Check out the cover of the latest issue of ESPN The Magazine:

The news of Woods’ repeated infidelity and subsequent stint in a rehab clinic for sex addition broke less than a year ago and since then Woods has attempted to rehab his image.

But I think the words “NOBODY’S PERFECT” next to a shot of Tiger looking off into the distance with the sun rising behind him like he’s Jesus or something is a little inappropriate. The phrase “nobody’s perfect” is good for a husband to use when he forgets to take the trash out or when he rips a stinky fart but can’t blame the dog because it’s not in the room.

I realize that the cover and story about an athlete’s quest for perfection, but the image of Tiger still brings to mind scandal, and that’s not going to change for a while.

So what do you think? Appropriate or inappropriate?

ESPN The Magazine just released a movie issue where various athletes pose in iconic movie scenes. For the cover, they (wisely) chose alpine ski racer Lindsey Vonn…

In the Oct. 19 issue of ESPN the Mag (a.k.a. “The Body Issue”), Bruce Feldman argues that speed is far more important in college football, where the hash marks are wider, the preparation isn’t as good and the talent disparity is greater, than it is in the NFL, where everyone is fast.

Case in point, the Oakland Raiders:

Or you can just look at the Oakland Raiders. Much like the Gators’, their performance separates them from the pack in recent years — just not in a good way. No one in the NFL covets speed the way the Raiders do.

Al Davis, the man who pursued such speedsters as the aptly named James Jett, is downright enamored of fast guys, perhaps even more so than Meyer is. (Of the nine fastest players tested by the NFL over the past 10 years, four — Fabian Washington, Stanford Routt, Ashley Lelie and Carlos Francis — have played for the Raiders.) According to an NFL scout, the Raiders had 15 players on their roster last season who’d run a verified 40 of 4.5 or faster — four more than the next “fastest” team. And what did it get them? A sixth-straight season with double-digit losses.

It’s a good read.

On page 75 of ESPN The Magazine’s fantasy football preview, Ken Daube argues that owners drafting late in the first round should take WRs with their first two picks. Generally, I agree with the theory, but a few of the assumptions that Daube made appear to be incorrect. Here’s what I wrote on his fan wall at ESPN…

Hi Ken, I was reading “The Turn Is No Place For Running Backs,” and while I agree in principle with the strategy of going WR/WR with your first two picks at the first turn, I have a couple of questions.

1) In the second table, you show team #2 getting a 1-5 WR in the third round while team #4 gets a 6-10 WR. In round four, teams #1 and #3 get a 11-15 RB, while team #2 gets a 16-20 RB. Why the inconsistency?

2) Team #1 and #3 get an 11-15 RB at the start of the fourth round, but from ESPN’s live draft results, only guys in the 18+ range are available there.

3) Team #2 gets a 1-5 WR at the end of the third, and team #4 gets a 6-10 player, when only 12+ WRs are available there.

When I recalculate the totals to account for these problems, team #1 finishes with 1050 points, team #2 with 1011 points, team #3 with 1039 points and team #4 with 976 points. The theory still stands, but the execution is confusing.

I’m assuming that this is a 12-team league, which appears to be Daube’s assumption since he mentions pick #12 in the opening paragraph.

Does anyone else have this issue handy? If so, are you seeing the same things I’m seeing?

I’ll update this post if Daube responds.

No corny jokes.

No stale pop culture references.

Just a touching story about a Montana kid whose father was a big John Elway fan.

I’ll give props when props are due…

Good column, Rick.