Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   "I realize it is 2012 and you run out of things to write about, but we should be in a position where we are trying to help and lift up and support a player like Tiger Woods, instead of tearing him down"   (geoffshackelford.com ) divider line
    More: Obvious, Tiger Woods, forests, Sean Foley, etiquette  
•       •       •

614 clicks; posted to Sports » on 19 Apr 2012 at 10:41 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



40 Comments   (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-04-19 09:46:24 AM  
Oh yeah, the media has been SO MEAN to Tiger.
 
2012-04-19 10:53:04 AM  
The only thing that's holding Tigre down is his golf game.
 
2012-04-19 10:58:10 AM  
Speaking of Tiger Woods, let's go to a shot of him now. He's 14 strokes back from the lead, between an insurance salesman from Manitoba and the shambling zombie corpse of Byron Nelson.

Who is in the lead at the moment? Who cares. Tiger Woods is hacking at a ball in the sand. Let's see if we can dedicate the next 30 minutes to Tiger Woods comeback story. Oh, the leader just put his first stroke on 17 into the water. We're not going to cut to that, though. Tiger Woods.
 
2012-04-19 11:13:05 AM  
You really do have to wonder how long the casual golf media will stay with this "Is Tiger Back?" obsession. When he's 42 and hasn't had a Top 10 finish in eight years, are we still going to have to hear about it every time he gets a little frisky on the first day back 9 at the Cooper Tire Des Moines Invitational?
 
2012-04-19 11:13:05 AM  
Why's a man got to pick up sticks against another man, instead of using those sticks to prop a man up?
 
2012-04-19 11:18:14 AM  

Treygreen13: Speaking of Tiger Woods, let's go to a shot of him now.


That's true. It's also true that he is quite literally the only guy in the game who can move the ratings needle. Oh, a great tourney by any of a handful of guys catches the public's fancy for a few minutes, then we forget about them again. When Tiger is on the first page of the leaderboard the ratings go through the roof again. I don't know why that is, but we all know why they show him so much - because he's the one the most people want to see and they simply make more money when he's playing well. Why doesn't even matter.
 
2012-04-19 11:23:24 AM  

jayhawk88: You really do have to wonder how long the casual golf media will stay with this "Is Tiger Back?" obsession. When he's 42 and hasn't had a Top 10 finish in eight years, are we still going to have to hear about it every time he gets a little frisky on the first day back 9 at the Cooper Tire Des Moines Invitational?


depends on the ratings I guess. Clearly he's not the player he was - then again I seriously doubt anyone will ever be the player Tiger was again in my lifetime. That said, It ain't like we're talking about John Daly here - the guy has played 6 events and he has a win and is top 10 on the money list. Two thirds of the guys in the top 150 dream about sucking as much as Tiger woods. Sucks for him that he set the bar so high he'll never reach it again.
 
2012-04-19 11:25:22 AM  
This reminds me of Scrooge when no one comes to his funeral. Tiger was such a jerk when he was winnining and pushed everyone away that now when he's down the the only friends are the ones he's currently paying , like Foley. The exception is of course the Golf Channel where Charley Reimer actually had an orgasm live on TV when Tiger won a tounament 2 weeks ago.
 
2012-04-19 11:34:15 AM  

jayhawk88: You really do have to wonder how long the casual golf media will stay with this "Is Tiger Back?" obsession. When he's 42 and hasn't had a Top 10 finish in eight years, are we still going to have to hear about it every time he gets a little frisky on the first day back 9 at the Cooper Tire Des Moines Invitational?


At this point I really blame the media, something I'm not really prone to do because it's generally a cop out.

There is an entire generation of sportswriters and talking heads who literally have no idea how to cover the game any other way.
 
2012-04-19 11:42:04 AM  

MFAWG: There is an entire generation of sportswriters and talking heads who literally have no idea how to cover the game any other way.


True. The other thing is he was gone for quite a long time and ratings weren't very good. Then he won at Bay Hill and the ratings were through the roof. The viewers want what the viewers want.

The other thing is he's not playing poorly at all. His finishes this year...

3rd in a euro tour event, 15, 17, 2, WD on sunday, 1, 40th at the Masters. That's not only the makings of a good year, it's the beginning of a great year for nine out of ten guys. The public is still wishing for a level of play we probably won;t see ever again. The tour is too deep these days.
 
2012-04-19 11:44:39 AM  

JohnBigBootay: Treygreen13: Speaking of Tiger Woods, let's go to a shot of him now.

That's true. It's also true that he is quite literally the only guy in the game who can move the ratings needle. Oh, a great tourney by any of a handful of guys catches the public's fancy for a few minutes, then we forget about them again. When Tiger is on the first page of the leaderboard the ratings go through the roof again. I don't know why that is, but we all know why they show him so much - because he's the one the most people want to see and they simply make more money when he's playing well. Why doesn't even matter.


I think it's a self-fulfilling prophecy. When he was winning everything, it made sense to cover him exclusively. Now when the golf tournament is going on, ESPN is burying the leader under Tiger coverage, then saying, "well the only person anyone cares about is Tiger".

Of course it is. He's the only golfer you cover on ESPN. If you never show anyone else and dedicate all your golf coverage to one guy nobody will develop an interest in a new guy.
 
2012-04-19 11:54:25 AM  

Treygreen13: Of course it is. He's the only golfer you cover on ESPN. If you never show anyone else and dedicate all your golf coverage to one guy nobody will develop an interest in a new guy.


Dude was gone for well over a year. They weren't covering him then. Did anyone else move the needle worth a shiat for more than two weeks? For farks sake there was more interest in his ex-caddy for several months than any of the other players. Bob harig wrote a good article about it once when people were laying into him for all the tiger talk - he said he's damned if he does and damned if he don't. I think I recall in one of his live blogs that if he analyzed all the questions he gets when he's doing one it's seventy percent - tiger, thirty percent - all other golfers.

It'll stay the same until someone else (a male I mean) does something remarkable as Tiger did and sustains it for a long time. Until then, people will be looking to see if the old Tiger comes back. I think he'll win more but won't ever reach 2000 levels. Nor will anyone else.
 
2012-04-19 12:11:48 PM  
"...we should be in a position where we are trying to help and lift up and support a player like Tiger Woods"
And by "like Tiger Woods" you mean: phony, aloof, foul-mouthed, poor temper control, cheapskate, fan-ignoring, serial-adulterer, dull-interview, multi-multi-multi-millionaire golfers?

"...because everyone in the golf industry is better off because of his existence."
Ah, now I get it. We should support him so you and your buddies in the industry can make more money?
 
2012-04-19 12:27:08 PM  

RedZoneTuba: Ah, now I get it. We should support him so you and your buddies in the industry can make more money?


Well, I don't think anyone should support anyone they don't know personally. That's kind of an optional deal no matter who is involved. Then again, given his premise, his reasoning is sound.
 
2012-04-19 12:28:34 PM  

RedZoneTuba: foul-mouthed


oh...

/do not recall actually playing golf with anyone who was NOT foul-mouthed. But I know a lot of shiatty golfers.
 
2012-04-19 12:38:36 PM  
Tiger destroyed his body trying to do things he shouldn't have tried. I have no sympathy for him at all. He'll win a few tournaments, maybe a major or two, maybe even have one or two more GREAT years but his best days are far behind him.

The media wants ratings. If they thought a live shot of Tiger banging some guy's wife in a bunker would give them ratings, they'd show it.

No matter what Tiger does and no matter how hard the media hypes it, Tiger will never be Nicklaus winning his last Masters.
 
2012-04-19 12:42:09 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: No matter what Tiger does and no matter how hard the media hypes it, Tiger will never be Nicklaus winning his last Masters.


Well, that's certainly true. Nicklaus winning his last masters was nicklaus winning his last masters. He will never be me eating my yogurt this morning. But I get your point. And winning at 46 was cool. But I think Watson damn near winning the British at 59 was way more impressive.
 
2012-04-19 12:43:05 PM  
RedZoneTuba: "...we should be in a position where we are trying to help and lift up and support a player like Tiger Woods"

And by "like Tiger Woods" you mean: phony, aloof, foul-mouthed, poor temper control, cheapskate, fan-ignoring, serial-adulterer, dull-interview, multi-multi-multi-millionaire golfers?


