The new realignment structure features two conferences, with a total of four divisions. Though they have yet to be given permanent names, the divisions are as follows:

Western Conference

• A: Anaheim, Calgary, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose, Vancouver
• B: Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Winnipeg

Eastern Conference

• C: Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Florida, Montreal, Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Toronto
• D: Carolina, Columbus, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington

This redesign aims to align the teams more appropriately from a geographic standpoint, although the Eastern Conference had a good mind to maintain divisional rivalries as they currently stand.

New NHL Divisions under the approved realignment plan; Mandatory Credit: SN Illustration

Among the bigger changes in this new setup, the Detroit Red Wings and Columbus Blue Jackets have been shipped over to the Eastern Conference, allowing them to

be able to play conference matchups within their own time zone. Detroit joins a division that already boasts three of the league’s Original Six teams, and is free to restore their historic rivalry with the Toronto Maple Leafs. Unfortunately, this will also hamper their present Original Six divisional rivalry with the Chicago Blackhawks.

The team that triggered the necessity for realignment, the Winnipeg Jets, will finally land in the Western Conference. There will be no loss of divisional rivalry for this current Southeast Division squad, and many are hoping that a geographic abhorrence will be able to grow from playing against the Minnesota Wild four or five times each season.

As was the concern of many fanbases, each team will now play at least once in every building in the NHL. Though the schedule will remain stacked in terms of playing more games within your own conference and the most games within your own division, each set of non-conference opponents will match up against each other both home and away.

Whether due to travel or tradition, the Stanley Cup Playoffs will begin with a team’s own division. The playoffs will still consist of sixteen teams, but there will be the introduction of a wild-card system for determining the final playoff entries.

Each of the top three teams in each division will be assured of a playoff spot within their own division, occupying the top three seeds in their respective bracket. The vacant fourth seeds will be determined by the next two teams that finish with the most points in each conference, regardless of division. This means that one division in the conference could send five teams to the playoffs in a given season, though no division can send less than three.

As far as this realignment goes, there was no magical solution for drawing up the perfect plan that would make everyone happy. Western Conference owners may be disappointed to lose the gate fees that accompany the attraction of Detroit coming to town, while many Eastern Conference players have already expressed an objection to their divisions being stacked eight teams high to the West’s seven.

A geographic look at the new realignment; Mandatory Credit: NHL.com

Still, the league did an excellent job with this realignment, solving more discrepancies within the current alignment than deterrents they created. Aside from the overarching separation of Detroit and Chicago, the new divisions have managed to maintain the majority of the league’s rivalries, while promoting a playoff system aimed at seeing these rivalries develop and mature.

The playoff system is perhaps the most exciting part of this approved arrangement. Not only will playing out of one’s own division produce a familiarity that is sure to breed contempt, but having wild-card teams with the ability to cross over into another division’s playoff bracket will help to combat any concerns that too much familiarity would potentially produce a stale playoff matchup, if there is such a thing. Furthermore, the wild-card team crossing over can still win its way out of the other division, thereby setting up a showdown with a divisional rival to see who wins the conference.

The NHLPA has consented to this realignment and new playoff system for a minimum of three seasons, at least through 2015-16, at which point the system will be reassessed. For more on this new realignment, see: NHL Realignment II: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

Without further adieu, here is the latest two-conference, four-division proposal:

Eastern Conference

• Atlantic: Carolina, Columbus, New Jersey, NY Islanders, NY Rangers, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington
• Central: Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Florida, Montreal, Ottawa, Tampa Bay, Toronto

Western Conference

• Midwest: Chicago, Colorado, Dallas, Minnesota, Nashville, St. Louis, Winnipeg
• Pacific: Anaheim, Calgary, Edmonton, Los Angeles, Phoenix, San Jose, Vancouver

The regular season scheduling will still be weighted heavier within a team’s own conference and heaviest within its own division.  However, each team will play every other team in the league both home and away each season.

The playoff format will revert from an 8-seed conference tournament to two initial rounds of divisional play.  This means that the first round of the divisional playoffs will be 1 vs. 4 and 2 vs. 3 within the division; both winners meet in the second round; division winners meet in the conference finals; conference champions meet for the Stanley Cup.

The one wrinkle to the divisional playoff seeding is a reported “wild card.”  The top three teams in each division at the conclusion of the regular season will automatically qualify for the playoffs.  The final seed in each division will be made up of the next-best two teams in the conference, regardless of which division.

This means that within the same conference, five teams could qualify from one division and just three from another.  The division winner with the highest point total would then take on the wild card team with the lowest point total.  How does this proposal shake out?

The Good

Detroit Red Wings and Toronto Maple Leafs will be able to reignite their historic Original 6 rivalry; Mandatory Credit: Abelimages/Getty Images

Perhaps the most important part of any realignment is maintaining rivalries.  This proposal does an excellent job at maintaining the historic and ongoing rivalries in the current-day Northeast and Atlantic Divisions.  By flipping Detroit into the Eastern Conference, the Red Wings can ostensibly resume their suspended rivalry with the Toronto Maple Leafs.  By placing teams like the Pittsburgh Penguins and Washington Capitals into the same division, these two teams can really take their present-day rivalry to new heights.

