It'll be great for most players, but it's going to be terrible for the chl. The fact that ncaa players can also get paid too is ridiculous because it's not even amatuer hockey, it's a pro league.
It may not make a ton of difference in the end. You can be great at hockey, but you'd still need to meet university academic requirements, which a decent player in the CHL might either be unable or unwilling to meet if they are already on a decent career trajectory. Junior A and USHL focus heavily on prep for NCAA right from day one whereas major junior goes heavy on NHL hopes and dreams. In addition, Junior A allows a player to stay closer to home with less travel since the leagues are more granular than major junior.
The option of a paid university education is there for junior players. It’s much easier to do after a junior career is over. I know a former player in the Q who got a finance degree after playing and has had a very successful career since he left the league about 20 years ago
@@BigD751 Yes, see how many players at the CHL level end up having multi years contracts in the NHL. What do you do with a high school degree these days? You compete for a job against migrant workers and you vote for Trump.
Good video first of all, but just an inaccuracy I noticed; Not everybody who plays NCAA D1 hockey is on a full ride. Teams have a scholarship limit of 18 (or in the case of the Ivy Leagues, none). They could receive other kinds of scholarships, but many don't get full rides. If this were to pass, I wonder how many CHL players would go D3 because of the lack of supply (D1 teams) to meet sudden increase in demand (# of players). As crazy as it sounds to someone unfamiliar with NCAA D3, a lot of players have gone pro out of it in the last decade or so (mostly to ECHL, SPHL, or European leagues). It has gotten a lot better in terms of quality too, especially the top programs. The biggest difference between the NCAA and Major Junior paths currently is this; in NCAA hockey, you practice more than you play. In Major Junior, you play more than you practice. The leagues most adversely impacted by this rule change would be, in my opinion, the Canadian Junior A leagues. Many top NCAA-bound Canadian prospects have already been skipping them in favor of the USHL. Lower-caliber Canadian NCAA prospects play in the NAHL. Why? They're significantly cheaper, and overall more heavily scouted nowadays.
@@amandahugandkiss2126 It should be noted that recent rule changes now allow 26 scholarship equivalents, and a roster size of 26, so every NCAA player SHOULD be on a full scholarship now, rather than the half scholarships that were normal before. I would also say though, many, many players that play in junior just want to play hockey. They don't want to balance hockey and college level classes, homework, tutors, labs, etc.
@@robertcampbell8070 First of all, as far as I'm aware, the roster and scholarship proposal you mentioned is just a rule recommendation at the D1 level, and would be an opt-in program if implemented. It is not a rule as of now, as far as I know. Second of all, sure, players just want to play hockey. Going to college and graduating offers them more options after their playing career is over though. NCAA hockey offers them a chance of doing so at a reduced cost compared to average tuition (even at the D3 level on occasion), and letting them practice and refine their skills before they try to play professional hockey. It sets them up for a better future if they can't make the professional leagues for long enough to have some savings.
@@robertcampbell8070 There is one other item to consider as well. In the Great Lakes Region of the USA, one of the better NCAA leagues, the Big Ten, a large number of its schools do NOT have hockey programs. However, there have there have been rumblings for nearly two decades in some states to add these programs, money so far being the limitation. Well-heeled alumni are always competing to show off their wealth and brag about their ownership or support of things. If they can’t own a piece of an NHL club, what better way to be part of the ”in” crowd in your social circle than being the major donor to a hockey program. Think University of Illinois, or Purdue, Penn State or Rutgers, none of which have hockey programs today. Add in new Big Ten members Washington and Oregon. Another example - the Illich family was in discussions just before Mike’s death to fully fund a new hockey program at 50,000 student Wayne State University in the heart of Detroit. With lots of new players don’t you think the Illich’s would revisit those discussions?
This is actually good for the CHL. Now it's not an either or - USA players might consider the CHL vs USHL, with the NCAA in their back pocket if the top junior leagues (OHL, QMJHL, WHL) don't work out for them
It's the players who the CHL does work out for that will leave. Anyone good enough at the age of 17 and over will go to the NCAA. many top 16 year olds are gone if they have a good rookie season to play in the more competitive league where they get paid more (NCAA). It's going to have a massive impact. More young players from USA but the quality will go way down as all top 17,18,19 and 20 players are leaving. That's a massive impact
This won't be detrimental to the CHL. It will have a lot more impact on Usport, Junior A, and USHL teams. Currently, the main thing attracting higher end talent to both USHL and Junior A in Canada is that you can play there and not lose NCAA eligibility. With that restriction gone, the CHL is going to see some of that higher end talent cross over to the CHL. You'll also see guys choosing to go to NCAA after the CHL instead of Usport. The CHL already offers tuition benefits to players, it will just go to NCAA schools instead of players going to Usport. If anything, USHL teams will have to pivot to the CHL model to try keep up. Folks in USHL circles are hoping for some kind of merger with the CHL or possibly a North American Junior super league, but that is unlikely and very telling of their position. The only thing the CHL has to try to figure out is how to get from 2 year draft retention to 4, and they're already working on that. I also don't think it'll impact the overage players much, those spots are already pretty limited. The only thing that drastically would change that would be if the NCAA would drop the clause of not allowing players who are under NHL contract to play there. Even then, I think it would be minimal.
It will have a much larger impact then you think. Your going to see a lot of top talent from the ages of 16-17, and then everyone who can will leave. Why would you play in the CHL when you can play in a more competitive league and get paid far more for it. Only hope CHL has is to start paying guys like the NCAA is
What about the fact that if you graduate from NCAA you become a free agent in the NHL? Jimmy Vesey for example or Adam Fox holding Calgary hostage after drafting them.
@@prozac. true, but if I’m a Canadian player, do I sign with my hometown team or sign in a state that has no state income tax and make that 8 year, $68 million or 4 year, $32 million a better deal after taxes. And with the CRA going after signing bonuses now, that one iota of hope that Canadian teams had to offer, is out.
It's not going to do anythinh to the CHL except take away a few overagers, and there's only 3 per team allowed now anyways. Most NCAA teams except for the very top programs aren't taking 18 year olds. They're deferring guys until they're 19 or 20. What's going to happen is the tip top guys are going to come in to the CHL at 16 like they always have and stay for at least two years. The mid level guys will stay until they're 19, like they always have.
I think the biggest changed will be to the USHL/Junior A in Canada. A lot of top USHL players may choose to go toi the CHL knowing if they don't end up being a McDavid/Crosby/Bedard they will still have the option of D1 NCAA vs Usports/Lower pro leagues. I think young prospects like the more "professional" scheduling and feeling the CHL gives as well which draws people. I think youll still get the top guys (bedards, mcdavids, etc) drafted out of the CHL. Guys who seem to just miss the cut (examples in CHL currently would be like a Markus Vidicek) will now have the opportunity to go D1 and continue a very high levle of development, vs having to go USports or hope to make a lower level Pro-league
@@RobTalksHockey OK,so now your top 19 year olds are your best players. you remove literally 3 players per team, MAYBE, and create room for more younger players to get an opportunity. Plus guys that age out or want to get an education at a top academic school after finishing major junior now have that opportunity, because the CHL scholarship program is a joke. Let me also say this, the NHL isn't going to let a free developmental league die. If the CHL went away, the NHL would be screwed. There aren't enough NCAA teams, and not enough money, to support all these players. The CHL will become an NHL farm system before it ever goes away.
