The early days of NHL history can be divided into two 24-year blocks.
The first, from 1917 to 1941, featured a revolving door of teams with near-constant change. The second, 1942 to 1966, was more stable, with a group of six squads that remained in place.
In 1967, everything exploded.
The league doubled in size, bringing the total to 12. Additional squads would join one or two at a time over the next 33 years — some via expansion, others through the collapse of the World Hockey Association — and by the turn of the millennium, it was a 30-team league.
The additions of the Vegas Golden Knights in 2017 and the Seattle Kraken in 2021 brings the NHL to its current size: 32. But it doesn’t seem to be stopping there.
Nothing is official yet, but the NHL is considering another round of expansion.
As always, the fans’ opinions range from full support to total opposition. Both sides have valid reasons for their beliefs. Here are some points for fans to know as they form their own opinions.
Why should the NHL not expand again?
Divisional alignment
A little bit of middle school math will tell you that 32 is divisible by a lot of different numbers.
It can be split evenly into two conferences of 16. Each conference can then be divided into two divisions of eight.
The new 84-game schedule makes it even better: In a given season, each team can play its divisional rivals four times, the remaining in-conference teams three times and the opposing conference squads twice.
Growing to 33 or 34 teams would make all that math uneven.
It wouldn’t be the first time. The NHL has periodically had mismatched divisions throughout its history — as recent as 2020, just before the Kraken began playing.
But they just got it all solved. Why mess it up again?
Championship rarity and playoff structure
As it stands now, 31 NHL fan bases watch their teams fail in a given year. There’s only one Stanley Cup. Adding more teams means more disappointment.
If there were no repeat winners, each fan would get to see their team win two to three times in their life. There are plenty of repeat winners, though, making it likely that many fans will never watch their team hoist the trophy.
By contrast, every “Original Six” team won multiple times during the early era of the NHL.
It’s not only about winning, though.
Until 2017, more than half the teams in the league made the playoffs. Today, it’s precisely half. If the playoff structure remains the same after expansion, it will be less than half.
Sports sell the fans on hope. If less than half the teams in the league get the hope of a playoff series, fans might lose interest quickly.
The solution would likely be a play-in series, similar to the NBA’s system. NHL commissioner Gary Bettman is strongly opposed to that as it stands now, but perhaps he could be persuaded after additional expansion.
Is talent dilution a concern?
The league doubling in 1967 made it possible for players with no chance at an NHL career to become NHL regulars. There were twice as many roster spots available, after all.
Have you ever wondered why Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux were so dominant? They were obviously highly talented players, but much of their competition was equivalent to today’s American Hockey League players. Connor McDavid and Nathan MacKinnon would have comparable stats if they had the same opportunity.
But adding an extra team or two wouldn’t have the same effect — especially with the amount of NHL-caliber players without jobs.
Fans have joked on social media that you could comprise a playoff team out of the current unsigned free agents. A few of those guys still might land on teams before the season begins, but some will undoubtedly retire early or head to Europe.
If the talent is diluted a little bit, it won’t be the worst thing, either. The league has occasionally changed its rules to allow more goals to be scored because it keeps fans engaged. The superstars having slightly weaker competition might accomplish that.
Can Atlanta, Southern Texas or Arizona support an NHL team?
If possible, the league wants to put teams in Atlanta and either Houston or Austin. It is also reportedly considering going back to Arizona.
Can those areas really support hockey?
Bettman has proven time and time again that hockey can work in warm-weather locales. It was under his watch that Southern Florida, Anaheim, Dallas, Raleigh, Nashville and Las Vegas got teams. At the same time, he has seen teams fail in Atlanta and Phoenix.
The biggest draw for these particular cities is the population. In a metropolitan area of 7.8 million people, for example, there must be enough hockey fans to fill an 18,000-seat arena, right?
If Atlanta gets a team, it will be the NHL’s third venture there. More favorable expansion draft rules might help the team be more competitive from the opening face-off. If it doesn’t work, though, don’t say they couldn’t have seen it coming.
Fool me once? Shame on you. Fool me twice? Shame on you. Fool me three times? You know the rest.
Why should the NHL expand again?
Hockey could become more mainstream in the U.S.
A lot of American sports fans pay close attention to basketball, football and baseball. For whatever reason, though, hockey often gets overlooked.
The game is undeniably growing in the United States. People tend to latch onto hockey once it becomes accessible to them, so giving millions of extra people direct access to the sport’s best league will naturally rope more people into the hockey family.
A common complaint among U.S.-based hockey fans is the insignificant coverage it gets from major sports networks — especially the ones that televise it. Getting more of the country’s biggest TV markets hooked on hockey could increase the amount of attention the sport gets.
More jobs — on and off the ice
Adding, say, two more teams would mean 40 more people on any given night get to live out their dream of playing in the NHL. But the job creation reaches far beyond the players.
More people would need to be hired for coaching and front office roles; scouting positions; public relations specialists and content creators; equipment managers; athletic trainers and medical staff; business operations staff of every kind; reporters; ice maintenance crews; security and in-arena hospitality staff; vendors and more.
Thousands of extra people would get to work in professional sports — a dream that would otherwise be unachievable for many of them.
It would also have a significant impact on the local community.
Sports teams typically donate generously to charitable organizations. They invest heavily in local youth sports. They sponsor community events. Additionally, many businesses benefit economically from the team’s existence.
Better travel schedules for some teams
As it currently stands, the Western Conference covers the bulk of North America’s land mass. Many “Western” teams are much closer to the Atlantic Ocean than they are to the Pacific.
Take the Nashville Predators, for example. Of the five closest NHL teams to Nashville, three play in the Eastern Conference, while the Predators play in the West. This creates much more than the ideal amount of travel — especially when they meet teams from California in the playoffs.
They also play nine games this season in the Pacific time zone, with seven of them beginning at 9 p.m. Nashville time. It’s difficult to get people to stay up to watch those games entirely.
The Chicago Blackhawks, St. Louis Blues, Minnesota Wild, Winnipeg Jets and Dallas Stars are all in the same boat.
Putting teams in Southern Texas and Atlanta wouldn’t solve this problem, but bringing one back to Arizona would allow at least one of those teams to move to the Eastern Conference.
More money without necessarily raising fan cost
As the Deseret News wrote about in detail this summer, a rising salary cap isn’t always best for the fans. Much of the reason it’s rising is because it costs more to consume the game than ever before.
After all, the salary cap is calculated entirely from hockey-related revenue. When revenue goes up, so does the cap.
NHL expansion would increase both the supply and demand of tickets, merchandise and everything else that generates money for the league.
It would also decrease the likelihood of a future lockout. With an expansion fee of $2 billion per team divided among the 32 existing owners, as well as the steadily rising salary cap, neither the league nor the players have much financial reason to hold out.
