Tour de France

I've been watching the sports commentary shows the last few days on TV. You know these shows: Inarticulate men with the IQs of stumps who have spent their lives watching grass grow on the baseball diamond, who haven't participated in a non-beer related sport since their days on the Polk High School football squad (We love you, Al Bundy!).

Well, I've been watching these high-paid hacks discuss the Tour de France and I've been baffled by it. Suddenly, people who haven't ridden a bicycle since the U.S. hockey team's "Miracle on Ice" are commenting how refreshing it was that new blood rose to the top of the Tour and showed what the race was supposed to be like. Some even cheered the fact that there was no "iron grip" from Lance Armstrong on the tour and that this race reflected the pre-drug era of the Tour where homespun heroes like Floyd Landis could win.

I think these guys took too many shots to the head on homecoming weekend.

Now, I never played football, so my view must be skewed, but I can't believe the Lance bashing going on.

First, Armstrong was never guaranteed a Tour win. No predestination here. The man pushed his body to the limit -- and beyond -- with every race. He was challenged with every pedal he took. He crashed several times. He got flat tires. He rode 2,200 miles in heat topping 111 degrees, in mountain fog, in pouring rain, on wet cobblestones. Later, he had fans spitting on him and had to defend his accomplishments in the light of jealous, petty people.

Second, Armstrong never used illegal drugs, as far as we know. He's the most tested athlete in history. Remember, baseball is in the grips of a drug scandal that calls into question the accomplishments of the last decade. Everyone knows football is full of drug abuse. And basketball and hockey? Well, no one really cares. How many baseball games end with an official giving a random drug test to the hitters? So, no one but Armstrong knows if he used performance enhancing drugs, but, as far as we know, he did not. We have to accept this. We don't have to believe it.

By the way, drug use in the Tour was rampant in the "good old days." I'm not saying that past greats doped, but I'd say they probably had some medical help that would not make the grade today.

Third, Armstrong's "iron grip" was not just the use of his physical strength. This man used his mind -- and the minds of his trainers and teammates -- like a chess master. He knew that the race wasn't won by the strongest alone, but the smartest as well.

I'm not a Tour expert, and I don't play one on TV like most of the ESPN ogres, but I watched the chaos of the peloton almost every day of the race. I watched as the sprinters panicked in the last stretch because no one had organized the dash. I watched Landis let a breakaway run almost 30 minutes ahead of the group. True, it was exciting to a point, but the chaos showed no one was mature enough to ride up, break the anarchy and be a leader.

And I watched as Landis played the PR game with his hip. Why did he announce it on a Tour off day? Well, he needed the impact to boost him. He wanted everyone to talk about him. It worked.

Still, Landis' recovery was a great moment. The overall physical and mental will was amazing. Some of the TV drones said it was a greater accomplishment than Armstrong's physical recovery. Huh?

Well, at last one of the TV talking heads finally spoke up in the last few seconds of a forum. He told the knuckle-draggers around him to take a step back for a moment. Armstrong had a cancer running through his body, had part of his brain removed, and, like Greg Lemond, returned a winner from a devastating trauma.

And, he said, how many of those slack-jawed announcers actually ever watched a Tour over the entire month, and not just the last-day highlights? His fellow panelists were stunned silent and the moderator moved to the next topic -- Tiger Woods' "iron grip" on the golf world.

Thought: A Discovery team with Ullrich as its leader?