This. Golf was popular before Eldrick, it had a bump when he was winning that won't happen again, golf will be popular long after Eldrick retires to count his money. What will change is like what's happend with Tebow: all the "fans" who bought jerseys and made a bunch of media noise will fade away when Tebow flames out in New York and all the "only cares about Tiger" fans will disappear, leaving those of us who followed golf since Nicklaus/Palmer/Player, who love golf no matter who is popular.
 
2012-04-19 01:05:24 PM  

Henry Holland: Golf was popular before Eldrick, it had a bump when he was winning that won't happen again


These two statements are at odds. What golf is, is under 'other sports' at your popular sports websites. And that's fine. I could see ratings improve if someone captures the public imagination again. I could also see it sinking like tennis has if no one rises to the occasion. Compared to the big three golf ratings are abysmal. And I think what Tiger did for golf ratings for better than a decade qualifies as a bit more than a 'bump'.
 
2012-04-19 01:11:51 PM  
img.photobucket.com
 
2012-04-19 01:49:25 PM  

Henry Holland: This. Golf was popular before Eldrick,


Oh, you called him Eldrick. You're so edgy and/or knowledgeable.
 
2012-04-19 01:55:05 PM  

JohnBigBootay: TheShavingofOccam123: No matter what Tiger does and no matter how hard the media hypes it, Tiger will never be Nicklaus winning his last Masters.

Well, that's certainly true. Nicklaus winning his last masters was nicklaus winning his last masters. He will never be me eating my yogurt this morning. But I get your point. And winning at 46 was cool. But I think Watson damn near winning the British at 59 was way more impressive.


I wonder what would have happened if there had been a play-off the next day. Watson was very, very tired at the end of the day. Rules are rules, though.
 
2012-04-19 02:27:12 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: I wonder what would have happened if there had been a play-off the next day. Watson was very, very tired at the end of the day. Rules are rules, though.


I just remember marveling at his warm-up and stretching where he does that stretch with the club in his hands and puts the back of his hand on the ground and I was thinking, 'Jesus, this guys is fifteen years my senior and he's in way better shape than I am'. I've since lost 50 .lbs and walk probably 25 miles a week and do a lot of mountain biking as well as got the blood pressure back to 'normal' as I approach 50. He's STILL in better shape than I am.
 
2012-04-19 04:14:37 PM  

jayhawk88: You really do have to wonder how long the casual golf media will stay with this "Is Tiger Back?" obsession. When he's 42 and hasn't had a Top 10 finish in eight years, are we still going to have to hear about it every time he gets a little frisky on the first day back 9 at the Cooper Tire Des Moines Invitational?



Yes we will. The media got a great "minority kid done good in a white mans world" story out of him in the beginning, then they got alot of stories tearing him down over the cheating. Now they are desperate for the comeback story. Nobody wants to be the last one saying it so they are jumping the gun all over the place.
 
2012-04-19 04:28:20 PM  

Treygreen13: Speaking of Tiger Woods, let's go to a shot of him now. He's 14 strokes back from the lead, between an insurance salesman from Manitoba and the shambling zombie corpse of Byron Nelson.

Who is in the lead at the moment? Who cares. Tiger Woods is hacking at a ball in the sand. Let's see if we can dedicate the next 30 minutes to Tiger Woods comeback story. Oh, the leader just put his first stroke on 17 into the water. We're not going to cut to that, though. Tiger Woods.


Even losing tiger is the big draw of the PGA, the networks know this and you can bet the PGA all got moist panties over tiger winning arnies invitational.

They need him to win to maximize their TV and merchandise sales.
 
2012-04-19 04:32:36 PM  

Henry Holland: RedZoneTuba: "...we should be in a position where we are trying to help and lift up and support a player like Tiger Woods"

And by "like Tiger Woods" you mean: phony, aloof, foul-mouthed, poor temper control, cheapskate, fan-ignoring, serial-adulterer, dull-interview, multi-multi-multi-millionaire golfers?

This. Golf was popular before Eldrick, it had a bump when he was winning that won't happen again, golf will be popular long after Eldrick retires to count his money. What will change is like what's happend with Tebow: all the "fans" who bought jerseys and made a bunch of media noise will fade away when Tebow flames out in New York and all the "only cares about Tiger" fans will disappear, leaving those of us who followed golf since Nicklaus/Palmer/Player, who love golf no matter who is popular.


