If you knew there was only one opportunity to watch Richmond take on Essendon in the home-and-away season, there is every chance the MCG would have to close its gates two hours before the opening bounce. There would be a full house. Matches that are, historically, poorly attended would also be given a boost because members and supporters would have only eight chances to see their team play at home. You play a side away one year knowing that you are going to host them the following year. This would eradicate the argument of easy or hard draws. There would be even more importance to the marquee Friday night slot, giving even more credence to allowing all clubs to at least have one match in that timeslot - something that doesn't happen now. The United States' National Football League has led the way in ensuring every game matters.

The NFL is the highest-attended sporting competition, on average crowds, in the world and produces the greatest television audiences and revenue from a commercial point of view. Just think of those lucrative Super Bowl television advertisements. More meaningful matches through the AFL home-and-away season could help raise the value of commercials, benefiting broadcasters and increasing the value of the rights they own - which, in turn, would boost distributions to clubs, players and all in the industry. Playing each other once would also help to sort out two issues. Clubs would have to play full-strength every game because the value of any win is increased. If a club, for instance, was to drop three in a row, its season could be over. A shortened season could also help young sides, for we see now, towards the back-end of seasons, they are fatigued.

There could be two split rounds so the season is stretched to 20 weeks, creating the two byes the AFL Players Association is seeking for the benefit of players. The AFL has also said it is open to having two byes. I know this is the American way, but why not consider a wildcard weekend on the eve of the finals, with two teams jostling for that final spot in the eight? Why not have the ninth and eighth-placed teams playing off? The team that finishes on top of the ladder would have greater reward by at least having a week off. Six months of effort should be rewarded. As it stands, there is no difference in finishing first or second. There would be greater value attached to the McClelland Trophy, which is all but forgotten.