Fifteen years ago, after playing his first practice round prior to the 1995 U.S. Open, Lee Janzen sat in the locker room at Shinnecock and said this: “They ought to forget all the other golf courses and just rotate this event between here and Pebble Beach. Those other places are nice, but they just can’t compare to these two.”
Janzen had already won one U.S. Open-at Baltusrol—at that point and would go on to win a second one three years later at The Olympic Club. He knows most of the Open courses that have been in the rota in the last 20 years. His point is well-taken: There’s just nothing like Pebble Beach and Shinnecock isn’t far behind. Personally, I would throw Pinehurst in every so often and perhaps Bethpage Black—but the latter no doubt reflects personal bias.
Of course that isn’t going to happen. The USGA is committed to moving the national championship around the country and to trying to find new venues. That’s why it is going to Chambers Bay outside Seattle in 2015 and last week announced it will be going to another new course, Erin Hills (in Wisconsin) in 2017. Right now, negotiations are continuing to try to go back to Shinnecock in 2018—the membership is apparently hard-balling negotiations—wanting a different (read, far more lucrative) deal than the USGA gives other places because, well, it’s Shinnecock. Stay tuned on that one.
If the USGA makes a deal with Shinnecock, that would mean Janzen would get his wish for two years (problem being he’s unlikely to still be playing Opens at that stage since he’ll be 54) since that would mean Shinnecock in 2018 and Pebble Beach in 2019.
I say all this as a way to getting to the headline from this past week: there’s nothing like an Open at Pebble Beach. The USGA should, at the very least, go there every five years the way The R+A goes to St. Andrews every five years. Even if it means I have to get on an airplane.
There were, as always, some complaints about the golf course—notably the greens, especially after Tiger Woods got finished whining on Thursday. Complaints from the players are as much a part of The Open as narrow fairways and fast greens. There will also be some who will say, ‘who the hell is Graeme McDowell and what is he doing in the same sentence as Jack Nicklaus, Tom Watson, Tom Kite and Tiger Woods?’—the four previous winners of Opens at Pebble Beach.
Look, the stars don’t always win. Woods, Phil Mickelson and Ernie Els all had golden chances to win on Sunday and didn’t get it done. McDowell did. So too did Gregory Havret, the Frenchman who finished second. To show you how much I know I looked at the leaderboard on Saturday night and saw six names: Dustin Johnson, McDowell, Woods, Havret, Mickelson and Els and thought this: one of four guys is going to win this thing: Johnson, Woods, Mickelson or Els. So, McDowell and Havret beat all four of them. Shows you how much I know.
Of course I suspect I wasn’t alone and that’s comforting. Ironically, I walked with McDowell and got to see him up close on Thursday but it had nothing to do with any special golf acumen or ability to see the future. He was paired with Shaun Micheel and Rocco Mediate and I wanted to watch THEM play so, by accident, I ended up seeing McDowell. I’ll say this: I was impressed. He struggled at the start but stayed calm and pieced together an even par round that went un-noticed because everyone was screaming for Rocco and because Micheel ended up as one of the leaders that day after shooting 69. McDowell, who I’d never met, was also very friendly—even early on when he wasn’t playing well. I liked him.
His life is completely different now because he’s a major champion. As the first European winner in 40 years, he’s going to be a very wealthy man. Havret’s life will also be different because he’s an Open runner-up, but as I can tell you from my experience dealing with major winners and runners-up in, ‘Moment of Glory,’ the gulf between first and second is wider than The Atlantic Ocean.
Naturally, much of the talk today is going to be about Tiger Woods. The question that will be asked is this: Is he back? In my opinion—yes, he is. He was very much the old Tiger this week, on and off the golf course. He hit the ball far better than he has hit it all year and on the back nine Saturday it was all there again: putts going in from all over, the remarkable second shot on 18, the fist-pumps, the crowds roaring for him (which hadn’t happened at all before then) and that game-face of his, firmly in place as the thought crossed his mind that he could win another major.
