NCAA Eligibility & CHL

[Corso]

The NCAA sees it as a professional league for that and because the vast majority of teams compensate their players upwards of the mid-five figures.

Who here really believes the CHL are professionals? There is a lawsuit going on in Canada trying to define that at the moment. From nearly every angle, they are. And most are very compensated for it.

What CHL teams compensate their players in mid five figure salaries? Please provide evidence because standard CHL contracts only allow for stipends that cover the basic cost of living. From what I was told only over age players receive a stipend of 800 a month, all other receive 400 and that is a FAR CRY from a 50 thousand dollar salary that you are alluding to. The stipends should no longer matter as the NCAA has allowed for the very same thing for their players known as cost of attendance

So a kid is now finished high school and still has at least half of his CHL career left before he ages out. Depending on the jurisdiction, he could have 4 years (in Quebec) or 3 years in the other Canadian provinces and US states during which he has no secondary school obligations and only plays hockey.

In my experience as a post-secondary educator in Canada and Europe since 1988, a kid who has been out of school for 3-4 years and only playing CHL hockey might not be all that interested in returning to school after so much time away from it. If he is interested, he might not be successful in a post-secondary setting. The irony here is that the CHL likes to call the players “Amateur Student-Athletes,” even though many finished high school after their second season and are full-time hockey players for the rest of their time in the league. When that CHL time ends, becoming a REAL amateur student-athlete at the post-secondary level can be extraordinarily challenging. Even former players who hang up the blades and intend to focus solely on their studies often find the transition challenging. The CHL proudly announces the number of scholarships the league funds each year, but they don’t publish the post-secondary graduation rates for alumni. They likely don’t even track it, but if a kid with four years of scholarship funding stops drawing it after one year … . Anecdotally, I’ve personally had 20-30 former CHL players in my courses over the years, and their graduation rate, while not horrible, is still less than inspiring. Obviously, small sample size.

The very same thing can be said about USHL, NAHL and BCHL players (3 junior leagues that provide the majority of players to the NCAA). These are players who finish high school yet continue to play hockey full time for two or three years before entering D-1 hockey. The difference is that even fewer of these players take part time college courses than CHL players because their teams/leagues do not cover the cost of tuition while playing (as the CHL does)

Who here really believes the CHL are professionals? There is a lawsuit going on in Canada trying to define that at the moment. From nearly every angle, they are. And most are very compensated for it.

The lawsuit was settled. Right or wrong, every Canadian province and the states of Michigan, Washington and Oregon passed legislation defining the CHL as amateur in nature and exempt from labor laws. So the players are not classified as employees. Now let me say that I really do not agree with this as I believe both CHL and NCAA players ought to compensated for their services because they are in a FOR PROFIT model (yeah please spare me the bullshit of the NCAA being non profit). This, however, can also be extended to the USHL as their clubs also operate on a for profit basis and their operations closely follow the procedures of the CHL with the exception of allowing signed NHL players on their rosters.

I recall reading something from the WHL site where they talk about number of players using the school package and it was a lot of players.

Quick google search
OHL Scholarship Program Investment Tops $3.5 Million in 2021-22 – Ontario Hockey League

Western Hockey League

whl.ca

From those two leagues around 700 players used their scholarship packages. Could it be better...maybe but that's not insignificant either.

Long and short of it is this. European players who have played PRO HOCKEY have been granted eligibility. If Duda suits up for Maine after playing 28 games in both the MHL and KHL then it's only a short matter of time before CHL players begin trickling and then flooding into the NCAA

 

[AUS Fan]

The CHL does "pay" some players above the legal stipend. I don't follow CHL that closely but I know a couple of CIS players who were getting serious change in Junior. But not all players get that.

I agree with your take on USHL, NAHL and BCHL where those players are trying to get into NCAA schools.

I'd like to know how many Euro Pros are playing NCAA. Duda is worth following and see where this goes. I can't see other Hockey East teams allowing that to happen.

