NCAA vs. CHL

[stickboy1956]

^ My thoughts too. After watching this tournament I really liked the chl style of play.

Remember, your watching the best CHL teams play in a playoff setting.

Don't compare it to a regular season AA vs MSM game or USHL game.

[scpa0305]

Just seems like you're not actually confused, you just think that the CHL is perfect so you treat any negative comment about the CHL like it has to be a mistake.

...no I watch much more NCAA hockey....I find find it hard that people on this site are bashing one of the best develmental leagues in the world. More top NHL players come from the CHL than any other league. That league has the best kids from all over the world. I see some people comparing the USHL and the CHL...they are not even close. Now could BC beat a top CHL team..sure. Could a top CHL team BC....sure. I'm guessing BC would have a slightly older group of kids. But it would be a good game to watch. Again, I like watching NCAA hockey (or Sioux hockey that is) much more than CHL hockey....but I'm not ignorant to the fact that the CHL is the top developmental league in the world. Any hockey player knows that, although some simply want an education too...which I respect.

[scpa0305]

Remember, your watching the best CHL teams play in a playoff setting.

Don't compare it to a regular season AA vs MSM game or USHL game.

? Are you now comparing a CHL team to a USHL team?

[jpiehl]

I tried to watch a couple of the games, but I ended up having to change the channel because of the stupid air horns from the stands. First game it gave me a headache just watching on TV. Tried again, in the championship game, and ended up changing the channel in the 2nd because I couldn't take those anymore. I would rather listen to the vuvuzelas from the last World Cup in South Africa....

[scpa0305]

I tried to watch a couple of the games, but I ended up having to change the channel because of the stupid air horns from the stands. First game it gave me a headache just watching on TV. Tried again, in the championship game, and ended up changing the channel in the 2nd because I couldn't take those anymore. I would rather listen to the vuvuzelas from the last World Cup in South Africa....

Hahaha, I was thinking the same thing. They should outlaw those things.

[nodak hockey fanatic]

Hahaha, I was thinking the same thing. They should outlaw those things.

Not to get too off topic, but your picture below your name says North Dakota retires mascot. North Dakota has the Fighting Sioux name and logo, but no mascot that I am aware of. And, unfortunately, the nickname battle continues. I don't think anything has been permanently resolved.

[scpa0305]

Not to get too off topic, but your picture below your name says North Dakota retires mascot. North Dakota has the Fighting Sioux name and logo, but no mascot that I am aware of. And, unfortunately, the nickname battle continues. I don't think anything has been permanently resolved.

Yes I am aware of that...I wanted to note something about how the only reason it is being taken away is regarding its political correctness. Maybe I'll have to keep looking.

[passit_offthegoalie]

...no I watch much more NCAA hockey....I find find it hard that people on this site are bashing one of the best develmental leagues in the world. More top NHL players come from the CHL than any other league. That league has the best kids from all over the world. I see some people comparing the USHL and the CHL...they are not even close. Now could BC beat a top CHL team..sure. Could a top CHL team BC....sure. I'm guessing BC would have a slightly older group of kids. But it would be a good game to watch. Again, I like watching NCAA hockey (or Sioux hockey that is) much more than CHL hockey....but I'm not ignorant to the fact that the CHL is the top developmental league in the world. Any hockey player knows that, although some simply want an education too...which I respect.

Who's bashing the CHL? I've seen mostly positive comments. Again, you can't seem to tolerate any criticism of the CHL.

Most people are bashing the CHL for their practices in stealing away players that have already decided to go to college. You are really tone deaf if you expect Sioux hockey fans to stroke the CHL and thank them, as they continue poaching ours and other school's players.

btw, the CHL plays too many games and because the older players aren't challenged enough, they need more time in the AHL than NCAA players, IMO. So I think the NCAA is better for most NHL prospects.

[scpa0305]

Who's bashing the CHL? I've seen mostly positive comments. Again, you can't seem to tolerate any criticism of the CHL.

Most people are bashing the CHL for their practices in stealing away players that have already decided to go to college. You are really tone deaf if you expect Sioux hockey fans to stroke the CHL and thank them, as they continue poaching ours and other school's players.

btw, the CHL plays too many games and because the older players aren't challenged enough, they need more time in the AHL than NCAA players, IMO. So I think the NCAA is better for most NHL prospects.

Yeah I get the hatred towards the CHL for the poaching...I get that. I agree something needs to be done about that.

Regarding your second comment....I guess I'm barking up the wrong tree here. Sioux board...not hockey board.

[KTF]

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.

[watchmaker49]

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.

At the same time could it also not be a good thing for college players? Back to poaching players though. What is the real difference between the CHL going for the same kids as two schools going for the same kids? Besides are not the schools poaching players from the CHL?

[82SiouxGuy]

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.

I could see some benefits to colleges. Kids could go to school for 2 years and become free agents rather than the 4 years they have to wait now. So kids going to college would have more freedom than kids going the CHL route. Having kids leave after 2 years wouldn't be great, but more top end kids may choose the college route to be able to get their freedom.

