MORE FAMILY FEUD

Like many folks, we were home and watched Tiger's "act of contrition" yesterday.

I will agree with those who stated it was weird. Had Tiger been a boy when I was, many an adult male would simply have listened to his speech and said, "You know? That kid ain't right in the head!"

And, that would have been "the end of it. "

Unfortunately, today we are living in a time when it is common that one or more groups of people will publish a paper which purports to analyzye the number of snaps, crackles, and pops in one 10 ounce bowl of Rice Krispies. Then they will criticize each others scientific methodology.

Just like Tiger's speech: "there will never be 'the end of it'".

Okay, maybe until the time another public personality screws up. Tiger's advisors over at IMG are probably already inteviewing potential candidates.

Today, I read Bob Smizik's sports blog in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette regarding Tiger, whose confession he deplored. It was another blog where Bob allows us access to the views of various sports analyists whose communication we might never encounter otherwise.

Todays guest columnist was Gene Simmons with ESPN.com . Whoops, no that was Bill Simmons, (another guy with tongue problems). Simmons approach to Tiger's speech made me long for a deceased friend by the name of Eddy Angell.

Eddy once received a long scorching letter from his ex-wive severely criticizing his behavior. Rather than responding or rationalizing what he had allegedly done, he simply corrected her grammar, spelling, and punctuation with red ink, and mailed it back to her.

I wish Simmons had employed that same intellect. There are some who may have finished his lengthy and repetitive article in it's entirety. Those people are the same ones, who as kids, never threw up in the back seat of their parents car during a long trip.

I chose the Evelyn Woods method after digging through the first few paragraphs. My read on the column was that the only valid conclusion Simmons had was that he regretted not being chosen to write Tiger's speech nor afforded the opportunity to determine the appropriate venue.

Oh, and of course, being paid fabulous sums to do so.

Help me out here, will you please. Isn't ESPN the entity that had a major sports commentator disappear from the air recently because he was accused of being a philanderer? As I recall, they responded to the accusation at about the same speed Toyota did to the mechanical claims.

Now, I may have missed it, but, I don't recall four of his ESPN peers sitting down together in a circle and analyzing his actions. For hours and hours.

Probably never happened. Although if ESPN could have found a way to spin it as a responsbile approach in the critique and rehabilitation process of a public figure, I'm sure they would have .

Of course, that would be only after their actuaries produced a favorable profit analysis.

You see, the key question in our day will always be : "Where's The Money?" It is the one thing (other than the consumption of beer, as our bartender buddy, Andy, reminded us) that drives this country and defines what and who we are all about.

His observation came during an open discussion my wife, Phyl, and I were having with him as we exchanged reactions to Tiger "falling on his sword" earlier in the day.

The three of us talked about sportscasters and the extreme blitz approach the sports media took in their coverage after the speech. We also addressed Tiger's comments regarding the notorious paparazzi and their pursuit of his kids.

We finally concluded that if we were hosting Family Feud (there's that reference again) and said:
"We interviewed 100 sports media and paparazzi and the top 7 answers are on the board. Our question was: 'What wouldn't you do for money?"

At the end of that round, not one of the panelists would have correctly answered the question.

You see, no one would have come up with "NOTHING", the only viable answer to the question.