It was electric stuff. The fact that he didn’t close the deal on Sunday changes nothing. He’s never come from behind to win a major on Sunday before so it wasn’t stunning that he didn’t do it on this Sunday. It is also difficult for ANYONE to back up a great round with another one the next day. Think about the three 66’s shot this week: Mickelson shot 66 on Friday; 73 on Saturday; Woods went from 66 to 75 and Johnson went from 66 to (gasp) 82.
He was also back to being totally-Tiger in his behavior. On the course there were the looks to the sky, the eye-rolling, the occasional slammed club when things didn’t go exactly as they were supposed to go. Off the course, more of the same. On Tuesday someone asked him a very carefully couched question about the fact that ANYONE dealing with personal troubles can find his job more difficult and he snapped, “it’s none of your business.” So much for getting back to Buddism. On Thursday he acted as if he had just discovered that the greens at Pebble Beach were poa annua and might get bouncy in the afternoon.
He said no one had been able to putt on them in the afternoon even though the three guys leading the golf tournament had played in the afternoon. Don’t bother Tiger with the facts. What’s more, the greens in 2010 were MUCH better than the greens were in 2000 when Tiger made every putt you could possibly make on them en route to his astonishing 15-shot victory. What wasn’t better was TIGER, not the greens. Or, to quote Nick Faldo, who was once asked if his problem was his putter: “No, the problem wasn’t the putter, it was the puttee.”
It wasn’t the greens either. Sure they bounced—this just in, poa bounces. On Saturday, after USGA executive director David Fay had pointed out that both Woods and Mickelson had used the word, ‘awful,’ in talking about their putting Thursday: one said the greens were awful; the other (Mickelson) said HE was awful, Woods was given a chance to say, ‘hey, I was frustrated, I didn’t make a birdie all day.’ Instead, looking away from the questioner as he always does to show his disdain, he said, “A lot of guys thought the greens were awful. I was just the only one who said it.”
Actually, a lot of guys thought Tiger was acting like a big baby.
Then on Sunday, Tiger threw Steve Williams under the bus, blaming him for several bad decisions. Look, no one likes seeing Stevie with tire tracks on his face more than me, but Tiger lost because Tiger lost. Period. Still, my guess is he will have a great chance at St. Andrews where he can keep the driver in the bag almost the entire week.
His whining brings me back to Tom Watson, whose emotional final Open at Pebble is something I will remember for a long, long time—especially the tears he shed without hesitation on the 18th green on Sunday. I know he was thinking about how cool it was to have his son Michael walking next to him at that moment; of all the memories he has of the golf course; of the ’82 Open and of Bruce Edwards.
Through my own tears I thought about Bruce telling me one reason he loved working for Watson was because he never blamed anyone but himself when things went wrong. Which is one more thing—among many—that Eldrick T. Woods might be able to learn from Thomas Sturges Watson.
-------
John recently appeared on The Jim Rome Show (www.jimrome.com) to discuss 'Moment of Glory.' Click here to download, or listen in the player below:
------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and in bookstores nationwide. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
Showing posts with label Phil Mickelson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Phil Mickelson. Show all posts
Monday, June 21, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
To Paul (and others): after today, I will do my best to not write about Tiger anytime soon
On Saturday night I went to dinner with a group that included Paul Goydos, who people on the golf tour half-jokingly refer to as, “my guy,” because we’ve been friends since 1993 and because I openly root for him to play well. In fact, I felt a little bit guilty on Sunday when he played an awful final round at The Players Championship to drop from a tie for 15th to a tie for 52nd. In the vernacular of golfers, he spent a lot of cash on Sunday.
I like Paul because he’s smart and opinionated and funny and never afraid to share his opinions. On Saturday, as is always the case when people who care about golf get together, the subject turned inevitably to Tiger Woods.
“You write about him every day,” Paul said—referring to this blog and, as always, exaggerating, if only a little bit. “You just can’t resist.”
I told him he was right—and wrong. It isn’t so much that I can’t resist, it’s that the guy simply can’t stay out of the news these days. He’s a train wreck right now that keeps barreling through barriers day after day.
If there was ever a weekend when Woods should have been an after thought, it was this past one. He did NOT miss the cut at The Players so there was no reason for people to go off on tangents about the fact that he had missed consecutive cuts for the first time in his career. He did NOT make any kind of a move on the leaders on Saturday (Phil Mickelson did). He played early, finished bogey-bogey to shoot a one-under-par 71 and was tied for 39th place.
The only thing that even approached a news-making moment came as he was walking into the scoring cabin after finishing his round. Mickelson was standing outside signing autographs when a little boy, no more than 7 or 8-years-old, actually began heckling Tiger, saying something like, “You can forget about being number one Tiger, it’s over!”
Woods kept walking. Mickelson leaned down to the youngster and said, “hey come on, be polite.”
Sunday should have been a quick and easy day for Woods: play early (10:30 tee time) finish back in the pack and head for his plane to fly to Philadelphia for a media day scheduled Monday to promote The AT+T Invitational NOT hosted by Tiger Woods (according to a PGA Tour edict) but still benefiting his foundation and still being run by his employees. (A subject for another day).
Except it didn’t turn out that way. After two early bogeys and after missing the green at the 7th hole, Woods shook hands with fellow competitor Jason Bohn and told officials he was withdrawing. His neck hurt. Bohn, who has had serious back and neck problems in his career, said later he could see Woods was in pain.
And so, the last day of The Players Championship became NOT about eventual winner Tim Clark or runner-up Robert Allenby or Mickelson or anyone else in the field. It became about the pain in Tiger Woods’ neck. When Tiger’s neck hurts, the golf world needs therapy.
No sane person would question Woods’ pain threshold. He won the United States Open in 2008 playing on a broken leg. He’s had all sorts of physical problems throughout his career and played through them. Here’s what you do question: On Friday, after a desultory 71 left him well back in the pack, someone asked Woods how his knee felt. “Knee’s good,” he answered. Asked if he had any physical issues at all, Woods said: “No. Zero. Absolutely 100 percent.”
On Sunday, when Woods was asked by a small gaggle of reporters in the locker room what had happened on the golf course his first answer—helpful as always—was, “I withdrew.”
When he finally elaborated, he said his neck hurt; that he might have a bulging disc, that he’d been playing in pain for, “quite a while,” and that the neck problem had started before The Masters. Check me if I’m wrong on this: Is that the same as, “zero, absolutely, 100 percent?”
There are two issues here: the first is the fact that Woods and his IMG/Tiger Woods Inc. spin doctors simply refuse to give straight answers to straight questions. Is golf now hockey? Is Woods afraid that Mickelson will check him into a tree if he thinks his neck is sore? Maybe Woods should have told people Sunday he has “an upper body injury.”
If he was hurt before The Masters why did he play The Masters? If the pain was getting worse, why continue in a tournament that really means nothing to him? Neck injuries are a serious deal. They can ruin a golfer’s career (Jerry Pate comes to mind). Why mess with it at all if there was ANY kind of pain? Let’s not go down the path of, “he wanted to finish what he started,” because there isn’t a soul alive who is going to blame a player—especially one who is injury-prone to begin with—for being careful about an injury like this one.
If Woods would just answer direct questions directly—no one is sure to this moment whether Hank Haney is fired or not fired, his denial was a non-denial denial earlier in the week; no one knows if the clubs on e-bay were his or not although every equipment rep in golf swears that the ex-Titleist rep who put them up for sale is telling the truth—we all wouldn’t be left to speculate on what this means or what that means. Reading Tiger-talk right now is like plowing through a Latin test.
Of course there are far more important questions going on here. Does his neck need a massage or surgery? Should he even be trying to play golf right now? After Tiger had Left The Building on Sunday surrounded by EIGHT sheriff’s deputies plus his usual posse, I talked to a couple of players—no, Goydos wasn’t one of them—who have gone through a divorce.
