Lawsuit Challenges NCAA’s Player Eligibility Rules in Wake of CHL Transition

Buffalo, NY – A new lawsuit has emerged regarding the movement of hockey players from the Canadian Hockey League (CHL) to the NCAA, raising questions about the rules governing player eligibility. Former junior hockey player Rylan Masterson has filed the suit against the NCAA, claiming the organization is violating federal antitrust laws by preventing players who have played in CHL games from competing in NCAA hockey.

Filed in the United States District Court on August 12, the lawsuit claims that the NCAA’s policy is designed to deter top players from choosing the CHL by restricting their eligibility when they participate in CHL games. Masterson, who played two exhibition games for the Ontario Hockey League’s Windsor Spitfires at the age of 16, asserts that this restriction is unfair and illegal.

According to the lawsuit, Masterson’s chances of playing Division I hockey have been harmed due to the current NCAA rules, which classify CHL as a professional league. This classification stems from the fact that some CHL players are signed to professional contracts in the NHL. The NCAA rules indicate that any player who competes in a professional league is ineligible for collegiate sports.

Masterson did not play regular-season games within the OHL but instead continued his hockey career in the GOJHL, appearing as captain with the Fort Erie Meteors. Under NCAA regulations, players must choose to commit to either the CHL or NCAA at a young age, which puts enormous pressure on them to decide their future.

The implications of this lawsuit are significant, as it highlights the challenges faced by young athletes trying to navigate their options between junior and collegiate hockey. In recent years, there has been a growing trend of top NHL draft prospects opting for the NCAA route over the CHL, which could further complicate the NCAA’s position.

The lawsuit suggests the current system serves as a boycott against the CHL, creating an unfair playing field in which competition for top talent is limited. This restriction not only affects the players’ career options but also influences the financial landscape of collegiate hockey. As younger players are forced to choose too early, the lawsuit argues this system undermines their ability to compete at the highest level in the future.

Freedman Normand Friedland LLP, the law firm representing Masterson, has a history of tackling antitrust issues in sports and education. In the past, the firm has challenged agreements that limited financial aid in academic institutions. While the allegations in Masterson’s lawsuit have not yet been proven in court, they raise important questions about fairness and accessibility in college athletics.

The NCAA has been approached for a comment regarding this case but has yet to respond. Future updates may be provided as the legal situation progresses.