|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 8:05:37 GMT -4
I'd rather have the compensation pick at next year's draft than two years of Chartrand at 16 and 17. Not that those would be the only two possibilities, but if someone has their heart set on NCAA they likely want to make the jump at 18 as opposed to 20, even if the rules would allow them to stay longer. If he forfeits his NCAA eligibility under the current rules then that would be fantastic. If that’s what the Q and CHL come too, I’ll be totally out on the product. You want to talk about a league of haves and have nots, wait until kids aren’t happy with their situation or the best players demand to be traded or head to the NCAA. The transfer portal and NIL has completely ruined college sports.. this will completely ruin the CHL. 100%. Kids will have no penalty from jumping league to league. I look at this past weekends draft and wonder why, if in that system, Quebec would bother trading up. If the plan for big market CHL teams is to sell a plan where these kids all leave the league after their 17yr old season I just don't see how that works long term. |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 8:08:15 GMT -4
The NCAA possible rule change could be good and bad for the Q. Has anyone seen any updates as the last thing I found was the D1 coaches and Atlantic directors do not want a change. There has been nothing publicly said about the rule, BUT Basically, the NCAA is no longer in a legally defensible position from a lawsuit so if any of these guys wanted to come north, they would be in a position where the NCAA would lose in court if it tried to block them. IMO, the expected result of this is that the NCAA will be getting a lot of these kids at 20 or 21 depending on the deals they make with the teams. Basically, if the kid doesn't go pro at 20, a lot of Americans will go back stateside to play NCAA (again, depending on both the agreement and what the NCAA school would want to do) Again, this will do little for the Jamie Glances of the world, who can play USNTDP at 16/17 and likely stay at high level hockey until NCAA, but even a Matthew Krayer might be better off in Saint John at 16-19 if he's going to college at 20 or 21 (not currently committed). Again, the biggest factor for some of these kids will be when they actually begin playing (the younger they want to play NCAA, the less CHL makes sense). |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 8:11:48 GMT -4
If that’s what the Q and CHL come too, I’ll be totally out on the product. You want to talk about a league of haves and have nots, wait until kids aren’t happy with their situation or the best players demand to be traded or head to the NCAA. The transfer portal and NIL has completely ruined college sports.. this will completely ruin the CHL. 100%. Kids will have no penalty from jumping league to league. I look at this past weekends draft and wonder why, if in that system, Quebec would bother trading up. If the plan for big market CHL teams is to sell a plan where these kids all leave the league after their 17yr old season I just don't see how that works long term. What Gagne hinted (2 year rule) goes completely against the beliefs of Mike McMahon (who had been extremely anti-CHL in the past). Basically, if the rule is that they are flat out eligible, then they will sign agreements that explicitly say when they can go NCAA (NCAA recruiting starts at 14, so families will have a good idea what year they want an out clause for). |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 8:14:34 GMT -4
Also, if Krayer ever agreed to come, I would expect that SJ would also ask if his brother wants to come (even if it is for 48 hours).
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 8:30:43 GMT -4
100%. Kids will have no penalty from jumping league to league. I look at this past weekends draft and wonder why, if in that system, Quebec would bother trading up. If the plan for big market CHL teams is to sell a plan where these kids all leave the league after their 17yr old season I just don't see how that works long term. What Gagne hinted (2 year rule) goes completely against the beliefs of Mike McMahon (who had been extremely anti-CHL in the past). Basically, if the rule is that they are flat out eligible, then they will sign agreements that explicitly say when they can go NCAA (NCAA recruiting starts at 14, so families will have a good idea what year they want an out clause for). I think the first year you see highly touted 17's and 18's who teams suffered for years to draft suddenly go south in a system only now designed to benefit the NCAA you see a big % of your season ticket base go with them. At that point it might actually be time to force an opt in to the Q draft. How else do you level the playing field? If Saint John can only sign players for 2 years and I can't even get them to report why is anyone supporting my team at that point? A CHL super league of the top 20 or so markets just taking the top talent and forcing everyone else into jr a caliber might be the only way to save the Canadian system if all these high end kids just leave after early development. |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 8:37:58 GMT -4
What Gagne hinted (2 year rule) goes completely against the beliefs of Mike McMahon (who had been extremely anti-CHL in the past). Basically, if the rule is that they are flat out eligible, then they will sign agreements that explicitly say when they can go NCAA (NCAA recruiting starts at 14, so families will have a good idea what year they want an out clause for). I think the first year you see highly touted 17's and 18's who teams suffered for years to draft suddenly go south in a system only now designed to benefit the NCAA you see a big % of your season ticket base go with them. At that point it might actually be time to force an opt in to the Q draft. How else do you level the playing field? If Saint John can only sign players for 2 years and I can't even get them to report why is anyone supporting my team at that point? A CHL super league of the top 20 or so markets just taking the top talent and forcing everyone else into jr a caliber might be the only way to save the Canadian system if all these high end kids just leave after early development. Now, you are bringing into the conversation one of the biggest problems with the QMJHL. While the other leagues have haves and have nots, they don't have markets that Americans are likely to outright say no to. Outside of a couple of teams, most of the Quebec markets are a hard no to all Americans. I think that all of the Maritime teams could make real cases where it would just become about selling your program. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 8:42:23 GMT -4
I think the first year you see highly touted 17's and 18's who teams suffered for years to draft suddenly go south in a system only now designed to benefit the NCAA you see a big % of your season ticket base go with them. At that point it might actually be time to force an opt in to the Q draft. How else do you level the playing field? If Saint John can only sign players for 2 years and I can't even get them to report why is anyone supporting my team at that point? A CHL super league of the top 20 or so markets just taking the top talent and forcing everyone else into jr a caliber might be the only way to save the Canadian system if all these high end kids just leave after early development. Now, you are bringing into the conversation one of the biggest problems with the QMJHL. While the other leagues have haves and have nots, they don't have markets that Americans are likely to outright say no to. Outside of a couple of teams, most of the Quebec markets are a hard no to all Americans. I think that all of the Maritime teams could make real cases where it would just become about selling your program. This plays no factor at all. Historically the best draw for Americans was the biggest market in Quebec with an NHL arena. The issue became the spending by the big markets so the smaller markets basically wiped out that talent pool. But its not like Sydney and Rouyn or Baie-Comeau don't have similar issues when it comes to Americans. Their biggest issues are being in Canada and not having teams in the NCAA. These American kids don't want to play junior in Canada. They want to play NCAA. Unless you can throw 6 figure scholarships at them to give up the chance. There's a reason the Q has basically been American free when there was a time between 2000 and 2010 or so where there was real intrigue because there was more financially available from the big markets to spend on them. |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 8:46:48 GMT -4
Now, you are bringing into the conversation one of the biggest problems with the QMJHL. While the other leagues have haves and have nots, they don't have markets that Americans are likely to outright say no to. Outside of a couple of teams, most of the Quebec markets are a hard no to all Americans. I think that all of the Maritime teams could make real cases where it would just become about selling your program. This plays no factor at all. Historically the best draw for Americans was the biggest market in Quebec with an NHL arena. The issue became the spending by the big markets so the smaller markets basically wiped out that talent pool. But its not like Sydney and Rouyn or Baie-Comeau don't have similar issues when it comes to Americans. Their biggest issues are being in Canada and not having teams in the NCAA. These American kids don't want to play junior in Canada. They want to play NCAA. Unless you can throw 6 figure scholarships at them to give up the chance. There's a reason the Q has basically been American free when there was a time between 2000 and 2010 or so where there was real intrigue because there was more financially available from the big markets to spend on them. Quebec, BLB and Sherbrooke (and to a lesser extent Rimouski) will be the Quebec markets that have a decent chance with any American. In a world where CHL doesn't stop their NCAA scholarships, Cape Breton isn't competing against the NCAA, they are competing against NCDC and other U18 leagues. |
|
galixon
Blue-Chip Prospect
Posts: 486
|
Post by galixon on Jun 11, 2024 8:48:53 GMT -4
If that’s what the Q and CHL come too, I’ll be totally out on the product. You want to talk about a league of haves and have nots, wait until kids aren’t happy with their situation or the best players demand to be traded or head to the NCAA. The transfer portal and NIL has completely ruined college sports.. this will completely ruin the CHL. 100%. Kids will have no penalty from jumping league to league. I look at this past weekends draft and wonder why, if in that system, Quebec would bother trading up. If the plan for big market CHL teams is to sell a plan where these kids all leave the league after their 17yr old season I just don't see how that works long term. The word around the draft was that the Dagenais clan said he had to be picked 1st overall or he wasn't coming. Quebec easily could have gotten him at 4 but he wouldn't report if he didn't go 1st due to the history that was made with him and his dad. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 8:50:45 GMT -4
This plays no factor at all. Historically the best draw for Americans was the biggest market in Quebec with an NHL arena. The issue became the spending by the big markets so the smaller markets basically wiped out that talent pool. But its not like Sydney and Rouyn or Baie-Comeau don't have similar issues when it comes to Americans. Their biggest issues are being in Canada and not having teams in the NCAA. These American kids don't want to play junior in Canada. They want to play NCAA. Unless you can throw 6 figure scholarships at them to give up the chance. There's a reason the Q has basically been American free when there was a time between 2000 and 2010 or so where there was real intrigue because there was more financially available from the big markets to spend on them. Quebec, BLB and Sherbrooke (and to a lesser extent Rimouski) will be the Quebec markets that have a decent chance with any American. In a world where CHL doesn't stop their NCAA scholarships, Cape Breton isn't competing against the NCAA, they are competing against NCDC and other U18 leagues. Why are you believing there's more of a chance with Americans after these rule changes? Unless the Q changes its financial rules this entire discussion is pointless and has nothing to do with the NCAA rules changes. You're not recruiting Americans to the Q. The only Americans you're going to see are the very odd case where teams get a young guy to report. Likely with other factors (bad grades for example) killing the NCAA dream for them. Or the NCAA guys who wear out their welcome with their NCAA team and have nowhere else to |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 8:54:05 GMT -4
