Totally agreed. What I would do, personally:
No wild cards, but adjust the schedule.
8 games vs. teams in the division (56 games)
2 games vs. teams in the other division in your conference (16 games)
1 game against each team in another division in the other conference (8 games)
80 games. 74% against teams in your division. Playoffs are simple: top 4 in each division...play to a division champ, then conference champ, then SC champ.
The alternative, keeping wild cards but adjusting that: top 2 in every division, then next best 4. Top 2 in each division get home ice advantage (ie, they're the top 4 seeds).
5 games vs. teams in your division (35 games)
4 games vs. teams in the other division in your conference (32 games)
2 games vs. teams in another division in the other conference (16 games)
83 games. Vast majority in-conference with a slight edge to divisional play. Playoffs are a straight 1-8 seed (again, top 2 in each division get the top 4 seeds). No re-seeding.
If you want to go crazy with mike's 16-team-single-division idea:
4 games vs. every other team in your conference (60 games)
1 game vs. each team in the other conference (16 games)
1 "extra" game vs. teams that used to be in your division
I don't think that expanding the playoff field is a real option for one major reason: regardless of what basketball players say/believe/think.....the playoffs in hockey are by far the most endurance-testing time in any of the major sports. Adding more playoff hockey might lead the players to revolt.
MAYBE expanding the playoffs could work if the round of 16 (and maybe the round of 8) were Bo5. Not sure if there's appetite for that though.
