As for Nadel's column, I was fascinated first by his choice of topic and then the firestorm it created in the sports blogosphere, where Andrews is regularly worshipped and site operators go out of their way to find candid pictures of her because, quite frankly, they drive up traffic.

If Erin Andrews photos drive Web traffic, it's logical to assume that she has the same impact on TV ratings. The people at ESPN headquarters in Bristol, Conn., are aware of this, which explains Andrews' heavy travel schedule during peak times of the year.

This is not to imply that she isn't good at her job. Like TV in general, sideline reporting is one of those "looks far easier than it is" gigs. Many of my sports media brothers consider the role to be somewhat trivial. Some of them get really worked up about it, especially during those waste-of-time halftime interviews with football coaches hurrying to the locker room to berate their players.

As sideline reporters go, Erin Andrews is a competent professional. It's not her fault that she is both attractive and a pop culture icon. If you read the column closely, Nadel doesn't really criticize her work, per se.

He did, however, question her choice of outfits and the way she comported herself in the clubhouse, which -- despite all the advances made by hard-working pros like Leslie Visser, Andrea Kremer, Lori Nickel, Jessie Garcia, Stephanie Sutton, Trenni Kusnierek, Jen Lada and others -- is still a boys' club.

Put it this way, in thousands of trips to clubhouses and locker rooms, I've never heard a coach or manager greet a male reporter by saying ""Hey, hey, hey! Look at this! Are you doing a baseball game today or a modeling assignment?" which is what Cubs skipper Lou Piniella said when he saw Andrews in the clubhouse.

Some people look at Nadel's column and see jealousy bordering on misogyny. They assume Nadel is bitter because he never will be as big a star as Erin Andrews on the national sports scene. Drunken male fans don't chant his name and he has to live with realization that attractive women with national cable network flags on their microphone get access to players that he'll never enjoy. (Some Talkbackers even questioned his sexual orientation, which would no doubt get a chuckle from Mike's wife and kids.)

Believe me, I don't think Mike is worried about any of that. Nor do I think that he has a problem with women working in sports media. I just think he saw a situation that struck him as unusual and decided to write about it, rather than providing details from a lopsided and largely uninteresting game.

A decade ago, when readers didn't have access to countless accounts of games, he may have been guilty of journalistic malpractice. In today's saturated sports marketplace, he found an angle that virtually everyone else ignored, but that generated lots of comments and provoked plenty of discussion.

ESPN spokesman Norby Williamson released a statement about Nadel's column: "Erin is a tremendous reporter. She's a prepared and a hard-working journalist, who is well respected and asks excellent questions. We're proud to have her as an important part of our coverage team. Beyond that, we feel it's unnecessary to even respond to any of the specifics outlined."

That was the public statement. You wonder if the folks at ESPN may talk to Andrews privately about her choice of wardrobe. They'll either tell her to add a few inches to her skirts, which would have made it easier to walk down the dugout steps at Miller Park and forced Nadel to find another angle, or tell her to keep doing what she's doing because it's good for business.