The endless back and forth speculation about YouTube crack smoking star and amateur fighter Amy Winehouse, back when she was expected to perform at the Grammys – but, uh, wasn't exactly "healthy" enough to do so — accomplished at least one thing: Incredible interest from the American public (and British tabloids) in the broadcast.

In the end, of course, Winehouse couldn't make it to the stage, phoning in her performance via satellite; and while the blogs and trades were abuzz with rumormongering, three million fewer viewers bothered tuning in to February's show.

Just imagine what those audience numbers could've looked like without the Winehouse gossip. So it makes sense that producers of the show, while of course concerned about the health of the celebrity music acts they invite to perform, are at least equally as interested in the buzzworthiness of their headliners.

Which explains why MTV Networks Music president Van Toffler is already speculating on a certain blonde pop tart who may, or may not, be ready for a repeat appearance at this year's VMAs.

Toffler is already, very subtly, starting the rumor mill that Britney Spears could return to the VMA's in September.

"Everyone deserves a second or third chance, right?" Van Toffler, president of MTV Networks Music Group, playfully told The Associated Press during a telephone interview Friday. When asked if he was just joking, Toffler said "sorta."

"Who knows?" he said.

Ms. Spears, of course, opened last year's show to dismal results: botched lip-syncing, unrehearsed choreography, belly and back fat. But the tremendous amount of buzz preceding her appearance – "Is this the Britney comeback we've been waiting for?! ZOMG!!" – launched MTV's awards show out of downward spiral.

In 2006, the VMAs captured just 5.8 million viewers, its smallest audience in 10 years. But last year's Britney spectacle? Some 7.08 million total viewers and 5 million viewers 12-34 lifted ratings 23 percent. Just imagine what two a half months of new speculation could bring.

And just for good measure, let's revisit that infamous performance:

Compared with 2000's much different showing: