Nobody likes to watch a blowout in the AFL.

It is boring and we can all think of better ways to spend our time.

Believe me, it is not much fun being involved in a blowout either.

In the past few weeks we have seen some almighty spankings.

It takes me back to my days of running around in the under-12s at Alfredton Oval.

Some weeks we would see a struggling team turn up with only 14 players. Back then, it was fairly simple. The coaches would just demonstrate good sportsmanship by lending a few players to the other side to make it an 18-on-18 contest.

The result would still be the same, but it might not have been the blowout that was expected.

The supporters were happy, so were the players and nobody was any worse off because of the decision.

If only things in the AFL were as simple as under-12s.

When there is millions of dollars worth of sponsorship and broadcasting rights on the line, there is more than just a competitive match and happy supporters to consider when decisions are being made.

We might be overreacting. We usually see a few games end up in a blowout every season, but with a perceived increase in one-sided matches in the past couple of rounds, it does highlight a few points of interest.

I can see two reasons why the gap between the best and worst teams seems to be widening — the draw and money spent on coaches and specialised staff in a club’s football department.

Collingwood and Geelong have strong on-field teams complimented by strong off-field teams (administrators and football departments).

I believe the latter is where the edge lies, with them having it all at their fingertips.

Every team’s playing list is governed by a salary cap, which was created so all AFL clubs could pay its playing list the same amount. So, it’s agreed that no club can supposedly gain an advantage in this area.

To the AFL’s credit, in the past few years it has helped improve training facilities of all clubs through its facilities fund. Collingwood built the Lexus (now Westpac.