I'm not sure I'm with you on CHL players going to NCAA. Are you talking about 20 yr olds going to NCAA?

Interesting thread.....

 

[Barclay Donaldson]

What CHL teams compensate their players in mid five figure salaries? Please provide evidence because standard CHL contracts only allow for stipends that cover the basic cost of living. From what I was told only over age players receive a stipend of 800 a month, all other receive 400 and that is a FAR CRY from a 50 thousand dollar salary that you are alluding to. The stipends should no longer matter as the NCAA has allowed for the very same thing for their players known as cost of attendance

It was more or less confirmed Patrick Kane and his family were given $1 for each ticket sold by the London Knights in 2006. There is obviously not an source material I can provide for this, it is all under the table. But I can say for certain it is such common knowledge you'd have to live under a rock not to acknowledge its existence. It is even a running joke on Spitting Chiclets, that's how mainstream it is.

 

[Corso]

It was more or less confirmed Patrick Kane and his family were given $1 for each ticket sold by the London Knights in 2006. There is obviously not an source material I can provide for this, it is all under the table. But I can say for certain it is such common knowledge you'd have to live under a rock not to acknowledge its existence. It is even a running joke on Spitting Chiclets, that's how mainstream it is.

Common knowledge is it? Well was it allowed under CHL rules? NOPE! Read this about improper benefits given to NCAA players

Even When Allegedly Paid Illegally, NCAA Athletes Appear To Be Very Underpaid

It has been alleged that universities have paid six figure bribes to acquire stars in college men's basketball. Although the alleged bribes are much more than what players are currently being paid, these bribes are far less than the revenue many players generate.

www.forbes.com

Does this mean the NCAA is professional because they illegally paid players? NOPE! Just like the CHL isn't professional if the London Knights paid Kane hundreds of thousands of dollars to play. It's simply called CHEATING and it happens in all sports ( and spare me the bullshit that this is rare in the NCAA as the NCAA is the most corrupt sporting organization out there)

So again, there is no valid reason for the NCAA to view the CHL as a professional body and again ONLY A MATTER OF TIME before it no longer does.

 

[BadgerBruce]

Common knowledge is it? Well was it allowed under CHL rules? NOPE! Read this about improper benefits given to NCAA players

Even When Allegedly Paid Illegally, NCAA Athletes Appear To Be Very Underpaid

It has been alleged that universities have paid six figure bribes to acquire stars in college men's basketball. Although the alleged bribes are much more than what players are currently being paid, these bribes are far less than the revenue many players generate.

www.forbes.com

Does this mean the NCAA is professional because they illegally paid players? NOPE! Just like the CHL isn't professional if the London Knights paid Kane hundreds of thousands of dollars to play. It's simply called CHEATING and it happens in all sports ( and spare me the bullshit that this is rare in the NCAA as the NCAA is the most corrupt sporting organization out there)

So again, there is no valid reason for the NCAA to view the CHL as a professional body and again ONLY A MATTER OF TIME before it no longer does.

What the NCAA does (such as the NIL provisions) once the athletes are in the NCAA has little bearing on how they view the athletes before they become NCAA athletes. Are NCAA programs and athletes “professional”? Maybe, but it doesn’t matter in terms of one’s eligibility to enter the NCAA.

Hockey players with major junior experience once were NCAA eligible. Give or take a year, the last former major junior hockey player to seamlessly move to NCAA hockey was in 1981.

So, what changed? The CHL did.

First, new Ontario Major Junior Hockey League commissioner David Branch pulled the league out of the CAHA (Hockey Canada forerunner) in 1980. The other major junior leagues soon followed. This meant that the players were no longer governed by the CAHA and had no recognized claim to amateur status. No claim to amateur status meant no NCAA eligibility. As an aside, to this very day the Ontario Hockey League pays an annual fee to the Ontario Hockey Association (about $30K a few years back) for the right to represent Ontario in Memorial Cup competition. Dave Branch would, of course, know the exact figure — he was once the Treasurer of the OHA and a CAHA executive.

