Feinstein’s Odd Words

I wrote earlier that I had to turn off Morning Drive because they discussed nothing other than Woods.  There was a 5-minute discussion about Tiger smiling.  I’m not kidding.  So, later, when Live From the Range started, I flipped back to Golf Channel.  As I did so I laughed, muttering to myself how long it would take until I heard “Tiger Woods.”

The very first thing I hear — the very first — come out of John Feinstein’s mouth: “It’s always going to be Tiger Woods.  If Rory wins the next five majors, there will still be more media attention on Tiger.”

First off, what an insult to Rory.  Second, what an insult to the golf media.  Third, what an insult to golf fans.

I mean, what exactly is Feinstein saying here?  “I don’t care if Rory wins the next five majors, I’m going to f—ing talk about Tiger Woods.  Screw all of you!”

Is he saying he is no longer a sports journalists, but a TMZ style “celebrity” chaser?

This is especially depressing to me, because I always considered Feinstein a true sports journalist.  So, why exactly would he say this?  Is he trying to empower faltering golf journalists who are starting to present Rory-Jordan as THE story in golf?  Does Feinstein have some kind of financial incentive to continue to push Woods, and is his comment intended to keep the other journos from jumping ship?

It seems like the Woods coverage is getting sillier and sillier.  I wonder if maybe the golf reporters are trying to convince the Tiger Only crowd that Woods is still relevant, and that they should stick around.  They’ve always said, No Tiger, No Watch.  That’s probably true, and the golf reporters know it.  Even the most devoted Woods backers know that Tiger 2000 is gone, and gone for good.  They probably have little interest in following a guy who didn’t live up to the projections.  They expected to be gloating over Woods having 25 majors by now.

They are not going to stick around to see Woods win fewer events than Jimmy Walker, who is, at this point, a better golfer, a healthier golfer, and a three-years-younger golfer.  Rory and Jordan?  Fuhgeddaboudit!

I think such comments as Feinstein’s are a plea not to get the Tiger Only crowd to hang around for a few more years, but a plea to get them to watch even another day.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Feinstein’s Odd Words

  1. BigTimeTimmyJim says:

    Follow me here. By talking incessantly about Tiger, the media folk are (potentially) getting the Tiger Only crowd to stick around. By sticking around, those fans are then exposed to the likes of Rory and Jordy. And maybe those fans develop a fandom for another player other than Tiger so that when he does finally disappear, those once Tiger Only fans don’t disappear with him because they’ve developed a liking of other players.

    • lannyh says:

      I’ve definitely thought about that, but they are very condescending toward the other players, so their message would be, “There are other players besides Tiger, but they all suck.”

      There could be some logical explanation, but as short-term oriented as companies like Comcast are, I’m not sure it goes any deeper than, “You better get more viewers or we’re going to have to lay some of you off.”

      I will say this, and it’s a bit off-topic: CBS is, imo, massively better than GC/NBC. I was not kidding when I said GC had a five-minute discussion of what Woods smiling meant. And basically their entire past two days have been a string of such segments.

      I was going to write this in an article, or maybe I already did, but I find myself unable to even open up Porter’s Tiger articles any more. Pretty much the only time I’ll open one is out of curiosity to see how many comments it attracted. I used to open them and make my little troll comments in response to his click-bait, trolling articles, but now, I mean, it’s all gone on so long, it’s just boringly repetitive.

      I noticed the past couple of days that the Google News topics list had started showing Woods instead of Jordan/Rory. Sometime this afternoon, Woods was gone and Rory was listed. Jordan stayed on the list for a couple of days as the Match Play got underway last week. My point is that in the past, no golfer other than Woods (or I suppose Mickelson) ever made those lists unless they made four holes-in-one in a round or murdered someone.

      I think the whole world is tired of it, though. The Tiger Tiger Yay Yay crowd is starting to look like 8-track tapes or something at this point. You know, I know Tanya Harding is. She’s probably the only skater I know. But should NBC make Olympics skating revolve around her because people like me have heard of her?

      I think the Woods thing is pretty much ending now unless he wins a major or POY. Even at that, it’s not going to have the legs the golf media seems to think it would. We’re talking Jack ’86/last hurrah stuff. And I am still wondering if after Woods is safely enshrined in the HOF, if any PED stuff will hit the fan.

      I think Woods is a pimple on the nose of golf, and the sooner he’s gone, the better off golf will be.

      Anyway, I didn’t mean to rant, and, yes, your line of reasoning certainly should be considered.

      • Anonymous says:

        “I think Woods is a pimple on the nose of golf, and the sooner he’s gone, the better off golf will be.”

        Amen to that, but it took so long to get to.

  2. lannyh says:

    Just saw an article in the Telegraph, a UK newspaper. The article was about Jordan Spieth and Rory. There was a photo of Woods with the caption, “Woods will also steal some of the limelight.”

    Contrast to Feinstein who says if Rory wins five straight majors, Tiger would still be the big media story. Well, Woods is already NOT the big media story outside of the U.S. Feinstein is saying, “We the American media are going to cram Woods down your throats even should Rory win five majors in a row.” When already, in other parts of the world, Woods is relegated to “stealing some of the limelight.” [I want to puke when I think of golf fans around the world getting better Spieth coverage that we Americans do. We are getting, “If Tiger smiles, I think there will be less stress, and he’ll shoot better scores and stay healthy and blah blah blah blah blah…”]

    This, to me, fits my little narrative that the American media is pretending Woods is relevant long-term in order to maintain Woods Loyalists short term. If the media says, “Woods only has a year or two more, to be honest,” they will lose fans NOW, not just after those two years expire. Woods fans want to think he’s still “chasing Jack.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s