Recruits 2026 and Beyond

[margolism]

Incentive to play his absolute best.

[Trotsky]

They all always have that anyway.  Nobody in D1 is dogging it based on their draft status.  They need to prove to coach they deserve premium minutes, to their draft team they are developing, and they'd never have reached this level without the neurotic thirst to achieve it takes decades of therapy to unkink.

[stereax]

Oh... great...

The new CBA changes the time teams have drafted players' rights before signing them (4 years for drafted at 18, 3 years drafted at 19, etc).

These changes are expected to be effective starting with the 2027 draft class. Players drafted prior to 2027 will be subject to the existing rules/timelines

[BearLover]

Oh... great...

The new CBA changes the time teams have drafted players' rights before signing them (4 years for drafted at 18, 3 years drafted at 19, etc).

These changes are expected to be effective starting with the 2027 draft class. Players drafted prior to 2027 will be subject to the existing rules/timelines

There was talk that there may be an exception if a player is in college, in which case their rights would expire X days after graduating. Did that end up not making it into the CBA?

This change seems to hurt most the teams with a lot of good but not great draft picks (guys who might want to stay 3 or 4 years). It also means college teams should rush drafted players to college whether they're ready or not.

[scoop85]

Oh... great...

The new CBA changes the time teams have drafted players' rights before signing them (4 years for drafted at 18, 3 years drafted at 19, etc).

These changes are expected to be effective starting with the 2027 draft class. Players drafted prior to 2027 will be subject to the existing rules/timelines

There was talk that there may be an exception if a player is in college, in which case their rights would expire X days after graduating. Did that end up not making it into the CBA?

This change seems to hurt most the teams with a lot of good but not great draft picks (guys who might want to stay 3 or 4 years). It also means college teams should rush drafted players to college whether they're ready or not.

If they're "not ready" for college, what is the benefit of rushing them to come in? I'd rather have a guy who's "ready" even if it's for only 2 or 3 years.

[BearLover]

Oh... great...

The new CBA changes the time teams have drafted players' rights before signing them (4 years for drafted at 18, 3 years drafted at 19, etc).

These changes are expected to be effective starting with the 2027 draft class. Players drafted prior to 2027 will be subject to the existing rules/timelines

There was talk that there may be an exception if a player is in college, in which case their rights would expire X days after graduating. Did that end up not making it into the CBA?

This change seems to hurt most the teams with a lot of good but not great draft picks (guys who might want to stay 3 or 4 years). It also means college teams should rush drafted players to college whether they're ready or not.

If they're "not ready" for college, what is the benefit of rushing them to come in? I'd rather have a guy who's "ready" even if it's for only 2 or 3 years.

Fair enough—I think though that it's rarely black and white, and if a player is anywhere close to being able to make the lineup (probably true of most draft picks) they'll be brought in immediately event if a year of juniors would be better for their growth.

[stereax]

Ok so as per this what I understood is true:

Draft rights: starting in 2027 draft

• age 18, rights expire on the fourth June 1 afterward.

• 19 or older, rights expire on the third June 1 afterward.

• if NCAA, rights expire following the 30th day after Central Registry is informed the player is leaving college hockey

[BearLover]

Ok so as per this what I understood is true:

Draft rights: starting in 2027 draft

• age 18, rights expire on the fourth June 1 afterward.

• 19 or older, rights expire on the third June 1 afterward.

• if NCAA, rights expire following the 30th day after Central Registry is informed the player is leaving college hockey

So the exception I was referring to above made it into the CBA after all. I.e. I don't think the new rule changes much of anything for college hockey.

[adamw]

Ok so as per this what I understood is true:

Draft rights: starting in 2027 draft

• age 18, rights expire on the fourth June 1 afterward.

• 19 or older, rights expire on the third June 1 afterward.

• if NCAA, rights expire following the 30th day after Central Registry is informed the player is leaving college hockey

So the exception I was referring to above made it into the CBA after all. I.e. I don't think the new rule changes much of anything for college hockey.

changes nothing - except I think it used to be Aug. 1 now says "30 days" - and I also don't know what it means to inform anyone they're leaving college hockey if they're a senior.

[marty]

Ok so as per this what I understood is true:

Draft rights: starting in 2027 draft

• age 18, rights expire on the fourth June 1 afterward.

• 19 or older, rights expire on the third June 1 afterward.

