Something about the reaction to the Erin Andrews mess just seems wrong

We were among the first to give Erin Andrews attention in an objectifying way on a blog. We kept doing it because it's fun to have pictures of a hot chick while simultaneously making penis jokes.

Now that this video has surfaced, many blogs and media outlets are coming out in defense of EA about how wrong and horrible the making of this video was. And it is wrong and awful and sorta hot and vile and wretched. But so is all of the attention we're bringing it.

With the plethora of blog posts now dedicated to this incident, we're bringing more attention to this mess than it deserves. If this happened to Shelley Smith we don't think anybody would really care. Had this story not been reported ad nauseam by blogs and now mainstream media, we (and likely many others) would have never even known about this.

And, naturally, with every post saying how wrong this is, there's a nice picture of EA to remind you that she's cute and innocent and pretty attractive, all at the same time. (That's why we chose a photo of Inés Sainz, instead. She's totally hotter anyway).

At the same time, while all the blogs are citing this an act of the devil, anyone who's ever written about EA has had their traffic increase significantly the last few days. She's currently holding the No. 4 and 5 spots on Google Trends because people are trying to go masturbate to this video. So while this is an awful, tragic, horrible, disgusting, blah, blah, blah event, our traffic has increased about 100% since Saturday.

Should we feel guilty? No. Sometimes we feel guilty that we mix milk and meat and that we used to listen to 311. But to have written about her a while back in a tongue-in-cheek way is fair game.

Taking illegal videos of her is not. Nor, should it be, bringing a ridiculous amount of attention to something that has nothing to do with any of us. This is something for lawyers and courts. Let's stick to what we know best: sports and dick jokes.

Fun with the law and Duke football

It's not easy being associated with Duke football. A 6-45 record over the last five seasons, always being overlooked by the basketball fans and, wow!, 6-45 is fucking atrocious.

But bad was good last week as Duke lawyers used the team's poor on-field performance to get out of a lawsuit against Louisville.

A Franklin, Ky., Circuit Court judge sided with a devilishly clever argument and ruled in favor of Duke University yesterday in a breach of contract lawsuit brought forth by the University of Louisville.

U of L sued Duke for $450,000 -- or a series with another Atlantic Coast Conference opponent -- after the Blue Devils backed out of a four-game football contract with three dates remaining.

The contract called for a penalty of $150,000 per game if a date with a “team of similar stature” could not be arranged.

Duke’s lawyers argued the Blue Devils, which have a record of 6-45 over the past five seasons, were so bad that any team would be a suitable replacement.

We're not sure if the lawsuit or the successful legal argument is funnier, but regardless, 6-45?! Heavens.