KTF

Well after just watching the Memorial Cup final, it would be a heck of a game between NoDak and that London Knights team. Both solid teams dripping with talent but I daresay I think the slight edge would go to London.

Considering that the NHL is going after a 50/50 revenue split and asking the union to give up up 7% of what they are currently getting, allowing prospects to become free agents sooner rather than later would be a very very minor consesion...remember that CHLers and those out of Europe already go back into the draft after 2 years and then to free agency, the same would then apply to college prospects.

Look at this way, right now there are a lot of NHL GMs leary of the college route because of free agency after four years, what do you think their reaction will be if the contract is changed that allows free agency to all players (CHLers included) two years removed from being drafted. They will want to sign these players ASAP, negating the college route all together. From what I heard, the NHL wanted the NCAA to come to an agreement concerning CHL eligibility, and Paul Kelly was working on it. The powers that be in college hockey got rid of Kelly, leaving a very bad taste in the mouth of the NHL.....me thinks they are done protecting college hockey concerning the draft and they will easily give in to the NHLPA's demand....

Again, I'm not sure what the NCAA can do to stop the CHL from poaching college bound players. I know that Paul Kelly was working behind the scenes with the NHL and CHL to come to some sort of understanding and rumor has it that an agreement was close but the NCAA would have to relax its eligiblitly requirements and allow CHL players to play in the NCAA. Paul Kelly was all for this, as were some pretty prominant coaches (you can guess who one is I'm sure ) but the old guard was not in agreement and Paul Kelly and the rest is history. Concerning development and CHLers in the AHL, I'm hering some interesting developments from someone in the know (at least he claims he is...and has a good track record.) Apparantly the NHLPA is going after the NHL to alter its agreement with the CHL and allow players who played at least 3 years in the CHL to be signed and dropped down to their AHL club (currently a CHL player has to play 4 years or be 20 years of age before they can be placed in the AHL). This will skim the very best CHL players into the AHL, making the CHL even younger and weaker....the downside for the NCAA is that the NHLPA also wants to have college bound players signed within 2 years of being draft or have them either go back into the draft or become unrestricted free agents....this will have major negative implications for college hockey.

Wathced the entire tournament....some good fast paced and physical hockey, very fun to watch. I can tell you this, I've seen the Gamblers of the USHL play this year and they would have been soundly beaten by any of the teams in this tournament. I can also comfortably say, however, that Boston College would have fared well against any of these teams.

The WHL will also pay for your post secondary schooling while you are playing in the league and this does not count against the scholarship money they will provide after graduating from the league. Many players are enrolled on a part time basis at their local college/university, meaning they will have a year or two of schooling already completed by the time they leave the league.

Players receive tiny stipends for living expenses....really no different from what many players receive in other Junior A leagues/ The NCAA views the CHL as a pro circuit because it allows players who have signed NHL contracts to play. You are right though, in that the vast majority have not signed contracts and are not being paid to play....Paul Kelly also argued that those who have not signed contracts should be allowed to play in the NCAA.

This is something that more and more coaches are favoring, but opposition still remains from some key players.

Money...the CHL is a whole is a well financed organization receiving millions of dollars anually from the NHL as "development' money. Many teams are very profitable. This allows them to hire top notch coaching staffs and all the proper accessories...strength/conditioning coaches, power skating instructors, goalie coaches, educational advisors and academic tutors. Many teams play in large modern arenas with all the amenities usually associated with pro style franchises. This is all very alluring to 15, 16 and 17 year old players, making the CHL are very difficult route to pass up. Education, the CHL has done a very effective job in convincing players that their educational needs will be taken care of. They even allow their players to play minor pro hockey (below the AHL) level for up to 18 months before voiding their scholarship packages and they eagerly point out the NCAA's draconian policies concerning amature rules and eligiblity. Games, players love playing games, that is why they play hockey. Furthermore the CHL can point to the long NTDP season as proof that more games mean better players, if not then why would the National DEVELOPMENT team try and mimic and CHL style schedule? Why would leagues like the USHL play 60+ game regular seasons as they DEVELOP their players for teh NCAA? Competition - CHL recruiters would point to the fact that there are about a dozen solid programs in the NCAA with the rest being below average. They would say what would playing games against no talent teams like Mankato State and Bowling Green actually do for your development (note, I'm just taking their line of thinking and I do not really agree with this but this is the arguement the CHL makes). Sure you may play against older competition, they might say, but against less talented players. They might also argue that while scoring may be easier in the CHL, this does not mean the competion is any less. Take a look at Cam Reid, who so far in 50 games at the CHL level, is scoring at a .82 ppg clip as a 20 year old, not all that much better than the .78 ppg clip as a 19 year old playing for St Cloud in the WCHA....they might even say that at St Cloud he was a 1st line forward while for Portland he is bouncing around between the 2nd and 3rd lines after not being able to secure a 1st line spot. If the competition was so much easier in the CHL, should not an over-age 20 year old be dominating 17 year old kids after spending a season playing against "men" in the NCAA? The CHL also enjoys tremendous recruiting advantages over the NCAA. They can talk to players of any age at any time. There is very little enforcment, allowing the many rich franchises to funnel under the table money to the sought after player and his family. It is quite common for a CHL team to transfer a players scholarship money once they have signed a NHL contract to a sibling...how can the NCAA match that? Now my own personal belief is that the NCAA offers the majority of players (though not all) the better route but the CHL is relentless in its pursuit of top level talent and I would argue that over the past 5 years has effectively shut the NCAA out of the Canadian market for elite level talent and is making huge in roads in the U.S. where traditionally the NCAA has had the advantage. I do not know how the NCAA can respond or how they will be able to stem the tide when so many things are against it.