BUMP? That's what you call golf moving from a 2 second blurb to a full breakdown of the tournament? Golf went mainstream while he was playing and made everyone a shiat ton of money in the process.

Golf was a niche sport that had a small but loyal following, tiger made them all rock stars.
 
2012-04-19 04:38:03 PM  

steamingpile: BUMP? That's what you call golf moving from a 2 second blurb to a full breakdown of the tournament? Golf went mainstream while he was playing and made everyone a shiat ton of money in the process.

Golf was a niche sport that had a small but loyal following, tiger made them all rock stars.



You are correct. '96 was a long time ago, so people forget. Whether you love TW or hate him, pretty much every player on tour over 30 knows that Tiger made them all a lot of money. The purse increases were due very (I did not say exclusively) due to the number of eyes TW brought to the tv set. It's a fact.

The PGA was fine before tiger. It'll be fine after tiger. But anyone who denies his direct economic impact is an utter fool.
 
2012-04-19 05:34:53 PM  
Yes, come on people. Serial adulterers with a billion dollars need your sympathy. What is wrong with you?
 
2012-04-19 06:05:19 PM  

JohnBigBootay: You are correct. '96 was a long time ago, so people forget. Whether you love TW or hate him, pretty much every player on tour over 30 knows that Tiger made them all a lot of money. The purse increases were due very (I did not say exclusively) due to the number of eyes TW brought to the tv set. It's a fact.


All they need to do is let another American dominate for a while and ratings will go back up.

I don't really understand it, Woods always seemed like a soulless golfing automaton to me. Just a really, really boring person who happened to be good at golf. Imagine if someone entertaining were able to perform that well.
 
2012-04-19 06:56:31 PM  

IAmRight: All they need to do is let another American dominate for a while and ratings will go back up.

I don't really understand it, Woods always seemed like a soulless golfing automaton to me. Just a really, really boring person who happened to be good at golf. Imagine if someone entertaining were able to perform that well.



Phil can move the ratings needle from time to time. And he's been an amazing golfer with a career almost any golfer except woods would kill for. I doubt it's gonna get much better than that for any American I can think of. And the fact is Phil hasn't had near the impact Tiger has - at 42 that's not likely to change for the long term anyway. And woods is boring. Hell, ALL golfers are boring. Tiger was a special case - due was on TV at 2 years old and everyone said he would be great. Couple that with the fact that he was not only black, his name was Tiger. And then he turned out to actually be greater than anyone could have imagined after all the hype. Dude went years without missing a cut. Dude won the US freakin' open by 15 strokes. That's impossible shiat. What he did was unfathomable. Won't happen again in our lifetime. But if it does, people will certainly watch it.
 
2012-04-19 06:57:56 PM  

IAmRight: All they need to do is let another American dominate for a while and ratings will go back up.


Oh, and the guy at #1 for quite a while before woods was david duval. As far as tv ratings went, no one really gave a shiat.
 
2012-04-19 07:54:07 PM  

JohnBigBootay: Oh, and the guy at #1 for quite a while before woods was david duval. As far as tv ratings went, no one really gave a shiat.


Maybe a gay guy will do really well and they can pump the everloving sh*t out of that story, since most of the early intrigue with Woods was skin-color based. I dunno, there's the potential to pull in the dollars even more than he did if someone worth a sh*t as a personality were to succeed on near that level. Maybe they could start letting fans move boulders and chop down trees for that golfer, too, just to help him out.
 
2012-04-19 08:26:40 PM  
It's telling that so much of the discussion of Woods these days involves television ratings. The number of viewers certainly drops a bit when Woods is either not playing or not in the hunt, but the coverage of the event is always greatly improved. Woods is still a top of the line player but there dozens of others who are just as interesting to watch. Golf fans know this and they tune in whether or not Eldrick is on the screen.

I understand why people in the sport care about ratings but I don't see why the rest of us should care. Eventually, Woods will not be playing the regular tour. There will still be tournaments played all over the world and people will have a chance to see them on tv. It's not as if there is some danger that the U.S. Open will never be played again once Tiger says he's done. Actually, there is no tournament, anywhere in the world, that will cease to exist because Woods isn't around to talk about.

I'm not sure what Foley is talking about either. I'd say the coverage of Woods overall, for at least the last year, has been largely positive. It's not the endless hero worship we used to see from the press but he's not being treated unfairly. Maybe it has something to do with the public figuring out that his client is a boorish asshole.
 
