The NHL and NHLPA continue to discuss a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) as the current one in place is set to expire in September 2026.Among the topics discussed in the current CBA negotiation is expanding the current regular-season format from 82 to 84 games. While it wouldn鈥檛 be the first time the league had an 84-game slate, the proposed change has raised numerous concerns.So, here鈥檚 a look at three major arguments in favor and against going from an 84-game schedule in the NHL regular season.3 major arguments for and against an 84-game NHL seasonFavor#3 Two additional games generate more revenue for teamsThe likeliest way the league implements the two additional games is one home and one away for each team. That extra home game generates further revenue for teams. As such, it could lead to an increase in the salary cap ceiling moving forward.#2 Balances scheduleOne of the biggest arguments against the current scheduling format is that some teams only face division rivals three times while others four times. The additional games would allow the NHL to schedule four games against every division rival, creating more balance.#1 Foments rivalriesWith a more balanced schedule comes fomenting rivalries. Teams that have heated rivalries would face each other more often, allowing the league to boost TV ratings and earnings, while giving fans more to cheer about.Against#3 Expanded travel timesAdding more games to the schedule could mean expanding travel times for teams. That situation could negatively impact player wellness, leading to increased fatigue. While the league would try to avoid making travel more cumbersome, there鈥檚 no telling how much added travel could impact players.#2 More wear and tear on playersAdditional games could represent more wear and tear on players. This has been a crucial point brought up by the NHLPA. The NHL has countered this argument by assuring that the preseason schedule would be shortened to accommodate the two extra regular-season contests.However, reducing preseason games, ones in which most regulars don鈥檛 play, would have little impact on player well-being. The league will need to address player wellness situation in order to make the expanded schedule work.#1 An 84-game schedule had mixed results in the pastThe league tried an 84-game schedule in the 90s, by adding two 鈥渘eutral site鈥 games to each team鈥檚 schedule. The aim was to promote the game in non-traditional markets with hopes of expanding there at some point.The experiment led to teams like the Carolina Hurricanes, Atlanta Thrashers, Arizona Coyotes, Seattle Kraken, and Colorado Avalanche.But the additional travel, wear and tear, and unbalanced schedule at that time led the experiment to conclude in 1994.Unless the league can refine the mistakes from the past, an 84-game schedule could be doomed from the start.