Interesting rant indeed, if that is what he meant. I am not sure where he is coming from though. In the last two drafts, U.S. College and college bound players certainly made their presence felt but the CHL had twice as many drafted in the first round. Take a look at this years rankings and the trend will simply continue (meaning far more CHL players taken than college ones.) The NHL CSB has 20 CHLers in their first round compared to 10 from the NCAA...or NCAA bound players. ISS has 14 CHLers to 7 NCAA players, McKeens has 18 CHLers to 8 NCAA players and I believe Red Line also has a 2-1 margin in favor of the CHL. This also assumes that all the NCAA bound players will actually play college hockey (I am hearing a lot of talk that E. Johnson will not be playing for the Gophs next year after all) and these numbers do not take into account the drafted Euro players who will play in the CHL next year. U.S. college hockey has certainly made great strides in the past decade or so, but the CHL still draws in more talent as evident by the draft.

Perhaps this has already been beaten to death (to lazy to go back and check) but props to Toews for being named MVP of the western regional! I think Toews proved who the better freshman was this year and if I were a NHL GM, there is no way I would take Kessel over Toews!

Can you imagine what would happen if a majority of the drafted players stated they wanted to graduate, and upon doing so, in a few short months they would be UFA. This certainly would put the dampers on the NHL drafting college bound players. Of course that will not happen. Like I said before, I remember watching a TV interview with the Wild's GM and he stated a matter of factly that NHL clubs will be signing more drafted NCAA players before their senior years strictly because of the new CBA. I am not sure why Eaves and Howard were mentioned in that article because the new CBA entry draft rules only applies to those drafted in 05 and later. That means a player like Stafford is still under the old CBA and his NHL team will have up to a year after he graduates to sign him.

RedWing, here is an exerpt from an old NHL.com article "There's no question (Hockey East) has been affected," said Commissioner Joe Bertagna about his league's four key losses due to the new NHL CBA. "You can make the case that four of our first-team potential all-stars are gone in (BU's) Chris Bourque (to Washington), (BC's) Ben Eaves (Ottawa), (Lowell's) Ben Walter (Boston), and (Maine's) Jimmy Howard (Detroit)." (The new NHL labor agreement allows the team drafting a college player to retain signing rights only until the year of graduation, or the player becomes a free agent.) Link http://www.nhl.com/features/college/college100605.html The chances of someone like Oshie staying for his senior year are less than 5% The chances of Oshie staying his Junior year are less than 50% Heck the chance of Oshie signing after his freshman season is probably around 50%

Actually only Euros must now be signed within 2 years of being drafted. Both MJ and NCAA players will have a 4 year window before becoming UFA. The difference for college hockey in the new CBA is that they no longer have to wait an entire season after graduating from college to become UFA. They simply have to finish their senior year and thats it. That is why you will see NHL clubs pull the trigger sooner to sign their NCAA players.

You are aware that the CBA you posted is the old one aren't you? Under the new CBA, a player not signed by his senior year will in effect become an UFA by August and before NHL camps open. If Oshie were to play his senior year, the Blues would have only until August to sign him. All Oshie would have to do is wait them out, become a UFA and sign with what ever team he wants to before the start of the season. The chances of the Blues letting that happen are very slim and as a result will sign Oshie before his senior year. My bet is before his Junior year, just to be on the safe side.

I think what many people are forgetting is the new CBA will actually spur more players to leave early. Someone like Drew may hang around because he is under the old CBA but T.J will be under intense pressure to sign probably after his sophmore year. Remember that if players aren't signed before their senior year, they become UFA at the completion of their last year. I have heard the Wild's GM on TV stating that you will see very many players being signed from the college ranks after their sophmore and junior seasons because of this.

The Golden Bears are the defending CIS champions but it looks like they lost a good part of their team and are in a rebuilding mode. I don't know how much better they are than Manitoba but they lost to Sasketewan 3-1 before their game against the Gophs.

Manitoba beat the Beavers last night 5-3. Maybe the Bisons will give the Sioux a game?

Ran across a blurb that said the bisons will actually be playing an AHL team before they take on the Sioux and that they beat the Vancouver Canucks rookie team. So a couple of questions here. How in the heck can a Canadian University team compete against an AHL team when they get blown out by NCAA teams?!? Have they lost their minds in agreeing to play an AHL team?!?!? Or perhaps are they greatly improved and will they give the Sioux a run for their money and perhaps even beat them?