Monday Thought

Afternoon Update:

Someone mentioned this morning that Golf Digest had a redesigned website.  I just now remembered to check it out, and what do I find, but a propaganda piece for Tiger Woods (or maybe it is just a Troll of Desperation):

TOP DRAW: 7 photos that prove Tigermania is still alive and well

Tiger Woods didn’t win the Wyndham Championship, but his mere presence reminded us he’s still golf’s biggest star — and it’s not even close

They then show some photos with a cheering gallery in the background.  Gee, I’m convinced.  Although I’m still a little confused: If Woods is so popular, how come his bag sponsor is MusclePharm (and Fuse Science before that)?

Question: If someone looked through photos of Jordan Spieth at this year’s John Deere, would they be able to find some where the galleries behind him were large and cheering?

Now, for comparison purposes, here’s one of Golf Digest’s photos showing why Woods is “golf’s biggest star — and it’s not even close.”  Followed by a photo of one of golf’s inferior losers:

tw1rm1Just keeping it real, folks.


Okay, I say this with no reservation whatsoever: I am elated that Tiger Woods is not in the FedEx Cup “playoffs.”

I will enjoy the tournaments vastly more with Woods not in them.

Maybe that sounds odd to you.  How could one player out of 125 make any difference?  Because the golf media totally distorts coverage when Woods is anywhere around.

Consider the following:

  1. You are watching a great golf tournament; a weather warning pops up on your screen obscuring a lot of the television screen.  You think, well, this is annoying, but it’s important to know about the severe weather headed my way.
  2. A weather warning pops up; it is for people in your viewing area, but nowhere near you.  You think, my gosh, that weather warning graphic is annoying, but I guess they have a responsibility to warn their entire viewing area.
  3. A weather warning pops up; it is for people three states and 500 miles away.  You think, Okay, this weather graphic is really annoying, and I don’t understand why they are showing it during the golf tournament.
  4. A weather warning pops up; it is for people in Russia.  You think, My gosh, but this is annoying.  There is no reason in the world for them to be showing this weather warning graphic during the golf tournament.  All it does is lower viewer enjoyment.
  5. You think about this.  You conclude those responsible for the broadcast have decided: Screw the golf audience; more people in the general population are interested in severe weather, even when that weather is nowhere near them.  The golf viewers will still watch (trying to pick out the golf ball behind the weather warning, with its radar in motion).  So let’s turn out golf broadcasts into the Weather Channel.
  6. The golf media makes up nonsense reasons to explain why weather coverage is necessary during golf coverage.  Golf would die if we didn’t obsess over Russian weather.  Russian weather is why there is prize money in golf.  Look at all the people chatting online about Russian weather!
  7. Charlie Rymer and Gary Williams tells us over and over that there is more of a buzz when there is a Russian Typhoon.  They open Morning Drive with a discussion of where a storm may be brewing during the U.S. Open.  They hope it happens because, love bad weather or hate it, it brings in marginal fans.  Yeah, no denying, Russian typhoons grow the game of golf.  Paige and Hack and Cara all nod in agreement, then hold up over/under cards predicting the strength of a hurricane in the Atlantic.
  8. People wanting to watch golf will complain.  Weather fans will say things like, “The ratings are higher with weather.  Weather moves the needle.”  They don’t give a damn about golf; they want their weather coverage, don’t give a damn about golf, and, frankly, they kind of get their jollies by forcing the weather on people who want to watch golf.
  9. Animosity develops between golf fans and weather fans; some go online to CBS Sports and write, “Kyle, your Masters headline says nothing about the tournament.  It says, ‘Russian Typhoon Brewing.'”  Others respond, “Face it.  No one cares about James Hahn and Bo Van Pelt.  There is a typhoon brewing in Russia.”  And, “If the golf media doesn’t cover the weather, I don’t watch or read.”  And, “If you don’t care about Russian weather, you are hateful for not caring about those Russians at risk.”  Others chime in that people are voting the wrong way in political elections, and it shows in their views on golf vs. weather.  Kyle gets a lot of comments and views.

Somewhere, golf coverage died.  It turned into weather coverage.  Of course, if you point this out, you are a “hater.”

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Monday Thought

  1. JoseyWales says:

    Lanny… here’s a great article about the golf media’s latest victim of really sh*tty coverage: Brooks Koepka.