Both made the same point: It took them at least a year, maybe longer, to even think about focusing on golf. The circumstances of the divorce don’t matter; nor does it matter who is to blame for it. “All you can think about,” said one, “is what’s going to happen to my children? Even Tiger Woods HAS to be affected by that.”
Maybe Woods’ neck will leave him no choice but to take an extended break from golf. Or maybe he’ll play more often than he planned—something he hinted at Friday while telling people he was 100 percent healthy—to get ready for the U.S. Open. But one thing one player said on Sunday resonates with me: “When he said at that first public appearance that it would be a while before he played golf I thought, ‘that’s the right play.’ I wish he’d stuck to that.”
Right now, Woods may be wishing that too. Of course he’s not about to tell us what he’s wishing or thinking anytime soon.
Paul, my apologies. I will try my best not to write about Tiger again anytime soon. But you might want to talk to HIM too. Believe me, I’d have rather have written about Dallas Braden’s perfect game today.
***
Several people asked last week for more details on, ‘Moment of Glory,” which will officially be published on Thursday. I will write about it later in the week but it is on sale online right now and at most bookstores. One person raised a question: How have most of my subjects reacted to the books I’ve written. I can honestly say that, with the notable exception of Bob Knight, I think just about everyone I’ve written about in detail has either been happy with what I’ve written or believed what I wrote was fair, even if some of the facts were painful. (The Navy kids reading about their 14-13 loss to Army in the final chapters of ‘A Civil War,’ come to mind). As for the response to a book that meant the most to me it would almost certainly be the note Tom Watson sent me after I had sent him an early copy of ‘Caddy For Life.’ (Which by the way will air as a documentary on Golf Channel on June 15th).
----------------------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
I like Paul because he’s smart and opinionated and funny and never afraid to share his opinions. On Saturday, as is always the case when people who care about golf get together, the subject turned inevitably to Tiger Woods.
“You write about him every day,” Paul said—referring to this blog and, as always, exaggerating, if only a little bit. “You just can’t resist.”
I told him he was right—and wrong. It isn’t so much that I can’t resist, it’s that the guy simply can’t stay out of the news these days. He’s a train wreck right now that keeps barreling through barriers day after day.
If there was ever a weekend when Woods should have been an after thought, it was this past one. He did NOT miss the cut at The Players so there was no reason for people to go off on tangents about the fact that he had missed consecutive cuts for the first time in his career. He did NOT make any kind of a move on the leaders on Saturday (Phil Mickelson did). He played early, finished bogey-bogey to shoot a one-under-par 71 and was tied for 39th place.
The only thing that even approached a news-making moment came as he was walking into the scoring cabin after finishing his round. Mickelson was standing outside signing autographs when a little boy, no more than 7 or 8-years-old, actually began heckling Tiger, saying something like, “You can forget about being number one Tiger, it’s over!”
Woods kept walking. Mickelson leaned down to the youngster and said, “hey come on, be polite.”
Sunday should have been a quick and easy day for Woods: play early (10:30 tee time) finish back in the pack and head for his plane to fly to Philadelphia for a media day scheduled Monday to promote The AT+T Invitational NOT hosted by Tiger Woods (according to a PGA Tour edict) but still benefiting his foundation and still being run by his employees. (A subject for another day).
Except it didn’t turn out that way. After two early bogeys and after missing the green at the 7th hole, Woods shook hands with fellow competitor Jason Bohn and told officials he was withdrawing. His neck hurt. Bohn, who has had serious back and neck problems in his career, said later he could see Woods was in pain.
And so, the last day of The Players Championship became NOT about eventual winner Tim Clark or runner-up Robert Allenby or Mickelson or anyone else in the field. It became about the pain in Tiger Woods’ neck. When Tiger’s neck hurts, the golf world needs therapy.
No sane person would question Woods’ pain threshold. He won the United States Open in 2008 playing on a broken leg. He’s had all sorts of physical problems throughout his career and played through them. Here’s what you do question: On Friday, after a desultory 71 left him well back in the pack, someone asked Woods how his knee felt. “Knee’s good,” he answered. Asked if he had any physical issues at all, Woods said: “No. Zero. Absolutely 100 percent.”
