WP: Lance pulling a page from Favre's playbook??

Let me begin by saying, I like Lance Armstrong. Despite the rumor and innuendo surrounding his final few runs at the Tour, I believe he reinvigorated a waning interest in cycling as a sport in Europe and created a new buzz over cycling as recreation here at home. His retirement at the pinnicle of his career, I felt, set a standard for athletes-at-large who seem to have a hard time figuring out just when to call it a night. Now all of that nobility and wisdom that Lance displayed, all of his tremendous accomplishments, appear to be teetering on the edge of a treacherous chasm we shall call "if only forsight had been 20/20."

No, I do not believe Lance Armstrong should return to cycling...at least not in this manner. My reason for thinking thus is twofold, and I will start my argument with Lance's stated purpose for the triumphant return.

"I am happy to announce that after talking with my children, my family and my closest friends, I have decided to return to professional cycling in order to raise awareness of the global cancer burden," Armstrong said in a statement released to The Associated Press.

Noble...selfless...compassionate? Perhaps. But will it really make a difference in "global awareness?" I would counter that there is far more to lose by a comeback attempt. By ending his career at arguably the top of his game, having won an unprecedented seven Tours, Lance demonstrated that a cancer patient could not just survive, but excel and thrive. This was a crowning achievement for anyone, let alone someone fighting the ravages of a disease. Now suppose that he was to return and NOT win, or worse yet, fail miserably. Which scenario has the greater positive impact on cancer awareness??

So, any negative attention that would come with his return has the potential to undo all of the positive press that has been created for his cause. That is the exact opposite result that he intends.

And negative attention is a rather sticky wicket when you left a sport under, at best suspicions and at worst (in the European community) expectations, of drug use. Lance is not alone in this "did they or didn't they?" group which ranges from those who "did" (Festina, Rasmussen, Landis) to those who "didn't" (Ullrich, Astana, Bass). Please not the quotation marks...I am not making accusations of guilt or innocence. Now due to increased rhetoric from WADA, the World Anti-Doping Agency (think Yoda's impetuous and windy twin who is far less skilled in the powers of the force) and threats from European broadcasters of reduced coverage, the cycling community and more importantly individual teams (go Slipstream!) are seeing the need to self-police in an effort to overcome the tarnished image of the sport.

So does cycling really need one of its icons, who many believe got away clean, stepping back into the limelight, reminding everyone of the old ways? It seems possible that this might be a rubberband set to snap back catching Lance and the sport in general squarely in the chamois protected nether region. There is just far too much potential for a negative outcome here to make a return to the Tour de France seem sensible.

Why not reach out for new records in cyclocross or the numerous mountain bike events throughout the world. He has the mettle and the drive for it...I think it would be a fantastic, and risk free, avenue for him to extend his contributions to the sport he loves and the cause he has embraced.

If not...maybe there is an NFL team who needs a quarterback.