    • lannyh says:

      Thanks. I’ll give it a read.

    • Ken says:

      Good piece. Koepka sure seems like a future/current star. He’ll apparently totally shock CBS when he wins again.

    • Sports-realist. says:

      ……..We knew going into last week, that it was going to be terrible coverage….The media only wanted to talk and cover ONE golfer, which they did…..
      ……..Four missed cuts in 12 tournaments, while just making the cut in at least two other events…
      ……..The media proves itself to be ultimately racist against white golfers, as they don’t really care about Jordan Spieth, so why would they care about Koepka……
      ……..The media stated that if Eldrick were to win the po-punk classic yesterday, that would somehow supersede what Spieth accomplished this year? That’s about the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard, YET that is what the CULT channel was saying..
      ……..Spieth has EXCEEDED what Eldrick accomplished in 1997, yet Eldrick winning this po-dunker classic would have exceeded what Spieth did?
      ……..It boggles the mind at the reverse racism and hypocrisy going on here……
      ……..I’ve said this before, but SOME careers will go almost UNKNOWN until Eldrick is retired or dead…..Obviously Spieth needed to win more than TWO Majors this year to equal the Wyndham Classic…….What if Spieth had won THREE majors this year….Would THREE Majors in one season have been a bigger story than the Wyndham?

      • lannyh says:

        I don’t really think there is any “racism against white golfers,” but more and more I do think the Woods coverage is driven by some kind of push to be politically correct. Look at the difference between the coverage of the private lives of Tiger Woods, John Daly, and Robert Allenby. Two are laughing-stock, walking punch lines. The other’s world-famous sex scandal was “his auto accident.”

        Again, the Serena comparison… If the week after Serena won Wimbledon, if Caroline Wozniacki was in the finals of the Podunk Classic, would the sports media claim her winning would be the biggest story of the year because of “all she’s been through with the cancelled wedding and everything”?

      • Sports-realist. says:

        ………Put it another way, if you were to ask the golf channel folks about the 1997 Golf season, they would describe it as absolutely amazing, magical, untouchable, win for the ages, bla, bla, bla…….
        ……..But then ask them about this 2015 season for Spieth, and they are willing to sell it down the river for the 4th weakest tournament on the golf calendar…
        …….Again, same age, Spieth with a better result, but suddenly this season meant NOTHING to them…..
        …….Actually, a pretty good way to CORNER a Eldrick fan in an argument, to show their hypocrisy….

      • lannyh says:

        Exactly! They never would have clung to Greg Norman or Nick Faldo in 1998 at the expense of Woods. They were anxious to move onto the Next Big Thing. “After all he’s been through, with the meltdown at the Masters, wouldn’t Norman winning the Wyndham be the biggest story in golf?”

      • Sports-realist. says:

        ……Well it’s white people being overtly racist against other whites, all in the name of this absurd thing called PC..It’s not racism in the sense that we are using seperate bathrooms…..Perhaps it’s corporate racism or PC racism, but it’s there…..
        …..Comparing the 1997 to the 2015 season is very comparable, except Spieth’s is better, yet it’s sold down the river…..I find that very telling….
        …,.Both your tennis and Daly/Allenby vs Woods comparisons are perfect examples of the NEW racism vs whites in the media, by other whites…..What whites do is ALLOWED to be ridiculed and made fun of and embarrassed, but somehow not blacks…..
        ……It’s PC racism though…It’s like internet terrorism vs actual terrorism….

      • lannyh says:

        I think I largely agree with you, but I don’t think the term “racism against whites” fits. I suppose there are elements of “reverse racism” in the PC movement, but I don’t think the discussion moves forward when people in opposition point fingers and shout, “You’re racist!” “No, YOU are racist!”

        I think it’s possible that one consideration in the coverage is that some of the organizations fear they’ll be labeled racist just for logical coverage of Woods. For example, I honestly don’t recall, but I bet you will find at least some stray calls of “Racist!” when Chamblee gave Woods an “F” a couple of years ago.

        So they trash John Daly and Allenby, but it’s hands-off for Woods. I don’t think that is “racism,” but rather fear of PC backlash.

