So if the NCDC team cuts a kid from the roster mid season, is the team going to pay the kid thousands for opening up a spot on the roster? The taking up a spot on the roster argument is complete BS.
Players migrate toward the higher quality teams and away from lesser quality teams.
The NCDC is not an equal to the NTDP. They're not in the same universe. What the NTDP does means nothing in that context.
Okay Mr. Einstein, you're saying if the NCDC player gets an opportunity to move up in level of play from NCDC, first he's got to pay the NCDC a hefty fine. Unlike the NTDP, that won't be tolerated at the NCDC level of play.
If that's truely what NCDC plans to do, NCDC will solidify its place as a DIII developmental league because any player with a legitimate shot of advancing in hockey will avoid the NCDC like the plague.
The NCDC will be one and done. Next year the NCDC will be gone and in its place there will be a newly named league promoted with a new sales pitch and about half of the league's teams being first-timers.
The fine is tolerated at NTDP because the NTDP has far more to offer being at the top rather than the NCDC being far lower on the totem pole.
Great article on USPHL website. Looks like the NHL sees NCDC a good jr option.
So if your a scout your ass is on the line each draft. Your going to watch your top elibile prospects as much as you can leading up to that's years draft. If a kid is not eligible until the following year, then you have plenty of time to watch him the next year. Your only going to watch a TIII game if you have nothing else to do or no where else to be.
If the leage want's to position itself as a college development league, then they should stay hyper focused on that. Seems like they can't help themselves in terms of overhyping and they haven't played a game yet.
Most 'scouts' aren't NHL scouts so I'm not sure what draft you are referencing. And it might make it a little easier for all of us if you could figure out the difference between your and you're. Once you learn the difference it might make your whole post different.
Yay, hurray for you.
Instead of Coprenicus or Galileo, how about Stephen Hawkin for the discovery of empty voids in the universe called black holes.
Your signing an agreement. Each party "agrees" to provide what's in the terms. If the terms call for reimbursing the club if the player chooses to leave early, then that's what you owe. If you don't want to take on that risk, or more specifically, if you think there is a chance you are going to leave early, then don't sign the agreement.
Exactly! Excellent advice. You must be another one of those internet lawyers.
If a player is looking to possibly move up in the hockey ranks, DO NOT SIGN an NCDC contract. And any player worth his salt is looking to move up in the ranks.
But on the other hand, if realistically the DIIIs are stretch schools hockeywise, and odds are the player will be lucky to make a good college ACHA club hockey team, the "tuition free" NCDC is a dream come true. If a player is merely looking to occupy a roster spot - and not advance - in that case, a player should lock in, and SIGN an NCDC contract.
In the NAHL players can leave and go to other leagues without paying the team anything. However USA Hockey has agreements in place that if they go to another league the teams work out compensation. For instance a player can just leave a team and play for say the EHL but the NAHL team must give the player his release (which they usually but not always do) or work out a trade with other team. But can't just leave one USA hockey team and go to another USA hockey team. Same for ushl. But there is no financial penalty for player as in both leagues there is no actual "contract" signed as it is free to play. Player is simply put on a USA hockey protected list.
They are only the same technically in that they fund by taxing others. The concept is the same, but in practice there is no comparison.
And watch out for the grammar dbag. He'll be coming for you.