CHL(WHL,OHL,QMJHL) Is Killing Canadian Content

[RayMartyniukTotems]

In the 1970's the different leagues of the CHL allowed 1 overager player. Today they allow 3 per team per game. Plus the fact that each CHL team is allowed 2 European exports. And that doesn't even count the number of Americans playing in the CHL. In the last 10-15 years there has been a huge push to get European goaltenders to come over and fill the nets that once was solely Canadian content. Not any more. And with the draft age having gone down from 20 to 18 there is even more of a push to have "ready made" players. Unfortunately the Canadian kids are getting squeezed out while the European kids get more playing time and roster spots. Love Don Cherry or hate he was right in this regard, Canadian content is suffering because greedy owners want to put the best product on the ice to attract the most paying customers. I get that but the clincher is that more and more Canadian kids are not getting the development they need and fall between the cracks.
Overager players aren't needed most of those players barely get a ECHL contract. Perhaps there can be a League made of 20 year olds like the Senior Leagues use to be. As for the European exports. A rule should be put into place where perhaps no European is allowed to play in the CHL until they are 19 years old leaving them 1 year before heading to NHL training camps, rosters or back to Europe. I love hockey and players from all nations but the onus for Canadian teams should be Canadian content and development. The CHL claims to be a feeder system for the NHL but lately its been at the cost of Canadian players. And since most of the teams 52 out of 60 in the CHL are paying Canadian customers we as Canadians should demand from Ownership mainily Canadian content. And content throughout Canada. Not what the Canadian owners pretend is happening. You know the ones who claim to have the interest of Canadians at heart. The best part of all this post Co-Viod has been the huge loses at the gate for those greedy owners and their light pocketbooks. The onus should be on development as they claim the 3 Leagues of CHL say they are! And it should be mostly Canadian development. So currently there are 3 overagers taking up positions on every CHL team. Plus 2 Europeans. That's 5 players taking up valuable spots from Canadians. How many CHL teams produce 5 NHLers per team...non if any. And how many are Canadian...not many with fewer and fewer every year especially in the goaltender department where most of the top NHL goaltenders are Europeans or Americans,why? CHL Ownership needs to stand up and answer that question and all the others. Are CHL teams here to develop Canadian content or World content?

Click to read more...

 

[OMG67]

You are missing a lot of the other changes.

First, there are a ton of CHL teams. Back in 1980, the WHL had 13 teams, QMJHL had 10 teams and the OHL had 12 teams for a total of 35 teams. The CHL boasts 60 teams. 25 additional teams with 23 roster spots increases the roster spots available by 575 players.

Second, the growth of the game through Europe and the USA has seen a tremendous boost. That growth increases the number of players playing exponentially.

Third, developing hockey players doesn’t mean you should simply restrict who plays to smaller groups. If developing players was about restricting geography then why not have five leagues of 20 teams in Ontario and don’t let anyone outside Ontario play? That logic would suggest we’d develop five to ten times the number of NHL calibre players. But, we don’t.

The reason why Canada still develops the largest number of NHL players while experiencing tremendous growth of the sport outside Canada is because the CHL teams have a mandate to insert the best available talent in the World. Elevating the overall talent pool pushes the best players past their limits and those players grow.

Your entire logic is flawed. As hockey lovers, we should want Canada to continue to lead the World BUT we shouldn’t want to run it as a monopoly. The USA has ten times the population of Canada. They should produce ten times the number of NHL players but they don’t….YET.

It is only a matter of time before the rest of the world starts to outpace Canada and that is great for the game because it shows the game is growing. Your philosophy is rooted in a stagnant approach to development and it only works to restrict development, not improve it.

You really need to rethink your philosophy.

 

[BE Friend]

CHL role is to produce NHL talent. Period. For the 22 and beyond seasons lets hope they wall off Russia even tighter. No relenting until Putin is dead and gone.

 

[jetsmooseice]

Interesting comments OP regarding overagers and the possibility of bringing back senior hockey.

I wonder if instead of bringing back senior hockey, it might make more sense to limit to one overager as in the old days, and give the 20 year olds a push into university hockey which basically is senior hockey? For a 20 year old who won't be going pro, maybe it's doing them a disservice to keep them around junior one more year (which they will understandably gravitate to, since it's all they know). At 20, give them a gentle push to their local U Sports team so they can keep playing hockey while getting on with life.

 

[hockeykid87]

Man what are you even complaining about?

"That doesn't even count the number of Americans playing in the CHL" According to eliteprospects there are 74 Americans in the CHL. That's essentially one per team.

"there has been a huge push to get European goaltenders to come over" There are currently 11 European goalies in the CHL. Eleven. They banned import goalies for a few years and guess what, the quality of goaltending dropped. So they brought them back.

"Canadian content is suffering" I dunno man, the 2005 age group looks pretty damn elite to me.

"Overager players aren't needed" So you're just spare parts once you hit 20? Career over? Banished from the league?

"The CHL claims to be a feeder system for the NHL but lately its been at the cost of Canadian players" The 2021 and 2022 NHL Drafts saw 89 Canadians drafted in each. That's the highest since 2013 when 99 Canadian players were drafted. I realize not all of those 89 were from the CHL, but your statement is just false.

"there are 3 overagers taking up positions on every CHL team ... taking up valuable spots from Canadians" Those players ARE Canadians. There are currently three non-Canadian overagers in the WHL. Three.

Damn dude. Just go outside, yell at the clouds and keep it yourself.

 

[alko]

because greedy owners want to put the best product on the ice to attract the most paying customers.

Hm, what is wrong with that?

Now back to topic. Are you complaining about CHL and Canadian players? Why? Canada is still best country in ice-hockey.

You have McDavid, there will be another Connor, many many top players in NHL. Winning gold almost every year on WCH U20, U18. Everytime they play in senior WCH, Canada is always a top dog. 6 Gold medals in last 20 years, many silver and bronze. Even with B-team.
And if Canada plays wit top players... Fuuu. Thats another level.

Again. I dont understand, why are you complaining?

 

[Hammer9001]

I will say this, Senior hockey and the Allan Cup have some pretty slim pickings. There's four teams, three of which are part of the city of Hamilton and one in Brampton. It was rough before the pandemic, but now it's been pretty much wiped out.

It's the sad reality of the sport in Canada. There is next to no local support for older players who aren't somehow connected to the big league via the AHL or ECHL, and even the ECHL seems to struggle. There's just no way we'd ever see another WHA.

Frankly, I'm surprised they keep shop in the Hammer, what with the presence of the Bulldogs. Also to clarify, not the hilarious but fictional Sudbury Bulldogs who also play Senior AAA

 

[MM917]

I think hockeykid did a pretty good job of pointing out some flaws in your post. It seems there is always a complaint that CHL is somehow limiting Canadian hockey growth but when you actually look at it the numbers rarely agree. I know many want to hate on it and there are some legit complaints but always odd when false things are presented as fact.

The one area I would look at is the 20 year olds. I certainly would be willing to look at removing them altogether. There will always be a bit of an issue with age gaps but 20-16 is a very big gap. If we recognize a need to limit it to 3 not sure why they don't just get rid of it altogether. Maybe there is a good reason to keep a few around but I don't see the need at all.