Mutual Funds Opportunity Costs

I thought it was interesting how Stossel beat 54% of mutual funds when he threw darts at the stock page. I was wondering what percent he would have beat without including the fees mutual funds charge. I don't necessarily like mutual funds but I was thinking about the "tiger woods" (opportunity cost) problem, everyday americans don't necesssarily understand the market (neither do all mutual fund managers but the Sec 6 test requires BASIC understanding) and if they spent their time studying stocks/bonds to invest in they could have spent that time doing heart surgury or playing professional golf getting paid way more than the small mutual fund fees. I understand that americans could do the same as Stossel and pick random stocks, but after picking random stocks I would still do research, using time that could have been spent elsewhere. When using a mutual fund I think that people could spent less of their time studying their portfolio allowing for more time to do other things hopefully making up for any fees. Personnaly I spend a lot of time watching the market so I would never use a Mutual fund, but if I were a lawyer I wouldn't waste my time. Just wanted your thoughts on the opportunity cost of watching the market and tring to make a relativly informed decision as opposed to telling your mutual fund manager you want.