On Sunday, when Woods was asked by a small gaggle of reporters in the locker room what had happened on the golf course his first answer—helpful as always—was, “I withdrew.”
When he finally elaborated, he said his neck hurt; that he might have a bulging disc, that he’d been playing in pain for, “quite a while,” and that the neck problem had started before The Masters. Check me if I’m wrong on this: Is that the same as, “zero, absolutely, 100 percent?”
There are two issues here: the first is the fact that Woods and his IMG/Tiger Woods Inc. spin doctors simply refuse to give straight answers to straight questions. Is golf now hockey? Is Woods afraid that Mickelson will check him into a tree if he thinks his neck is sore? Maybe Woods should have told people Sunday he has “an upper body injury.”
If he was hurt before The Masters why did he play The Masters? If the pain was getting worse, why continue in a tournament that really means nothing to him? Neck injuries are a serious deal. They can ruin a golfer’s career (Jerry Pate comes to mind). Why mess with it at all if there was ANY kind of pain? Let’s not go down the path of, “he wanted to finish what he started,” because there isn’t a soul alive who is going to blame a player—especially one who is injury-prone to begin with—for being careful about an injury like this one.
If Woods would just answer direct questions directly—no one is sure to this moment whether Hank Haney is fired or not fired, his denial was a non-denial denial earlier in the week; no one knows if the clubs on e-bay were his or not although every equipment rep in golf swears that the ex-Titleist rep who put them up for sale is telling the truth—we all wouldn’t be left to speculate on what this means or what that means. Reading Tiger-talk right now is like plowing through a Latin test.
Of course there are far more important questions going on here. Does his neck need a massage or surgery? Should he even be trying to play golf right now? After Tiger had Left The Building on Sunday surrounded by EIGHT sheriff’s deputies plus his usual posse, I talked to a couple of players—no, Goydos wasn’t one of them—who have gone through a divorce.
Both made the same point: It took them at least a year, maybe longer, to even think about focusing on golf. The circumstances of the divorce don’t matter; nor does it matter who is to blame for it. “All you can think about,” said one, “is what’s going to happen to my children? Even Tiger Woods HAS to be affected by that.”
Maybe Woods’ neck will leave him no choice but to take an extended break from golf. Or maybe he’ll play more often than he planned—something he hinted at Friday while telling people he was 100 percent healthy—to get ready for the U.S. Open. But one thing one player said on Sunday resonates with me: “When he said at that first public appearance that it would be a while before he played golf I thought, ‘that’s the right play.’ I wish he’d stuck to that.”
Right now, Woods may be wishing that too. Of course he’s not about to tell us what he’s wishing or thinking anytime soon.
Paul, my apologies. I will try my best not to write about Tiger again anytime soon. But you might want to talk to HIM too. Believe me, I’d have rather have written about Dallas Braden’s perfect game today.
***
Several people asked last week for more details on, ‘Moment of Glory,” which will officially be published on Thursday. I will write about it later in the week but it is on sale online right now and at most bookstores. One person raised a question: How have most of my subjects reacted to the books I’ve written. I can honestly say that, with the notable exception of Bob Knight, I think just about everyone I’ve written about in detail has either been happy with what I’ve written or believed what I wrote was fair, even if some of the facts were painful. (The Navy kids reading about their 14-13 loss to Army in the final chapters of ‘A Civil War,’ come to mind). As for the response to a book that meant the most to me it would almost certainly be the note Tom Watson sent me after I had sent him an early copy of ‘Caddy For Life.’ (Which by the way will air as a documentary on Golf Channel on June 15th).
----------------------------------------------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
Friday, May 7, 2010
Tiger still draws all eyes, but to make quick judgment on his game right now is silly
There’s a golf tournament going on this week—an important one. It isn’t a major but it is one that players do care about; in part because they are playing for a lot of money; in part because a win carries a five year exemption on tour (as opposed to two years for other non-majors); in part because it is called “The Players,” and makes the tour a lot of money.
