The answer to this is very simple to explain. First, If you count Sweden, Finland, USA, Canada, Switzerland, etc, many of the top WCHA seniors draft eligible are going to be playing this year with their respective countries. Second, a former Wisconsin player signed this year for $3000 yes 3K. The pay scale generally runs from 3K to 30K (Hilary Knight) which is minuscule. Getting what for the most part are midwest girls to go out east and play for peanuts is not very attractive to many girls in the WCHA. Third, the Minnesota Whitecaps. This team is as good as any and probably the best in women's hockey. Girls can stay home, pursue careers and still play college teams on the weekend at the highest level. Fourth, Europe! Many girls choose to go play in Europe to gain experience and see the world. I believe the WCHA defenseman of the year is playing in Sweden next year and Stalder is playing in China next year.
And last, the double edge sword that did so much good may be the end. The USA Women's team getting "paid" was an amazing thing for equality and women's rights, as well as a wonderful way to bring attention to the equality situation. However, in all honesty the WHL was an avenue for some girls to continue their hockey careers as well as keep themselves relevant in the USA player pool. I believe that many players will not choose the WHL moving forward, finding it difficult to compete with a select few that will get paid year round to train. Girls making 10K to play in the WHL will have to work, and I believe the main point of the USA team getting "paid" was so they did not have to work, making it almost impossible for a WHL player not in the player pool to compete. Thus weakening the league, creating a smaller player pool of talent and perhaps putting it in danger. I hope not, women's hockey has come a long way. I wish the could make 300K a year. With no sponsors and small attendance this may have the opposite effect of what everyone thinks. Time will tell.