Second, once the exit from the CAHA was complete, the CHL (a somewhat loose alliance in those days) negotiated its own agreement with the NHL, which we now know as the “CHL-NHL Agreement” but was previously the “CAHA-NHL Agreement” going back to the mid-1930s, when the CAHA was broke and signed a deal with the NHL to save its financial ass. The new agreement between the CHL and the NHL completely removed the amateur hockey governing body (CAHA) from the equation (NHL development money used to flow directly to the CAHA, which used much of the cash for grassroots programming).

Third, CHL players were now playing with and/or against paid professionals. The CHL-NHL agreement codified that, and NHLPA collective bargaining agreements specifically referenced the Agreement. The issue was not whether the CHL teams paid players, which they’d been doing for generations via a weekly stipend; no, the issue was in an exclusive contractual relationship with the NHL and at least some of the players were also under contract with NHL teams. Thus, on its face, the CHL was now operating as a professional hockey business enterprise. That ain’t amateur by any definition and certainly not the NCAA’s.

Flash forward to 1998 and the old CAHA (amateur hockey governing body) and the old Hockey Canada (international hockey broker historically run by the glorious crook Alan Eagleson) merged to create one governing body. The CHL becomes a “Member Partner” in this new Hockey Canada governing body, but retained complete independence. The whole “Member Partner” thing was nothing more than a commercial contract intended to allow both corporate entities to get rich from international hockey, particularly the world juniors. But neither the CHL nor its players were in any way governed by Hockey Canada. They still aren’t. Sure, every now and again someone will say, “but they are on the Hockey Canada Registry!” but that’s just a housekeeping technicality that facilitates the CHL’s participation in the various insurance schemes Hockey Canada subscribes to.

A few other points: the “minimum wage” lawsuit between former CHL players and the league is not settled. The judge rejected the settlement largely because it protected the league in OTHER similar court actions in which it is the defendant. So it’s ongoing. Also, anyone familiar with the USHL (or the BCHL, for that matter) knows that the overwhelming majority of players already have NCAA commitments. Neither the USHL or the BCHL provide post-secondary education scholarships to former players because the institutions to which they’ve committed are picking up all or most of the tab through their own scholarship/financial aid programs. Is it fair to say that many junior hockey players across North America often have 2-3 year gaps before they attend post-secondary school? Yes. It’s the norm, actually. But there’s a difference between having such a gap with an NCAA commitment already in hand and having such a gap with no post-secondary school commitment in hand, which is the case for the overwhelming majority of CHLers.

If all this sounds as though I’m somehow “anti-CHL,” I’d like to directly state that I am not. The league has a purpose and fulfils it well, better than any junior league in the world. But the NCAA also has a purpose, which it fulfils very well. The two distinct purposes do not mesh and have not for 40+ years now. The CHL is not going to change anytime soon; Will the NCAA? I highly doubt it. There’s no benefit to doing so.

 

[Corso]

What the NCAA does (such as the NIL provisions) once the athletes are in the NCAA has little bearing on how they view the athletes before they become NCAA athletes. Are NCAA programs and athletes “professional”? Maybe, but it doesn’t matter in terms of one’s eligibility to enter the NCAA.

Hockey players with major junior experience once were NCAA eligible. Give or take a year, the last former major junior hockey player to seamlessly move to NCAA hockey was in 1981.

So, what changed? The CHL did.

A well reasoned response. Thank you for that information. I'm not as well versed on the CHL such as yourself.

I can tell you, however, that the NCAA has gone through just as profound change in the past ten years as the CHL did some forty years ago.

Today, NCAA athletes and perspective athletes can train, compete with and against professional players. That was once verboten! Ten years ago it was unheard of Europeans who even sniffed professional leagues to play college hockey. The NCAA has become far less rigid in its definition of amateurism and eligibility and both the O"Bannon and Alston cases have thrown the doors wide open for an even more radical over-haul where players receiving direct compensation for play is now a distinct possibility.

The NCAA's rules are fast changing and it is very reasonable to assume that CHL players will become eligible. After all, the USHL, BCHL and NAHL (the main feeder leagues to the NCAA) all accept former CHL players. If such players were indeed professionals by virtue of having played in the CHL, then would they not also contaminate those leagues as well?

Is it fair to say that many junior hockey players across North America often have 2-3 year gaps before they attend post-secondary school? Yes. It’s the norm, actually. But there’s a difference between having such a gap with an NCAA commitment already in hand and having such a gap with no post-secondary school commitment in hand, which is the case for the overwhelming majority of CHLers.

Not sure what having a NCAA commitment already in hand means for future academic success. Your prior point was that former CHL players may not be prepared as "regular" students because of the gap between high school and college. Having a commitment wouldn't really change that and in fact it is likely that CHL players would be more academically prepared than their USHL/BCHL counterparts because they enroll in college classes while playing in the CHL. USHL players often haven't stepped into any type of academic environment for the better part of two years before playing D-1 hockey

 

[Juniorhockeyguru]

Not to mention the abuse, hazing, and general awfulness of the Major Junior culture... Anyone who sends their kid to play Major Junior if the kid isn't a sure-fire first round NHL draft pick is a fool. The education package is seldom comparable to an NCAA scholarship, it's difficult to use, and only gets a former player tuition at a good university if the university happens to be near the Major Junior team's city. So if you didn't play in Kingston, Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and a handful of other places... good luck.

Oh I'm sure that none of that has ever happened before in the NCAA. Good grief.

 

[Corso]

Oh I'm sure that none of that has ever happened before in the NCAA. Good grief.

We all know it did and sadly still does. It happens in all sports and unfortunately all walks of life. Changes have been made and we are all a bit more aware and hold those in power to account, at least more so than we use to.

There are NCAA apologists (and the CHL has theirs as well) who use outdated arguments, innuendos and outright falsehoods to discredit the other side. Fortunately most posters on this board are pretty aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both leagues/systems to buy into it.

My argument remains that there is really no longer any sound rationale from keeping CHL players out of the NCAA. Granting them eligibility would significantly deepen the player pool for D-1 hockey and aid in it's expansion. Yes some leagues like the USHL and U-Sports hockey would be hurt but they would eventually adapt to the new realities and this would in the end provide more opportunities for more players.

 

[AUS Fan]

I'm not going to dispute your "abuse happens everywhere" theme, because you are absolutely correct.

The rationale for keeping CHL players out of NCAA doesn't have to be sound. It just has to sound good to the followers.

I still wonder if CHL players will go to US college at 20 yrs old. Some of them will have gone to a local university where they played Junior. Are these credits transferable to BU or UND? Will these players be scholarship players or will the CHL fund pay?
Ivy League schools don't give athletic scholarships and have high academic standards, so that would limit some CHL guys, for sure.

I'm just not sold on the idea of CHL guys going to NCAA schools, maybe because it's foreign to me.

The CIS has enough problems now without adding 'CHL players going South' to the list.

 

[BadgerBruce]

We all know it did and sadly still does. It happens in all sports and unfortunately all walks of life. Changes have been made and we are all a bit more aware and hold those in power to account, at least more so than we use to.

There are NCAA apologists (and the CHL has theirs as well) who use outdated arguments, innuendos and outright falsehoods to discredit the other side. Fortunately most posters on this board are pretty aware of the strengths and weaknesses of both leagues/systems to buy into it.

My argument remains that there is really no longer any sound rationale from keeping CHL players out of the NCAA. Granting them eligibility would significantly deepen the player pool for D-1 hockey and aid in it's expansion. Yes some leagues like the USHL and U-Sports hockey would be hurt but they would eventually adapt to the new realities and this would in the end provide more opportunities for more players.

The CHL does not want their players — not even the 15th round/300th overall priority selection picks — to be NCAA eligible.

The league’s nightmare scenario is for players to leave for NCAA programs before they’ve aged out. The CHL already loses the absolute cream to the NHL (for which they are financially compensated via terms of the CHL-NHL Agreement), so to lose the next tier of players to NCAA programs after just a few junior seasons (without any financial compensation) is just not on the agenda. The CHL won’t even allow guys to leave for the AHL until they’ve put in 4 seasons.

So if the NCAA lifted the eligibility restrictions on CHL hockey players, I’d fully expect the league to change its own regulations and the terms of the Standard Player Agreement to cut that off at the pass. The CHL and all 60 teams within it are businesses and the players are controlled assets for 4 seasons. They buy and sell them amongst themselves or to the NHL, but they aren’t about to willingly allow them to just leave for the NCAA.

Now, if we are talking about NCAA eligibility strictly for guys who have aged out of the CHL, that’s a different story. I’m sure many NCAA programs would be more than happy to welcome aged-out CHLers who would bring with them their CHL post-secondary education scholarship packages.

 

[Corso]

The CHL does not want their players — not even the 15th round/300th overall priority selection picks — to be NCAA eligible.

Interesting angle as I never really considered what the CHL would want. The truth of the matter is that they would be powerless to do anything about it.

So if the NCAA lifted the eligibility restrictions on CHL hockey players, I’d fully expect the league to change its own regulations and the terms of the Standard Player Agreement to cut that off at the pass. The CHL and all 60 teams within it are businesses and the players are controlled assets for 4 seasons. They buy and sell them amongst themselves or to the NHL, but they aren’t about to willingly allow them to just leave for the NCAA.

What would the CHL change. They fought a lengthy court battle and successfully lobbied Canadian provinces and American states to legislate an amateur status for the CHL. Do you really believe they would throw all that out the window and declare themselves a professional entity? Would they be able to afford to take such a route? I think not.

Now, if we are talking about NCAA eligibility strictly for guys who have aged out of the CHL, that’s a different story. I’m sure many NCAA programs would be more than happy to welcome aged-out CHLers who would bring with them their CHL post-secondary education scholarship packages.

The majority of players entering the U.S. college ranks today are 20 year old overages. We can assume that the majority of CHL players going to the NCAA would be 20 and over as well. So in the end, the CHL may lose the odd 19 year old and even rarer 18 year old to the NCAA, they would still retain the majority of their talent before they aged out.

 

[BadgerBruce]

Interesting angle as I never really considered what the CHL would want. The truth of the matter is that they would be powerless to do anything about it.


What would the CHL change. They fought a lengthy court battle and successfully lobbied Canadian provinces and American states to legislate an amateur status for the CHL. Do you really believe they would throw all that out the window and declare themselves a professional entity? Would they be able to afford to take such a route? I think not.



The majority of players entering the U.S. college ranks today are 20 year old overages. We can assume that the majority of CHL players going to the NCAA would be 20 and over as well. So in the end, the CHL may lose the odd 19 year old and even rarer 18 year old to the NCAA, they would still retain the majority of their talent before they aged out.

Oh, there’s A LOT the CHL can do if a player decides to just bolt. Just read the CHL current Standard Player Agreement — it’s a legally enforceable contract which automatically renews each season unless the team voids it. Section 9 (Recourses of the Club) outlines all the breach of contract legal steps and injunctive relief the club/league will pursue if a player even attempts to play for another team without the express permission of the team/league. The Standard Player Agreement also “includes the right to legally enjoin the Player from playing hockey for any amateur or professional club other than in the NHL pursuant to the NHL-CHL Agreement.” There’s also a short section (11) dealing with “Termination by the Player” (you basically can’t terminate the contract) and a longer section (12) dealing with “Termination by the Club” (we own you until we don’t want to).

The NCAA can go right ahead and allow CHLers, but the CHL will absolutely use the courts to enforce the contracts and prevent players from leaving.

Edit:

The CHL did not receive legislated “amateur status” declarations from states/provinces or any court. Rather, they received exemptions from labour legislation (which includes minimum wage requirements, statutory holidays, etc.).