Realignment became necessary when the Atlanta Thrashers relocated to become the second incarnation of the Winnipeg Jets.  The Jets needed to find a home in a Western Conference division, and the move was likely to shake up a conference with many geographic concerns to begin with.  The proposed Midwest and Pacific Divisions probably do the best job and creating a geographic alignment that is most true to travelling within the same time zone.  The one exception to this is in Colorado, where the Avalanche find themselves on Mountain Time, rather than Central.  For Winnipeg, they’re now able to develop the rivalry that everyone has hoped to incite with the Minnesota Wild, their closest neighbors.

In terms of scheduling, I view it as a positive that teams will still play a schedule tilted towards more meetings with both divisional and conference opponents, slightly upgraded in that sense from the outline of last year’s proposal.  For organizations that have a tough time drawing fans, seeing every team in their barn every year can only help put people in the seats to get a look at the top team/player attractions the league has to offer.

What I like most about this proposal is the playoff format, one which happens to be the Jack Edwards design that I endorsed in my previous column.  The old school aspect of “play-your-way-out” of your division coupled with a wild card formula that would help to resolve competitive imbalance is spot on.

Familiarity breeds contempt.  If there is such a thing as too much familiarity, to the extent where repeated early round playoff opponents begin to grow stale, the wild card will serve as a combatant.  As I wrote before, “Fans will still get to see plenty of hated rivals match up with each other in the first two rounds of divisional playoffs, while still having the possibility of a more unique matchup or two when their team slides over to compete in the conference’s other division. Even when a team’s divisional rival finishes as a 5^th seed and is flipped to the other division, there is still the chance the two could meet up in the conference finals, where a rivalry is even further enhanced.”

The Bad

As admirable a job as the NHL did at preserving many of their existing rivalries, there were a few casualties.  Most notably, the Original 6 feud between Detroit and the Chicago Blackhawks will be severely leveled.  More recently, the current Central Division has also seen antagonism between Detroit and the St. Louis Blues, not to mention one of the preeminent budding rivalries in the league right now between Detroit and the Nashville Predators.

Speaking of Nashville, they may not be happy about remaining in the Western Conference.  Under this proposed realignment, the Predators find themselves as the eastern most team in the West.  Had the NHL elected to go with the least radical form of realignment based on their current structure, the most logical one-for-one switch would’ve been placing Winnipeg in the Central Division and swapping Nashville into the Southeast.  The state of Tennessee is split between the Eastern and Central Time Zones (though Nashville is in the Central), and the area’s proximity to teams in the current Southeast Division meant that the exchange could have been a feast for the Preds.

Looking at the league’s two southernmost teams, what do the Tampa Bay Lightning and Florida Panthers think about being grouped with Detroit and the present-day Northeast Division?  Aside from pairing the state of Florida squads together, the two were hard to group elsewhere.  Still, it makes more sense for the alignment of the rest of the league to slot the Florida teams in the new Central Division, while those arenas benefit from enhanced attendance as fans from Northeast cities often vacation and retire in the Sunshine State.  Still, players on these two squads might as well take up second residencies up north.

The new scheduling also means that there are fewer interdivisional rivalry matchups between teams like Chicago—Vancouver and (the NBC-led) Boston—New York Rangers.  Rivals like Detroit and Colorado will only play each other twice a year, and wouldn’t meet in another classic playoff series until the Stanley Cup Finals (which might actually be the only way to elevate their playoff rivalry from the past two decades).

The Ugly

Of course, the ugliest part of this proposal is still the unbalanced divisions/conferences.  Thirty does not divide by four, but it does divide by two.  Having both of the overloaded eight-team divisions appear in the Eastern Conference could be enough for the NHLPA to nix this proposition.

Furthermore, instability still remains amongst several of the league’s franchises.  Additional realignment might not be necessary if, say, Phoenix relocates to Seattle, but suddenly it appears less of a foregone conclusion that the NHL is interested in a return to Quebec City or fielding another squad in (Greater) Toronto.  If this competitive imbalance is just a prelude to expansion, a new team in Seattle could easily be placed in the Pacific Division and Kansas City or Wisconsin in the Midwest.  Still, that’s bad news for cities falling east of the divide.

For fans of Western cities who are annoyed with the media’s East Coast bias, prepare to be further alienated.  The Winged Wheel of Detroit, perhaps the current Western Conference’s biggest television and attendance draw, are taking their fanfare to the East.

On the other side of the coin, the Atlantic Division contains a cluster of several major media market teams.  Sure, today’s Atlantic Division is pretty similar, but the current playoff format allows for more of these teams to qualify for (and go deeper in) the postseason.  In the proposed Central Division, television networks find four of the Original 6 squads in a similar cluster.

