yzerman19 Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I read a post on Brad's blog where someone wanted to know what the deal was with the OHL and why JT Miller went that route. As a result, I am building this thread of CHL basics. 1. The CHL (Canadian Hockey League) is comprised of the Ontario Hockey League, the Western Hockey League, and the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League. 2. The CHL is referred to as major junior hockey or Canadian Tier 1 junior hockey. 3. The CHL is tied tightly to Hockey Canada, the governing body of Canada's international program. 4. CHL players can be paid (usually its not much, like $15k per year, although there are big money exceptions: Lindros, Crosby). 5. The CHL has a special deal with the NHL. CHL eligible players that sign pro deals can play in either the NHL or the CHL. They can not be assigned to the AHL or the ECHL. 6. Junior age rules apply: 16-20. 7. Bantam age players are drafted in a bantams future draft by CHL teams (Toewser went #1 in the WHL "dub" draft when he was 15) 8. The Memorial Cup is the CHL championship series. 9. The nearest CHL team to Grand Forks is the Brandon Wheat Kings of the WHL. 10. A player like JT Miller can accept a $350k signing bonus under the NHL collective bargaining agreement (rookie max) and then go and play for Plymouth in the OHL. 11. The CHL plays as close to an NHL type season as any league in the world. 12. Prior to the 1990's, pro players from North America were almost exclusively veterans of the CHL. 13. Currently, the majority of NHL players are veterans of the CHL. 14. THe CHL is still viewed as the fastest route to the NHL for top end hockey talent. NCAA hockey has been making a statement with the likes of Heatley, Parise, Toews, Vanek, Gionta, etc. 15. THe CHL talent level is generally considered to be better than other leagues (including NCAA) for 16-20 year olds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwing77 Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 16. CHL fans are very passionate. In fact, some of the more vocal ones tend to come across so arrogant that they make Minnesota trolls look like saints. Overall, I tend to sum up CHL vs. NCAA like this: NCAA fans love the NCAA. CHL fans love the CHL. CHL fans think that the best alternative to the CHL is the NCAA for those who want to do something other than play in the NHL. NCAA fans see that both routes produce NHLers and that regardless of whatever it comes down to, both routes can take a top tier talent and turn them into a prized NHL prospect. Both sides think they are right and neither side is willing to truly acknowledge the other as being legit without getting the final word in that their respective league is just a better way to go. So, just don't debate it and smile and nod. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzerman19 Posted July 28, 2011 Author Share Posted July 28, 2011 A guy like Parise or Toews would dominate CHL or NCAA...one big issue is when you have 22-23 year olds dominating NCAA; they would be way too old to play junior. As a result, the CHL misses all late bloomers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goon Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 A guy like Parise or Toews would dominate CHL or NCAA...one big issue is when you have 22-23 year olds dominating NCAA; they would be way too old to play junior. As a result, the CHL misses all late bloomers. One of the good things about the NCAA is that if you're a late bloomer you still have a chance to become better what do you do if you're in the CHL and run out of eligibility? I suppose you can go play in the CIS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nodak hockey fanatic Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I won't deny that the CHL is a great hockey league... it has been for a long time and I don't see that changing. They consistently put players into the NHL. I will deny that college hockey isn't catching up, and it probably pi$$es the CHL and it's fans off. A summer like this completely sucks for college hockey, but it is what it is. Another thing about the age limit in the CHL... you can't convince me that when Oshie and Parise and Toews dominated college hockey as teenagers, it didn't make them that much better playing against stronger, older 20 somethings. I do think that is one thing you can't get in the CHL that is a valuable tool for the young blue chippers. the CHL will have the advantage over college hockey as long as they can pay them and we can't, and as long as the NHL has their agreement with the CHL and not college hockey. it's a big dissadvantage. but the top college programs, UND right at the top, prepare players as good and better than ANY CHL team does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almostheavenin2011 Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I called Spokane, Seattle, and Portland and they all cracked up laughing when I asked them if the players made 15K a year. They said the get a small stipend and if they made that much they would not be living with host families. I don't know where the 15K figure came from but it seems that it is wrong. That is unless all these teams were lying but the laughter did not make me think that. Maybe the 15K figure was for the Central Hockey League. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yzerman19 Posted July 29, 2011 Author Share Posted July 29, 2011 For top end talent it is really true; they need to weigh a 40ish game season with time for the weight room and individual edge work training and skill sharpening as well as competing against big, strong, men vs a 70ish game season with little time for weights, more team based practice, against younger, less physically developed (generally) players, who are in general more skilled. I have to believe that NCAA is a better training ground, whereas the CHL is a better place to display how sick your skills are. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDColorado Posted July 29, 2011 Share Posted July 29, 2011 For top end talent it is really true; they need to weigh a 40ish game season with time for the weight room and individual edge work training and skill sharpening as well as competing against big, strong, men vs a 70ish game season with little time for weights, more team based practice, against younger, less physically developed (generally) players, who are in general more skilled. I have to believe that NCAA is a better training ground, whereas the CHL is a better place to display how sick your skills are. I couldn't agree more and college definitely allows more time for development of body and skills. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almostheavenin2011 Posted July 30, 2011 Share Posted July 30, 2011 Here is a website I found where the discussion is about pay in the CHL. http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=515514 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.