes to commit when they are 17. That means that a rookie comes and plays for 2 years then he goes to the NCAA.

NCAA teams are not going to want 19-year old players. so while they may change their policy there ar still going to be hurdles.

 

[OMG67]

I am sure that the 5th round was a flier that made sense.

I have to think that these guys are gone. As to the CHL/NCAA fight changing I really do not see it for a long time.


The challenge is that NCAA want athletes to commit when they are 17. That means that a rookie comes and plays for 2 years then he goes to the NCAA.

NCAA teams are not going to want 19-year old players. so while they may change their policy there ar still going to be hurdles.

I’m not sure about the “long time” part but I doubt it would open up for the 2025-26 season. It will come down to whether the NCAA feels it is worth the fight. There is a part of me that suggests it likely isn’t worth the fight. They have lost or bent on a few other things related to financial compensation. IT seems like this one thing falls on the flimsy side of the books by comparison.

We have to remember that although this is a big deal for hockey, I am not too sure it is a big deal for other sports. Now that players can get NIL $$$, the other options for financial gain open up as well. The sticky point is the pro athlete definition. That still remains but if players in the NCAA are profiting of NIL then how is that not considered a professional league? Like I say, it will come down to how much the NCAA wants to fight it. I am not too sure their heart is in it like it was in the past. I think they will roll over at some point in the near future.

 

[cvandenberg22]

Canadians are not eligible for NIL.

 

[ScoutLife4]

Canadians are not eligible for NIL.

Correct.
It has nothing to do with NIL why canadian athlete's want to go NCAA.
They are just prioritizing school first.

 

[MJ5]

I am sure that the 5th round was a flier that made sense.

I have to think that these guys are gone. As to the CHL/NCAA fight changing I really do not see it for a long time.


The challenge is that NCAA want athletes to commit when they are 17. That means that a rookie comes and plays for 2 years then he goes to the NCAA.

NCAA teams are not going to want 19-year old players. so while they may change their policy there ar still going to be hurdles.

I'd say the majority of "freshman" are 19/20/21 years old in the NCAA route, usually spending a couple seasons in the USHL.

The top 5% are 17/18 year olds, and those top 5% are the highly drafted guys.

I have season tickets for Michigan State & the Flint Firebirds, the NCAA is a much more physical game, compared to the skill of the O. There was a goalie from a team out east who was skating towards the bench during an intermission last season with his helmet on top of his head. I looked at him like holy shit, that's a grown ass man. And according to Elite Prospects, the dude was 26. The CHL/NCAA fight is going to end sooner than later.

 

[OMG67]

Canadians are not eligible for NIL.

The NIL relates to how the “pro” aspect is broken down in the NCAA. IT makes it much harder for them to not allow ex-pro athletes to participate in NCAA sport. If the current “american” players are earning NIL money, it effectively makes them pro athletes because they are making money off their skill/talent while in school. It is going to make it near impossible if/when this goes to court in the USA.

Keep in mind, this isn’t as much a fight about CHL/NCAA as it is an internal struggle withthe NCAA rules in general across all sports with respect to eligibility. It is that struggle that would, by default, end up ending the ban of CHL players.

If players are effectively getting paid to play then how can NCAA Governing body hold back ex-pro athletes?

I'd say the majority of "freshman" are 19/20/21 years old in the NCAA route, usually spending a couple seasons in the USHL.

The top 5% are 17/18 year olds, and those top 5% are the highly drafted guys.

I have season tickets for Michigan State & the Flint Firebirds, the NCAA is a much more physical game, compared to the skill of the O. There was a goalie from a team out east who was skating towards the bench during an intermission last season with his helmet on top of his head. I looked at him like holy shit, that's a grown ass man. And according to Elite Prospects, the dude was 26. The CHL/NCAA fight is going to end sooner than later.

Yes. I think we will see the doors open for everyone. There may be certain regulations in place concerning how money is made while playing but previous earnings and how they were made won’t make a difference IMO.

You could hypothetically see a player that is 28 years old that played 6 year toiling away in the minors and Europe end up playing NCAA for four years from age 28 to 32.

 

[ScoutLife4]

The NIL relates to how the “pro” aspect is broken down in the NCAA. IT makes it much harder for them to not allow ex-pro athletes to participate in NCAA sport. If the current “american” players are earning NIL money, it effectively makes them pro athletes because they are making money off their skill/talent while in school. It is going to make it near impossible if/when this goes to court in the USA.

Keep in mind, this isn’t as much a fight about CHL/NCAA as it is an internal struggle withthe NCAA rules in general across all sports with respect to eligibility. It is that struggle that would, by default, end up ending the ban of CHL players.

If players are effectively getting paid to play then how can NCAA Governing body hold back ex-pro athletes?

I'm not sure the CHL even would support any changes.
They don't want to become a 16/17 year old league.
HC i'm sure would be heavily involved in any decision making.

 

[OMG67]

I'm not sure the CHL even would support any changes.
They don't want to become a 16/17 year old league.
HC i'm sure would be heavily involved in any decision making.

How so? There is no “agreement” in place between the two bodies. It is simply a rule the NCAA has regarding their interpretation of “Pro athlete.” The CHL has nothing to do with what the NCAA does. The CHL Allows NCAA players to join their member leagues. This would simply be about the NCAA allowing CHL players to join their league. The CHL and Hockey Canada would have nothing to do with the NCAA.

The reality is, a player having success in the CHL is likely to remain in the CHL.If they play their four years in the CHL, they still can go to the NCAA. The only caveat is the canadian players cannot use their CHL scholarship to play there so they’d need a school sponsored scholarship.

 

[ScoutLife4]

How so? There is no “agreement” in place between the two bodies. It is simply a rule the NCAA has regarding their interpretation of “Pro athlete.” The CHL has nothing to do with what the NCAA does. The CHL Allows NCAA players to join their member leagues. This would simply be about the NCAA allowing CHL players to join their league. The CHL and Hockey Canada would have nothing to do with the NCAA.

The reality is, a player having success in the CHL is likely to remain in the CHL.If they play their four years in the CHL, they still can go to the NCAA. The only caveat is the canadian players cannot use their CHL scholarship to play there so they’d need a school sponsored scholarship.

HC would have all sorts of sanctions on any player that left the CHL to pursue NCAA.
Just like the do the BCHL.
I'm not saying the players would care but it won't something that changes this year or anytime soon.

 

[OMG67]

HC would have all sorts of sanctions on any player that left the CHL to pursue NCAA.
Just like the do the BCHL.
I'm not saying the players would care but it won't something that changes this year or anytime soon.

I guess that is my point. Players are already bolting so I don’t see HC sanctions being of any real significance. Maybe there are 2-3 players across the CHL that would stay in the good graces of HC to play in the WJHC? Maybe?

 

[Petes1987]

I guess that is my point. Players are already bolting so I don’t see HC sanctions being of any real significance. Maybe there are 2-3 players across the CHL that would stay in the good graces of HC to play in the WJHC? Maybe?

I doubt there would large amount of CHL players bolting to US College at 18 or 19. CHL would be within their legal rights to hold players to the Standard Player Agreement they have signed. I guess the CHL could amend the agreements to allow them to leave but I doubt they do it. I think the the majority of players want to play in the CHL.

 

[ScoutLife4]

42% of NHL players come from Canada and the number has been falling yearly.

I would like to see a better system where the CHL and USHL are more alike feeding the NCAA but would never support it to allow 17 year old kids to bail on Canadian JR Hockey.
There's is a 100 ideas to make this work better but i don't trust we will see positive change in Canada.
I would probably get on board with a scenario where 16-19 year olds played CHL then 20 year olds could opt out and go to NCAA instead of an overage year.

 

[dirty12]

42% of NHL players come from Canada and the number has been falling yearly.

I would like to see a better system where the CHL and USHL are more alike feeding the NCAA but would never support it to allow 17 year old kids to bail on Canadian JR Hockey.
There's is a 100 ideas to make this work better but i don't trust we will see positive change in Canada.
I would probably get on board with a scenario where 16-19 year olds played CHL then 20 year olds could opt out and go to NCAA instead of an overage year.

42% is a ridiculously high number considering how many NHL brats were born and raised in the US in a hockey centered environment.

 

[OMG67]

42% of NHL players come from Canada and the number has been falling yearly.

I would like to see a better system where the CHL and USHL are more alike feeding the NCAA but would never support it to allow 17 year old kids to bail on Canadian JR Hockey.
There's is a 100 ideas to make this work better but i don't trust we will see positive change in Canada.
I would probably get on board with a scenario where 16-19 year olds played CHL then 20 year olds could opt out and go to NCAA instead of an overage year.

I think this is more accurate. AND, I think the CHL league can change their scholarship packages to align with this too. Make the scholarships based on max yearly value so if a player is in a US Ivy League school and it cost $50kUS then the OHL team provides $25kCDN toward it. Something like that.

From my perspective, I am 100% behind you on the CHL and USHL being feeder leagues. Get more advanced players into NCAA programs.

Also, move the NHL draft to 19 instead of 18. If an elite player is too good for the CHL team, accept the fact that player goes and plays in Europe or NCAA where they can further their development OR allow each NHL team a certain number of exemption roster spots for underage pro players (European or North American) so they can have more say in the development of their prospects.

If the CHL were to be able to keep more Canadian born players from going to the BCHL and/or USHL, they can offset the ones that leave early.

 

[OHL4Life]

I doubt there would large amount of CHL players bolting to US College at 18 or 19. CHL would be within their legal rights to hold players to the Standard Player Agreement they have signed. I guess the CHL could amend the agreements to allow them to leave but I doubt they do it. I think the the majority of players want to play in the CHL.

Pete’s are the best!

 

[Savard18]

I think this is more accurate. AND, I think the CHL league can change their scholarship packages to align with this too. Make the scholarships based on max yearly value so if a player is in a US Ivy League school and it cost $50kUS then the OHL team provides $25kCDN toward it. Something like that.

From my perspective, I am 100% behind you on the CHL and USHL being feeder leagues. Get more advanced players into NCAA programs.

Also, move the NHL draft to 19 instead of 18. If an elite player is too good for the CHL team, accept the fact that player goes and plays in Europe or NCAA where they can further their development OR allow each NHL team a certain number of exemption roster spots for underage pro players (European or North American) so they can have more say in the development of their prospects.

If the CHL were to be able to keep more Canadian born players from going to the BCHL and/or USHL, they can offset the ones that leave early.

My youngest daughter’s tuition is $72k a year. My oldest was at $63k when she acquired her bachelors. That includes the required dorm/meal program for year one and two students. They’re both highly respected institutions but they ain’t Ivy League schools so….. Also, for the record they both banked a ton of scholarship cash so we’re not paying anywhere even remotely close to those numbers and where my oldest is getting her Masters is significantly cheaper. Just to give you an idea of the ridiculousness of higher education this side of the border currently.

 

[OMG67]

My youngest daughter’s tuition is $72k a year. My oldest was at $63k when she acquired her bachelors. That includes the required dorm/meal program for year one and two students. They’re both highly respected institutions but they ain’t Ivy League schools so….. Also, for the record they both banked a ton of scholarship cash so we’re not paying anywhere even remotely close to those numbers and where my oldest is getting her Masters is significantly cheaper. Just to give you an idea of the ridiculousness of higher education this side of the border currently.

It is pretty crazy really. But, as a Canadian, the current scholarship program is based on the cost of tuition at the closest University or College to your home. I don’t think it extends to the US unless it is an American player. Then their scholarship is based on pricing there.

I don’t believe there is an annual maximum that is put in place but maybe there is for the US Based packages? I know in Canada, basic tuition for University is around $12k per year and College is about half that or less depending on the program. Those with Gold packages get residence and books etc added. Residence with a meal plan ranges depending on the program but usually falls between $12k - $15k per year for most institutions. Books and expenses maybe $2k per year? So, total cost would be in the range of $30k on the high side.

I imagine State Colleges and Universities are more favourably priced, correct?

 

[beastintheeast]

I guess that is my point. Players are already bolting so I don’t see HC sanctions being of any real significance. Maybe there are 2-3 players across the CHL that would stay in the good graces of HC to play in the WJHC? Maybe?

