Nothing illustrates this more clearly than watching Western Bulldogs Lin Jong or Travis Cloke compete as ruckmen in centre bounces as they did on Friday night against Geelong. Or more subtly, watching Adelaide's midfield bouncing back after looking tired for the previous two weeks.

As philosopher Mokokoma Mokhonoana puts it: "12 per cent of employees eat because they're hungry; 88 per cent of employees eat because it is one o'clock".

From the outside, Luke Beveridge looks like he's in the 12 per cent who make decisions based on what they feel is right rather than the current convention.

This manifests in many ways, such as Bulldogs players starting training at midday on the first two training days of the week because sleep is so important for recovery, or his side's refusal to kick the ball long down the line out of defence against West Coast in last year's elimination final, even when under extreme pressure.

His current decision to use Tom Boyd as his starting ruckman, helped by players such as Jong, Cloke and before that Josh Dunkley, is a move that only a couple of years ago seemed unthinkable.

Clearly the value he places on forward-50 pressure, being able to move the ball from defence to attack, and spread from stoppages outweighs the value he places on winning hit-outs and, potentially, first possession.

In the last quarter when Joel Selwood and Patrick Dangerfield were streaming away from centre bounces with ball in hand after getting silver service from Zac Smith it was easy to point to this as the deciding factor in the game.

But going into a game without a specialist ruckman (Boyd's more of a forward/ruck) means that some pain in clearances, particularly at centre bounces where there's more space, is to be expected.

What was more important to the result of last Friday night's game was the fact that the area where the Western Bulldogs were looking to get an advantage through the make-up of their side didn't eventuate. Geelong's incredible pressure meant that the Dogs couldn't move the ball as effectively from their defence to attack as they would have liked, and Geelong won the forward-50 tackle count 24-15.

Forward-50 pressure and a high level of efficiency with their forward-50 entries is also associated with Adelaide and how they've played this year.

One of the reasons for their efficiency in their forward line is that most of their forwards don't rotate through the midfield, as happens with a lot of other teams.

Once the AFL introduced a cap on rotations, conventional wisdom said that midfielders would all have to rotate through the forward line. While Charlie Cameron and Richard Douglas will float between the midfield and forward line, the rest of the forwards play there the whole game.

There's the risk that this will cause Adelaide's midfielders to burn out as the year goes on as they're playing more game time in the middle than many of their opponents. There's also a cost in terms of predictability, as opposition coaches can plan more easily for how they'll set up.

But with the Crows sitting on top of the ladder with 181 more points-for than the next best, it seems these are risks well worth taking.

There are costs associated with being both predictable and unpredictable.

If you believe the key to becoming elite at a skill is repetition, then you could argue that lines and individuals will function better if they're constantly playing in similar roles. For example, would Tom Liberatore have fallen out of form if he had spent more time in his best position in the centre square?

This, then, gets weighed against the ease of planning against predictability and that some players work better if they're constantly given new challenges and opportunities to grow.

Like most things in football, there isn't a definitive answer as to what works best, but a philosophy that's malleable to suit the players, their personalities and capabilities seems to be the most logical approach.