The winter of despair is also the spring of hope. In 2014 we have a tale of two competitions. In the bad competition the fixture and the Essendon saga are turn-offs, the ticketing a mess. The price of unhealthy food is indefensible, the rolling mauls unsightly.

Where’s the good competition? Well, Hawthorn v Sydney was an excellent spectacle, as was the Western Bulldogs v Essendon. But the most encouraging development is the ladder, starting from the bottom.

No team has won fewer than four matches this year. With four and a half rounds remaining, no team appears to be tanking.

There isn’t a genuinely hopeless side deserving of a priority pick. St Kilda, which has suffered the worst beatings, upset Fremantle, which was ensconsed in the top four.

Meanwhile, up in the ladder’s penthouse, no team has lost fewer than four matches.

It seems quite probable that the minor premier will finish with a 17-5 record. In 2011 this would have placed a club (West Coast) fourth. Hawthorn was 18-4 that year and couldn’t make top two.

Joe Hockey has proclaimed "the age of entitlement" over.

A French economist, Thomas Piketty (Capital in the 21st Century), has predicted that we are entering the next Gilded Age in which "patrimonial capitalism" — inheritance of vast wealth — will see the mega rich increase their share of the global pie.

In the AFL, Gillon McLachlan is soon to reveal how the league will redistribute funds, as part of the New Deal for equalisation.

We know that St Kilda, the Bulldogs and the Brisbane Lions will receive significant help, along with Melbourne and North Melbourne, that Collingwood, Hawthorn and West Coast will be taxed, but not as much as Geelong, Fremantle, Essendon and Carlton think they should, relative to those middle-tier clubs.

The irony of equalisation is that the ladder is compacting, the gap narrowing on the field, just at the moment when Gillon’s New Deal is being introduced. We are entering a new age of equality — on the field.

Last year Melbourne was dismal and Greater Western Sydney was still a 90-pound weakling; combined, those clubs won an aggregate of three games — and two were against one another.

Their percentages were — like the Dogs’ only premiership — back in the 50s. This year each has already won four.

The Giants slew Sydney in round one and almost ran Geelong down last weekend.

The Dees, unwatchable at their worst, have beaten Adelaide on the road, Essendon, Richmond and Carlton.

Carlton, dreary and depressing for the first dozen games, is playing its best football of the season.

Richmond has recovered from its collapse and, like the Blues, has been on an upward curve.

The Bulldogs, meanwhile, are probably the most exciting Victorian team outside the eight, by dint of their exceptional young talent. The draft, suddenly, is working for them.

Brisbane had seemed to be a cot case last year. The club botched the sacking of Michael Voss, then five youngsters fled, seeking asylum in the southern capitals. Jonathan Brown and Simon Black were spent. Then something clicked.

The Lions discovered they had a weapon: speed. If their home ground isn’t quite the "Gabbatoir" again, it is no longer a place to pick up an easy four points. Ask North.

The Roos have beaten top four sides on the road and have been taken down by the Lions and Blues. They are the exemplar of the competition’s levelling.

Even the best teams are fragile. Hawthorn is sweating on Cyril Rioli’s hamstring and the attitude of Brian Lake. Sydney needs Kurt Tippett’s knee to be sound, for Buddy Franklin to kick 5.2, not 2.5.

On January 28 this year the then chief executive of the AFL Players’ Association and subsequent St Kilda CEO, Matt Finnis, put a Piketty-like case for equalisation, citing the National Football League in the US.

The NFL has a motto that on "Any Given Sunday" one team can beat another.

"With the growing gulf between the richer and the poorer clubs in the AFL and the strengthening correlation between football department spend and on-field performance, we are seeing less unpredictability in our game," Finnis wrote on the AFLPA website.

"Analysis of year-on-year statistics shows that bigger-spending AFL teams are now consistently winning more games and playing in more finals matches than smaller-spending teams – an emerging trend which, if left unchecked, could have serious implications for the vibrancy of our competition."

It’s strange to consider anyone looking to America to find a model for equality, but it’s certainly true that the NFL is the most equal of competitions, just as the unfettered, globalised English Premier League is the least equal.

The AFL always looks first to the NFL for policy inspiration.

When Finnis wrote those words, they seemed plausible. The Dees were terrible and had been bailed out, the Bulldogs had an eight-figure debt, were relying on Daniel Giansiracusa and those kids hadn’t bloomed. The Saints were in fiscal — and football — free fall.

In hindsight it appears that the extent of the on-field disparity — and correlation with wealth — was exaggerated. From 2008-2010 St Kilda and the Dogs were in the top four. The Eagles spent those three years in the cellar.

Lately, I’ve posed the question of which four clubs — barring the expansion teams — have not played in a preliminary final since 2001. They are Carlton, Richmond, Essendon and Melbourne; three are heavily supported. It’s easy to forget, too, that Geelong and Hawthorn are nouveau riche.

The gap that opened up — particularly from 2011 until 2013 — was obviously widened by the expansion teams. They deprived clubs such as the Bulldogs, Lions and Demons of access to the best talent, while removing key players. Geelong, Hawthorn, Sydney and Collingwood had stronger lists, while other clubs struggled to make up ground in compromised drafts.

This is not to argue against the measures that the AFL is introducing to equalise the clubs. Rather, this column wishes to clarify what those reforms really mean. The most critical plank of equalisation is to ensure that every team can pay 100 per cent of its allowed salary cap, and to ensure that we no longer see huge discrepancies in player payments. Nothing influences outcomes more than what players are paid — as the EPL demonstrates.

The impact of free agency in future is certainly a wildcard. But the extent to which it will advantage the rich clubs is unclear, albeit it appears to favour teams that aren’t near the bottom. Nick Dal Santo went to North, not Essendon. What it clearly favours is any very good player.

What equalisation really addresses is the fiscal position of the smaller clubs and those with crappy stadium deals. Too many clubs are lumbered with excessive debt — the Lions’ debt is said to be hurtling towards $12 million, the Dogs are hovering near eight figures and St Kilda’s is creeping to dangerous levels.

On the field we’re approaching an Any Given Sunday competition. On that score, the best of times beckons.