2012-04-19 08:45:26 PM  

IAmRight: JohnBigBootay: You are correct. '96 was a long time ago, so people forget. Whether you love TW or hate him, pretty much every player on tour over 30 knows that Tiger made them all a lot of money. The purse increases were due very (I did not say exclusively) due to the number of eyes TW brought to the tv set. It's a fact.

All they need to do is let another American dominate for a while and ratings will go back up.

I don't really understand it, Woods always seemed like a soulless golfing automaton to me. Just a really, really boring person who happened to be good at golf. Imagine if someone entertaining were able to perform that well.


Tiger has 5 times the personality of the almost faceless, soulless robots that were playing in the late 80's and early 90's. With the exception of Colin Montgomerie, Daly, Singh, and Els (the last two because of the beautiful swings) I can't really remember anybody who stuck out.
 
2012-04-19 09:30:11 PM  
John Rocker was basically run out of baseball because of mean words.

Tiger Woods destroyed lives of his wife and children. He has no where near the level of vilification
 
2012-04-19 09:59:45 PM  

TheShavingofOccam123: JohnBigBootay: TheShavingofOccam123: No matter what Tiger does and no matter how hard the media hypes it, Tiger will never be Nicklaus winning his last Masters.

Well, that's certainly true. Nicklaus winning his last masters was nicklaus winning his last masters. He will never be me eating my yogurt this morning. But I get your point. And winning at 46 was cool. But I think Watson damn near winning the British at 59 was way more impressive.

I wonder what would have happened if there had been a play-off the next day. Watson was very, very tired at the end of the day. Rules are rules, though.


Yes, yes: winter rules.
 
2012-04-19 10:06:41 PM  

IAmRight: JohnBigBootay: Oh, and the guy at #1 for quite a while before woods was david duval. As far as tv ratings went, no one really gave a shiat.

Maybe a gay guy will do really well and they can pump the everloving sh*t out of that story, since most of the early intrigue with Woods was skin-color based. I dunno, there's the potential to pull in the dollars even more than he did if someone worth a sh*t as a personality were to succeed on near that level. Maybe they could start letting fans move boulders and chop down trees for that golfer, too, just to help him out.


Don't be stupid. Sergio is never going to win a major.
 
2012-04-19 10:12:51 PM  

hbk72777: John Rocker was basically run out of baseball because of mean words.

Tiger Woods destroyed lives of his wife and children. He has no where near the level of vilification


Destroyed? Well f*ck me running. If a few hundred million bucks and kids that are too young to remember all the events that transpired is "destroying" their lives, I'm sure a LOT of people wish their lives were destroyed. Hell, she probably knew what he was doing all along, and was accepting enough until the media firestorm.

Incidentally, the reason Rocker was run out of baseball had nothing to do with being a dickbag. In fact, Tiger was out of golf in part due to his family troubles longer than Rocker was suspended for those mean words. But don't let history stand in the way of a good story.
 
2012-04-19 11:00:41 PM  

IAmRight: Maybe a gay guy will do really well and they can pump the everloving sh*t out of that story, since most of the early intrigue with Woods was skin-color based.


When he won his first masters, sure. Then later on it was because he was simply way, way better than anyone else. he had a couple of years where the golf rankings stats had a further spread between #1 and #2 than between #2 and #150.

I dunno, there's the potential to pull in the dollars even more than he did if someone worth a sh*t as a personality were to succeed on near that level.


For some nice guys, sure. Every now and then there's a peyton manning nice guy who can move some product. But for every one of them there's a Jordan or Iverson. Doesn't matter if you are a giant dick. If you win a lot you get endorsements. I don;t think personality plays into it that much.
 
2012-04-20 09:52:44 AM  

JohnBigBootay: If you win a lot you get endorsements.


Hypothetically someone could be good at sports AND be a good person, though. Then it will be nice.

Gonna be tough when they have people hanging on their nuts telling them how awesome they are every day from age 2 on.

/remembering what club you hit on your second stroke on Hole 16 of Round 3 of a tournament a year later is friggin' creepy
//I dunno, the guy just never seemed to have any charisma to me. It's one of those "I just don't see what other people see in that person" situations.
 
Displayed 40 of 40 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report