|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 9:04:18 GMT -4
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. I don't agree with that at all. I look at a Joe Fleming and see that as the group of players that are likely to come. A 4th D at 19 in the QMJHL isn't playing NCAA. 19 year-old forwards in the NCAA are almost universally guys who played top line at 18 on their previous team. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 9:05:16 GMT -4
They're playing in the NCAA at 19 if they are. I don't agree with that at all. I look at a Joe Fleming and see that as the group of players that are likely to come. A 4th D at 19 in the QMJHL isn't playing NCAA. 19 year-old forwards in the NCAA are almost universally guys who played top line at 18 on their previous team. Well a 4th D at 19 who has replaced our high end talent is playing in front of under 1500 people in most Q markets if thats where it all goes. |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 9:08:52 GMT -4
I don't agree with that at all. I look at a Joe Fleming and see that as the group of players that are likely to come. A 4th D at 19 in the QMJHL isn't playing NCAA. 19 year-old forwards in the NCAA are almost universally guys who played top line at 18 on their previous team. Well a 4th D at 19 who has replaced our high end talent is playing in front of under 1500 people in most Q markets if thats where it all goes. What high end talent? I don't know what you are talking about. The high end Canadian kids will do what they have always done. The high end American kids did not come here. The other Canadian kids will still get drafted. Some of the middle-end Americans MIGHT report as a result and the overall level of the Q might increase slightly. That is all that I see. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 9:16:23 GMT -4
Well a 4th D at 19 who has replaced our high end talent is playing in front of under 1500 people in most Q markets if thats where it all goes. What high end talent? I don't know what you are talking about. The high end Canadian kids will do what they have always done. The high end American kids did not come here. The other Canadian kids will still get drafted. Some of the middle-end Americans MIGHT report as a result and the overall level of the Q might increase slightly. That is all that I see. The high end kids won't do what they've always done when the landscape is drastically different. A high end kid with great marks and an NCAA scholarship is going to stay in Val d'Or or Sydney after their 17 or 18yr old season? |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 9:24:35 GMT -4
What high end talent? I don't know what you are talking about. The high end Canadian kids will do what they have always done. The high end American kids did not come here. The other Canadian kids will still get drafted. Some of the middle-end Americans MIGHT report as a result and the overall level of the Q might increase slightly. That is all that I see. The high end kids won't do what they've always done when the landscape is drastically different. A high end kid with great marks and an NCAA scholarship is going to stay in Val d'Or or Sydney after their 17 or 18yr old season? I believe that there will be something in place to prevent them from jumping to the NCAA. They could still bolt for Jr A or U18, but I don't think the USHL or NCAA will be options. |
|
|
|
Post by puckstopper on Jun 11, 2024 9:50:10 GMT -4
Correct me if I am wrong on what is being said. It sounds like high end Canadian players might decide to stay in the Q at 16-17 but go states bound at 18. The high end Americans it won’t help us draw them to the Q but might help bring lower end players up. How does this benefit teams in the Q. It sounds like it will be very hard to develop kids and keep them when they are 18-20?
|
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 9:54:28 GMT -4
Correct me if I am wrong on what is being said. It sounds like high end Canadian players might decide to stay in the Q at 16-17 but go states bound at 18. The high end Americans it won’t help us draw them to the Q but might help bring lower end players up. How does this benefit teams in the Q. It sounds like it will be very hard to develop kids and keep them when they are 18-20? If that truly happens, the Q as a whole will die. What I expect is that the CHL and NCAA come to a handshake agreement where NCAA outs can be negotiated in player's deals to let them out at 20. AFAIK, the NCAA would have to pay for the release of CHL players until they age out currently, so a handshake agreement allows them to get around this and allows the CHL to not have to worry about poaching. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 10:04:14 GMT -4
The high end kids won't do what they've always done when the landscape is drastically different. A high end kid with great marks and an NCAA scholarship is going to stay in Val d'Or or Sydney after their 17 or 18yr old season? I believe that there will be something in place to prevent them from jumping to the NCAA. They could still bolt for Jr A or U18, but I don't think the USHL or NCAA will be options. Why? Everything we're talking about here is opening up the playing field for 17/18yr olds to leave after 2-3 years in the league. The rules now prevent them from jumping. The discussion is being had because the rules are changing. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 10:05:57 GMT -4
Correct me if I am wrong on what is being said. It sounds like high end Canadian players might decide to stay in the Q at 16-17 but go states bound at 18. The high end Americans it won’t help us draw them to the Q but might help bring lower end players up. How does this benefit teams in the Q. It sounds like it will be very hard to develop kids and keep them when they are 18-20? If that truly happens, the Q as a whole will die. What I expect is that the CHL and NCAA come to a handshake agreement where NCAA outs can be negotiated in player's deals to let them out at 20. AFAIK, the NCAA would have to pay for the release of CHL players until they age out currently, so a handshake agreement allows them to get around this and allows the CHL to not have to worry about poaching. Why is the NCAA doing a handshake deal to help the CHL? Why would the CHL put their future on a handshake with a bigger league with more money behind it? Why is the NCAA changing their rules if its not to bring in the players their rules have eliminated them from recruiting? |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 10:08:26 GMT -4
If that truly happens, the Q as a whole will die. What I expect is that the CHL and NCAA come to a handshake agreement where NCAA outs can be negotiated in player's deals to let them out at 20. AFAIK, the NCAA would have to pay for the release of CHL players until they age out currently, so a handshake agreement allows them to get around this and allows the CHL to not have to worry about poaching. Why is the NCAA doing a handshake deal to help the CHL? Why would the CHL put their future on a handshake with a bigger league with more money behind it? Why is the NCAA changing their rules if its not to bring in the players their rules have eliminated them from recruiting? Because I believe that the NCAA is an IIHF sanctioned league, meaning that they can only bring in kids with release clauses (similar to bringing imports in). While Jr. A and the US leagues allow the release because it is part of their model, the CHL is not going to. Therefore, both sides will have to come together. |
|
|
|
Post by puckstopper on Jun 11, 2024 10:57:12 GMT -4
I would guess the Q has no control if NCAA has the rule in once to stop kids coming over if they play in the Q and if they want to change the rule they can without talking to the Q correct? If they do the Q will be made up good players until 18 anyone older are not good enough to make the jump. Would this make the Q more like Junior A? A
|
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 11:01:03 GMT -4
I would guess the Q has no control if NCAA has the rule in once to stop kids coming over if they play in the Q and if they want to change the rule they can without talking to the Q correct? If they do the Q will be made up good players until 18 anyone older are not good enough to make the jump. Would this make the Q more like Junior A? A The NCAA is what has stopped our Q kids from going south. The Q can't do anything about what the NCAA deems as eligibility requirements. The NCAA also has no reason to not want to crush the CHL as a competitor as it attempts to grow the sport to make up for these NIL deals. Halifax can't offer a European any more then Bathurst can. But Boston College can offer that European (or Canadian....) $5 million and of course a free scholarship and all other elements of a free ride. The CHL either changes its rules back to what they were when we'd see players like Radulov, Voracek, Hennessy, Sharrow, etc or we're about to see it become a secondary product when all these kids we're fighting for in our drafts as 15yr olds all secure 7 figure guarantees south of the border. |
|
|
|
Post by joehockey on Jun 11, 2024 11:46:34 GMT -4
