Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="jncuse, post: 5387703, member: 1969"] A data update as of today, and what I perceive is the impact. Its certainly not insignificant. Source (I had to some counts and collation) [URL unfurl="true"]https://www.collegecommitments.com/[/URL] #1) 75 to 80 CHL (2004's) have committed to NCAA Schools, (this includes a few 2005 in the WHL if they played a few games as 15 year olds. . Many of these kids seem to be to teams outside the top 10. More than half the eligible 2004's are going to the NCAA in the OHL for example. #2) Approximately 80 players who were playing in different junior leagues (to avoid the CHL penalties) who had already committed to or intended to commit to NCAA schools (USHL, BCHL) are now playing in the CHL. These are largely 17 and 18 year old kids. [B]"The 2004 rule... for next year 2005, and year after 2006" I was incorrect in one item earlier. I had said it was erroneous that the CHL had restrictions on players academic choices. There is one big item. The standard CHL player and academic scholarship contract based appears to requires that you do your full CHL service time before you can leave to university and get CHL academic bursary. For this year that means only the 2004 born kids can head to the NCAA after this year. A 2004, 2005 or even 2006 kid, that may be academically eligible can't yet head to the NCAA or the CIS (Canada version of the NCAA). And I believe that is due to the contract they signed when they entered the CHL. The implications of this are the following: - [/B]Only 2004 born CHL players can make the switch to the NCAA in 25/26. (2005 born for 26/27) (2006 born for 27/28). So it will a slow drawn out process. [U][I]- NCAA are basically getting 21 year old men as freshman right now, in terms of the players that were in the CHL before the announcement[/I][/U] - That being by 27/28 you will have "double classes" of sorts, as 2006 born will enter the NCAA (as allowed per the contract they signed before this year) but you also have 2008, 2009 born players that joined the CHL since the rule change that didn't have the education clause*. This will have big impacts on the quality of the CHL up to that point, and after that point. *After the November announcement, Players that are already committed to the NCAA that are coming from other leagues appear to just a player contract, so there is nothing stopping them from leaving. [U]Impact on the NCAA[/U] I still think it will be a very nice impact on the quality of NCAA play. The CHL players won't necessarily come in and be the best, but they will add greatly to the depth of play and probably create a little more parity at the bottom. For example Bowling Green appears to be going hard after the better 2004 players coming over. Will be interesting to see where they are at in 26/27 with a bunch of 22 year old soph's. Plus a consistent flow will come each of the next 3 years. 2004's this year, then 2005 and 2006. So if teams were slower to adapt this year, they have a chance to quickly catch up next year. [U]Impact on the CHL[/U] Its going to be a positive in 25/26 and 26/27. They will have a higher quality of 17 and 18 year olds kids playing in the CHL, and the 2005 and 2006 born kids will still be protected from leaving to the NCAA. 27/28 is where things can go bad. Currently only 20/21 year old kids can go to the NCAA. By 27/28 it could be 18 and 19 year olds that leave to the NCAA so that will cause some uncertainty. [U]Impact on the USHL / BCHL (other Tier 2)[/U] These were where the "Shield" leagues where Canadian kids could play to retain their NCAA eligibility. They are losing lots of player. The USHL is also losing a decent amount of American kids to the CHL as there are no longer any consequences for them playing here [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?