 

[Corso]

Oh, there’s A LOT the CHL can do if a player decides to just bolt. Just read the CHL current Standard Player Agreement — it’s a legally enforceable contract which automatically renews each season unless the team voids it. Section 9 (Recourses of the Club) outlines all the breach of contract legal steps and injunctive relief the club/league will pursue if a player even attempts to play for another team without the express permission of the team/league. The Standard Player Agreement also “includes the right to legally enjoin the Player from playing hockey for any amateur or professional club other than in the NHL pursuant to the NHL-CHL Agreement.” There’s also a short section (11) dealing with “Termination by the Player” (you basically can’t terminate the contract) and a longer section (12) dealing with “Termination by the Club” (we own you until we don’t want to).

The NCAA can go right ahead and allow CHLers, but the CHL will absolutely use the courts to enforce the contracts and prevent players from leaving.

Could players negotiate out clauses in the standard contract? Say if a player like Fantili ( a star player) said that he would play in the OHL if they allow an out clause to play NCAA hockey at the age of 19? Can the CHL hold the rights to players 20 years of age or can they choose to play any where they like? Are 19 year old CHLers not allowed to sign on to U-Sports teams?? Would the CHL risk backlash from media stories about the league tying their players down and refusing them the ability to pursue a U.S. college education when they saw fit?

 

[BadgerBruce]

Could players negotiate out clauses in the standard contract? Say if a player like Fantili ( a star player) said that he would play in the OHL if they allow an out clause to play NCAA hockey at the age of 19? Can the CHL hold the rights to players 20 years of age or can they choose to play any where they like? Are 19 year old CHLers not allowed to sign on to U-Sports teams?? Would the CHL risk backlash from media stories about the league tying their players down and refusing them the ability to pursue a U.S. college education when they saw fit?

That is a great question. The Standard Player Agreement is identical for every player, though the appendix dealing with the scholarship issue has two versions (one for the “gold package” first rounders and another for everyone else).

The league commissioner must approve every Standard Player Agreement, and any alterations are rejected. Lots of CHL teams have got themselves into hot water by adding “side deal contracts” that are not submitted to the league office. The Niagara IceDogs owners sold the team in part because an independent 3rd-party investigation revealed the existence of a side deal with a player that enhanced his post-secondary scholarship by $10K per year.

But sure, in theory the CHL COULD allow for greater contractual variance, the kind that would provide players with the right to leave for NCAA at a pre-determined point. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for this — the current Standard Player Agreement looks an awful lot like the ones the NHL used back in the 1950s, where the owners independently create the terms and you either sign or don’t play in the league. If there’s any hope of the kind of change you’re proposing actually happening, it would stem from the increasingly wealthy and well-educated parents of modern junior players, a group that might support student-athlete opportunities once the kids hit the age of majority.

Edit: CHL players are “free” of their contractual obligations once they either a) complete 4 seasons, b) play in the NHL, or c) turn 20 years of age (not all 20 year olds played 4 seasons — some joined the league later). They can play USport when they are 19 provided they’ve fulfilled their 4-year commitment OR they’ve been released and cleared waivers.

 

[Corso]

CHL players are “free” of their contractual obligations once they either a) complete 4 seasons, b) play in the NHL, or c) turn 20 years of age (not all 20 year olds played 4 seasons — some joined the league later). They can play USport when they are 19 provided they’ve fulfilled their 4-year commitment OR they’ve been released and cleared waivers.

Once again BadgerBruce, some fascinating information. Frankly I am surprised that no player has challenged those contractual terms in court since it prevents an 18 year old player from pursing employment in professional hockey. I understand that signed NHL players are only allowed to play either in the NHL or CHL but what of the other unsigned "amateur" players. Could the CHL legally stop an 18 year old player from pursuing a pro career in Europe or the AHL/ECHL?

I know that there are transfer agreements between federations and leagues (movement is highly regulated between the USHL and NAHL) that have specific rules to prevent the raiding of players by one body from another (hence the angst created by the BCHL going "rouge") BUT we are talking about an "amateur" league not allowing it's players to advance to the pros until contractual obligations are fulfilled. Of all the lawsuits against the CHL out there, you would think that a binding contract like this would be front and center in the courts.

 

[BadgerBruce]

Once again BadgerBruce, some fascinating information. Frankly I am surprised that no player has challenged those contractual terms in court since it prevents an 18 year old player from pursing employment in professional hockey. I understand that signed NHL players are only allowed to play either in the NHL or CHL but what of the other unsigned "amateur" players. Could the CHL legally stop an 18 year old player from pursuing a pro career in Europe or the AHL/ECHL?

I know that there are transfer agreements between federations and leagues (movement is highly regulated between the USHL and NAHL) that have specific rules to prevent the raiding of players by one body from another (hence the angst created by the BCHL going "rouge") BUT we are talking about an "amateur" league not allowing it's players to advance to the pros until contractual obligations are fulfilled. Of all the lawsuits against the CHL out there, you would think that a binding contract like this would be front and center in the courts.

Well, John Tonelli left the junior Toronto Marlboros for the Houston Aeros of the WHA the day he turned 18 in 1973. The Marlboros sued him for breach of contract. Tonelli won the case on a technicality — he was a minor (16) when he signed with the junior club and, under the law, had the legal right to repudiate the contract when he became an adult (age 18), provided he could demonstrate that the hockey club gained more benefit from the contract than he did. Given that the terms of his standard player agreement with the Marlboros required him to pay them 20% of his gross salary earned with any professional team for three years, the judge ruled that Tonelli had a right to repudiate the contract because it was clearly uneven and heavily favoured the Marlboros’ interests. The Marlboros appealed the ruling and the original decision was upheld.

The loss in the Tonelli case led the junior leagues to revamp the standard player agreement to eliminate the various escape routes. Nobody to my knowledge has challenged the current version in court because lawyers created it to meet all the legal requirements of contracts with minors. And hey, at least players aren’t forced to fork over 20% of their pro salaries for three years any more.

 

[Hollywood3]

Once again BadgerBruce, some fascinating information. Frankly I am surprised that no player has challenged those contractual terms in court since it prevents an 18 year old player from pursing employment in professional hockey. I understand that signed NHL players are only allowed to play either in the NHL or CHL but what of the other unsigned "amateur" players. Could the CHL legally stop an 18 year old player from pursuing a pro career in Europe or the AHL/ECHL?

I know that there are transfer agreements between federations and leagues (movement is highly regulated between the USHL and NAHL) that have specific rules to prevent the raiding of players by one body from another (hence the angst created by the BCHL going "rouge") BUT we are talking about an "amateur" league not allowing it's players to advance to the pros until contractual obligations are fulfilled. Of all the lawsuits against the CHL out there, you would think that a binding contract like this would be front and center in the courts.

Research the John Tonelli case.

 

[AUS Fan]

If I read all this correctly, CHL players are pevented by their contract from leaving before they've played 4 years unless it's to the NHL, via the draft.

If I'm correct, wouldn't this preclude a player "jumping" from CHL to NCAA at age 18 or 19?

 

[BadgerBruce]

If I read all this correctly, CHL players are pevented by their contract from leaving before they've played 4 years unless it's to the NHL, via the draft.

If I'm correct, wouldn't this preclude a player "jumping" from CHL to NCAA at age 18 or 19?

That is correct, putting aside NCAA eligibility rules (CHLers are not eligible). If we are talking about USport, the other option for CHLers who wish to play prior to fulfilling their contractual obligation is to be released and clear league waivers, which essentially means “nobody in the CHL wants me.”

 

[Drummer]

How come the vast majority of CHL players don't use their education packages? Is it because the packages are useless? Is it because they're difficult to actually realize the benefits?

I don't agree with Badger's assessment that the CHL continues to use the domicile rule. I believe they cover tuition at any institution the player is accepted at (this past year, the WHL provided scholarships to 18 participants attending US Colleges). That said - tuition is pretty close to the same amount across Canada - so it might be a moot point.

Eddie - the only challenge to using the package is the player must continue their studies after High School. This can be hard for some 18-21 year-olds with no one looking over their shoulder making sure the school work is getting done. I believe they have to take 2 courses a term (most do Distance-Ed/Online University courses).

Those who stay with it generally have 1 year out of the way when they get to school - can graduate in 3 and have funds leftover for an MBA if they want.

 

[Drummer]

The NCAA is rapidly changing and it's amateur model is in great flux. Consider the case of Aryom Duda.

I really can't see him getting through the review. Nice try by Maine and I wish them luck (only 3hrs away and our neighboring US Rival) but hockey in Russia is really shady sh*t.

 

[EH7]

Edit: CHL players are “free” of their contractual obligations once they either a) complete 4 seasons, b) play in the NHL, or c) turn 20 years of age (not all 20 year olds played 4 seasons — some joined the league later). They can play USport when they are 19 provided they’ve fulfilled their 4-year commitment OR they’ve been released and cleared waivers.

That is correct, putting aside NCAA eligibility rules (CHLers are not eligible). If we are talking about USport, the other option for CHLers who wish to play prior to fulfilling their contractual obligation is to be released and clear league waivers, which essentially means “nobody in the CHL wants me.”

This doesn't quite line up with how Ben Boyd played for SMU this year (he remains on Charlottetown's protected list), or how Peter Reynolds might go to UNB this fall (would likely not clear waivers). Is there another loophole that is being used?

 

[AUS Fan]

That is a good question. Boyd was a 19 yr old when he played at SMU last year, so he didn't "fulfill" his contract, if that's a fact.

 

[BadgerBruce]

That is a good question. Boyd was a 19 yr old when he played at SMU last year, so he didn't "fulfill" his contract, if that's a fact.

This isn’t a reply aimed specifically at you, AUS Fan — I’m just covering a few bases in one post.

A couple of points.

First, the CHL still uses the domicile rule to determine the dollar value of scholarships. According to Brodie Barrick, the OHL’s current director of player recruitment and player support services: “The education packages from our league are based on the university closest to where you’re from, and that’s able to be used at any university, college or trades school in the world.”

One-time OHL goalie promoting the benefits of league’s scholarship package to draft-eligible players


Second, there are occasionally unique personal circumstances that lead CHL teams to “do the right thing.” In the case of Ben Boyd leaving Charlottetown to join SMU, Ken Campbell wrote about this (“QMJHL GM-coach puts player's mental health ahead of wins”). “When a Columbus Blue Jackets' prospect needed to be closer to his family, the Charlottetown Islanders put his well-being ahead of their own.” In other words, the Islanders did him an absolute solid when he was in distress.

QMJHL GM-coach puts player's mental health ahead of wins

 

[AUS Fan]

This isn’t a reply aimed specifically at you, AUS Fan — I’m just covering a few bases in one post.

A couple of points.

First, the CHL still uses the domicile rule to determine the dollar value of scholarships. According to Brodie Barrick, the OHL’s current director of player recruitment and player support services: “The education packages from our league are based on the university closest to where you’re from, and that’s able to be used at any university, college or trades school in the world.”

One-time OHL goalie promoting the benefits of league’s scholarship package to draft-eligible players


Second, there are occasionally unique personal circumstances that lead CHL teams to “do the right thing.” In the case of Ben Boyd leaving Charlottetown to join SMU, Ken Campbell wrote about this (“QMJHL GM-coach puts player's mental health ahead of wins”). “When a Columbus Blue Jackets' prospect needed to be closer to his family, the Charlottetown Islanders put his well-being ahead of their own.” In other words, the Islanders did him an absolute solid when he was in distress.

QMJHL GM-coach puts player's mental health ahead of wins

Never worry about "insulting" me. I have thick skin.

I didn't know that about Boyd so thanks for pointing it out.

I recall a Moosehead player at SFX and he played some games for the Mooseheads over Christmas because they had some injuries. May have been Patty Kyte, I'm not sure.