I hate the AFL wildcard round. I hated it when it was first announced last November, and I hate it even more now.
But why has that hatred grown further before we've even had a taste of it, you ask? Because I think we're already seeing the consequences I'd feared from it, which go well beyond simply an instinctive aversion to our eagerness to ape American sporting concepts.
Primarily for me, it was about devaluing the importance of the 207 premiership season games which go towards finals qualification. How much would the bulk of them mean if 10 out of 18 teams still had a crack at a flag when they were all over?
I think we're getting our answer, and I reckon it was on display again over the weekend in teams "not showing up" mentally for four quarters, or in Hawthorn's case against Melbourne, nearly three quarters, the Demons "clocking off" themselves in the last.
Geelong was asleep then woke up then fell asleep again against Brisbane, and the Bulldogs were mentally on a later flight than the team which ran on to the SCG against the Swans on Friday evening.
The Cats have lost four of their past five now, but really, so what? We all know their capabilities and they're still only a game outside the top four (which, you'll remember, was also devalued in importance by the AFL introducing the pre-finals bye a decade ago).
A bit like Brisbane when the Lions were 6-6 four games ago, having been beaten up on by the Cats, Giants, and Dockers. Now they're back in the top four and clear second flag favourite. Those lapses were huge but in the bigger picture, relatively inconsequential.
Are we seeing more teams, even the really good ones, having "off" days because sub-consciously they know they can have far more "mulligans" along the journey of 23 games than they used to, safe in the knowledge that even less than a 50-50 season record could give them a finals shot? I think we are.
Now take a look at the ladder. There's only seven games left for every team, surely the wheat must now have been sorted from the chaff?
Well no, not really, because there's still 15 of 18 teams that can play finals (and yes, those wildcard games are officially designated finals). And the three that can't (West Coast, Richmond, and Essendon) you probably could have worked out wouldn't be in February.
We now have more than 200 home and away games, the bulk of which don't have massive long-term ramifications for the pointy end of the season.
Does that mean we're reading and hearing less about Team A's "season being on the line"? Yep. Because it really isn't. And does that in turn mean we're reading even more (if it were humanly possible) about which club Zak Butters may end up at in 2027? Sadly, also yes.
Talking points. Content. "Where's Butters going?" "We need a definitive answer from Carlton on Josh Fraser" five seconds after the Blues have just won their seventh game in a row because we can't just enjoy this unexpected revival and ponder what that could mean this season, not the ramifications for who sits in the Blues' coaching box next season.
Oh, and while we're talking about the Blues, aren't there real similarities emerging between what's happening now and Carlton's incredible late-season revival in 2023? Which is funny, because there's a point to be made about the wildcard concept in that context, too.
Much of the motivation for the wildcard, we're told disingenuously (because as if it isn't really about revenue) is keeping interest in the season alive longer. That discussion was in itself a knee-jerk reaction to last season, when a sizeable gap opened up between the top and bottom half of the ladder.
That, however, was far more the exception than the norm. And completely ignores examples like three years ago, when not only Carlton, but Sydney and GWS all came from the clouds to end up playing finals.
All three of those teams were at one stage in the back end of the season sitting as low as 15th on the ladder, Carlton after Round 15, the Swans as late as Round 17. Not only did they all end up playing finals, the Blues and Giants went famously close to playing in a Grand Final.
If that's not proof of the essential evenness of the competition, what is? But at least they had to win a majority of their games to get there. That won't be the case for several finalists now.
So if there's that many teams capable of winning when it matters most, and given the dilution of the top four advantage have a better chance than previously of getting there from the finals' lower reaches, why on earth did we have to throw down even more red carpet for teams whose performance across the preceding six months hasn't really warranted the opportunity?
More to the point, though, what a tremendous (please note the sarcasm) way of making the season proper feel like a six-month dress rehearsal for the now five weeks of finals which really matter.
And that, frankly, is how too many games this season have come across: sides effectively failing to turn up, lacking urgency, atmosphere, and intensity.
I'm not one of those people who carries on about kids being given "participation ribbons" in junior sport. But I draw the line when they start doing so in professional codes. Particularly when the "big boys" are happy enough to effectively take a week off here and there because they know there's now next to no chance they'll ever miss out.
And most of all when a home-and-away season which once upon a time overflowed with "critical clashes" week after week, now as often feels like the old pre-season night games, albeit a far, far longer prelude to when wins and losses really do mean something.
You can read more of Rohan Connolly's work at FOOTYOLOGY.