I would guess the Q has no control if NCAA has the rule in once to stop kids coming over if they play in the Q and if they want to change the rule they can without talking to the Q correct? If they do the Q will be made up good players until 18 anyone older are not good enough to make the jump. Would this make the Q more like Junior A? A The NCAA is what has stopped our Q kids from going south. The Q can't do anything about what the NCAA deems as eligibility requirements. The NCAA also has no reason to not want to crush the CHL as a competitor as it attempts to grow the sport to make up for these NIL deals. Halifax can't offer a European any more then Bathurst can. But Boston College can offer that European (or Canadian....) $5 million and of course a free scholarship and all other elements of a free ride. The CHL either changes its rules back to what they were when we'd see players like Radulov, Voracek, Hennessy, Sharrow, etc or we're about to see it become a secondary product when all these kids we're fighting for in our drafts as 15yr olds all secure 7 figure guarantees south of the border. I think we need to be realistic here - no one is offering a college hockey player 5 million dollars or close to it. Even the top college football players aren’t making 5 million. A coach said it costs about a million or 2 to get a proven QB now through the transfer portal - see Sam Hartman last year for Notre Dame. But we need to recognize that college football is by far the most popular college sport - it’s not even remotely close. It’s also coming out that a bunch of kids who are signing these agreements are not getting paid even close to what is reported because they aren’t meeting the requirements of the contract (likely poor advice from their NIL advisors). Texas A&M signed the best class in the history of college football in 2022 because of these NIL promises and has already lost like half of them. A bunch have come out and said that they weren’t being paid what they expected based on the agreement (a few thousand if at all). Also, for most schools, football is the only profitable sport (some basketball teams are profitable) because of the incredible TV deals that they sign and they use the money to help fund other sports. Hockey just doesn’t have the same support or viewership. Offering the QB for Notre Dame a million dollars for a NIL deal when he’ll be on national television every game of the year is much more palatable for businesses than some random hockey player that no one hears about unless they pay attention to college hockey in the northeast. Sure, in theory someone could offer a player 5 million to go to play college hockey, but I’d be blown away if someone offered that to someone to play a sport where the NCAA / schools don’t care enough to give enough full scholarships to ice a full roster. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jun 11, 2024 11:53:02 GMT -4
The NCAA is what has stopped our Q kids from going south. The Q can't do anything about what the NCAA deems as eligibility requirements. The NCAA also has no reason to not want to crush the CHL as a competitor as it attempts to grow the sport to make up for these NIL deals. Halifax can't offer a European any more then Bathurst can. But Boston College can offer that European (or Canadian....) $5 million and of course a free scholarship and all other elements of a free ride. The CHL either changes its rules back to what they were when we'd see players like Radulov, Voracek, Hennessy, Sharrow, etc or we're about to see it become a secondary product when all these kids we're fighting for in our drafts as 15yr olds all secure 7 figure guarantees south of the border. I think we need to be realistic here - no one is offering a college hockey player 5 million dollars or close to it. Even the top college football players aren’t making 5 million. A coach said it costs about a million or 2 to get a proven QB now through the transfer portal - see Sam Hartman last year for Notre Dame. But we need to recognize that college football is by far the most popular college sport - it’s not even remotely close. It’s also coming out that a bunch of kids who are signing these agreements are not getting paid even close to what is reported because they aren’t meeting the requirements of the contract (likely poor advice from their NIL advisors). Texas A&M signed the best class in the history of college football in 2022 because of these NIL promises and has already lost like half of them. A bunch have come out and said that they weren’t being paid what they expected based on the agreement (a few thousand if at all). Also, for most schools, football is the only profitable sport (some basketball teams are profitable) because of the incredible TV deals that they sign and they use the money to help fund other sports. Hockey just doesn’t have the same support or viewership. Sure, someone could offer a player 5 million to go to play college hockey, but I’d be blown away if someone offered that to someone to play a sport where the NCAA doesn’t even offer enough full scholarships to ice a full roster. But even high 5/low 6 figures will be enticing. We all know hockey players aren't getting $5 million tomorrow as any sort of norm. But what if a Crosby or MacKinnon come through? What's a generational Maritimer worth to a Boston College when a Halifax Mooseheads have their hands tied? Being realistic also looks at the extension of the NCAA and why all this NIL stuff was even needed - it's not the teams - it's the boosters. Those fans with lifelong ties who want to throw money and resources at their favorite team. So maybe a Hockey East team never pays a Maritimer 7 figures. But maybe Winston's Audi dealership in Salem writes the family a 7 figure check and tosses in a new ride. With no limits you need to see how its quickly going to blow up. Especially if the Q keeps the hands tied of the big markets. As the American hockey system continues to grow it will keep growing in resources and revenue and the development system will want to become the best in the world. It would be extremely naive to view the landscape today and not at least try to prepare for what is coming. Especially when we know there's teams in this league who can do more and have done more but are now not allowed to spend the same. |
|
|
|
Post by Briwhel on Jun 11, 2024 12:44:22 GMT -4
One interesting thing about the Dogs draft is that they took 3 RD who are all 6' or taller and are all 190lbs or more already.
Add on that Bonnet 6'2 182 and Sea Dogs could potentially have a blue line with size as they move forward.
Up front, Beveridge is only 5'8, but a respectable 170 lbs (for a 16). Groulx is 6'1 177. The smallest guys are Rozzi (bro Jake is 183 at 19, so I'm not too worried), Miller (162), Beaulieu (157, and arguably his size is the biggest problem with everything he does) and of course Simek at 160.
|
|