  2. Ken says:

    Okay after reading your late comments from Sunday I just discovered how dense I can be. I’ve read a lot of racist stuff about Woods. But I’ve read “Tigger” hundreds of times and never connected it the word beginning with “N”. I just thought people were writing “Tigger” as a form of Tiger. Visions of the tiger from Winnie the Pooh were in my head. Maybe I’m just stupid. Although really in the context of most posts that I’ve seen using “Tigger”, you would not say that the bulk of them were racist in tone.

    • lannyh says:

      If they write anything overtly racist, it would be deleted. They found that “Tigger” was defensible by “Oh, I just meant that cute little animal in Winnie the Pooh.” But consider this: When is the last time you read a post with “Tigger” in it that was complimentary to Woods?

      It’s really not defensible, and I assume Golf Digest and Golf Channel and CBS allow it because they fear they’ll lose viewers/readers/commenters.

      • Ken says:

        I’ve seen it on many Yahoo board posts. Some positive but most negative. But really only a fraction of the negative posts using it are negative in a racist way. Mostly I think people think they’re being cute in some way.

      • lannyh says:

        Well, I’ll offer a two-year free subscription to Lanny H Golf to anyone who can find a single “Tigger” comment from a person complimenting Woods.

        And they all must predate today, as I don’t want anyone writing one then pointing to it!

      • Sports-realist. says:

        Does that 2 year subscription come with the lannyh family swimsuit edition?

      • lannyh says:

        No. So you are safe to enter the contest.

  3. JoseyWales says:

    I never assoc. “Tigger” with the “N” word…I always thought it was just a nickname used in humor.

    • Sports-realist. says:

      Yeah, I’m sure it’s a mixed bag….Some were doing it, trying to be overtly racism, some were doing it with affection, and some were doing it because they can’t spell…..

  4. JoseyWales says:

    Golf (Payola) just unveiled their brand new website with a notable change…NO READER COMMENTS! Get ready for some new readers, Lanny.

    • lannyh says:

      Interesting! Wow!

      I like comments. First, it’s fun to comment even if you are just trolling (like I often do at CBS), but, second, you get a feel for the opinions in the real world.

      Some of these websites new designs are so awful I couldn’t read them even if I wanted. In this case, I never read their site before (it was unreadable), so maybe this will be an improvement.

      Actually, I never go to a golf website other than CBS, and Shack’s once in a blue moon. I usually only go via a Google News search.

      That’s interesting, though. Is that the new thing, going comment free? Mr. Elling’s new website doesn’t allow comments wither. Maybe they want to push people toward Twitter?

    • lannyh says:

      You remind me: Today is golf/si’s Tour Confidential day. I think I’ll mosey over there; it will be funny to see all the writers who last week were Tiger Tiger Tiger now asking, ignoring their own roles in the madness, “When will the media stop covering Woods so much”?

      • benchrat says:

        Sens is the only sane one in the bunch. At least for today.

      • lannyh says:

        I noticed that, too! I’ve definitely criticized Sens in the past (the $15 Billion Dollar Man), but his reply today about his eyes getting tired of squinting through rose-colored glasses was a welcome change of pace from the others.

  5. Sports-realist. says:

    I really, really, really want Spieth to win a few of these events and win the Fed Ex……Ofcourse it’s not as big as winning the Wyndham, but….

  6. Anonymous says:

    Their primes were before my time but when did rational thinking people of the day finally come to the conclusion that Snead, Hogan, Palmer, Nicklaus, etc. were no longer going to win golf tournaments?

    • Ken says:

      Palmer won consisently until he was 43 though the majors were done at 34. His dropoff then was pretty severe though he did win a couple of times in Europe when he was almost 46. Any time he shot a decent round, like a 68 to start the Masters at 53 or at the PGA when he was 59, the hope sprang up with fans and writers but nothing like with Woods. Palmer was so overshadowed by Nicklaus by the late 60s that his decline didn’t leave a big hole in golf.

      Jack gradually faded after he turned 39. He only won five more times, including the Masters at 46. But from the time Jack was 35, he really wasn’t the best player in golf anymore. Watson had supplanted him. So like with Palmer, golf wasn’t lacking a top dog.

      Woods was unchallenged at the top for a long time. He didn’t have the slow fade as someone else emerged. I think his drastic fast decline with no immediate successor somewhat led to the media obsession. The rise of Rory and Jordan should end that, in a more rational world. Give it time.