100%. Kids will have no penalty from jumping league to league. I look at this past weekends draft and wonder why, if in that system, Quebec would bother trading up. If the plan for big market CHL teams is to sell a plan where these kids all leave the league after their 17yr old season I just don't see how that works long term. The word around the draft was that the Dagenais clan said he had to be picked 1st overall or he wasn't coming. Quebec easily could have gotten him at 4 but he wouldn't report if he didn't go 1st due to the history that was made with him and his dad. You can believe that but if the rules were different I would say his people would advise him that going to Quebec at 4 and them having more assets is a considerably better alternative for him. Point remains the same. It would be another blow to small markets on the trade market if big markets were selling 2 year stop overs on the way to the NCAA. Whether Dagenais was pulling a Bowers or not really doesnt matter as its only baseless speculation. For some kid in the future there would be no reason to not wait it out and get to the big market at a lower rank which just benefits the player and their future team. |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 8:57:03 GMT -4
Quebec, BLB and Sherbrooke (and to a lesser extent Rimouski) will be the Quebec markets that have a decent chance with any American. In a world where CHL doesn't stop their NCAA scholarships, Cape Breton isn't competing against the NCAA, they are competing against NCDC and other U18 leagues. Why are you believing there's more of a chance with Americans after these rule changes? Unless the Q changes its financial rules this entire discussion is pointless and has nothing to do with the NCAA rules changes. You're not recruiting Americans to the Q. The only Americans you're going to see are the very odd case where teams get a young guy to report. Likely with other factors (bad grades for example) killing the NCAA dream for them. Or the NCAA guys who wear out their welcome with their NCAA team and have nowhere else to Because there are a lot of kids in New England who end up playing at a fairly low level at 16-18, who could potentially play at a higher level with absolutely no draw back. From an SJ point of view, I look at a kid like Matas Janulius, who played U16 at 15, likely plays U18 at 16, then maybe NCDC at 17 and 18, then USHL at 19 (this is a common development path for a lot of kids). If he could potentially make SJ at 16 or 17, then he could spend that whole time in the CHL (higher level) without having to give up NCAA. Keep in mind, this rule change does absolutely nothing for higher end kids. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 8:59:05 GMT -4
Why are you believing there's more of a chance with Americans after these rule changes? Unless the Q changes its financial rules this entire discussion is pointless and has nothing to do with the NCAA rules changes. You're not recruiting Americans to the Q. The only Americans you're going to see are the very odd case where teams get a young guy to report. Likely with other factors (bad grades for example) killing the NCAA dream for them. Or the NCAA guys who wear out their welcome with their NCAA team and have nowhere else to Because there are a lot of kids in New England who end up playing at a fairly low level at 16-18, who could potentially play at a higher level with absolutely no draw back. From an SJ point of view, I look at a kid like Matas Janulius, who played U16 at 15, likely plays U18 at 16, then maybe NCDC at 17 and 18, then USHL at 19 (this is a common development path for a lot of kids). If he could potentially make SJ at 16 or 17, then he could spend that whole time in the CHL (higher level) without having to give up NCAA. Keep in mind, this rule change does absolutely nothing for higher end kids. So the plan in losing the higher end kids is to bring in the lower end NCAA kids and develop them for the NCAA? |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 9:00:55 GMT -4
Because there are a lot of kids in New England who end up playing at a fairly low level at 16-18, who could potentially play at a higher level with absolutely no draw back. From an SJ point of view, I look at a kid like Matas Janulius, who played U16 at 15, likely plays U18 at 16, then maybe NCDC at 17 and 18, then USHL at 19 (this is a common development path for a lot of kids). If he could potentially make SJ at 16 or 17, then he could spend that whole time in the CHL (higher level) without having to give up NCAA. Keep in mind, this rule change does absolutely nothing for higher end kids. So the plan in losing the higher end kids is to bring in the lower end NCAA kids and develop them for the NCAA? The plan IMO is to have a bigger market to choose from. If the guys that come are only top 6 forwards or top 4 D at 19, I don't think that is a terrible thing. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 9:02:19 GMT -4
So the plan in losing the higher end kids is to bring in the lower end NCAA kids and develop them for the NCAA? The plan IMO is to have a bigger market to choose from. If the guys that come are only top 6 forwards or top 4 D at 19, I don't think that is a terrible thing. They're playing in the NCAA at 19 if they are. |
|
