KTF

Pretty harsh to say Piccinich was a bust since you really don't know how he would have did on B.U.s team as a sophmore this year if he did not leave...I mean I'm not quite sure what the deal was with John Simonson freshman season where he only played 22 games and registered 5pts but he did manage to play in all the games this year and tripled his point totals. Even Chyzyk didn't have the best freshman season did he? Also scouts some something in Piccinich to make him a 4th round NHL pick. Explain more about the second NCAA bust?

London's 2nd Line RW Berisha (21 year old 5'10 190) C Cliff Pu (ranked 75th by NHL CSS likely 3rd round pick in 2016 draft, possible 2nd, listed as 6'1 188) LW Daniel Bernhardt (20 year old 6'3 194 NHL 4th round pick) London's 3rd Line RW JJ Piccinich (19 year old 4th round NHL pick 6' 185) C Owen MacDonald (20 year old 5'9 180) LW Max Jones (17 year old 6'3 200lbs ranked 14th over-all by NHL CSS and a sure fire 1st round pick) No way these two lines get dominated by anyone...there are no 16/17 year old 5'10 155 lbs weaklings here

I saw far more time and space in NoDaks 5-1 win over Quinnipiac than I did in London's 3-2 OT win over Rouyn-Noranda

I understand this is a pro NCAA board and all but some of these comments are really out there....London's top line would do "some damage" but hey they wouldn't dominate in the mighty NCAA right? Well Tkachuk and Dvorak were the top forwards for the U.S, along with Mathews, at the recent WJC...but yeah I know, I'm sure you all believe that even the WJC is a touch below the vaunted NCAA and their tough bruising style with there massive 25 year old Dmen who would crush those puny 18 year old Finns and Canucks...except that this U.S. U-20 team featured two of the best forwards from NoDak who shockingly were behind the depth chart of the top two players from London. How is that possible?!?!?!? Link to the Bronze medal line up http://www.worldjunior2016.com/en/games/2016-01-05/SWE-vs-USA/#lineup-tab Umm clearly London's top line would do as much and probably more damage then NoDak's top line did in the NCAA

Curious as to why you feel that NoDak would win so handily?

What matters is the final score and not the shot count, which by the way we all know can be inaccurate. The fact of the matter is that a team like the NTDP proves that age is not the mitigating factor many of you are making it out to be. A young talented team can beat an older squad. B.U. is a good team that featured 9 NHL drafted players but none of them were high end elite first round talented types. The NTDP will most likely have two players selected within the first 20 picks of the draft and will have a dozen players picked through out the 7 rounds. In short they are a very young but talented team. Now I've never said they could compete for a NCAA championship but merely used them as proof that 17 year olds can hold their own against your vaunted 24 year old 500lb beasts..do players get better with age, of course they do and I'm sure that if you take this same U-18 team and have them play as an U-20 then they very well could compete for a national NCAA title. Now a team like London is every bit as talented as the NTDP, featuring 8 current drafted players and 8 player ranked in the upcoming draft, three of them in the top 20 and two of them in the top 10. There is no reason to think that they could not compete against a team like NoDak.

B.U. may not have been the creme dela creme but they certainly were an above average D-1 team, sporting a .603 winning percentage. The NTDP also managed to beat the NCHC playoff champions St Cloud State as well this year. I've been lucky enough to have seen the NTDP play D-1 teams a few times and the games seemed as intense as any regular season game as the college boys hate to lose to a bunch of high school kiddies.

The NTDP is split into an U-17 and U-18 team. The U-18's generally win most of the games played against the USHL teams while the U-17s generally have a below .500 record. Just a random look at the game between B.U., a very good to elite hockey program from an elite conference, showed that B.U. played their very best players (and started their top players) and yet still lost to the U-18s. They may be "exhibition" games but as you know, in college where few games are played, even exhibition ones are treated as the real deal. The reality is that this year's NTDP was a solid squad and did well against D-1 competition despite the players being several years younger. Yes you had that "16" year old "lightweight" go up against that "behemoth" 24 year old and the youngster not only survived but prevailed.. A uber talented team like London would hold their own against any D-1 program and it would be one hell of a game between them and North Dakota.

I don't really consider the NTDP U-18 as a USHL team. They merely use the USHL in order to give the U-17's playing time against older competition. They do not participate in the USHL draft nor do they trade with other USHL clubs and they often times do not even honor the commitments made by some players to specific USHL teams. Age and experience are important but they are not the only factors to consider. If they were the NTDP would not have gone 7-5-2 against D-1 teams. A young squad with an average of around 17.5 years more than proves talent can trump age. If a team comprising of high school seniors can give many of the better NCAA squads a game, what makes you think a stacked team like London could not??

I'd say it would be 50/50 between London and NoDak...London would be too much for the NTDP.

NTDP is a great team, this year they had a winning record against D-1 competition but highly unlikely they beat a London team that features the like of Marner, Dvorak and Tkachuk...as for London having little depth, their roster has 8 drafted NHL players and 8 players currently ranked by the NHL CSS, five of them in the first four rounds and three in the first round. Obviously the depth is there.

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%