Welcome to Saturday Scorecard, certified organic since 2007.

I don't know about you, but I have grass to cut, errands to run and cream puffs to eat, so let's get busy...

Blonde bombshell: The Brewers didn't produce many memorable highlights during their series against the Cubs. The fact of the matter is that they embarrassed themselves on the biggest stage the franchise has stepped on in some time.

Enough of that... For me, the lasting memory of the series did not take place on the field.

Mike Nadel, a columnist for GateHouse News Service and a graduate of Marquette University, touched off a firestorm with this column, in which he provided a few details about the game and many more about the appearance of ESPN sideline reporter Erin Andrews.

(Disclosure time: I've shared press boxes with Nadel for nearly 20 years and often chide him about his age, his MU heritage, the state of Chicago sports and even the traffic on the Edens Expressway. I do not know Erin Andrews personally, but I've seen her at venues in the past and have several friends who work with her at ESPN).

If you've read Nadel's piece, please continue to the next paragraph. If you haven't clicked on the link yet, please do -- it will help set the stage for the discussion that follows. I'll wait. (Tapping fingers on desk... switching iTunes to "shuffle"... more tapping).

OK, here is the deal: the scene that Nadel described in the Cubs clubhouse pretty closely mirrored what I saw on the Brewers' side as well. I didn't directly hear any lewd comments from players, but Erin Andrews' outfit did draw a lot of attention and generate comments.

This isn't exactly uncommon. Andrews is a rising star at ESPN. Her presence at events lends a "big game" atmosphere to the proceedings. When she covers college basketball games, throngs of face-painting, Red Bull-chugging, red-blooded male students - which pretty much describes ESPN's target demographic -- chant her name. Unfortunately for those guys in Chapel Hill, Lawrence, Madison and elsewhere, college basketball is pretty much a winter sport and Andrews generally doesn't appear in short dresses like the one mid-thigh length number she wore Wednesday night.

As for her "flitting" and "flirting," that was pretty much the same on the Brewers' side. Andrews came on the field while the Brewers were stretching and hugged centerfielder Mike Cameron, who I assumed is one of the few Milwaukee players she has met before, and spoke to a few other players while gathering information for the broadcast. When it comes to getting interviews, attractive women generally have an edge over dumpy men in Dockers pants. That's why it was a bit heartening when Ryan Braun turned down Andrews' request for an interview on the field and told her to ask him later. It was one of those "Welcome to our world" reactions.

As all this unfolded, I thought about writing a blog about Andrews' appearance (at the game, not how she looked). I decided against it, in part because I had other things to do and also because to make a big deal about an appearance by ESPN's top sideline reporter would have violated two principles that I hold dear:

First, the media's job is to report the news. We aren't there to report on each other; Second, there is the old Vince Lombardi "act like you've been there before" attitude instilled in Wisconsinites at birth.

I've covered big events before. The game in Milwaukee was a big event. Most of the smart people (like you) who read this site knew that the Cubs-Brewers series was a BIG event. I covered the Brewers back when they were a "score only" team on "SportsCenter" and only appeared in national publications when they were an opponent of the team or player being featured.

Those days are gone.

The Brewers get plenty of publicity in the national media. If they aren't comfortable in the spotlight now, and they didn't look very at ease this week, they better get used to it.

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.