      • Ken says:

        Too young to remember much of Snead. He only won a handful of times after 45, but he stayed competitive forever. Won his last at nearly 53. His record from age 58 until he was 63 (1975) was pretty amazing. Contended at the PGA three straight years at ages 60-62. Rarely missed cuts playing 10-12 times a year and had a lot of top 10s. When I was a kid in the 70s, you didn’t hear a lot about him because of Jack, Trevino, Miller, etc. He had long been replaced and really didn’t get the attention his amazing play deserved, not that I remember anyway.

      • Sports-realist. says:

        Ben Hogan had that car accident along with WW2, otherwise, he would probably have won around 20 Majors and 90 wins(maybe more)….Heck, the main reason he doesn’t have the official “GRAND SLAM” is because back then, the stupid schedule had the two majors OVERLAP during the same week……

      • Ken says:

        The British Open had really declined in mid-century. The prize money too poor to attract much interest around the world and the course conditions had declined after WWII. All foreign players had to play a qualifying tournament shortly before the British Open, so that did make competing in both was usually impossible. You’re right about the overlap in ’53. The PGA ended on July 7, the British Open began on July 6. Most travel back then was by ship, which took typically about five days to cross the Atlantic so even without an overlap it was very difficult to compete in both.

        Hard to say how much Hogan’s accident cost him. He was 36 when that happened and came back to win the US Open the very next year. After winning the three majors in 1953 when he turned 41, he won only one event after that, in 1959 (he played until 1970). He was something of a late bloomer, not really winning regularly until he was nearly 30; his first major came when he was 34 in 1946. He did lose two years, 1943-1945, to the war (as did Snead). So I think it’s doubtful that he’d have gotten to 20 majors, particularly competing against Snead and Nelson.

      • lannyh says:

        Interesting in all this “Tiger chasing Snead” talk, Snead’s two years serving in the military is not mentioned.

    • lannyh says:

      The difference is that those guys were not covered as THE story when they were in their twilight years. This past week, Woods WAS a big story on the weekend. However, he was NOT a story the week before and the week after. And the other 50 weeks of the year.

      The day after Woods won the Masters in 1997, the next day’s lead was not, “Jack, What’s Wrong With Him?”

  7. benchrat says:

    I really enjoy reading the blog Lanny, since I’ve hated the way tournaments were covered for years, for all the reasons you and many here have mentioned many times. And the sole person that has been over the top covered until now has been Woods. No question. I don’t love him or hate him, but i hate watching ‘All Woods All The Time Golf’, because of the gaudy infatuation with him, and the lack of coverage others get. And I can’t help but wonder if the high school crush media will eventually move on when it becomes clear to them that Woods is no longer moving their needle.
    I’ve liked watching some of the younger and relatively new players for a handful of years now such as Snedeker, Fowler, Stenson and Oosthuizen to mention a few, but none more than Day since he came up so close at the masters the year Schwartzel won it. I kept pulling for the guy to win as a lot of others did as well, and it was great to see him finally break through. Thing is, there are a lot of good young golfers with great stories and great potential. Include Spieth and McIlroy too, but a lot of others as well.
    This current group of lazy, inept, golf bobble-heads have cut their teeth in the trade having the golden goose needle mover, and once Woods is no longer there for them, I think they will decide one of these, such as Spieth is the new IT, and absolutely ruin the enjoyment of watching golf again for the same reasons, just with another idol. I just don’t see them resuming watchable coverage once Woods is gone.

    tldr: Woods is the first, but there will be someone else. Soon. Who will be the next uber-hated spectacle created by the golf media? Woe is me.

    • lannyh says:

      It could happen, but I don’t expect it. They’ll cover Spieth and Rory a little more, but let them have a bad year, and they will fade into the background. With Woods, we’ve been told many times, “His not playing poorly is just as fascinating to watch as when he played well.”

      Golf Channel people are on record as saying, “If Woods doesn’t win for another ten years, he’ll still be the biggest story in golf.” I’ve documented that here somewhere.

      And these is absolutely no way you’ll hear, if Jordan Spieth goes seven majorless years (and suffers an image-ruining scandal) and 19-year-old Willie Wedge wins two majors, there is no way you’ll heard, “If Jordan wins the Wyndham, that will be a bigger story than little Willie Wedge setting a record for youngest to win two majors.”

