Stuff about nothing

 So I got this call from my sister the other day, and she wanted to know why people were trashing all the NFL announcers, and what the hell is their problem, anyway?

"Well," I replied, somewhat lamely. "It's just what they do."

A bit later I started thinking about that.

Because, see, it is what "they" do. Meaning media/social media/people-who-think-they're-media-because-they're-on-social-media. 

They gripe. They whine. They yell. In this particular case, they don't like Tony Romo anymore because he talks to much (i.e.: He got too much praise early on) ... and they don't like Cris Collinsworth because he occasionally says dumb stuff ... and they don't like much of anyone calling the games these days, because, well, because.

Everybody hates everything, it seems. And I hate that.

This morning, for instance, a former journalist turned Bible-thumping fringe righty was carping about why ESPN was leading with two women's college basketball games last night, because NO ONE cares about women's sports. So what was the target audience? 

The implication was this was ESPN pushing its woke agenda on America -- "woke agenda" being fringe-righty chic these days for anything that happens to offend them. Which is pretty much everything that doesn't harken back to the glory days of the 1950s.

But to answer the former journalist's question, in this case ESPN led with women's buckets because one game (Iowa at Ohio State) was a showdown between two top-ten teams in which the No. 10 team (Iowa) handed the No. 2 team (Ohio State) its first loss of the season. I don't know about you, but this kinda qualified as news -- something the former journalist seems to have forgotten in his apparent zeal to keep those damn women in their place.

Meanwhile, in more stuff about nothing ...

Bills wide receiver Stefon Diggs was compelled to go on social media and defend his behavior in Sunday's playoff loss to the Bengals, because apparently the gripers didn't like it that he was over on the sideline demanding better play from his teammates. Diggs wondered on Twitter whether they thought he should be OK with losing. Diggs answered his own question with "Nah."

It was the correct answer, and his behavior was the correct response to the Bills' play. But of course the gripers had to make a whole thing out of it.

Look. I can go negative with the best of 'em. Do it all the time. Just yesterday, in fact, I made fun of the Cowboys losing to the 49ers, because they're the Cowboys and losing in the playoffs is their deal.

But in doing that, I failed to make it clear that the Cowboys lost mainly because the 49ers were simply a better team. Just as the Bengals were clearly a better team than the Bills.

The gripers, however, would prefer calling the losing teams playoff chokers. And I get that; it's a lot more fun to go that route, inaccurate though it usually is. It is for me, too.

But sometimes I just wanna say, "Shut up already."

Which makes me a griper, too, I suppose.