On the scale of respectability, Brandel Chamblee is now one step above a crack whore.
This has gotten to the point of awkwardness. Brandel Chamblee has nothing left to say, yet he continues to collect a hefty paycheck for saying it.
As viewers and readers, are we supposed to take Chamblee seriously? Or, are we supposed to chuckle because we’re in on the joke and recognize Chamblee as an overpaid version of a common Internet troll? Or, are we supposed to pridefully say, “It’s simple commerce; Chamblee says what Golf Channel’s advertisers and industry partners tell him to say”?
I don’t know the answer, but it can’t possibly be to take him seriously.
For the better part of the past year, Chamblee told us (“Is Logic Extinct?“) over and over that Tiger Woods needed to go back to the Harmon or Haney swing. However, Chamblee ignored the fact that Woods publicly stated he made his latest change because the Harmon/Haney swings were no longer viable due to injury concerns. Chamblee’s oversight is tantamount to a mathematician overlooking the matter of two plus two equaling four.
Or maybe he was just trolling. Certainly, last year when Chamblee gave Woods an “F” for on-course cheating, his quick reversal made the whole episode look like a publicity stunt.
Which brings us to Chamblee’s latest offering, the column he posted yesterday at GolfChannel.com. Here’s the final paragraph, Chamblee’s “money shot”:
Who should be his [Woods’s] next coach is likely the difference between him breaking Jack’s major record or not and because of what he means to golf, that decision means a lot to the game. This is all precisely why I hope his next teacher’s name is Tiger.
Okay, when it comes to propaganda, recall this: the propaganda is in the assumptions, not in what is expressly stated. So, toss aside the idea that Woods should be his own coach. Maybe that’s a good idea, maybe it’s a bad idea, maybe it doesn’t matter. Whatever the case, it’s of no concern to the propaganda Chamblee is pushing.
Let’s work backward on Chamblee’s claim:
- Woods’s “decision” is vitally important and “means a lot to the game.”
- This is because of what “[Woods] means to golf.”
- He means so much to golf because he might break “Jack’s major record.”
- Woods’s “decision” will “likely” determine whether he breaks Jack’s record.
Alright, how about a reality check? The odds for Woods breaking Nicklaus’s record are 25-1. The odds for Rory breaking Nicklaus’s recard are 6-1. Those odds are from this USA Today story which also points out that “McIlroy winning 14 more majors is four-times as likely as Tiger winning four more majors.”
When it comes to breaking Jack’s record, the world has moved on, but the Golf Channel refuses to do so. They are adamant about continuing their Only Tiger Matters bullshite coverage.
Rory is the story, but Golf Channel just can’t accept that, so they try to trick people into believing Woods catching Nicklaus is not only a possibility, but a “likelihood.”
Well, as long as Woods becomes his own coach, mind you.
Think it through. The world certainly does not expect Woods to catch Jack, so if this Big Important coaching decision “likely” determines whether Woods will or will not catch Jack, it means, if he self-coaches, he will “likely” catch Jack. Most of the world doesn’t think the decision makes a damn bit of difference as Woods is old and injury-prone and can’t be expected to catch Nicklaus regardless of what he does.
I didn’t do a good job of explaining, but the bottom line is that Chamblee has implicitly stated if Woods self-coaches, he will “likely” break Nicklaus’s record. Which is why I say Chamblee has reached a new low. On the scale of respectability, Brandel Chamblee is now one step above a crack whore.
I am sure you see why the Golf Channel wants to sell this nonsense. It allows them to follow another Woods “story” to the exclusion of legitimate golf coverage. Consider: Woods says “hi” to David Ledbetter on the range; Golf Channel can drop all coverage of that week’s tournament to obsess over what that “hi” might mean. They can trot out Chamblee, who will say if Woods hires Ledbetter, he won’t break Jack’s record, but that he “likely” will if he self-coaches. Gosh, gee, this is important because it has such a bearing on that Jack Nicklaus record thing and all.
Again, the man most likely — to use Chamblee’s word — to break Jack’s record is not Tiger Woods, but rather Rory McIlroy. That is a very inconvenient truth for the Golf Channel.