This system sounds a little closer to baseball. In baseball players are usually drafted out of high school. They can be signed right away and play minor league baseball, or go to college. If they don't sign or go to college they are put back in the draft the following year. If they start college, the teams lose their rights and the kids can't be drafted until after their Junior year. If they stay in school, they can be drafted again after their Senior year. They draft a lot more players in baseball because so many don't sign each year, plus because the development system is much bigger.

[KTF]

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....

[82SiouxGuy]

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....

Signing a lot of these kids at 18 is not good for their development, and neither is trying to drop all of those youngsters into the AHL. So I have a lot of doubts that the NHL would go for the plan. They also like being able to string the kids along as long as possible, which helps delay their ability to become actual free agents. The NHL is going to be very reluctant to go that far. It is in their best interests to delay free agency as long as possible. I'm sure that this will be part of the NHL-NHLPA contract negotiations this summer, but the NHL will be very reluctant to expand the free agency limits any further than they are right now.

[KTF]

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.

[82SiouxGuy]

I don't doubt that the PA is going to go after this, but I think it will be a tough sell for a lot of teams. They like the ability to keep control of a player for quite a while before they have to give them money, letting someone else pay for the development without huge risk. With the CHL and European players, the player can sign a contract but still go back to their team for a year or 2 before having to fit them into the AHL or lower leagues. Eliminating the college path as a viable option would force a lot more guys to try and fit through that pipeline of the CHL. I think the NHL will fight it. They got a lot of financial considerations the last contract fight and most of the league is in decent financial shape. They will try to do more, but I don't see this contract fight as bad as the last one for them or even the NBA contract last year.

[Longfellow_Deeds]

Remember, your watching the best CHL teams play in a playoff setting.

Don't compare it to a regular season AA vs MSM game or USHL game.

Most of the hockey I watched at the end of the year was playoff settting. I seen Portland play a regular season game 2 years ago and my thoughts were wow this team would destroy Fargo. CHL is a step above the USHL for sure. CHL vs NCAA would depend on the teams playing.

[scpa0305]

At the same time could it also not be a good thing for college players? Back to poaching players though. What is the real difference between the CHL going for the same kids as two schools going for the same kids? Besides are not the schools poaching players from the CHL?

There is no difference, however, the issue has been kids decommiting at the last second and going up to canada. If it were two CHL teams, once the contract is signed no other team can negotiate with that particular player. Actually once a kid is drafted no other team can talk to that kid. There must be some regulation in place where CHL GMs cannot negotiate with committed college players.

[scpa0305]

Most of the hockey I watched at the end of the year was playoff settting. I seen Portland play a regular season game 2 years ago and my thoughts were wow this team would destroy Fargo. CHL is a step above the USHL for sure. CHL vs NCAA would depend on the teams playing.

Yes there is a pretty big difference with top end kids (blue chip prospects), however, there are also kids in the CHL that could never play college hockey (WCHA, HE, CCHA, etc). But overall you are correct, it would simply depend on the matchup. FYI, Portland is jacked up with prospects.

[scpa0305]

I think whoever is running College Inc these days must address the lack of top end talent coming in the NCAA these days. I know I'll get crap for this but it's getting worse and worse and now even USCHO is putting out articles and for some reason I think Trouba will decommit as well if he goes top 10.

http://www.uscho.com/2012/06/21/after-trouba-best-chance-for-college-players-in-2012-nhl-entry-draft-may-be-second-round/

[passit_offthegoalie]

I think whoever is running College Inc these days must address the lack of top end talent coming in the NCAA these days. I know I'll get crap for this but it's getting worse and worse and now even USCHO is putting out articles and for some reason I think Trouba will decommit as well if he goes top 10.

http://www.uscho.com...e-second-round/

And yet more NHL players than ever are former college hockey players. College hockey must be doing something right if they can take lower draft picks and still turn out over 30% of NHL players.

[scpa0305]

And yet more NHL players than ever are former college hockey players. College hockey must be doing something right if they can take lower draft picks and still turn out over 30% of NHL players.

Yeah I know, but all those players are older and were in college a while back. I am talking the last 5-7 draft classes. Each year college hockey seems to have less and less TOP end talent and each year there are less and less college bound players actually drafted. Please actually read what I am writing before jumping all over me.

[passit_offthegoalie]

Yeah I know, but all those players are older and were in college a while back. I am talking the last 5-7 draft classes. Each year college hockey seems to have less and less TOP end talent and each year there are less and less college bound players actually drafted. Please actually read what I am writing before jumping all over me.

I've heard that this is going to be one of the weaker and more unpredictable draft classes in years, so I'm not going to start freaking out because there may not be any college players in the first round, this year.

Besides, I don't know what college hockey is supposed to do, you can't win 'em all--some players are going to prefer the CHL to college hockey. Especially Canadians.

[scpa0305]

I've heard that this is going to be one of the weaker and more unpredictable draft classes in years, so I'm not going to start freaking out because there may not be any college players in the first round, this year.

Weaker for college players maybe...there are a lot of other great players in this draft class.

[passit_offthegoalie]

Weaker for college players maybe...there are a lot of other great players in this draft class.

OK, we get it, you don't like college hockey.