Unpacking and understanding Rylan Masteron’s lawsuit against the NCAA regarding the CHL rule

Late week, 19-year-old Canadian hockey player Rylan Masterson filed a lawsuit against the NCAA, alleging that its ban on CHL players violates antitrust laws.

This could be the spark that ultimately opens the gate for CHL players to earn NCAA eligibility. However, the process still has to play itself out in court.

If nothing else, it’s the latest development in a story we’ve been covering here since January.

The NCAA’s CHL rule has been a hot-button topic among coaches for the last year, when the NCAA approached the coaching body asking for opinions on whether or not they should continue with the rule.

To this point, the coaching body has yet to agree to eliminate the ban on CHL players. In Naples this past May, a committee was formed to investigate further and monitor the situation.

The potential for this change could completely redefine the development model. The NHL is also keeping close tabs on the situation and has a vested interest in how this turns out.

Masterson made the objection against the NCAA and 10 member schools, including Boston University, Canisius, Niagara, RIT, Boston College, Denver, Quinnipiac, Notre Dame, Stonehill, and St. Thomas.

Masterson said in the filing that he played two exhibition games for the Windsor Spitfires in 2022 and has never appeared in a CHL regular-season game. However, due to his exhibition appearances, he’s prevented from participating in NCAA hockey. He called the NCAA’s CHL rule an “illegal conspiracy.”

The lawsuit alleges that the CHL rule is illegal, and “puts 16-year-olds in the impossible position of deciding, at that young age, whether they will ever want to play Division I hockey.” It also argues that the rule constitutes a group boycott.

Here’s what I was able to unpack after reading the 34-page suit: