Unless you're taking away the fact that each conference overwhelmingly plays the majority of their games against each other. There's just ZERO... and I mean... ZERO argument for sending teams cross conference or putting in the top 16 overall records.
Also, if you are going to change the schedule in order to make teams play both inter and cross conference games evenly. Why even have conferences?
I think that ultimately getting rid of conferences is kind of the point. Personally, I'm against it and think that a lot of it is an overreaction to the perceived difference in strength between the 2 conferences.
The idea behind it is to get the 16 best teams in the playoff regardless of geography. As it currently stands you have teams from one conference in the playoffs despite being weaker/having a worse record than teams from the other conference who didn't get in.
The biggest issue would be that teams would have to play a balanced schedule which means more travel. Although with travel the way it is today...that isn't as daunting was even 10-15 years ago.
There has always been a difference in strength between the 2 conferences and which conference is on top changes over time.
One of the main concerns with this current situation is the difference in star players per conference. If Lebron heads West this off-season...what stars are left in the East? Greek Freak? Wall? Love? Kyrie? Kind of pales in comparison to Lebron, KD, Steph, Harden, CP3, Westbrook, etc.