This three-conference alignment puts more emphasis on geographic alignment, but somewhat at the expense of rivalry building and market support. This is because this alignment concentrates many of the biggest markets into one conference (Eastern), and also increases the number of Rivals each team has (9 or 10 rather than the 7 in the current format). This takes away more games against a few opponents (only the Western Conference gets 5 games against any opponent, and only 2 at that, while all other “Rivals” play only 4 times), so it could be argued that this hurts rivalries compared to some of the other formats, including current and past ones.
However, the alignment is in many ways more ideal: it puts many teams that are awkwardly aligned in an arguably better place. For example, Colorado is aligned with the other 2 Mountain teams (Calgary and Edmonton), as well as many teams they had a rivalry with in the past in the Pacific time zone (Vancouver, San Jose).
Detroit is aligned closer to what they had in the past, placing them back with their top rival (Chicago), and many other Central teams that they once shared a Division with, but they do not need to play many games in the Pacific or Mountain time zones, as none of those teams are in their Conference, and they even get 4 teams from the Eastern time zone with them too.
All of the northeastern teams are together in one Conference, without any southeastern teams (Carolina, Tampa Bay, Florida) which these teams would likely consider far less relevant as rivals. All the major rivalries from the old Atlantic and Northeastern Divisions are maintained.
As for the southeastern teams, they get all of the most geographically close teams to them (Nashville, St. Louis, Dallas), as well as major markets in Detroit and Chicago. It could be argued that from a market support point of view, this alignment is less ideal for Tampa Bay and Florida, as the current format has them in a division with Boston, Detroit, Montreal and Toronto, but they would have less travel, despite the inclusion of Winnipeg, Minnesota and Columbus in their Conference, because of the inclusion of Carolina and the prior mentioned southeastern/south-central located teams in the Conference with them.
This format spreads out the potential for rivalries slightly more than typical 4 Division/Conference formats, but has a significant advantage in fairness and time zone travel. Each group has a range of teams that can make the playoffs that equal out the playoff odds: the Western Conference would have a minimum of 3 and maximum of 7 teams able to qualify (or only 6 without Seattle), while both 11-team Conferences qualify 4 teams automatically, with the possibility of 7. Thus, the ranges show how the playoff odds are evened in this format: each Conference’s range averages to 50% of the number of teams it contains (Western: 3-7/10 (3-6/9 without Seattle), Central and Eastern: 4-7/11, so all average to 50%).
In order to minimize the time zone travel, since frequent crossovers will need to occur in the playoffs (whenever Conferences have an odd number of teams left), the Central Conference teams have an automatic preference for which of the other Conferences they cross over to, based on which time zone they are in. Central time zone teams cross over with the Western Conference, and Eastern time zone teams cross over with the Eastern Conference, unless all of the teams left in the Central Conference are from only 1 time zone, in which case, they are all treated equally. Once the teams who qualify for the playoffs are determined, one of the following crossover scenarios will occur, depending on which (if any) Conferences have an odd number of teams:
Evidently, since the Central Conference must participate in a crossover with each of the other Conferences if they have an odd number of teams and the Central has an even number, and the time zone of the teams in the Central Conference predispose teams to meeting teams with less time zone difference between them, this is how the time zone travel is avoided.Here are four examples that show various different scenarios for how this format functions:
Extremely fair format, among the best in this regard;
Extremely minimal time zone travel, competitive with the best of my other formats in this regard
Greater variety of potential playoff matchups, with enough restrictions that rivalries created in this format could be sustained.
Disadvantages:
High travel in the Central Conference,particularly for Winnipeg/Minnesota and Tampa Bay/Florida, teams who are among the most distant to each other;
Potential disadvantages to Carolina, Tampa Bay and Florida, who would have more games against less-established teams, in order to save travel overall;
Debatable if format helps build rivalries more than other formats with a smaller, more concentrated pool of rivals for each team, and greater number of games against said rivals;
Low number of “division rival” games compared to other formats, once adjusted to a scale of 7 to match the others.
