In the name of bass and bluegill, is Tiger better than Tom?

Amid all the great questions being asked about our world these days, one in particular has pushed my button.

The question in question has nothing to do with fishing, but I’ll make it relevant for this column in a moment. Bear with me for a couple more paragraphs.

While everyone else is wondering about important things — like, did the groundhog see his shadow? — a couple of guys on ESPN got into a raging debate the other night about this question:

Who’s better — Tiger Woods or Tom Brady?

Are you kidding me?

It’s like asking which is the better fish — a walleye or a largemouth bass? (See, I told you I’d make this about fishing.)

As for the golfer and the quarterback, who could possibly answer that question? The better question is this: Why would someone even pose it? It’s a clumsy attempt to provide subject matter for millionaire sportscasters struggling to find relevance during Super Bowl week in the wake of Tiger’s latest PGA Tour victory.

So if Tiger hits more fairways, is that better than Brady’s quarterback rating? Does 62 PGA wins mean more than the Patriots’ fourth Super Bowl trophy?

Sheesh!

But just as I was trying to forget I’d even heard the nonsensical question, my thoughts drifted toward fishing and the petty rivalries that exist between fans of particular species.

You’ll find supporters for everything from muskies to bluegills, and some of them actually disdain those who fish for other species. I’ve heard walleye fishermen argue they’d rather not fish if they had only bass to pursue. And the bass folks counter with statements about the “fun” of reeling in a wet towel.

Artificial lure purists debate with live bait fanatics. Hey, even the fly fishers out there argue whether it’s really fly fishing if the little bug isn’t actually floating on the surface.

And in my own little corner of the fishing world, some bass anglers sneer at those who resort to fishing with light line and spinning rods.

Is it any wonder we fight wars?

Facts are it’s really not important whether Tiger Woods is “better” than Tom Brady. There is no valid way to compare, and even if we could, who cares? Even the most ardent viewer of “Pardon the Interruption” has to wonder about that one.

It’s just not important whether your fly floats or ticks the pebbles. It’s not important whether your favorite fish has teeth like a Doberman or tastes great after a quick fry in a sizzling skillet.

We all know what we like. That’s what’s important. It’s what you like that matters.

That’s bothersome is that somebody thinks we can be entertained by a couple of talking heads debating whether Brady is better than Woods. Of course, if you like to listen to people argue over just about any topic imaginable, then television is quickly becoming the medium for you.

All of which is pretty good reason for us anglers to click off the boob tube and get ready for the spring thaw. It’s coming — regardless of what that groundhog said this morning.

jwwollitz@aol.com