@@RobTalksHockey So you lose like 3 players, MAYBE, off of teams? And that's only if NCAA teams that are historically built on deferring players want to bring in 20 year olds instead of 21 year olds? And that still gives opportunity to other young players? The CHL will be fine.
15-17 for top talent. Even then top 17 yo prospects will leave for NCAA like celebrini. Even MacKinnon wanted to play in the NCAA because of the competition level, with the added money and even better competition it's going to drain the CHL of top talent.
@@jerryrikki9466 first off you’re assuming that these hockey players are even academically fit to play college. I played major junior half of the kids didn’t even go to high school never mind college.
@@Iambetterthanyouanduknowit well times have changed since you played, you need to be doing well academically unless you've already graduated highschool now
Won't affect Canadian Hockey CHL very much. The NCAA budgets aren't going to shift cash from their Football, basketball, or even baseball budgets to try boost Hockey which likely lose them cash compared to the other 3 sports. The NCAA has maybe five programs nation wide and that won't change a thing and player position dominance go up and down there will be years where CHL produces the top Goalies, Years Europe will have the best goalies and the NCAA will have their moments it has been happening for 70 years. Finally when was the last time a NCAA goalie started for a Stanley Cup Winner or how many NCAA goalies have started for a Stanley Cup in the last decade, even how many NCAA goalies have ever started for cups, then take those numbers and compare them to CHL draftees also over the last decade and ever. There is nothing going to change one way or the other, and if they did the CHL Board of Directors can counter with allowing individual commercial sponsorships a move the NCAA Hockey would never be able to take.
Things are changing. There’s a passion for college hockey that’s palpable. It may not be to the level of the other college sports but hockey fits in nicely as a third option superseding the other sports.
There have there have been rumblings for nearly two decades in some states to add hockey programs. Well-heeled alumni are always competing to show off their wealth and brag about their ownership or support of things. If they can’t own a piece of an NHL club, what better way to be part of the ”in” crowd in your social circle than being the major donor to a hockey program. One example - the Illich family was in discussions just before Mike’s death to fully fund a new hockey program at 50,000 student Wayne State University in the heart of Detroit. With lots of new players don’t you think the Illich’s would revisit those discussions?
The NCAA is producing excellent goalie talent. The fact that they haven't played for Cups yet (other than Quick) has a lot to do with the fact that elite goaltending is not a requirement for a Cup winner now. Elite forwards are far more important.
I think we are all forgetting how much cash female hockey could/is bringing. Just like Porsche, Ferrari, Aston selling SUV's it helos amortize the costs over a larger program. Growth of any kind is good. College is perfect for this. Brings potentially more fans too. costs in hockey now are astronomical and outrageous. Need a way to pay for it all.
@MP-dn4bs Hockey canada knows this, and this is the problem. We are focusing all of our developments on fowards as they are the most sought after players now (game breaking fowards). But now we have this scenario where we have no goalies.
@@hockeyaddict7007 Hockey in Canada is much more popular, but development wise USA has much more money and USHL is almost equal to the canadian juniors. NCAA is miles ahead on anything Canada has on university level. If this goes through USHL might be a better place for Canadians just because of the connection with NCAA. Obviously the CHL is still good, but yeah...
@@deounivers7663 yeah I guess I really don't care where Canadian players decide to play as long as they're ready to go during international tournaments.
I'm wondering if this will actually hurt US hockey more than Canadian. Back in the 60's you had NCAA programs like Cornell, Denver & Michigan who wouldn't even consider American players because they'd just import players wholesale from Canada. And those were the top hockey programs in the NCAA at that time. This set back the development of hockey in the US for 20 years. In the 1930's & 40's, there were a number of American players in the NHL. The Canadians still dominated, but at least there were a few from the US, and they were regulars, some were stars, like Frankie Brimsek & Mike Karakas. But from the 50's to the early 70s, American players disappeared almost completely. For a period of 25 years only one American player (Tommy Williams) had any kind of considerable NHL career.US players didn't have the option of playing in Canadian Juniors and the top NCAA teams were shut off to them, so their development ended at high school. Now you wonder if American players coming out of high school are going to get shut out again by Canadian players, having finished 4 years of juniors, now at the age of 20, 21, older, bigger, stronger, more experienced, becoming available to NCAA teams. An interesting development would be if the younger US players, now shut out of the NCAA, start going instead to Canadian Juniors and the NCAA becoming a Canadian league and Canadian Juniors becoming the go-to place for 17 year old Americans. Could happen.
If I’m a player I would definitely go the college route….you never know when your hockey career ends and you don’t have any other education to fall back on and earn a dollar,
not necessarily, there will be players who: - don't get offers from highly rated NCAA programs and don't want to go to a mid/low level program - know they will get much more playing time in the CHL and more important roles - can't afford to move and/or go to college (not everyone will be offered full rides) - really like their team and their area and don't want to move somewhere like North Dakota. Especially for kids that have already been drafted.
also you can always do NCAA after you're 20. There will be players who stick out their last 2 years in the CHL and then they can go to NCAA. If I was not a highly touted prospect, I think that would be appealing. I get to stretch my hockey career until I'm 24 years old at least and still get to graduate with a diploma if hockey doesn't work out professionally
@@nolane3972 Also, if, as mentioned in the video, the CHL pays one year's college tuition for every year you play in the CHL, that means an overage player, coming out of juniors after 4 years, doesn't even need a scholarship to play in the NCAA because his tuition is already paid for by the CHL. I'm not sure exactly how that all works. Maybe they'll only pay tuition to a Canadian college? I have no idea. But Derek Ryan played 4 years for Spokane in the WHL then 4 years for the U of Alberta. No scholarship to the U of Alberta, but I'm guessing his tuition was paid for by the CHL tuition program. No scholarship necessary.
I don't think this will be that big of a deal, the star level players can jump from CHL to NHL hockey and those over aged players playing in the CHL aren't revenue drivers like Mcdavid or Bedard, just gives the middle class of Hockey players more options
Played for a D1 school, as a goalie that saw a good amount of playtime, I did tree work offseason to pay for classes, rent, etc. Granted this was way back in 2001-2005.
I see why some CHL teams are getting antsy about this, but honestly I think this is better for the players, as some players could continue their hockey career and further their education in the NCAA playing high level hockey after they age out of jrs. It will also help develop a lot of players that need more time, instead of having them sit in the minors without the option to go to a good university.
550k minor hockey registrants in us vs 500k in canada. Hockey alberta is same size as finland. Could a hockey alberta team take on team finland? Not a chance. Hockey canada is broken. Not bettmans fault.
@@MrGamman3ytAn Alberta hockey team would do just fine vs Finland. Also Finland has nearly 1 mil more people and lots of Alberta's recent population growth is Indian, Chinese and Filipino.
With the NCAA, there's also the possibility of NIL deals. Granted, I don't see a large market for that for college hockey, but I do see a scenario where a college hockey program poaches a star to attract more talent and increase brand visibility. Considering all athletes are potentially one injury from losing the opportunity of earning millions playing pro, it does make sense to get NIL money if you can.
When I would sit down with parents and answer CHL/Juniors or the college route, I would always say, Do you need to develop your individual game or your team game. Individual games are better developed in college and game play better develops in CHL/Junior. Goalies and defense need a little more time to develop their personal games where forwards can build their skill at the team level. History shows this and this rule change will only magnify that. More games vs more practice. The majority of junior teams are tax write offs, lose money or bust even. That will not change with the rule change. Personally I see it watering down the CHL but increasing the college landscape from D1 to D3. You will see a increase in D1 teams that play in the ACHA move to D1. Not a lot but a few will. D3 will become more competitive with those players not drafted but would have previously had a D1 position.