The ugliest thing about the Eastern Conference division opposite the Atlantic is its name, the Central Division.  Though the names in this proposal are not final, it would feel odd that Boston, the NHL’s easternmost city, would be competing in the Central.  Adding the two Florida teams to Detroit and the Northeast Division may prove to be prohibitive for retaining the Northeast name, but I do feel they can do better.  Maybe a return to the Adams, Norris, Patrick, and Smythe Division names is in the cards?  An idea has even surfaced that the NHL could look to earn revenue through sponsored divisions.  Would it serve the league well to line their pockets while teams battle their way out of the Bridgestone Division?

There may not be any way to realign the NHL that will satisfy all thirty teams.  The proposal you see above represents the best thing for appeasing the most teams.  It won’t last forever and it stands to reason that it could even be tweaked before it is implemented.  For my money, the alignment looks good and the playoff structure looks great.  Ratify this proposal and let’s draw up a schedule for the 2013-14 season.

To be clear, two teams don’t have to play in the same division to forge a rivalry.  The Colorado Avalanche and Detroit Red Wings have never occupied spots in the same division, yet the two squads grew to hate each other in the late ‘90s through early 2000’s after meeting up five times in the playoffs, three of which came in the Western Conference Finals.  In recent years, there’s no doubt been a bit of a rivalry brewing between the Chicago Blackhawks and Vancouver Canucks, due to their playoff matchups in three consecutive seasons.

Rangers vs. Bruins, Jan. 19, 2013; Mandatory Credit: Getty Images

The Bruins and Rangers have not met in the playoffs since 1973.  They have not been in the same division since 1974.  Yet, there’s been plenty of overhyping coming from the NBC Sports Network to promote their Wednesday Night Rivalry premiere broadcast.

Growing up in Boston, I can say with certainty that the Bruins—Rangers animosity does not nearly compare to the Red Sox—Yankees or, at this time, the Patriots—Jets.  The Pats—Gang Green rivalry, however, is a good starting point for describing the terms of the Black & Gold and the Broadway Blueshirts’ contention.

If the Bruins and Rangers continue to be viewed as historic rivals, then their rivalry has certainly been inclined to ebb and flow over the years.  In the days of the Original Six, really everyone enjoyed a rivalry with each other at one time or another.  The league was just 1/5^th the size that it is now, so teams only had five opponents with which to butt heads.  Due to players being swapped between the two franchises (most notably the 1975 deal that sent, among others, Phil Esposito to the Rangers and Brad Park to Boston), one could argue that the heavier days of this opposition stretched through the ‘70s.  If the rivalry is ready to pick back up now, then it remained fairly dormant for a few decades.

Not even has this rivalry not remained consistent for 85+ seasons, but each of these teams would also count others around the league as much bigger rivals.  The Rangers have good reason to consider themselves rivals with every other team in the Atlantic Division, while the Bruins already compete in one of the best and oldest rivalries in the NHL with the Montreal Canadiens.  Rivalries like this one are so strong that I don’t see these teams being separated from the same division ever again.

Rivalries can certainly be forged between two teams during the stretch of a season or over a stretch of years.  Particularly when teams are close both in the standings and geographically, it’s hard for the hype between the two to not be blown out of proportion.  People want to see these two cities do battle.  In the case of the Rangers and Bruins, you can even count on the fact that both teams were numbers one and two, respectively, in earning the most fighting majors last season.

Both teams even employ very similar philosophies.  Though each team has guys who can put the puck in the back of the net, both coaches preach team defense.  Every player is expected to be responsible, play within the system, and block shots.  From top to bottom, these teams play hard and are hard to play against.  To borrow a phrase from Wes Welker (while speaking on a different Boston—New York rivalry), each of these coaches can undoubtedly rely on their “good little foot soldiers.”

Boston took the season opening matchup on Saturday.  The Rangers won the rematch on Wednesday, in overtime.  When NYR went up 2-0 in the first period of the rematch, Bruins coach Claude Julien was forced to call timeout to slow things down.  No one thought the game was over.  These two teams will meet again on February 12, in their last matchup of the regular season.  With both being favorites to win their respective divisions, it is not unlikely they will meet up again in the Eastern Conference playoffs, conceivably in a later round.

Many people felt when the Bruins hosted the 2010 Winter Classic at Fenway Park that it should have been against the Rangers.  While this would have been a nod to a rivalry, it is a rivalry that in Fenway belongs to another sport.  The fans of each city may always be rivals, but let’s not go so far as to stretch this one into the NHL just yet, not when the most captivating moment in the history of this matchup was a 1979 fight between Bruins players and Rangers fans in the Madison Square Garden stands.  NBC may be looking for ways to market their product (and I don’t blame them for that), but the matchup of two of the league’s biggest juggernauts will be more than enough of a reason for viewers to tune in.