    • Bird says:

      Golf television’s “feature groups” is lazy coverage, that’s all. Forget all the conspiracies.

  8. Ken says:

    The couldn’t make up their minds on GC today. Once they said that Love “inspired Woods” and another time said that Woods “inspired Love” in their practice rounds together earlier in the week.

    How about they both played practice rounds and they both wanted to win the tournament. One of them did. It had nothing to do with the other.

    • Sports-realist. says:

      ……Yeah this ‘INSPIRED’ stuff is some of the LAMEST bunch of horse dung I’ve heard in a long, long time……
      …..So Davis Love is sitting there sulking, then Boy Scout Eldrick comes up to him and says ‘hey Davis, why not try and win’….Then Davis looks to the heavens, and the skies open up, and…..I mean cmon…It’s beyond poor journalism, and ofcourse it’s just some LAME way of keeping their boy in the headlines….
      …….This is why we KNOW the announcers are allowing themselves to look foolish and to SPEW this RIGGED announcing……Would you, as an Ian Baker Finch or Peter Kostis, REALLY come up with the idea that ELDRICK is the reason that Davis Love FINALLY decided to win?
      …..So now the secret to winning is being in the PRACTICE ROUNDS with Eldrick and listening to his MOTIVATIONAL SPEECH…What is he now Chris Farley? Does he live in a van down by the river?

      • Sports-realist. says:

        Watched some of the replay, and the announcer fall back on their same tired nostalgia of ‘how tough it is to play with Tiger’…….Scott Brown out played Eldrick, but it seems like ALOT of people have been outplaying Eldrick for a while now, in the same group….
        …..For Spieth to be 8-0-1 against Eldrick in where they are playing together, that had to take a few years for that record… Yet they keep trying to tell us how it’s still 15 years ago, but golf REALITY has moved on, just the tired, old, lame announcers and networks haven’t……

      • lannyh says:

        “same tired nostalgia” — that perfectly sums up the broadcasts.

  9. Bird says:

    For some, a cause for celebration this weekend, when Americans won PGAT and Champions events. Not to mention the US Men’s Amateur. LPGA is once again omitted from such celebration.

  10. JoseyWales says:

    Here is the lead story today on Morning Drive…”What’s next for Tiger? Will he play in more new events?”
    I mean…really?…that is who they are…that is the best they can do…pathetic show…pathetic format…pathetic commentators…it is truly an insult…would rather watch SuperBetaProstate infomercials. Golf Channel really, really, sux.

    • lannyh says:

      Yup. It’s horrid. DLIII, third oldest guy to ever win PGA Tour event, a guy in same “win or go home” situation as Woods, was almost ignored.

      It’s insulting, insulting, insulting to every other player. Did you hear Williams’s comment about “weak field” being a “euphemism.” I’m going to write about that in the morning. That was idiotic on multiple levels.

    • Sports-realist. says:

      The show belongs on one of those ‘Farm Report’ channels

  11. Bird says:

    DL3 WITB–TaylorMade, Mizuno, PING, Titleist.

  12. Bird says:

    “If Woods is so popular, how come his bag sponsor is MusclePharm (and Fuse Science before that)?”

    True, and same could be said for PGAT. The Fortune 500s aren’t clamoring for sponsorships anymore, with shareholders demanding leaner and meaner, and more integrity. Although the latter oft goes wanting in business.

    Re Old Tiger Woods, the best scenario for him these days seems to be starting strong, and finishing lame? Not exactly a quarterly analogy companies want.

    • lannyh says:

      True, but there are still guys like Jordan Spieth who are integral to a company’s image like Under Armour. He’s been nothing but good for them, and them for him. So for Golf Digest to say (troll) that Woods is game’s biggest star and it’s not even close is really asinine when one looks at Spieth and UA.

      • Bird says:

        Don’t build young Spieth up too high. No one’s perfect. He and other squeaky cleans may be tempted to go astray somewhere down the line.
        The stink left by Tiger and Dusty will always be present, and serve as reminders to corporations that, “These Guys Are Good And Bad”.

  13. Bird says:

    PGAT sponsor Wyndham loses judgment. You may want to think twice before staying at one of their hotels. They seem to have a disregard for their customers personal data.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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