Don't forget that every canadian junior hockey league is supported by private investors (one or more for each team) while in the US, the colleges have deeper pockets. They can play in empty arenas and it doesn't matter for the league while in canada, playing in front of empty seats means the team will be moved.
I grew up in a town with an mj team that has been fluttering with its existence for some time. When I was in school you would get some free gear and sticks to play for free. Now it’s a case of the kids have to pay to play for most teams and usually well above your triple A team fees. Not exactly a winning business plan. I think chl players being able to jump to ncaa will more hinder the ncaa younger prospects. As aside from your makars or celebrini’s you can bring in fully tested chl 20 year olds looking for that last kick at making it, while also providing an education. I also believe that there’s been many lawsuits against the chl because they restrict the paid schooling to only a few years after you are aged out of the chl. So many borderline pro players try their hand at Europe or echl and then lose the scholarships that are “paid for” simply because they chose to try and play pro hockey.
My only deal with the video is this. Not all of these CHL players coming into the NCAA would recieve full-ride scholarships, especially at these smaller D-1 schools here in the US. Furthermore, with there only being 22 roster spots and only a handful of bench spots, you would have to imagine that these players would want playing time. I feel you would need to see more D-1/D-3 hockey programs open up for this CHL to NCAA to truly become a problem. I think you might see a few more players from the CHL make their way to the NCAA, but I can't really see it become this incredibly fatal deal for canadian junior hockey if this deal goes through. Maybe I'm looking at this the same way I currently look at college football, but you have to admit that issues in college football could potentially transfer to college hockey as well.
If I was a Canadian hockey player and I had the choice to play in the CHL or play in the NCAA I'd definitely play in the NCAA. It's a higher level of hockey and I get a full scholarship at a US College. That's important because only a small fraction of college/junior players make it to the NHL
Rob, one of my thoughts includes Brad Park talking about playing in the afternoon in a game in Toronto, and being asked if he wants to watch a Junior game where a 14 year old Bobby Orr was playing, and Bobby was controlling the play with 18 year olds. Are there still players in Canada that are being rushed into situations in the CHL because of monetary problems with the teams they’re playing for, weakening their development even at that stage?
Less players moving to the States to pursue college cause their Jr. A league back home in Quebec, the maritimes or Ontario doesn't cut it? Now they can stay in Canada, play in the best league and still opt to go to college in the NCAA if they desire... if anything this is beneficial...
Being a North Dakotan and Hockey fan, I always wondered why I hated Crosbey, the fire went out last year, out of the blue, then you tell me he could've been with Toews and Oshie?! Wtf Sid UND is amazing! (I'm overdramatic with everything)
I understand the ban and the reason to lift it realated to the new NIL payments making the ban useless... but I also don't see it harming the CHL as much as many think.
Simple math says if lots of CHL players jump to the NCAA at 18, there will not be enough quality CHL players to maintain the current number of teams. Therefore, if the NCAA vote passes, the CHL will shrink. I would expect plenty of undrafted CHL players to jump to the NCAA for the degree for post-hockey.
Ngl the biggest problem for hockey in Canada is simply the economics. In the US buying equipment with US dollars the prices are actually not all that bad, but prices in Canada are just ridiculous with our currency being so low now. Moreover, to live in Canada is simply too expensive and you’re not left with all that much money to spend on other things like sports for your children. Once it’s becomes easier to live in Canada we will see for sure a rebound in youth players and again a rebound in the CHL.
I think time will tell with the NCAA vs CHL if it stays like this but an answer could be a joint venture with Usports and the CHL where we could see a UK system of university sports where you can have a University A,B,C teams all competing in a league and all being training pipelines for each other. This would provide a needed gap and competitive edge over American Universities where some players would rather try there hand at the USports B team then play for a dead low tier NCAA team that lacks the quality and talent they need to develop and also be cheaper on tuition since many of these NCAA spots are not filled by scholarships or full rides.
Getting along, and working out a good system? lol. Have you seen hockey canada? Too many ego's in hockey for 'a good' system. I truly wish I were wrong, but see last 40yrs.
But Modano played junior with the Prince Albert Raiders in the Western Hockey League, not the NCAA. Realistically, the big change is the court ruling against the NCAA in 2021 in favor of student athlete compensation. Prior to this the NCAA resisted efforts to compensate college athletes beyond the scholarship and stipend. In the CHL, Courts have approved a 33 million dollar settlement for former Major Junior Hockey Players who played in the WHL or OHL. The only remaining condition before the players can be paid is settlement approval by the Quebec Court for the QMJHL Class Action. If the settlement is not approved in Quebec then players will not be paid and all three matters will continue to be litigated, probably for years with no guarantee the players will win or see any compensation. This has the potential to bankrupt the CHL.
A number of top level American players have taken the Junior route over the years including Patrick Kane & Matthew Tkachuk. I think you might see even more if the NCAA teams start scarfing up 20 year old 4 year Junior Hockey vets there will be fewer opportunities for 18 year old American players, so they'll go to Canada.
I mean over the progress of a season in NHL 24 my first NHL game I went from rookie to pro in a season of pro career now Ive moved to superstar for the 2nd season and it's a huge transition between those two dofficultys
next year there will still be the same amount of roster spots across Canadian hockey leagues and NCAA. If NCAA is getting filled by ex-CHL players there is potential for US born players to play in the CHL. If not, then those players will be bumped down to the USHL (or other leagues) thus increasing their competition. The CHL could also have an influx of talent that might have gone to other minor hockey leagues to keep their NCAA eligibility (i.e. Makar, Celibrini), so now you'd have those guys from 16-17 years of age, and you might be able to convince them to stay in the CHL. I think there is a lot of potential for growth when you increase competition. Leagues will have to adjust and improve their system instead of taking advantage of a stupid rule that the NCAA had. In the long run, this will be great for the growth of the game IMO. Certainly for the NCAA, I bet there will be new teams that come into existence and mid/low level D1 teams that really grow their programs.
This is a complex issue with so many possible outcomes for various leagues and players. But one thing is for sure... that video had more sick snipes than I could wrap my head around. 😊
I personally hate this. It’s going to have a major negative impact on ushl nahl ajhl bchl and the couple other lower tiers that are growing. It’s also going to kill the futures of a lot of later developing prospects who weren’t stars at 15,16. If anything I think USports should find a way to continue developing players and turn them into pro players rather than punish players who thought more long term and wanted to go to school
I think it might be an opportunity for more players to play in the CHL then move on to a US college. Idk, interesting development. I think it opens up options for all players.
Doesn't the CHL provide 1 year of College for every year played in the league? If a full ride is the incentive then that's a wash, especially for those players that know that they won't make it to the show let alone the AHL.
It's the players who the CHL does work out for that will leave. Anyone good enough at the age of 17 and over will go to the NCAA. many top 16 year olds are gone if they have a good rookie season to play in the more competitive league where they get paid more (NCAA). It's going to have a massive impact. More young players from USA but the quality will go way down as all top 17,18,19 and 20 players are leaving. That's a massive impact, the leauge will be forever changed
Nah, Canada is still the best at hockey. I say that as an American fan. We have a lot of good players now but we've still never developed an Orr-Gretzky-Lemieux-Crsoby-McDavid level player. Our best guys are always a level below the best, except maybe at goaltending. The best player in the world in my lifetime, and that goes back a long way, has been a Canadian.
This is going to be interesting. I'm assuming that the average age of the top CHL players will become lower, but the overall level of play might remain the same? You would assume that Junior A and U-Sports will be the losers out of all of this. Of course, the NCAA should win....and hockey development in general will be better for the reasons you stated. Oh, I guess the NCAA might end up with a larger proportion of Canadians, meaning American-born players might lose out?
The US has their National Development Program. Could something like that exist in Canada and how would it work? Could this mean that NCAA Hockey might exist in a video game in the future? I wish Brooks was a better run organization that I was able to pronounce Cale Makar's name properly when he played there.
The IIHF, CHL, and the NHL have been trying to destroy Canadian hockey for years, Why? Because we win most of the tournaments around the world. Now fighting is out of the Q, and the OHL, a practice that will take a lot of physically dominant hockey out of the game. The WHL will soon follow with fighting banned across the league. Canadian fans should boycot all OHL and AHL games until fighting is re-instated. Why are the guru's of the CHL's in agreement with these policies? Because their jobs are on the line! Reduce physical hockey or else!!!!!
Or it changes the NCAA. Jr graduates move on to the NCAA to develop further and get an education before turning pro. Players that are 4 years older and more experienced over the younger and "inexperienced" college players. The CHL has scholarships for grads moving on to Canadian universities. US schools have far more money too.
So many people in the comments are missing the point. This move is about money. And with the NIL contracts, the exponential growth of hockey in the US, and the tax structures of Canada...this will be a no-brainer for top talents. Maybe not immediately, but over the coming years for sure. The NCAA has added 8 teams to D1 since 2016. Thats an average of 1 a year. The CHL? Well...hasn't. At all. The CHL will be a U18 league by 2030. The fact of the matter is, it's a better career move to live and work in the US as a professional athlete.
Things will change but I can't see it being anything but good for hockey. It was always a dumb rule to just arbitrarily limit paths available to players. Also hopefully this leads to chl players being able to go up to the AHL sooner
@RobTalksHockey 5:55 Just an heads up, being on the bottom of the totem pole would imply that they are the strongest team, as the beings on the bottom of the totem pole were always meant to hold/lift everyone else up. :)
Maybe hockey Canada can use the money they will save from SA lawsuit settlements to help out these teams. As well as help out less fortunate Canadians pay for hockey as its a very expensive sport to play.
Big names and winning brings people. Not overagers. Scoring or not. Drafted or not. Winning teams have overagers on them, definitely. But I really don't think this losing some would be "devastating" in any sense. If anything, perhaps those players get replaced with younger players who can use the game time to make a name for themselves sooner
They should go because they like to watch hockey. I'm in NYC. I wish we had a good lower level hockey team like AHL or CHL level, to go to because the NHL is too expensive. Junior hockey is good hockey. I've seen it on TV. No, it ain't the NHL, but it's a damn good game to watch.
I think its good. If your team cant survive without a superstar then your team should be moved or it should fold. CHL isn't a professional sports league. The players don't get paid making a profit off of unpaid teenagers is kinda shitty.
I'm not a fan of this potential rule change because my city has a USHL team, and if this rule change does happen, then everybody will go to the CHL since there is more talent
If this happens the CHL size will shrink, they will lose some teams. With a smaller team base the top players will play chl hockey as it readys you for NHL hockey. Mid tier to low tier prospects will play NCAA.
So canada is going to give hockey players the chance at a college education instead of just playing hockey and making some league richer? Ill take the better life for the players
I don't understand why anyone goes to the NCAA. why do homework and tests if you don't have to? You can always do your own education on the side if you want. On topics you actually find interesting and no testing. Unless you want to rest yourself 😂
A. You don't have to be a aerospace engineering student, they can take something easy B. Have you been to NCAA game? The atmosphere is incredible, you have a band in house, a student section which is always rowdy. Not to mention If you play for a team like the North Dakota Sioux your basically a local celebrity especially if you have a winning record
Have some of you hockey fans seen the training facilities and sports medicine clinics that are left behind when the NCAA football teams get a new one? Those can be used by the hockey program and It makes what the CHL has a joke.
Atlantic Hockey is entertaining as hell, even if it's all the smaller programs, it's unpredictable and home to some of the biggest upsets (Air Force anyone?)
NCAA should have 2 hockey teams per college 1. Players coming up with no prior amateur experience 2. Players coming from other leagues like CHL, AJHL, SHL, etc
Do you think this will be good or bad for hockey?
It'll be great for most players, but it's going to be terrible for the chl. The fact that ncaa players can also get paid too is ridiculous because it's not even amatuer hockey, it's a pro league.
Love the shoutout to The Pronghorn lol. This city is something else. Go Hurricanes lol
Short answer Good
It may not make a ton of difference in the end. You can be great at hockey, but you'd still need to meet university academic requirements, which a decent player in the CHL might either be unable or unwilling to meet if they are already on a decent career trajectory. Junior A and USHL focus heavily on prep for NCAA right from day one whereas major junior goes heavy on NHL hopes and dreams. In addition, Junior A allows a player to stay closer to home with less travel since the leagues are more granular than major junior.
ea nhl 25 allows tackling from behind and cross checking you down to the ice from behind .. these are penalties in real life right ?
A free college education and fewer games might be a good idea. Spending four years on a bus and ending up with nothing is a joke.
Yes, this, the trouble also is, it's very physically demanding. Time for a full time degree? Not likely, part time, for sure.
The option of a paid university education is there for junior players. It’s much easier to do after a junior career is over. I know a former player in the Q who got a finance degree after playing and has had a very successful career since he left the league about 20 years ago
For every year you play a game in the chl you get a year of university or college paid for
Yes a college education is great for.... wait let me get back to you on that
@@BigD751 Yes, see how many players at the CHL level end up having multi years contracts in the NHL. What do you do with a high school degree these days? You compete for a job against migrant workers and you vote for Trump.
Good video first of all, but just an inaccuracy I noticed; Not everybody who plays NCAA D1 hockey is on a full ride. Teams have a scholarship limit of 18 (or in the case of the Ivy Leagues, none). They could receive other kinds of scholarships, but many don't get full rides.
If this were to pass, I wonder how many CHL players would go D3 because of the lack of supply (D1 teams) to meet sudden increase in demand (# of players). As crazy as it sounds to someone unfamiliar with NCAA D3, a lot of players have gone pro out of it in the last decade or so (mostly to ECHL, SPHL, or European leagues). It has gotten a lot better in terms of quality too, especially the top programs.
The biggest difference between the NCAA and Major Junior paths currently is this; in NCAA hockey, you practice more than you play. In Major Junior, you play more than you practice.
The leagues most adversely impacted by this rule change would be, in my opinion, the Canadian Junior A leagues. Many top NCAA-bound Canadian prospects have already been skipping them in favor of the USHL. Lower-caliber Canadian NCAA prospects play in the NAHL. Why? They're significantly cheaper, and overall more heavily scouted nowadays.
@@amandahugandkiss2126 It should be noted that recent rule changes now allow 26 scholarship equivalents, and a roster size of 26, so every NCAA player SHOULD be on a full scholarship now, rather than the half scholarships that were normal before.
I would also say though, many, many players that play in junior just want to play hockey. They don't want to balance hockey and college level classes, homework, tutors, labs, etc.
@@robertcampbell8070 First of all, as far as I'm aware, the roster and scholarship proposal you mentioned is just a rule recommendation at the D1 level, and would be an opt-in program if implemented. It is not a rule as of now, as far as I know. Second of all, sure, players just want to play hockey. Going to college and graduating offers them more options after their playing career is over though. NCAA hockey offers them a chance of doing so at a reduced cost compared to average tuition (even at the D3 level on occasion), and letting them practice and refine their skills before they try to play professional hockey. It sets them up for a better future if they can't make the professional leagues for long enough to have some savings.
@@robertcampbell8070 There is one other item to consider as well. In the Great Lakes Region of the USA, one of the better NCAA leagues, the Big Ten, a large number of its schools do NOT have hockey programs. However, there have there have been rumblings for nearly two decades in some states to add these programs, money so far being the limitation. Well-heeled alumni are always competing to show off their wealth and brag about their ownership or support of things. If they can’t own a piece of an NHL club, what better way to be part of the ”in” crowd in your social circle than being the major donor to a hockey program. Think University of Illinois, or Purdue, Penn State or Rutgers, none of which have hockey programs today. Add in new Big Ten members Washington and Oregon. Another example - the Illich family was in discussions just before Mike’s death to fully fund a new hockey program at 50,000 student Wayne State University in the heart of Detroit. With lots of new players don’t you think the Illich’s would revisit those discussions?
@@robertcampbell8070that’s why they all get business or broadcasting degrees ha
@@Turnstables Not really how it works at places like Michigan or Boston College though. You are actually doing the work there.
This is actually good for the CHL. Now it's not an either or - USA players might consider the CHL vs USHL, with the NCAA in their back pocket if the top junior leagues (OHL, QMJHL, WHL) don't work out for them
It's the players who the CHL does work out for that will leave. Anyone good enough at the age of 17 and over will go to the NCAA. many top 16 year olds are gone if they have a good rookie season to play in the more competitive league where they get paid more (NCAA). It's going to have a massive impact. More young players from USA but the quality will go way down as all top 17,18,19 and 20 players are leaving. That's a massive impact
This won't be detrimental to the CHL. It will have a lot more impact on Usport, Junior A, and USHL teams. Currently, the main thing attracting higher end talent to both USHL and Junior A in Canada is that you can play there and not lose NCAA eligibility. With that restriction gone, the CHL is going to see some of that higher end talent cross over to the CHL. You'll also see guys choosing to go to NCAA after the CHL instead of Usport. The CHL already offers tuition benefits to players, it will just go to NCAA schools instead of players going to Usport.
If anything, USHL teams will have to pivot to the CHL model to try keep up. Folks in USHL circles are hoping for some kind of merger with the CHL or possibly a North American Junior super league, but that is unlikely and very telling of their position. The only thing the CHL has to try to figure out is how to get from 2 year draft retention to 4, and they're already working on that.
I also don't think it'll impact the overage players much, those spots are already pretty limited. The only thing that drastically would change that would be if the NCAA would drop the clause of not allowing players who are under NHL contract to play there. Even then, I think it would be minimal.
It will have a much larger impact then you think. Your going to see a lot of top talent from the ages of 16-17, and then everyone who can will leave. Why would you play in the CHL when you can play in a more competitive league and get paid far more for it. Only hope CHL has is to start paying guys like the NCAA is
What about the fact that if you graduate from NCAA you become a free agent in the NHL? Jimmy Vesey for example or Adam Fox holding Calgary hostage after drafting them.
Definitely. This rule change could lead to more situations like that
More canadian kids choosing where they want to play doesn’t sound bad
@@prozac.Canadian teams would be so dominant
@@prozac. true, but if I’m a Canadian player, do I sign with my hometown team or sign in a state that has no state income tax and make that 8 year, $68 million or 4 year, $32 million a better deal after taxes. And with the CRA going after signing bonuses now, that one iota of hope that Canadian teams had to offer, is out.
I'm sure the NHL and NHLPA would step in to make adjustments so that does not become a common issue
It's not going to do anythinh to the CHL except take away a few overagers, and there's only 3 per team allowed now anyways. Most NCAA teams except for the very top programs aren't taking 18 year olds. They're deferring guys until they're 19 or 20. What's going to happen is the tip top guys are going to come in to the CHL at 16 like they always have and stay for at least two years. The mid level guys will stay until they're 19, like they always have.
For many if not most teams, the overages are their top players.
I think the biggest changed will be to the USHL/Junior A in Canada. A lot of top USHL players may choose to go toi the CHL knowing if they don't end up being a McDavid/Crosby/Bedard they will still have the option of D1 NCAA vs Usports/Lower pro leagues. I think young prospects like the more "professional" scheduling and feeling the CHL gives as well which draws people. I think youll still get the top guys (bedards, mcdavids, etc) drafted out of the CHL. Guys who seem to just miss the cut (examples in CHL currently would be like a Markus Vidicek) will now have the opportunity to go D1 and continue a very high levle of development, vs having to go USports or hope to make a lower level Pro-league
@@RobTalksHockey OK,so now your top 19 year olds are your best players. you remove literally 3 players per team, MAYBE, and create room for more younger players to get an opportunity. Plus guys that age out or want to get an education at a top academic school after finishing major junior now have that opportunity, because the CHL scholarship program is a joke.
Let me also say this, the NHL isn't going to let a free developmental league die. If the CHL went away, the NHL would be screwed. There aren't enough NCAA teams, and not enough money, to support all these players. The CHL will become an NHL farm system before it ever goes away.
@@tylerjeffrey9139 Exactly my feeling.
@@RobTalksHockey So you lose like 3 players, MAYBE, off of teams? And that's only if NCAA teams that are historically built on deferring players want to bring in 20 year olds instead of 21 year olds? And that still gives opportunity to other young players? The CHL will be fine.
OHL will become a 15-19 league, no more overagers. Either you go to the show or you can go NCAA.
15-17 for top talent. Even then top 17 yo prospects will leave for NCAA like celebrini. Even MacKinnon wanted to play in the NCAA because of the competition level, with the added money and even better competition it's going to drain the CHL of top talent.
@@jerryrikki9466 first off you’re assuming that these hockey players are even academically fit to play college. I played major junior half of the kids didn’t even go to high school never mind college.
@@Iambetterthanyouanduknowit well times have changed since you played, you need to be doing well academically unless you've already graduated highschool now
Won't affect Canadian Hockey CHL very much. The NCAA budgets aren't going to shift cash from their Football, basketball, or even baseball budgets to try boost Hockey which likely lose them cash compared to the other 3 sports. The NCAA has maybe five programs nation wide and that won't change a thing and player position dominance go up and down there will be years where CHL produces the top Goalies, Years Europe will have the best goalies and the NCAA will have their moments it has been happening for 70 years. Finally when was the last time a NCAA goalie started for a Stanley Cup Winner or how many NCAA goalies have started for a Stanley Cup in the last decade, even how many NCAA goalies have ever started for cups, then take those numbers and compare them to CHL draftees also over the last decade and ever. There is nothing going to change one way or the other, and if they did the CHL Board of Directors can counter with allowing individual commercial sponsorships a move the NCAA Hockey would never be able to take.
Things are changing. There’s a passion for college hockey that’s palpable. It may not be to the level of the other college sports but hockey fits in nicely as a third option superseding the other sports.
