NHL Official Eager to Help College Problem
April 11, 2008
By John Gilbert
DENVER, COLO. --- College hockey teams and conferences throughout the U.S. share one common concern these days, and that is the early departure of their top players who sign National Hockey League contracts and turn pro. The problem has always been there, but it has worsened in recent years, and this past year even saw two players leave in midseason.
League officials from the WCHA and other conferences have met with NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and discussed the situation, and Friday morning they may have found an ally in Paul Kelly, the new executive director of the National Hockey League Players Association. The NHL and the NHLPA have been at odds in recent years over such things as collective bargaining agreements, but Kelly sounds eager to work with the league and with the colleges to try to come up with some agreeable compromises.
"In February, representatives of the college leagues made a presentation to Gary Bettman raising concerns about the number of players leaving college early, and particularly a couple of high-profile signings during the season. I came here to show support for college hockey."
Kelly is a former Boston College player, so he also was able to watch his alma mater beat North Dakota 6-1 and advance to the NCAA tournament championship game. His roots, being from Michigan, also are oriented toward helping promote college hockey as a viable developmental setting for pros, and also to help apprise prospective pro players of the value of getting an education.
The difficulty college hockey faces is that in pro football and basketball, the colleges are essentially the farm system for pro development. In hockey, there is a minor league system for signed players, and also the vast Canadian junior hockey route to the pro game, and more recently the European teams. So the pro football and basketball leagues have good reason to protect college players as they develop, but in hockey, the colleges have no such leverage. Some NHL teams would just as soon have their top prospects play more games in Major Junior Canadian hockey than to play college hockey, so college hockey has no leverage for pressing pro teams into leaving their drafted college players in college.
Before this season, North Dakota lost Jonathan Toews to the Chicago Blackhawks where he led NHL rookies in goals, while, among others, Minnesota-Duluth lost top scorer Mason Raymond to the Vancouver Canucks, and defenseman Matt Niskanen to Dallas, while Minnesota lost Alex Goligoski, and freshman Eric Johnson to pro contracts, as examples of key undergraduate signings.
This season, Minnesota's Kyle Okposo left the Gophers at the end of December to sign with the New York Islanders, where he played most of the second half of the season with the Islanders' American Hockey League affiliate. Denver lost leading scorer Brock Trotter as well, although he reportedly was facing some scholastic disciplinary circumstances.
Kelly is in an unusual situation. "My duty is to represent 750 NHL players," he said, "and thousands of former NHL players. We are very much committed to helping have strong hockey development programs at all levels - youth, college, junior and international. That's where our future members will come from."
It was suggested that since colleges and college hockey teams have no leverage with NHL organizations, the best solution might be a workable compromise that could limit the signings. If an NHL team signs a Canadian junior player, for example, it can't send the player to the minors, but must return him to his junior team if he doesn't make the major league roster. A similar arrangement exists for European players. That couldn't work with colleges, because signing a pro contract precludes college eligibility.
But could an arrangement work where an NHL team signing a college player early would have to keep that player on the major league roster instead of sending him to the minors? That at least would cause NHL teams to sign only those they are sure can step in and help at the NHL level, such as Toews.
"I have to tell you that I am not in favor of anything that would limit the flexibility of college players compared to Canadian junior or European players," said Kelly. "As an American, and a college graduate, I know that telling an NHL team it has to keep a player on its roster is a restriction that the Canadian junior or European players don't face. So it's a disadvantage, because you'd lose some quality players out of college who would go to junior instead."
Kelly is also not in favor of loosening the salary cap recently put in place on teams to restrict over-spending, "because you could have a situation where a team is taking money from a veteran player to give it to an entry-level player," he said.
"If there are any ways to fix the problem at all, it will probaly require some loosening of the collective barganing agreement. I've thought of possible signing bonuses, and I wouldn't oppose a plan to deter 30 clubs from early college signings by saying they could only sign players from the end of their college season through October of the following season.
"From my perspective, the more guys I have with college degrees, the better it is for them after they leave the NHL. That's a message I intend to communicate. All the players can think of is playing in the NHL, but they've got to realize, they have another 60 years to live after their playing careers."
Some see the proliferation of player agents recruiting players as a problem. As it stands, they must officially work only as "advisors" for the players to avoid tarnishing their eligibility. Kelly pointed out that the agent business has changed, and now agents must be certified by the NHLPA.
"Agents only exist with our blessing," he said. "They are granted authority to represent players only by our standards, and we certify them. They can be fined, suspended, or decertified if they don't go by our standards."
Kelly sees as a main issue the fact that college hockey coaches are trying to recruit older and older players. He said one estimate showed that college players average 2 years older now than they did 10 years ago. So they are recruiting players younger than ever, but trying to get them to go play junior hockey in the USHL for two or more years, and getting them at 19 or 20, which means they won't start their pro careers until age 24 in some cases. By the time they are juniors, they see that their pro future years are becoming more limited by their age.
"Ten years ago, college players were starting college at 18, but if they don't start until they are 20, it lessens the likelihood of them getting to their third year," Kelly said.
It was suggested that the whole scenario might be improved if colleges went back to bringing in 18-year-old freshmen. "That would undoubtedly keep them in college longer," Kelly agreed, "because most NHL teams would say they are not physically mature enough yet."
College coaches who encourage high school players to leave high school and play junior, where they can become more polished players by playing more games, may be contributing to their own problem. But if college coaches prefer to have more polished, mature, and experienced players by bringing in 20-year-old freshmen, the reality is that they are less likely to keep their best players for full four-year terms.
|
|
 |