• if NCAA, rights expire following the 30th day after Central Registry is informed the player is leaving college hockey

So the exception I was referring to above made it into the CBA after all. I.e. I don't think the new rule changes much of anything for college hockey.

changes nothing - except I think it used to be Aug. 1 now says "30 days" - and I also don't know what it means to inform anyone they're leaving college hockey if they're a senior.

Perhaps that is written if a player leaves before graduating.

[ugarte]

Ok so as per this what I understood is true:

Draft rights: starting in 2027 draft

• age 18, rights expire on the fourth June 1 afterward.

• 19 or older, rights expire on the third June 1 afterward.

• if NCAA, rights expire following the 30th day after Central Registry is informed the player is leaving college hockey

So the exception I was referring to above made it into the CBA after all. I.e. I don't think the new rule changes much of anything for college hockey.

changes nothing - except I think it used to be Aug. 1 now says "30 days" - and I also don't know what it means to inform anyone they're leaving college hockey if they're a senior.

Perhaps that is written if a player leaves before graduating.

or if they graduate but have eligibility remaining

[ithacat]

Fwiw, Heisenberg's list for 2026 & beyond, with updated teams, shows the following number of recruits planning to play in the CHL this season:

Cornell - 7
Harvard - 6
Colgate - 3
Clarkson, QU - 2
Dartmouth, Princeton, Yale - 1
Brown, RPI, SLU, Union - 0

[BearLover]

Fwiw, Heisenberg's list for 2026 & beyond, with updated teams, shows the following number of recruits planning to play in the CHL this season:

Cornell - 7
Harvard - 6
Colgate - 3
Clarkson, QU - 2
Dartmouth, Princeton, Yale - 1
Brown, RPI, SLU, Union - 0

Quinnipiac's and Clarkson's numbers are low because their strategy, at least for next season, was to load up on CHL overagers who could immediately come to college the following season. So these teams are recruiting heavily from the CHL, but less so younger players who are still a few years away from matriculating. Clarkson had a bunch of decommitments from the coaching change so I can give them a pass, but Q's strategy seems to have been to kick most of their longtime recruits to the curb (either tell them they no longer have a roster spot, or send them back to juniors for another year) in favor of bringing in 7 CHL overagers. These kids were likely lined up to come to Q this summer until the CHL players became eligible, and a few months later those kids were told to kick rocks. Quinnipiac is surely not the only team doing this, but they're probably the only team in the ECAC doing this.

[ursusminor]

Fwiw, Heisenberg's list for 2026 & beyond, with updated teams, shows the following number of recruits planning to play in the CHL this season:

Cornell - 7
Harvard - 6
Colgate - 3
Clarkson, QU - 2
Dartmouth, Princeton, Yale - 1
Brown, RPI, SLU, Union - 0

Quinnipiac's and Clarkson's numbers are low because their strategy, at least for next season, was to load up on CHL overagers who could immediately come to college the following season. So these teams are recruiting heavily from the CHL, but less so younger players who are still a few years away from matriculating. Clarkson had a bunch of decommitments from the coaching change so I can give them a pass, but Q's strategy seems to have been to kick most of their longtime recruits to the curb (either tell them they no longer have a roster spot, or send them back to juniors for another year) in favor of bringing in 7 CHL overagers. These kids were likely lined up to come to Q this summer until the CHL players became eligible, and a few months later those kids were told to kick rocks. Quinnipiac is surely not the only team doing this, but they're probably the only team in the ECAC doing this.

RPI's Jack Ziliotto left Trail (BCHL) for Sudbury (OHL) and played 28 regular season games (5 goals, 9 assists) and 4 more in the playoffs there. I wrote Chris about this, and he stated that he was not going to make the change. I will write to him again since there are a lot of changes (e.g., Klassek and Lemieux will be in Troy).

I also expect Chemrouk to play for Victoria (QMJHL) and Dwyer for Baie-Comeau (QMJHL) where they were after Stanstead's season ended. Neither got much ice time in the Q.

[stereax]

Fwiw, Heisenberg's list for 2026 & beyond, with updated teams, shows the following number of recruits planning to play in the CHL this season:

Cornell - 7
Harvard - 6
Colgate - 3
Clarkson, QU - 2
Dartmouth, Princeton, Yale - 1
Brown, RPI, SLU, Union - 0

But I was told Cornell was going to have problems recruiting from the CHL...

Genuine question tho, can you break it down by league? It feels like most of our recruits stem from the Q, would be interested to know if other ECAC teams are pulling from the O and W or if we're all mostly dealing with the closest league.