There have there have been rumblings for nearly two decades in some states to add hockey programs. Well-heeled alumni are always competing to show off their wealth and brag about their ownership or support of things. If they can’t own a piece of an NHL club, what better way to be part of the ”in” crowd in your social circle than being the major donor to a hockey program. One example - the Illich family was in discussions just before Mike’s death to fully fund a new hockey program at 50,000 student Wayne State University in the heart of Detroit. With lots of new players don’t you think the Illich’s would revisit those discussions?
The NCAA is producing excellent goalie talent.
The fact that they haven't played for Cups yet (other than Quick) has a lot to do with the fact that elite goaltending is not a requirement for a Cup winner now. Elite forwards are far more important.
I think we are all forgetting how much cash female hockey could/is bringing. Just like Porsche, Ferrari, Aston selling SUV's it helos amortize the costs over a larger program. Growth of any kind is good.
College is perfect for this.
Brings potentially more fans too.
costs in hockey now are astronomical and outrageous. Need a way to pay for it all.
@MP-dn4bs Hockey canada knows this, and this is the problem. We are focusing all of our developments on fowards as they are the most sought after players now (game breaking fowards). But now we have this scenario where we have no goalies.
Hasn't been Canada's game in a long time Americas now but hey the way it's going here our national pastime will be cricket soon enough
World hockey rankings...1. Canada...2...Russia....3...Finland....4...Czechia...5..switerland....6..USA
@nakednerdo1424 Many of the NHL games are blacked out in my area. It's annoying! You don't see that with NFL, NBA or MLB games.
@@hockeyaddict7007 Hockey in Canada is much more popular, but development wise USA has much more money and USHL is almost equal to the canadian juniors. NCAA is miles ahead on anything Canada has on university level. If this goes through USHL might be a better place for Canadians just because of the connection with NCAA. Obviously the CHL is still good, but yeah...
Cricket? You couldnt have said soccer or basketball? ... You went with cricket AHAHAHAH
@@deounivers7663 yeah I guess I really don't care where Canadian players decide to play as long as they're ready to go during international tournaments.
I'm wondering if this will actually hurt US hockey more than Canadian. Back in the 60's you had NCAA programs like Cornell, Denver & Michigan who wouldn't even consider American players because they'd just import players wholesale from Canada. And those were the top hockey programs in the NCAA at that time. This set back the development of hockey in the US for 20 years. In the 1930's & 40's, there were a number of American players in the NHL. The Canadians still dominated, but at least there were a few from the US, and they were regulars, some were stars, like Frankie Brimsek & Mike Karakas. But from the 50's to the early 70s, American players disappeared almost completely. For a period of 25 years only one American player (Tommy Williams) had any kind of considerable NHL career.US players didn't have the option of playing in Canadian Juniors and the top NCAA teams were shut off to them, so their development ended at high school.
Now you wonder if American players coming out of high school are going to get shut out again by Canadian players, having finished 4 years of juniors, now at the age of 20, 21, older, bigger, stronger, more experienced, becoming available to NCAA teams. An interesting development would be if the younger US players, now shut out of the NCAA, start going instead to Canadian Juniors and the NCAA becoming a Canadian league and Canadian Juniors becoming the go-to place for 17 year old Americans. Could happen.
If I’m a player I would definitely go the college route….you never know when your hockey career ends and you don’t have any other education to fall back on and earn a dollar,
CHL will become a U18 league
Agreed!
not necessarily, there will be players who:
- don't get offers from highly rated NCAA programs and don't want to go to a mid/low level program
- know they will get much more playing time in the CHL and more important roles
- can't afford to move and/or go to college (not everyone will be offered full rides)
- really like their team and their area and don't want to move somewhere like North Dakota. Especially for kids that have already been drafted.
also you can always do NCAA after you're 20. There will be players who stick out their last 2 years in the CHL and then they can go to NCAA. If I was not a highly touted prospect, I think that would be appealing. I get to stretch my hockey career until I'm 24 years old at least and still get to graduate with a diploma if hockey doesn't work out professionally
@@nolane3972 Also, if, as mentioned in the video, the CHL pays one year's college tuition for every year you play in the CHL, that means an overage player, coming out of juniors after 4 years, doesn't even need a scholarship to play in the NCAA because his tuition is already paid for by the CHL.
I'm not sure exactly how that all works. Maybe they'll only pay tuition to a Canadian college? I have no idea. But Derek Ryan played 4 years for Spokane in the WHL then 4 years for the U of Alberta. No scholarship to the U of Alberta, but I'm guessing his tuition was paid for by the CHL tuition program. No scholarship necessary.
Way better for the kids to leave hockey with a degree, and if it’s better for them, then that’s what really matters.
i live in medicine hat and i remember when we drafted gavin. i knew he would be a hockey prodigy and im so happy i get to watch him play every week
I don't think this will be that big of a deal, the star level players can jump from CHL to NHL hockey and those over aged players playing in the CHL aren't revenue drivers like Mcdavid or Bedard, just gives the middle class of Hockey players more options
Played for a D1 school, as a goalie that saw a good amount of playtime, I did tree work offseason to pay for classes, rent, etc. Granted this was way back in 2001-2005.
In addition to the NCAA’s “free degree” (92% grad rate surprises me) the recent Name Image Likeness decision could make NCAA a more attractive option.
I see why some CHL teams are getting antsy about this, but honestly I think this is better for the players, as some players could continue their hockey career and further their education in the NCAA playing high level hockey after they age out of jrs. It will also help develop a lot of players that need more time, instead of having them sit in the minors without the option to go to a good university.
Why not.. Bettman took this game from Canada a long time ago. The league is a joke, look at the department of player SAFETY lol.. total joke
550k minor hockey registrants in us vs 500k in canada.
Hockey alberta is same size as finland. Could a hockey alberta team take on team finland? Not a chance. Hockey canada is broken. Not bettmans fault.
@@MrGamman3ytAn Alberta hockey team would do just fine vs Finland. Also Finland has nearly 1 mil more people and lots of Alberta's recent population growth is Indian, Chinese and Filipino.
With the NCAA, there's also the possibility of NIL deals. Granted, I don't see a large market for that for college hockey, but I do see a scenario where a college hockey program poaches a star to attract more talent and increase brand visibility. Considering all athletes are potentially one injury from losing the opportunity of earning millions playing pro, it does make sense to get NIL money if you can.
When I would sit down with parents and answer CHL/Juniors or the college route, I would always say, Do you need to develop your individual game or your team game. Individual games are better developed in college and game play better develops in CHL/Junior. Goalies and defense need a little more time to develop their personal games where forwards can build their skill at the team level. History shows this and this rule change will only magnify that. More games vs more practice. The majority of junior teams are tax write offs, lose money or bust even. That will not change with the rule change. Personally I see it watering down the CHL but increasing the college landscape from D1 to D3. You will see a increase in D1 teams that play in the ACHA move to D1. Not a lot but a few will. D3 will become more competitive with those players not drafted but would have previously had a D1 position.
