Overall, the NHL is in a good place. This isn’t a “the sky is falling” article — instead it is focused on a few changes that will improve an already good product.

If I were NHL commissioner for a day, here are six changes I would make.

Next season, there are currently 67 skaters and seven goalies who fall into that category. That is roughly 9.6% of current NHL players. This rule change will benefit the league and players. The top-end players who are currently on 6-8+ year deals would become UFAs earlier, thus increasing their odds of a higher salary after five seasons, while teams would have fewer players performing below their AAV in years six to eight.

Teams can still sign young players to longer-term deals. Starting September 15, the maximum contract length will go down to seven years, and six years for unrestricted free agents. The NHL, and NHLPA have realized that longer-term deals aren’t good for the league or players. But I would only instill the five-year limit on players 28 years of age or older. Teams could still sign players who are 27 and under to seven-year deals. History shows that the contracts that often age the worst are signed by players 28+. This reduces wasted money for the league, and the players who are still producing into their 30s will have more available cap space for themselves.

Teams would have four sets of games where they would play the same team on consecutive nights in the same city. Each team would have two at home and two on the road. These games would be either divisional matchups or teams in your conference, as you wouldn’t want it to work for east-west teams, as they only play one game on the road against the other conference.

The regular season is long and getting longer as it increases to 84 games this season. Having back-to-back games against the same team increases animosity while also reducing travel. For instance, Edmonton could have a four-game road trip that sees them play Anaheim twice and then they play in Los Angeles and San Jose once. Tampa Bay could travel to Montreal and play the Canadiens on Saturday and Monday. I’d try to schedule most of these games between November and February, when the season becomes a bit tedious.

You can watch the play five times. If it is clearly offside, then the goal is overturned. If not, it is a good goal and we play on. Reviews have become too long, and in some cases, they are going frame-by-frame to see if the player was offside. The game isn’t played in slow motion. Players and linesmen have to make decisions in real time, and the reviews should be the same. The reason this rule was implemented was to negate any blatant missed calls, like the Matt Duchene case that led to this rule change, but I believe the league has gone too far on reviews. It only takes goals away. There are many instances where a linesman blows the play dead due to offside, but if they reviewed it, I guarantee there are plays where it was onside. This rule is one-sided, so at least even it out a bit, by having no slow-motion review on offsides.

This season I’ve noticed an increase in players embellishing when sticks are around their face. We are seeing too many “back and to the left” exaggerations by players. Watch this classic scene in Seinfeld where they reenact Keith Hernandez spitting on Kramer.

It is a normal reaction to move your head back when a stick actually hits your face, but we are seeing too many Kramer-like, exaggerated head snaps, and too often when the stick doesn’t even make contact. This isn’t soccer (I like soccer, but embellishing tackles is part of the culture, especially in Europe), and the NHL needs to stop this now before it becomes more prevalent. The league currently has an embellishing system, where the first time a player is warned and the second time they are fined $2,000 and $3,000 for a third offence, and so on. I don’t think it is stiff enough for the “back and to the left” reactions that are on the rise. Increase the fine right off the bat to $5K for a first-time offender and then $25K for a second time, combined with the public acknowledgment they have been fined. When the NHL decided to reduce head shots and suspended Raffi Torres for 41 games, the players took notice and head shots are very rare now. Do the same for egregious embellishment.

In overtime once a team crosses centre, they can not cross back into their side of centre. The NHL changed from 4×4 to 3×3 for the start of 2015/16 season because too any games needed a shootout. From 2013-2015 only 42.5% of games that went to OT, were decided in OT. That is too many games needing a shootout. In 2025 71.6% of OT games were decided in OT, but it dropped down to 63.4% this past season. We had 119 games decided in a shootout last year, the most ever in the 3×3 format.

Forcing teams to keep attacking is more exciting and it leads to more scoring chances, and more turnovers. The 3×3 format is best when both teams are exchanging chances, and this year we saw way too many overtimes that were boring with far too many regroups in the neutral zone. It is time to force teams to keep attacking.

Transparency would help the games. I believe NHL officials do a great job overall. It is a fast game and I expect them to miss the odd infraction, no different than players missing an assignment, but the NBA has a good system with the pool reporter. After the game reporters submit questions they would like answered immediately following the game. The crew chief/head referee provides an explanation, and the transcripts of those interviews are published officially on the NBA Official website a few hours after the game.

There is no reason the NHL can’t instill a similar process. The questions don’t always have to be about missed calls. They can explain situations and educate fans and media more on specific situations that occur during the game. It would be educational, but also tone down the “ref cost us the game” scenarios.

What changes would you make, and let’s avoid the 3-2-1 point system, because it will only separate teams more in the standings and Gary Bettman will never want that.

LeaseBusters is Canada’s premier lease takeover marketplace, helping drivers get out of their current vehicle leases without costly penalties or negative equity. Instead of paying thousands to break a lease, sellers connect with qualified buyers ready to take it over—saving money and avoiding financial stress. Buyers benefit from shorter-term commitments and often better monthly payments, while dealerships retain a replacement customer and leasing companies keep contracts active. It’s a smarter, more efficient solution for everyone involved. Four parties, four wins—only with LeaseBusters. For more information, check out www.LeaseBusters.com.