BankStreetParade
Registered User
Again, if it's based on money you can create monetary incentives for both sides through the use of things like transfer fees. At the end of the day, doesn't the NHL's team rights to own players under prospect supercede all other agreements? I don't think they'll flex that position too much as it's detrimental to a good working relationship but I have to imagine there's lots of GMs out there who would rather develop some of their guys at a professional level than watch them go back to junior and pointlessly dominate their competition.Teams decide on when they will go on runs 3 years prior to going on them, and they tank for high draft picks these years and then make their runs with these guys, which lasts for only a season, with these players. I know for a fact CHL teams will fight with everything they have to keep the guys under 29 not in the NHL in the CHL. Deciding to rebuild and doing bad for 3 years, and then in your run year you get 2/3 of your guys swiped into the AHL? Teams will be fighting that, and it’s a concession that is not likely to change.
If your point is that it isn't about money, then I would need a clarification on why the CHL would have such a hard stance on the subject.