There was this notion Sunday that Louis Oosthuizen winning the British Open was bad for golf, that his seven-stroke victory - the widest margin of success since some guy named Tiger once roared - was like throwing warm milk on the sport, all the better to put you to sleep.
And it did lack a bit of suspense, if only because no one challenged the 27-year-old South African.
But what if this had been the comeback of Tiger Woods instead of the coming out party for the South African Oosthuizen on, of all grand things, the 92nd birthday of Nelson Mandela?
Would a 7-shot Woods victory against a bunch of guys playing in reverse have been boring stuff? Has it ever been? Almost all of Tiger's 14 majors have been come-from-ahead affairs, given that he's never won a major coming from behind on the final round.
And much as no one really challenged Oosthuizen over the final round, Tiger routinely earns his stripes on Saturday, then merely shows up on Sunday to let his enemies see red.
So whether or not I'm the first sports writer to say that the son of a sheep farmer whose first golf clubs were bought by Ernie Els' foundation and who's had the same black caddie for seven years is a better story than Woods, I sincerely hope I'm not the last.
And it certainly the more wholesome story, given - among other things - the F-bombs that Woods was heard muttering over the weekend.
As his wife Nel-Mare said Sunday, the Claret Jug in her husband's hands as she held their baby, Janna, "We'll remember this day forever."
Of course, it's beginning to seem like forever since Woods won the 2008 U.S. Open on one leg. He hasn't won a single major since, a span of nine tournaments, though, to be fair, he's only played in seven since then.
But because the financial health of the sport apparently remains so tied to Tiger, if His Stripeness is going south, the sport could be headed there with him, however regrettable that seems when a stunning story such as Oosthuizen surfaces.
Not that we should worry about Tiger. He hasn't yet turned 35. He needs five majors total over the rest of his life to pass the 18 won by Jack Nicklaus. So even if it's been over two years since his last win, well, he's had a few other things on his mind the past few months.
This is not to make excuses for him. It would have been one of the great slaps in the face to all that's right and just in the world if Tiger had won the U.S. Open on Father's Day given his deplorable behavior as a husband.
But life goes on, even if Tiger figures to go it as a single dad, if you believe the rumors and tabloids. Yes, there are statistics around to stymie his quest. Only two players - Nicklaus and Gary Player - won as many as four majors after the age of 35.
Moreover, Tiger's career is trending downward - not a single victory in 2010, though he did take the first three months off.
Still, the guy whacked it around St. Andrews about as well as he ever did in winning on golf's grandest course in both 2000 and 2005, even if those came by a combined 13 strokes while he lost this year's tourney on that hallowed soil by, ugh, 13 strokes.
As Tiger rightly said, "I'm driving it better than I have in years, but I'm just not making putts."
Ask the grand veteran Tom Watson and he'll tell you that's why he lost last year's Open. The flat blade often falters first, done in by nerves, age and the morose memories of too many left on the lip.
Yet Tiger also is regarded by many as the best clutch putter of his time. So if this week's new putter of choice - the Nike Method led to his madness, the Sunday return to his Titleist Newport 2 may signal that his scoring will soon be as red as his shirts when it matters most.
Maybe he'll catch Nicklaus and maybe he won't. The odds certainly go higher with each lost major.
But to label his game as "Pretty average," which was the view of one ESPN analyst during Saturday's third round, is to forget that Woods is still the No. 1 golfer in the world.
Sunday was merely welcome proof that he doesn't always have to be golf's No. 1 story.