Don't forget that every canadian junior hockey league is supported by private investors (one or more for each team) while in the US, the colleges have deeper pockets. They can play in empty arenas and it doesn't matter for the league while in canada, playing in front of empty seats means the team will be moved.
this is absolutely a great change for the players. that rule was so dumb
Hope there’s a rule where you can’t go to NCAA till you’re over age in junior if you sign in the CHL
I grew up in a town with an mj team that has been fluttering with its existence for some time. When I was in school you would get some free gear and sticks to play for free. Now it’s a case of the kids have to pay to play for most teams and usually well above your triple A team fees. Not exactly a winning business plan. I think chl players being able to jump to ncaa will more hinder the ncaa younger prospects. As aside from your makars or celebrini’s you can bring in fully tested chl 20 year olds looking for that last kick at making it, while also providing an education. I also believe that there’s been many lawsuits against the chl because they restrict the paid schooling to only a few years after you are aged out of the chl. So many borderline pro players try their hand at Europe or echl and then lose the scholarships that are “paid for” simply because they chose to try and play pro hockey.
the full-ride scholarship to a U.S institution is also nice
My only deal with the video is this. Not all of these CHL players coming into the NCAA would recieve full-ride scholarships, especially at these smaller D-1 schools here in the US. Furthermore, with there only being 22 roster spots and only a handful of bench spots, you would have to imagine that these players would want playing time. I feel you would need to see more D-1/D-3 hockey programs open up for this CHL to NCAA to truly become a problem. I think you might see a few more players from the CHL make their way to the NCAA, but I can't really see it become this incredibly fatal deal for canadian junior hockey if this deal goes through.
Maybe I'm looking at this the same way I currently look at college football, but you have to admit that issues in college football could potentially transfer to college hockey as well.
If I was a Canadian hockey player and I had the choice to play in the CHL or play in the NCAA I'd definitely play in the NCAA. It's a higher level of hockey and I get a full scholarship at a US College. That's important because only a small fraction of college/junior players make it to the NHL
another great video rob, glad to see the continued growth of your page
Rob, one of my thoughts includes Brad Park talking about playing in the afternoon in a game in Toronto, and being asked if he wants to watch a Junior game where a 14 year old Bobby Orr was playing, and Bobby was controlling the play with 18 year olds. Are there still players in Canada that are being rushed into situations in the CHL because of monetary problems with the teams they’re playing for, weakening their development even at that stage?
8:40 $900 million????? I never knew the Canadian dollar finely caught up with the Yen ¥ 😂
Bro you went to uLeth?!
Less players moving to the States to pursue college cause their Jr. A league back home in Quebec, the maritimes or Ontario doesn't cut it? Now they can stay in Canada, play in the best league and still opt to go to college in the NCAA if they desire... if anything this is beneficial...
Being a North Dakotan and Hockey fan, I always wondered why I hated Crosbey, the fire went out last year, out of the blue, then you tell me he could've been with Toews and Oshie?! Wtf Sid UND is amazing! (I'm overdramatic with everything)
I understand the ban and the reason to lift it realated to the new NIL payments making the ban useless... but I also don't see it harming the CHL as much as many think.
Simple math says if lots of CHL players jump to the NCAA at 18, there will not be enough quality CHL players to maintain the current number of teams. Therefore, if the NCAA vote passes, the CHL will shrink. I would expect plenty of undrafted CHL players to jump to the NCAA for the degree for post-hockey.
Ngl the biggest problem for hockey in Canada is simply the economics. In the US buying equipment with US dollars the prices are actually not all that bad, but prices in Canada are just ridiculous with our currency being so low now. Moreover, to live in Canada is simply too expensive and you’re not left with all that much money to spend on other things like sports for your children. Once it’s becomes easier to live in Canada we will see for sure a rebound in youth players and again a rebound in the CHL.
I think time will tell with the NCAA vs CHL if it stays like this but an answer could be a joint venture with Usports and the CHL where we could see a UK system of university sports where you can have a University A,B,C teams all competing in a league and all being training pipelines for each other. This would provide a needed gap and competitive edge over American Universities where some players would rather try there hand at the USports B team then play for a dead low tier NCAA team that lacks the quality and talent they need to develop and also be cheaper on tuition since many of these NCAA spots are not filled by scholarships or full rides.
Getting along, and working out a good system?
lol.
Have you seen hockey canada?
Too many ego's in hockey for 'a good' system.
I truly wish I were wrong, but see last 40yrs.
But Modano played junior with the Prince Albert Raiders in the Western Hockey League, not the NCAA.
Realistically, the big change is the court ruling against the NCAA in 2021 in favor of student athlete compensation.
Prior to this the NCAA resisted efforts to compensate college athletes beyond the scholarship and stipend.
In the CHL, Courts have approved a 33 million dollar settlement for former Major Junior Hockey Players who played in the WHL or OHL. The only remaining condition before the players can be paid is settlement approval by the Quebec Court for the QMJHL Class Action.
If the settlement is not approved in Quebec then players will not be paid and all three matters will continue to be litigated, probably for years with no guarantee the players will win or see any compensation. This has the potential to bankrupt the CHL.
A number of top level American players have taken the Junior route over the years including Patrick Kane & Matthew Tkachuk. I think you might see even more if the NCAA teams start scarfing up 20 year old 4 year Junior Hockey vets there will be fewer opportunities for 18 year old American players, so they'll go to Canada.
I mean over the progress of a season in NHL 24 my first NHL game I went from rookie to pro in a season of pro career now Ive moved to superstar for the 2nd season and it's a huge transition between those two dofficultys
WHL used to produce top defenceman constantly. I think the Q is so offense focused that it hurts overall
next year there will still be the same amount of roster spots across Canadian hockey leagues and NCAA. If NCAA is getting filled by ex-CHL players there is potential for US born players to play in the CHL. If not, then those players will be bumped down to the USHL (or other leagues) thus increasing their competition. The CHL could also have an influx of talent that might have gone to other minor hockey leagues to keep their NCAA eligibility (i.e. Makar, Celibrini), so now you'd have those guys from 16-17 years of age, and you might be able to convince them to stay in the CHL.
I think there is a lot of potential for growth when you increase competition. Leagues will have to adjust and improve their system instead of taking advantage of a stupid rule that the NCAA had. In the long run, this will be great for the growth of the game IMO. Certainly for the NCAA, I bet there will be new teams that come into existence and mid/low level D1 teams that really grow their programs.
Someone smarter than I needs to do a video on this and exolain well.
This is a complex issue with so many possible outcomes for various leagues and players. But one thing is for sure... that video had more sick snipes than I could wrap my head around. 😊
Canadian House League will develop the best future beer leaguers in North America.
NCAA also allows you to train and play in facilities that the CHL can only dream of.
I personally hate this. It’s going to have a major negative impact on ushl nahl ajhl bchl and the couple other lower tiers that are growing. It’s also going to kill the futures of a lot of later developing prospects who weren’t stars at 15,16. If anything I think USports should find a way to continue developing players and turn them into pro players rather than punish players who thought more long term and wanted to go to school
I think it might be an opportunity for more players to play in the CHL then move on to a US college. Idk, interesting development. I think it opens up options for all players.
Good for hockey overall, but bad for canadian hockey.
Funny now Canadians are open to this change when USA hockey is starting to Peak! Must be a coincidence😂😂😂
They should remove League restrictions entirely. We should just be about age and quality.
"In wosrt case Ontario"... casually dropping a TPBs reference here, fuck Eh Buddy!
Doesn't the CHL provide 1 year of College for every year played in the league? If a full ride is the incentive then that's a wash, especially for those players that know that they won't make it to the show let alone the AHL.
8:25 Wow, Canadian inflation is that bad? $400-600K is equivalent to $900M now?
