The "rich" (Western Conference) get "richer" under the Association's new division alignment for the 2004-2005 season. With the addition of the Charlotte Bobcats into the East and the move of the New Orleans Hornets to the West, there will be 15 teams in each conference. Seven of the East teams made the playoffs this year, and five of them were at .500 or better. In the West, there will be nine playoff teams, and 11 teams at .500 or better. As we know, even the 12th place team in the current West would have made the playoffs in the East this year.

Here's the new divisions:

Eastern Conference

Atlantic Division: Boston Celtics, New Jersey Nets, New York Knicks, Philadelphia 76ers, Toronto Raptors

Central Division: Chicago Bulls, Cleveland Cavaliers, Detroit Pistons, Indiana Pacers, Milwaukee Bucks

Southeast Division: Atlanta Hawks, Charlotte Bobcats, Miami Heat, Orlando Magic, Washington Wizards

Western Conference

Southwest Division: Dallas Mavericks, Houston Rockets, Memphis Grizzlies, New Orleans Hornets, San Antonio Spurs

Northwest Division: Denver Nuggets, Minnesota Timberwolves, Portland Trail Blazers, Seattle SuperSonics, Utah Jazz

Pacific Division: Golden State Warriors, Los Angeles Clippers, Los Angeles Lakers, Phoenix Suns, Sacramento Kings

The Southwest pops out at you with 5 playoff teams, and loads of international stars (Gasol, Yao, Nash, Nowitzki, Najera, Parker, Duncan, Ginobili, Turkoglu, Magliore). Not to mention the Franchise, Baron, Mash, the Twans, Finley, JWill, etc.

Next best might be the Northwest: although only two playoff teams, you have two more that just missed (ending 20+ years of playoff consistency), the league MVP, shoulda-been ROY, and some great (and budding) rivalries. Seattle is a playoff calibur team that didn't reach its potential this year. Top to bottom, there's not a team you look at and say "breather game," despite the lack of perennial all-stars other than KG.

I'm saying the Central (aka Great Lakes division)is third-best. Detroit & Indiana are far & away the best teams in the East this year, particularly with the addition of Sheed. The Bucks are surprises and with the addition of some bulk in the middle should be good for a long time. Then there's the Cavs! King James - nuff said. The only thing keeping the Central from being the second best division is our lovaBulls. If they lose Crawford, expect another sad season.

Fourth is the Pacific. Sorry, but the Lakers and the Kings don't make up for the Clippers & Warriors. The Suns ... I don't even know what to say about their year. Still, four hall of famers on one team (this year) is pretty impressive for any division.

Fifth: Atlantic. Talk about your one-player teams! It's all about the stars here - Vince, AI, Marbury, Kidd, and Pierce. Yeesh! Okay, the Kings have K-Mart and that makes them legitimately deep. Otherwise, comparing these teams with those in the rest of the league really is striking (except Orlando, see below).

Sixth: Oh dear god. The Southeast division. The Heat started out 5-15 this year. And they were by far the best team in this new division! They've got a wonderful nucleus here - Odom, Wade, Grant, Jones. Then there's three of the four worst teams in the Association plus the brand new Bobcats. We don't know anything about them other than they're led by Bernie Bickerstaff. Uh oh.

The good news is that if a team wins in a crappy division with a crappy record, that team doesn't automatically get a higher seed than a better wildcard team. Which diminishes greatly the importance of these divisions. Still, in terms of rivalries and standings, I love the new alignment! Hopefully they stay this way for awhile, to start developing those rivalries.

No doubt in three years the conferences will appear very balanced; and in five years we'll be talking about how unfairly strong the East is. Hell, if the Patriots, Rams, Bucs and Ravens can win five straight Super Bowls, anything can happen . . .

Cyd, parity (and free agency) have destroyed the NFL. There's no arcs to teams anymore - there's something balletic about teams that are at the bottom of the barrel, improving slowly, becoming a perennial playoff contender, then a champion (or not), then falling off, the ending back in the gutter. Those teams that can avoid the arc become legendary (or, in the case of certain teams that shall not be named, infamous). Dynasties are great not just for historical reasons, but because when you can upend a truly great team, you know you've accomplished something.

The NBA of the 1970s was struggling at least in part to the ridiculous turnover of the "top teams" - Milwaukee, Golden State, Portland, Washington, and Seattle all won their only titles in that decade. Since then, there have been only seven champs in 25 years. Yet hope springs eternal for the Kings, Pacers, Nets, and up & comers of the league.

Jake Delhomme and the Carolina Panthers are Exhibit A-Z regarding the failure of the NFL as it slouches toward mediocrity. Pray the NBA doesn't follow in its richer sibling's footsteps.

I think parity is better for the NFL, from this fan's perspective, I like the Raiders but am not a total die hard fan, to where I am fanatical and live and die by whether they win or lose. It makes the NFL more fun to watch, trying to figure out who will win or lose, what team will do what and what players will come out of nowhere and become big stars.

The NBA is different for me, I love my Sonics and hate to see them lose, and like somewhat familiarity with the teams and some predictability. Look out for the Sonics making some big deals this off season and picking up a big name power forward, Hopefully Elton Brand.