What % of CHL players could make NCAA teams?

[inferno98]

I am just wondering but what is the % of the kids in NTDP that sign DIV 1 LOI, lets say to major NCAA Division 1 schools like Michigan, Minn, NODAK, not like robert morris. Is it 100%?

 

[FLYLine27*]

I think he meant players that graduate from the CHL.

In that case....just ignore everything I said.

 

[God Bless Canada]

Most of the kids in junior A who go to the NCAA aren't in junior A because they aren't good enough to play in the CHL. They're in junior A because they want a shot at a scholarship. If they play in the CHL, they lose that NCAA free ride.

If players in the CHL could play in major junior, then go down to the NCAA, then I think at least 90 per cent of players in the CHL would be good enough to crack that league. I would guess 75-80 per cent of current players would be good enough, but then you would also have to factor in those players who go the Junior A route to retain their NCAA eligibility. (Andrew Cogliano, for example).

I remember the story of Byron Bitz out here in Saskatchewan a few years ago. (A Boston Bruins fourth rounder in 2003). He was offered a spot on the Regina Pats roster at age 17, and had a good chance to be a top player on that team. But he wanted to get an NCAA scholly, so he played a year in Nanaimo and got a four-year free ride at Cornell. There are a lot of stories like that in junior A, of guys who are good enough to crack the CHL, and star in the CHL, but prefer the education route.

I've never understood this rule from the NCAA's perspective. They could amplify the quality of hockey in their league considerably if they allowed CHL players. Frankly, I think the NCAA would have more to gain than the CHL, who would likely lose most of their top players at 17 or 18 if those players could go the NCAA route.

 

[Oilers Chick]

Most of the kids in junior A who go to the NCAA aren't in junior A because they aren't good enough to play in the CHL. They're in junior A because they want a shot at a scholarship. If they play in the CHL, they lose that NCAA free ride.

If players in the CHL could play in major junior, then go down to the NCAA, then I think at least 90 per cent of players in the CHL would be good enough to crack that league. I would guess 75-80 per cent of current players would be good enough, but then you would also have to factor in those players who go the Junior A route to retain their NCAA eligibility. (Andrew Cogliano, for example).

I remember the story of Byron Bitz out here in Saskatchewan a few years ago. (A Boston Bruins fourth rounder in 2003). He was offered a spot on the Regina Pats roster at age 17, and had a good chance to be a top player on that team. But he wanted to get an NCAA scholly, so he played a year in Nanaimo and got a four-year free ride at Cornell. There are a lot of stories like that in junior A, of guys who are good enough to crack the CHL, and star in the CHL, but prefer the education route.

I've never understood this rule from the NCAA's perspective. They could amplify the quality of hockey in their league considerably if they allowed CHL players. Frankly, I think the NCAA would have more to gain than the CHL, who would likely lose most of their top players at 17 or 18 if those players could go the NCAA route.

First off, I must correct you on something...

Cornell is an Ivy League school, they don't give athletic scholarships....it's against Ivy League rules (which in many cases is separate from NCAA rules).

Second, as much as I am a supporter of the NCAA, I believe some of their rules are downright ridiculous, such as the opt-in rule.

In answer to the thread's original question, some very good answers were given but I'll add a bit more.

Someone mentioned the four "major" conferences (CCHA, ECACHL, HE and WCHA). Even within those conferences there is a wide spectrum of talent. UAA for example can't draw the elite talent (or as much thereof) as say a Minnesota or UND in the WCHA. Some will say the reason is geography, others will say it's money and so on.

There have been and continues to be cases where there are players that seems to have come out of nowhere who become great collegiate players, Scott Parse out of Nebraska-Omaha is a very good example.

What people forget is NCAA players are STUDENT-ATHLETES. Hockey isn't the only thing that's going to allow them to play in the collegiate ranks. They also have to be able to have the "grades" to play. Keith Yandle, who now plays with Moncton, originally had intended to go NCAA. UNH, where he originally wanted to go wanted him playing a year of US junior "A", so he opted to change his destination to Maine. The Black Bears really wanted him to play this year but he didn't have the grades to get into Maine, so he ended up going to the CHL. The academic standards are even more rigid for players desiring to go the Ivies. At schools like Cornell and Harvard, you can't just be a good hockey player and expect to get in, you have to have a very strong academic record (grades) as well.

 

[Blind Gardien]

What people forget is NCAA players are STUDENT-ATHLETES. Hockey isn't the only thing that's going to allow them to play in the collegiate ranks. They also have to be able to have the "grades" to play. Keith Yandle, who now plays with Moncton, originally had intended to go NCAA. UNH, where he originally wanted to go wanted him playing a year of US junior "A", so he opted to change his destination to Maine. The Black Bears really wanted him to play this year but he didn't have the grades to get into Maine, so he ended up going to the CHL. The academic standards are even more rigid for players desiring to go the Ivies. At schools like Cornell and Harvard, you can't just be a good hockey player and expect to get in, you have to have a very strong academic record (grades) as well.

That's a great point. I said earlier I thought 90-95% of graduating CHLers could get in. Based on hockey ability. But it's definitely true that there are a lot of near-juvenile delinquents and guys who have no academic ability whatsoever in the CHL. While I don't imagine the academic demands of most NCAA schools are very stringent (Ivy League aside), I would venture that ANY academic demands at all could cut into that 90-95% estimate quite noticeably.

So maybe I'll shave my estimate down to 75-80% on that basis. (But I'd probably be willing to shave it even more if I had a better/any handle at all on what the real academic environment is for student-athletes).

Of course, even if 75% of players coming out of the CHL could play NCAA hockey based on talent and academics, then still I would guess that relatively few would. The lures of professional contracts would do more than shave off the percentages. Not a lot of 20-year old CHL players choose to go into the CIS. Granted, there isn't much hockey prestige there like there would be in NCAA programs. But still.

 

[Gallagbi]

Don't they get paid in juniors?

Very little.

 

[Hasbro]

That's a great point. I said earlier I thought 90-95% of graduating CHLers could get in. Based on hockey ability. But it's definitely true that there are a lot of near-juvenile delinquents and guys who have no academic ability whatsoever in the CHL. While I don't imagine the academic demands of most NCAA schools are very stringent (Ivy League aside)

Actualy you won't find many degree mills in college hockey, there are plenty of private schools with D-1 teams, both military academies are tough to get into and even some of the state school like Minnesota and Michigan are very exclusive.

 

[RayLeeCharles]

Very little.

$250-500 a month american here in Spokane. You move up the pay scale the older you get.

 

[MN_Gopher]

I think that alot of CHL guys could play. Probally almost all of them minus some enforcer types as fighting is not allowed. But looking at many recruting classes it would be hard to bumb alot of guys. At 20 years old and having played several years of high level hockey many NCAA would be all over the CHL guys. A big strong forward or d man. I would imagine most guys that would score wiould be i nthe NHL at that point. Minnesota next recrutung class has E. Johnson, Okposo, and Fischer all ranked in the top 30 for NA amoung many scouting services. Jim O'Brien who should be a top pick in 07. Along with Carmen, Flynn and Wehrs.

 

[BCCHL inactive]

Don't they get paid in juniors?

Yeah, but only a 5th year veteran will make anything close to what a part-time job would pay them. I remember when my aunt billeted a 17 year-old Slovakian... his paycheque was $85 a month.

 

[leafnation67]

Yeah, but only a 5th year veteran will make anything close to what a part-time job would pay them. I remember when my aunt billeted a 17 year-old Slovakian... his paycheque was $85 a month.

most get post-secondary schooling fully paid for by the team though after their playing time is done

 

[Le Golie]

most get post-secondary schooling fully paid for by the team though after their playing time is done

For every year you play in the CHL, your team pays for a year of University.

 

[Kritty]

Except for the goons, all of them.

You can't be serious? If you are, then you know nothing about the two leagues because that is so wrong it's not even funny. As for the original question, it's not really a fair question. You have teams in the NCAA that are not very deep talent wise so that would be much easier for players to excel on those teams, but then you would also get teams that are very deep talent wise (Minnesota, North Dakota, etc.) where players would have a hard time playing unless they are a top talent. I think for that reason, it's tough to make a fair judgement. Another thing to consider, recently, a number of players that struggled to produce in the NCAA made the jump to the CHL and have put up solid numbers. Matt Auffrey and Victor Oreskovich come to mind this year. That doesn't necessarily say much, but it is definitely something to consider.

 

[Le Golie]

You can't be serious? If you are, then you know nothing about the two leagues because that is so wrong it's not even funny.

I'm not sure why you find it so absurd. I know several guys who played in the NCAA and I know several guys who played in the WHL. The more talented players always went to the WHL and the skilled late bloomers who took junior seriously got NCAA scholarships. Overall, the guys who went to the WHL were always the 'better' hockey players.

I know a guy who got a scholarship and went on to become a point per game sophomore with Western Michigan. He ended up in the ECHL and UHL. He didn't play Jr A because he wanted to stay eligible for the NCAA, he just wasn't good enough for the WHL. His brother was better than him and went to the WHL, had a good career there and went on to the NHL. That's very typical for players in Canada.

 

[Beatnik]

I think all the players good enough to get a job as 20 years old in the CHL could play in the NCAA(outside maybe the top teams).

 

[MN_Gopher]

I'm not sure why you find it so absurd. I know several guys who played in the NCAA and I know several guys who played in the WHL. The more talented players always went to the WHL and the skilled late bloomers who took junior seriously got NCAA scholarships. Overall, the guys who went to the WHL were always the 'better' hockey players.

I know a guy who got a scholarship and went on to become a point per game sophomore with Western Michigan. He ended up in the ECHL and UHL. He didn't play Jr A because he wanted to stay eligible for the NCAA, he just wasn't good enough for the WHL. His brother was better than him and went to the WHL, had a good career there and went on to the NHL. That's very typical for players in Canada.

The "skilled late bloomers" take time to devolp because they are playing against tougher and older players. Its a different league. Most freshman look like freshman becuase they are up to six years younger than some of their opponets. Look at guys like Heatley and Vanek. They did well and were some of the best. But not the best, and not first team all americans as freshman and not even first team all conference. Towes, Kessel, Oshie who all look like they will be solid NHLers were not top 5 scoring in conference.

 

[Le Golie]

The "skilled late bloomers" take time to devolp because they are playing against tougher and older players. Its a different league. Most freshman look like freshman becuase they are up to six years younger than some of their opponets. Look at guys like Heatley and Vanek. They did well and were some of the best. But not the best, and not first team all americans as freshman and not even first team all conference. Towes, Kessel, Oshie who all look like they will be solid NHLers were not top 5 scoring in conference.

That is true because it is much more likely that a 17 or 18 year old has a bigger impact in a league that tops out with 20 year olds than guys approaching their mid 20's.

It's pretty clear though that by the time a player is 20 years old, if he's played in the CHL he is talented enough to play in the NCAA. That's why my answer is that almost all CHL players could play in the NCAA upon graduation. Everyone but the goons are talented enough.

 

[5mn Major]

In the WCHA considerably less than half. The team I follow should have about 10 1st or 2nd round draft picks next year unless someone leaves early. What percent of the CHL has been drafted in the top 2 rounds?

 

[MN_Gopher]

That is true because it is much more likely that a 17 or 18 year old has a bigger impact in a league that tops out with 20 year olds than guys approaching their mid 20's.

It's pretty clear though that by the time a player is 20 years old, if he's played in the CHL he is talented enough to play in the NCAA. That's why my answer is that almost all CHL players could play in the NCAA upon graduation. Everyone but the goons are talented enough.

Now i would agree that most could play and that IMO it is a no brainer. But the 20 year olds are not typically the best in the CHL. Those guys go pro. So if those 20 year olds that did not have solid NHL contracts were the ones coming over they would be on par with your average junior or senior. Or a very seasoned USHL guy. As many NCAAers play USHL for up to 3 years. So what percent, depends on the team. I would find it hard in most years that many guys would crack the gopher line up. Next years team should have 5 first rounders and 5 second rounders. If they stay Potulny, Irmen. And the leading scorer from 2 years ago will be back. Add in the USHL MVP from 3 years ago and its a talented line up. Plus a possible first rounder in 07. Thats 15 guys.

 

[Transported Upstater]

First off, I must correct you on something...

Cornell is an Ivy League school, they don't give athletic scholarships....it's against Ivy League rules (which in many cases is separate from NCAA rules).

Second, as much as I am a supporter of the NCAA, I believe some of their rules are downright ridiculous, such as the opt-in rule.

In answer to the thread's original question, some very good answers were given but I'll add a bit more.

Someone mentioned the four "major" conferences (CCHA, ECACHL, HE and WCHA). Even within those conferences there is a wide spectrum of talent. UAA for example can't draw the elite talent (or as much thereof) as say a Minnesota or UND in the WCHA. Some will say the reason is geography, others will say it's money and so on.

There have been and continues to be cases where there are players that seems to have come out of nowhere who become great collegiate players, Scott Parse out of Nebraska-Omaha is a very good example.

What people forget is NCAA players are STUDENT-ATHLETES. Hockey isn't the only thing that's going to allow them to play in the collegiate ranks. They also have to be able to have the "grades" to play. Keith Yandle, who now plays with Moncton, originally had intended to go NCAA. UNH, where he originally wanted to go wanted him playing a year of US junior "A", so he opted to change his destination to Maine. The Black Bears really wanted him to play this year but he didn't have the grades to get into Maine, so he ended up going to the CHL. The academic standards are even more rigid for players desiring to go the Ivies. At schools like Cornell and Harvard, you can't just be a good hockey player and expect to get in, you have to have a very strong academic record (grades) as well.

You beat me to it with the Cornell thing. It's one thing I'm proud of; my alma mater doesn't give full athletic scholarships!

Why? Now I teach 4 Florida State football players that cannot tell the difference between a mile and a kilometer...

 

[VOB]

Considering that what, 85% of all USHL players end cracking a NCAA roster, it is lunacy to think that CHL players could only do the same or slightly better. There is no question that 100% of CHL players could play in the NCAA.

Now of course, not all CHL players could play for a Minnesota or a Wisconsin but heck we all now that not all Holy Cross players could have played or even currently play in the CHL.

Sorry Goph, couldn't resist the Holy Cross example!

 

[USA!]

Considering that what, 85% of all USHL players end cracking a NCAA roster, it is lunacy to think that CHL players could only do the same or slightly better. There is no question that 100% of CHL players could play in the NCAA.

Now of course, not all CHL players could play for a Minnesota or a Wisconsin but heck we all now that not all Holy Cross players could have played or even currently play in the CHL.

Sorry Goph, couldn't resist the Holy Cross example!

Michagin sucks 2

 

[5mn Major]

Considering that what, 85% of all USHL players end cracking a NCAA roster, it is lunacy to think that CHL players could only do the same or slightly better. There is no question that 100% of CHL players could play in the NCAA.

Now of course, not all CHL players could play for a Minnesota or a Wisconsin but heck we all now that not all Holy Cross players could have played or even currently play in the CHL.

Sorry Goph, couldn't resist the Holy Cross example!

Yes with significant acclamation to the NCAA...85% of all USHL players end up cracking AHA, CHA and ECAC type conferences. I would agree that with acclamation to the NCAA that over 85% of CHL players could crack leagues like the AHA, CHA and ECAC.

 

[jaydub*]

You beat me to it with the Cornell thing. It's one thing I'm proud of; my alma mater doesn't give full athletic scholarships!

Why? Now I teach 4 Florida State football players that cannot tell the difference between a mile and a kilometer...

i don't know what your talking about... Florida State has rigid academic requirements for football players

Seriously though, I think the major thing here is academics. You have to be at least an above average student in high school at most of these universities to make it academically I think. ANd if you want a real major, you would have to be well above that...

 

[Hasbro]

i don't know what your talking about... Florida State has rigid academic requirements for football players

Seriously though, I think the major thing here is academics. You have to be at least an above average student in high school at most of these universities to make it academically I think. ANd if you want a real major, you would have to be well above that...

It's worth mentioning under the new NCAA evaluations of acedemics hockey has performed almost at the top of all men's sports.