Let's pretend for a moment that Clive Palmer didn't form Football Australia. Let's pretend that it was launched by another less egotistical A-League club owner. Anyone, really - it doesn't matter who.
The whole rebel league/watchdog saga that has devoured football would be viewed from a completely different angle had it been the making of a different man.
Thursday's already-infamous press conference would have been less circus and more call-to-arms. For one thing, there'd have been fewer references to the Magna Carta, Syria, feminism and cowboys and Indians.
Whenever big Clive opens his mouth he tends to cloud the very points he tries to get across.
It's a shame, because he brings up many pertinent issues with the game in Australia. But he's got a scattergun approach. Throw enough darts on a board and eventually you'll hit the bullseye.
The football discourse has been framed by Palmer's eccentricity. Of course, his conduct over the past fortnight, and indeed over his period as chairman of Gold Coast United, has been indefensible.
The unveiling of Football Australia was a made-for-TV performance art piece. The confusion over whether it meant a breakaway competition or not didn't help its credibility - nor did Palmer's own myriad contradictions.
A man of his public standing would clearly be aware of his own hypocrisy, but that's just Clive. That's his personality, his approach. He doesn't care. Those close to him know it and accept it. He's a renegade.
But that doesn't mean Football Australia itself is a shambles. Not yet. Once the shock and awe from the press briefing goes away, there's a very real chance that it could become something.
To use the words of another rambler, Rob Oakeshott, Football Australia could be beautiful in its ugliness.
Put The Palmer Show to one side. There are still serious, potentially fatal issues within football, and there are many people who have been disenfranchised with the executive of the FFA.
The Smith review highlighted many of the problems facing football and many of the concerns within it are shared by Palmer and the owners of the other nine clubs. More input from club chairmen? Check. Greater transparency? Check. Cost reductions? Check.
The owners are losing money, and they want to spend their cash differently. Who can deny them that? Many came out against Palmer after he launched his lobby horse, but most of their statements were diplomatic - and most also acknowledged there needs to be change.
There's those who were slighted. The people of Townsville who were robbed of a team, those behind A-League club bids who were ignored, the various 'old soccer' folk who were discarded. The former FFA employees who know that all is not well. The good football people on staff at A-League clubs who are growing tired of dealing with Whitlam Square.
Then there's the small matter of the FFA's big payroll. Five suits earning a total of $5 million between them. This isn't one of Palmer's random arguments. The Smith report said FFA should 'review head office costs' and find 'more efficient approaches to travel and other procurement'.
Oh, and the World Cup bid. Nearly $50 million for one vote. Two conmen were hired with our money, and then they conned us. Then we voted for Sepp Blatter to stay as FIFA president. That's still inexcusable.
Sidenote - remember those mystical fan forums at the start of the season? Yeah, I didn't think so.
So the worst thing for the game would be if things chugged along as per normal, with no questioning of the status quo.
Take Gold Coast out of the competition, then. Take Palmer out of the sport. He's a poisonous influence, many say. It is indeed hard to fathom some of the decisions he's made in his management of the club.
But what will really change?
The FFA has been sweeping their problems under the rug, and the past fortnight is the result. Why else has it come to this?