It's the players who the CHL does work out for that will leave. Anyone good enough at the age of 17 and over will go to the NCAA. many top 16 year olds are gone if they have a good rookie season to play in the more competitive league where they get paid more (NCAA). It's going to have a massive impact. More young players from USA but the quality will go way down as all top 17,18,19 and 20 players are leaving. That's a massive impact, the leauge will be forever changed
Hockey isnt Canada's Game anymore. The US stole the soul of hockey and made it more American. Bettman has destroyed hockey for Canada.
Its population and wealth. Not entirely bettmans fault.
@@MrGamman3ytit is and you know it
Nah, Canada is still the best at hockey. I say that as an American fan. We have a lot of good players now but we've still never developed an Orr-Gretzky-Lemieux-Crsoby-McDavid level player. Our best guys are always a level below the best, except maybe at goaltending. The best player in the world in my lifetime, and that goes back a long way, has been a Canadian.
I really don't want to see college hockey become like college football and basketball
This is going to be interesting. I'm assuming that the average age of the top CHL players will become lower, but the overall level of play might remain the same? You would assume that Junior A and U-Sports will be the losers out of all of this. Of course, the NCAA should win....and hockey development in general will be better for the reasons you stated. Oh, I guess the NCAA might end up with a larger proportion of Canadians, meaning American-born players might lose out?
The US has their National Development Program. Could something like that exist in Canada and how would it work?
Could this mean that NCAA Hockey might exist in a video game in the future?
I wish Brooks was a better run organization that I was able to pronounce Cale Makar's name properly when he played there.
The IIHF, CHL, and the NHL have been trying to destroy Canadian hockey for years, Why? Because we win most of the tournaments around the world. Now fighting is out of the Q, and the OHL, a practice that will take a lot of physically dominant hockey out of the game. The WHL will soon follow with fighting banned across the league. Canadian fans should boycot all OHL and AHL games until fighting is re-instated. Why are the guru's of the CHL's in agreement with these policies? Because their jobs are on the line! Reduce physical hockey or else!!!!!
Or it changes the NCAA. Jr graduates move on to the NCAA to develop further and get an education before turning pro. Players that are 4 years older and more experienced over the younger and "inexperienced" college players. The CHL has scholarships for grads moving on to Canadian universities. US schools have far more money too.
That’s indeed a real dilemma
Looking forward to see how it is
So many people in the comments are missing the point. This move is about money. And with the NIL contracts, the exponential growth of hockey in the US, and the tax structures of Canada...this will be a no-brainer for top talents. Maybe not immediately, but over the coming years for sure. The NCAA has added 8 teams to D1 since 2016. Thats an average of 1 a year. The CHL? Well...hasn't. At all. The CHL will be a U18 league by 2030. The fact of the matter is, it's a better career move to live and work in the US as a professional athlete.
Let’s go Canadian USports, go Golden Bears!
Yeah that is actually a good thing for hockey and development
Things will change but I can't see it being anything but good for hockey. It was always a dumb rule to just arbitrarily limit paths available to players. Also hopefully this leads to chl players being able to go up to the AHL sooner
Can’t believe you’re a pronghorn, Rob!
Hasn't Canada hockey suffered enough. Been a while like staind said it be since they won a Stanley cup.
@RobTalksHockey 5:55 Just an heads up, being on the bottom of the totem pole would imply that they are the strongest team, as the beings on the bottom of the totem pole were always meant to hold/lift everyone else up. :)
Really just had to show Demko gameplay... I miss Demko
As long as they implement that the NCAA guys can't bail on the team that drafted them I'd be fine with it.
Maybe hockey Canada can use the money they will save from SA lawsuit settlements to help out these teams. As well as help out less fortunate Canadians pay for hockey as its a very expensive sport to play.
Big overreaction here lol.
Nobody goes to CHL games to watch overage players anyway. They watch for up and coming prospects
I would say it’s a combination of up and coming prospects and player who are leading scorers and or drafted to the NHL.
Big names and winning brings people.
Not overagers. Scoring or not. Drafted or not.
Winning teams have overagers on them, definitely. But I really don't think this losing some would be "devastating" in any sense. If anything, perhaps those players get replaced with younger players who can use the game time to make a name for themselves sooner
They should go because they like to watch hockey. I'm in NYC. I wish we had a good lower level hockey team like AHL or CHL level, to go to because the NHL is too expensive. Junior hockey is good hockey. I've seen it on TV. No, it ain't the NHL, but it's a damn good game to watch.
I think its good. If your team cant survive without a superstar then your team should be moved or it should fold. CHL isn't a professional sports league. The players don't get paid making a profit off of unpaid teenagers is kinda shitty.
I'm not a fan of this potential rule change because my city has a USHL team, and if this rule change does happen, then everybody will go to the CHL since there is more talent
OHL WHL and QMJHL need to pay their players better.
Only so many spots available in any league. Just gonna shift where some players end up
Canada is a mess
10:05 worst case Ontario love the rickyisms
Couldn't they put an age limit on it at say 18 . The chl would still get to the 16 and 17 year olds and anyone else that didn't get a scholarship
It was kinda cool seeing cellebrini lose to the blues
The CHL will just need to up its game and maybe pay its players better.
I should have became a goalie coach instead of ruining rosters as a GM
If this happens the CHL size will shrink, they will lose some teams. With a smaller team base the top players will play chl hockey as it readys you for NHL hockey. Mid tier to low tier prospects will play NCAA.
Only really the WHL will Shrink, I don't see the OHL and QMJHL shrinking, the QMJHL will probably come out unscathed.
The CHL is the stronger path to the NHL, this isn't going to hurt at all.
It makes sense for the defense to skip the chl and get a degree instead of playing in the minors for the first two years
So canada is going to give hockey players the chance at a college education instead of just playing hockey and making some league richer? Ill take the better life for the players
This rule is the best thing to happen to hockey
we need a professional canadian league
CHL leagues could change to be like the NCAA
I don't understand why anyone goes to the NCAA. why do homework and tests if you don't have to? You can always do your own education on the side if you want. On topics you actually find interesting and no testing. Unless you want to rest yourself 😂
A. You don't have to be a aerospace engineering student, they can take something easy B. Have you been to NCAA game? The atmosphere is incredible, you have a band in house, a student section which is always rowdy. Not to mention If you play for a team like the North Dakota Sioux your basically a local celebrity especially if you have a winning record
Competition, older players, going against bigger stronger making you better
@@thecastleofenlightenment2604playing against guys in their early 20 year olds instead of 16 -18 year olds will do wonders for their game
Have some of you hockey fans seen the training facilities and sports medicine clinics that are left behind when the NCAA football teams get a new one? Those can be used by the hockey program and It makes what the CHL has a joke.
Kayria didnt win that championship! College hockey rules
KEEP THE CHL PURE
Hi Rob 👋
great for hockey, bad the chl. more options for these kids is only a good thing.
$300,000 USD = $900,000,000 CAD hahahaha
Also... Go Pronghorns! Also a U of L alum haha
It might make the NCAA worth watching
Bro thought he cooked with this one 😂
Atlantic Hockey is entertaining as hell, even if it's all the smaller programs, it's unpredictable and home to some of the biggest upsets (Air Force anyone?)
NCAA should have 2 hockey teams per college
1. Players coming up with no prior amateur experience
2. Players coming from other leagues like CHL, AJHL, SHL, etc
That was deep.. lol