Interesting editor's note on Wetzel column

I'm not sure if this is a joke or what, but what are your thoughts on this editor's note:

Column link: http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaab/news;_ylt=Aq.wuZgR0oIuCUf1X59kXJs5nYcB?slug=dw-amtourney031708&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

 

I think he wrote it himself, or had input on it. Read the last line of it too.

 

In a related note, I think journalists need to back off the $1.2 billion lost in worker productivity nonsense.

It's a bullshit number that can never be proven. Yes, the tournament is a big deal. Yes, people watch the games. But $1.2 billion??? How is that measured exactly?

And trust me, if the tournament wasn't on, the average worker would find something else to occupy his or her time.

 

Spot on, silent one.
No empirical data to back up the number at all.

 

Like the note says, I distinctly remember some of his one-liners from last year's edition, and the year before that.

The column still rules.

 

His original Sweet 16 column is up again:

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaab/news?slug=dw-sweet16031608&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

My favorite part is the rip on Clark Kellogg, who picks the top seeds top reach the Final Four every year. When they asked on CBS who his sleepers were , it was all high seeds. Seth Davis threw a couple of double-digit seeds out there (because, you know, that's what a sleeper IS: a team that isn't supposed to win), and Kellogg laughed at him derisively on live TV. This from a guy whose analysis is useless.

 

It's been years and years since I've seen a truly original column about picking the NCAA Tourney...