OHL team sues U of Michigan student newspaper

It can be a very tough business, especially for 16-year-olds. You have to move away from home, attend a new school where the only other kids you know are your teammates, there's a very hectic practice schedule, a pro-style game sked and lots of travel. And there is always the threat of a trade or release. I sat in on plenty of those meetings over the years and they were never easy.

 

Huggy, I believe you can have seven full-rides (first rounders are mandatory gold packages) over a four year period (exempting gold-package players acquired in trade, those don't count against your total).

The way the "standard" US packages are structured it's the "average" tuition for a state school in your home state. For example, if you sign a player from Wisconsin, the average U of Wisc tuition school (let's say it's U-W Whitewater) is what the player gets. This doesn't restrict the player from going elsewhere, it just sets the bar on how much the team pays.

Some teams will "burn" a kid's eligibility by playing them in a pre-season game without any contracted guarantee ("you have to prove yourself when it matters" rationale), and you'd be surprised at some of the clubs that follow this mentality. Many teams, like your former club, refuse to do this and will pick up one year if they suit up in the exhibition games.

Also, formerly each team was required to manage their education packages. That's now done on a league level. This is done to prevent issues like Huggy raised above (dumping players, not paying off on a timely basis, etc).

And as Huggy stated, Kitchener wasn't the first (nor the last) to provide an exotic trip to their kids following a championship season. Hell, I know of one Ontario Junior B team that sends their players and staff on a Christmas holiday cruise (on the ownership's dime), no matter if they're winning or not.

Oh, and don't go crying "poor" on me, my brother....you-know-who has more money that Davey Crockett- despite being a former sports writer!

 

True dat, my bro, that doesn't mean the man wants to spend it.

 

Good point...it's HIS money.

 

When it comes down to it, the best thing a parent can do is educate themselves on all the rules regarding eligibility for the NCAA, CHL scholarships, and the different programs and teams that are available to their son. The bottom line is these teams and programs don't really care about the kid, they are a meat grinder. Both the NCAA and major junior teams are guilty of this. Priority No. 1 for them has been and always will be success on the ice.

There's also no one size fits all situation. If your kid is a top prospect and an early pick in the bantam draft, has a large frame and is mature enough to handle moving across the country to live with billets at 16 or 17, then major junior is probably the route for him. If he's a little smaller, doesn't have have huge prospects of turning pro one day -- maybe fits into that late bloomer category -- and is fairly intelligent, the junior A/NCAA route is probably best. There are positives and negatives to both. There are also no guarantees that if you go the junior A/NCAA route you will get that scholarship, or if you do you end up at Div III school and it will still cost big bucks to go. In that case, Major Junior has the potential to be best for you if you can get that scholarship money and then use it once your playing days are over.

 

Here are the different scholarship policies broken down for the CHL, some more specific than others. I'm sure each has a book six inches thick on the different regulations.

WHL
http://chl.ca/page/whlinfo

QMJHL
http://chl.ca/uploads/assets/CHL_EN_SITE/EngEducationPolicyAugust.pdf

OHL
http://www.bestofbothworlds.ca/ohl-scholarship-s12057

 

The latest on this:

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/kitchener-rangers%E2%80%99-lawsuit-against-student-newspaper-is-%E2%80%98bullying%E2%80%99--lawyer.html

I think the UM lawyer is right, this is just another battle in the war between the CHL and NCAA, but how is this "bullying". The UM daily ran something, the Rangers are asking them to defend it in court. Put up or shut up, right? Or am I missing something here?

 

According to CHL President/OHL Commissioner David Branch which did their own investigation, Kitchener didn't do anything against the rules according to the OHL.

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/ohl-slaps-windsor-spitfires-with-massive-sanctions-20120810.html

I haven't seen any response by Matt Slovin or the Michigan Daily, maybe on the advice of their lawyer.

 

Though the OHL says that the Windsor Spitfires did:

http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/08/10/windsor-spitfires-deny-recruitment-allegations/

Of course, the Spits are denying it...

 

Michigan Daily's lawyer made a comment if the case was moved to a US court http://blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/08/12/duff-column-on-spitfires-sanctions/ (Bottom of the story)

 

I know the attorney, Herschel Fink. Really nice guy, but I wouldn't want to oppose him in court. He's really, really good.

 

There has been a settlement http://www.kitchenerrangers.com/article/rangers-michigan-daily-reach-settlement