The issue for the CHL is going to be the validity of the agreements that players sign. I can not see the CHL allowing Johnny to sign and play for the 67's as a 16 year old and still letting other teams NCAA court him.

A better example mght be Thibodeau who thought he was going tolay inthe OHL get drafted by the NHL and be set. Now finds out that he is not drafted probably willnot be so having the ability to sign an NCAA card is different.

I can not see top NCAA teams signing players tht are finished 19 20 year olds.

HC willnot hve much say.

The issue in the course right now is not signing a contract and playing for a CHL team. It has the right to go to a camp, play exhibition games, and see if they are good enough to go the CHL route and not give up the ability to be NCAA qualified.

This would also apply to a kid who was drafted by the USHL and OHL and wanted to try training camps.

There is a lot to digest but I think this is going to take time in the courts not because the NCAA cares but because the lawyers care$$$$

 

[OMG67]

The issue for the CHL is going to be the validity of the agreements that players sign. I can not see the CHL allowing Johnny to sign and play for the 67's as a 16 year old and still letting other teams NCAA court him.

A better example mght be Thibodeau who thought he was going tolay inthe OHL get drafted by the NHL and be set. Now finds out that he is not drafted probably willnot be so having the ability to sign an NCAA card is different.

I can not see top NCAA teams signing players tht are finished 19 20 year olds.

HC willnot hve much say.

The issue in the course right now is not signing a contract and playing for a CHL team. It has the right to go to a camp, play exhibition games, and see if they are good enough to go the CHL route and not give up the ability to be NCAA qualified.

This would also apply to a kid who was drafted by the USHL and OHL and wanted to try training camps.

There is a lot to digest but I think this is going to take time in the courts not because the NCAA cares but because the lawyers care$$$$

The Standard Player Agreement cannot have language in it that precludes them from plying their trade in any other non-affiliated league. Players can leave the OHL and go play in lessor Junior Leagues. The only caveat is they would need permission to pick the team they want to play for otherwise they have to go to the team they are assigned. HOWEVER, as long as the leagues are not affiliated, in this case under Hockey Canada, any kid at any time can go play wherever he wants.

The existing Standard Player Agreement identifies the player as a Student Athlete. It would be very dangerous legally to alter the contract effectively limiting where a Student Athlete can play hockey. Imagine if a kid plays for the 67’s, doesn’t get much ice time as a 16 or 17 or 18 year old and decides he’d rather go play CIS hockey and the junior club says…no. We own you until you are 20. You cannot play anywhere else. You cannot access your scholarship. That is effectively what it would be like if a player left the CHL and went NCAA.

 

[AGranderson]

Looks like Luca Bonomo will play this season with Caledon Admirals I heard he had signed there & then seen he did play this evening for them in exhibition action

 

[beastintheeast]

It is pretty crazy really. But, as a Canadian, the current scholarship program is based on the cost of tuition at the closest University or College to your home. I don’t think it extends to the US unless it is an American player. Then their scholarship is based on pricing there.

I don’t believe there is an annual maximum that is put in place but maybe there is for the US Based packages? I know in Canada, basic tuition for University is around $12k per year and College is about half that or less depending on the program. Those with Gold packages get residence and books etc added. Residence with a meal plan ranges depending on the program but usually falls between $12k - $15k per year for most institutions. Books and expenses maybe $2k per year? So, total cost would be in the range of $30k on the high side.

I imagine State Colleges and Universities are more favourably priced, correct?

The cost of education in the States is far out of whack—it's ridiculous. Then add in the Mickey Mouse courses, and it seems that it may not be worth it.

There is a movement in some areas of business to hire kids who graduate high school with good grades and to teach them while employing them in the business as interns.

There needs to be changes, but I doubt it will happen any time soon in the streets as long as the government is going to lend people the money to go and not care about what happens later.

As far as hockey goes, I think that if you are getting a scholarship, then you should play and use it to the best of your ability. If after the first year it does not work out you can always come back to the CHL in Canada or possibly USHL in the states.

The thing that a lot of kids don't look at is what am I gong to do after I play in teh NHL for 5 yers and get cut. Or what am I going to do after hockey. There are a lot of horror stories out there of players that lost it allor had no idea what to do in every sport.

An education is not a bad thing to have.