Don't get me wrong, I'm all about frivolous features. They may not leave an impacting impression on society as a whole and advance the cause of good, but they let writers be creative and free-thinking.
They also let writers stay in the box they've allowed themselves to rot away in, and thus, encourage their readers to do the same.
Take, for example, this piece by a few NFL.com staffers, discussing which games on the 2012 NFL schedule should be considered 'National Holidays.'
Albert Breer takes the easy option, the season-opening Thursday Night Guaranteed Home Team Victory.
Ian Rappaport not only takes the second-easiest option, anything involving Patriots QB Tom Brady and one of the Mannings (Peyton, in this case). He even puts roman numerals after the cliche "Brady-Manning" moniker.
Charley Casserly throws his hat into the Broncos-Patriots ring, thus marginalizing the Colts-Patriots rivalry from the 2000s. Clearly, it's not about the teams if one player switches jerseys and takes the rivalry with him.
It's unclear whether Jason Smith understood the question. He did get in the requisite Tim Tebow entry to the argument, completely ignoring the fact he's a back-up quarterback. Apparently, the country should have a day off to watch him hold a clipboard and play on the punt team.
Gregg Rosenthal provides his typical originality by casting the third vote for Brady v. Manning.
But that's fine. If the majority of football fans want to listen to the Bee Gees while we crank Led Zeppelin, I'm not going to complain. I just can't hear any argument about must-see games if either one - both in reality - Steelers/Ravens games are not mentioned.