This year, Rylan Masterson, 19, a 19-year-old Ontario soccer player, filed a lawsuit against the NCAA and 10 other universities in a New York federal judge over a “boycott” of French Hockey League people, expanding the scope of the antitrust complaints against the NCAA.
In a modern world where university athletes can make millions of dollars through name, image, and likeness deals and where former professional hockey players on European teams are ready for Division I play, prohibiting players who as teenagers made moderate amounts of money playing in the CHL junior leagues seems anachronistic and as juicy as ever for a legitimate challenge.
Masterson, a defenseman who has most recently played for the Fort Erie Meteors in the Greater Ontario Junior Hockey League, lost eligibility for the OHL’s Windsor Spitfires, a division of the CHL, in 2022 after playing two show game. Because they are regarded as “professional sports” and no amateurs, CHL gamers are NCAA unsuitable.

Masterson has a high school diploma and would like to play D-I hockey, especially at an Ontario college. The 10 institutions named as plaintiffs include Boston College, Boston University and Niagara University.
The main competitive concept in Masterton v. NCAA is the same as the one used in O’Bannon, Alston, House and another claims challenging sportsmanship guidelines. Masterson argues the NCAA and its member institutions, which are competing companies, have conspired to reduce how they compete for players. When would-be rivals agree to not engage or engage less aggressively than the market had often incentivize, those athletes also suffer financial and professional harm.
The NCAA’s rule prohibits” competition between the CHL and NCAA for top-end players,” according to the article that disqualifies a hockey player who has played in a CHL game. This allegedly causes the compensation for those players to be stifled, and places “16-year-olds in the impossible position of deciding, at that young age, whether they will ever want to play Division I hockey” Additionally, fans and consumers have a chance because D-I hockey would be improved if CHL players could play it.
Richard A. Lafont and other attorneys from Freedman Normand Friedland LLP and Berger Montague PC, two law firms, are represented by Masterson. The case has been assigned to U. S. District Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo, whose courtroom is in the Robert H. Jackson United States Courthouse in Buffalo, N. Y.
Masterson asks that his lawsuit be classed as a class action on behalf of anyone who participated in the CHL from August 12, 2020, to the present, or who attended college after that date. There are 60 teams in the three leagues ( OHL, QMJHL and WHL ) that make up the CHL, meaning the class, if certified, would include thousands of players. According to antitrust law, Masterson wants a court order that would forbid the NCAA from applying the rule and for a jury to award money damages, which could be tripled.

CHL players ‘ compensation is crucial because it determines whether they qualify as “professional athletes.” CHL players, according to Masterson, “do not receive a salary.” Instead, they receive of a stipend that is intended to cover living expenses—not a wage for labor, payment for NIL or other compensatory purpose—and is not more than$ 600 per month. Additionally, according to Masterson, the stipend is not categorized as income for tax purposes but rather as an expense allowance.
Although there are several possible paths to the NHL, Masterson claims that the CHL and D-I hockey teams “are the main feeders” and give players” the best chance of making a career of playing hockey.” According to the complaint, more than 50 % of NHL players played in the CHL, and a significant portion of them also played D-I hockey. The United States Hockey League, another junior league, is another option for entry into the NHL, but Masterson claims that D-I is more likely to prefer its quality of play.
According to Masterson, the NCAA’s ban on CHL players is absurd because it allows other professional hockey players to play.
To that end, the complaint cites BU defenseman Tom Willander, whom the Vancouver Canucks selected with the 11th overall pick in the 2023 NHL Draft. Willander was a professional hockey player in Sweden before joining the Terriers.
The complaint also mentions that USHL players who are eligible for the NCAA receive comparable stipends to CHL players, and that the NCAA allows athletes competing in other sports to “receive significant compensation without losing their NCAA eligibility.” The complaint notes that tennis players can make up to$ 10, 000 per year without losing their eligibility, and that other NCAA athletes, like Katie Ledecky and Joseph Schooling, were able to make hundreds of thousands of dollars while still maintaining their eligibility.
The NCAA, Masterson asserts, has contemplated dropping the boycott but has n’t done so. He mentions that NCAA coaches held their annual meeting in Florida in May and discussed the legal issues surrounding the boycott but chose to abstain.
The NCAA will respond to the complaint and request that it be dismissed. Expect it to argue the rule advances amateurism goals related to distinguishing college athletes, who are also students, from pro athletes.
However, that line of reasoning has n’t been successful in recent NCAA decisions, and it appears particularly susceptible to criticism in this instance.
Attorney and retired hockey player Jonathan Calla stated in a phone interview that” the boycott of CHL players makes little sense given the significant NIL money earned by current college athletes and the NCAA eligibility of players who have played professional hockey outside of North America.
Prior to joining Northeastern University, Calla recorded 103 points for the Cowichan Valley Capitals in the British Columbia Hockey League in 1994-1995. Both he and the Cowichan Valley Capitals continued their hockey careers and education. He’s now a director at Goulston &amp, Storrs in Boston and serves as outside general counsel for Winners Alliance, a global athlete-centric commercial solution to group licensing, and the Professional Women’s Hockey League.
Calla emphasized the value of offering choice to young players and their families.
If the CHL is chosen, elite teenage hockey players and their families have historically had to make a decision that would have led to the forfeiture of the chance to earn a college scholarship and play D-I hockey at an NCAA institution. A player for the OHL’s London Knights should be able to continue his hockey career at Boston University given the changes in college sports.
Calla also thinks that D-I hockey could have better players if the boycott were to be lifted.
“NCAA hockey will be more competitive with a larger pool of players to draw from, enabling all players to become NHL ready.”