I think you may have taken my spittle flecked rant a little too seriously RD. I was, as in most things in life, being flippant. And yes, obviously it's not down to the intrinsic nature of a given sport and I think it's an accepted truism money has changed football. The IOC is a pretty unlikeable beast with billions swilling in the trough, hence why many, including myself, found the shameless jackbooted sponsorship enforcement left a somewhat bitter taste in the mouth, until those wholesome guys and gals who deigned to interact with Joe Public and looked like the person next door (because genreally they were, not holed up in some millionaires row) actually started winning stuff and we all momentarily lost our cynicsm. I'd actually argue that football's current success is a direct result of the loss of connection you describe. Glamour has to differentiate itself from the rest of us in order to be attractive, and I think it's the soap opera nature of it all that keeps the whole thing going. Funnily enough watching the handball final it's obvious that there are a million and one sports that can be nailbiting, get people passionate and come close to causing serious cardiac issues for the team coaches, but I realised that not all of them see billions of people poring over the minutea of those sports in the same way they do football over, as you say, 9 long months a year, and even discuss the sexual mores/antics of the players on the same par as the strategy and incidents on the playing field itself. You need something beyond that to keep the interest levels up, otherwise you might as well go down champion hill and discuss footie in the dry, knowleadgeable but soul achingly tedious manner of our mutual friend.