But I’m not sure anyone who isn’t a golf geek really cares that much. Oh sure, the whole world wants to know everything that Tiger Woods does all day, every day. But he could be playing in Charlotte, the way he was last week, or in Milwaukee—where he played his first tournament as a pro—and the same would be true.
There might be a little bit of extra interest in Phil Mickelson because, at least in theory, he has a chance to pass Woods as the world’s number one player this week. If Mickelson wins here and Woods finishes outside the top five, Mickelson will go to No. 1 in the world rankings.
Seriously though, if you aren’t a golf geek, do you really care about that? You might look up and take note of it, but if you stop and think about the fact that Woods has only played in three tournaments this year and his life is a complete mess, what’s the big deal? What Mickelson has done that’s truly important this year is win The Masters.
The next truly important moment in golf will come at Pebble Beach next month at the U.S. Open. If Woods doesn’t play well THERE, a place where he won the Open by fifteen shots 10 years ago, then it will be time to begin wondering if he’s going to make it back close to the level he was at as recently as two years ago when he won the Open while playing on one leg at Torrey Pines.
For now though, all the analysis of his swing and his mindset and his game and his life is kind of moot. As he correctly pointed out after shooting a two-under-par 70 on Thursday, he had only played six rounds of golf this year before arriving at The Players. So, to make any kind of judgment on his game RIGHT NOW, is just plain silly. Sure he was awful in Charlotte last week—all that does is prove that he’s human; that the carnage he has left in his wake the last six months has had some affect on him.
This week there are all sorts of rumors going around that he’s fired Hank Haney, his swing coach. It was the talk of the range on Wednesday and Woods’ denials don’t sound all that convincing. Maybe he hasn’t fired Haney, but technically he never fired Butch Harmon back in 2002. He just stopped working with him during The British Open and hasn’t worked with him since.
There was also a Woods-Haney joke making the rounds on the range on Thursday: “If Tiger keeps working with Hank for another few months, his swing will look like Ray Romano’s.” For those of you who aren’t Golf Channel geeks, Haney is involved in a show in which he is trying to coach Romano to the point where he can break 80. The good news in Charlotte was that one of his clients—Woods—did break 80, shooting 79 on Friday.
What is remarkable to me is the continuing fascination with all things Tiger. Maybe nowadays it is just people rubbernecking at the scene of a car accident but no one can seem to take their eyes off of Woods—regardless of how he’s playing or what he happens to be doing. Vanity Fair just came out with a SECOND story on Tiger’s various trysts (the first one did some serious damage to Mark Steinberg’s, “I know nothing,” claims not to mention to the late Earl Woods) and people are acting like the news that Woods is getting a divorce is going to be news.
It will be, sort of along the lines of tomorrow being Saturday.
On Thursday, I was on The Golf Channel set as part of their, “Live From,” show. We went into a break and the plan was to come back and talk about, I think, Vijay Singh, who has dropped to No. 42 in the world and could actually be in jeopardy of dropping out of the top 50 between now and May 23d—which would knock him out of the U.S. Open for the first time since 1994.
Suddenly, mid-break, the producer’s voice came into our ears saying, “Change of plan guys. We have video of Tiger walking in from the parking lot so we’re going to that.”
Yup, Tiger walking in from the parking lot. Look, I get why Golf Channel wants to cover every move he makes. It is what people want to see. I may have written this before but Tommy Roy, who has produced golf on NBC forever, once told me that a survey he’d seen showed that more golf fans would prefer to see Tiger Woods leaning on his bag than another golfer hitting a shot.
Last week in Charlotte, with Mickelson in contention, with Rory McIlroy playing a spectacular round of golf, ratings on CBS were down 37 percent from a year ago—when Woods was in contention. To we golf geeks that’s unfathomable. I sit here looking at the names in the field here at ‘The Players,’ and I can literally find 100 stories I find interesting. Most people would have little interest in at least 99 of them.
The Players, as I said, is a big-time tournament. But if Henrik Stenson defends his title or if my buddy Paul Goydos somehow wins or if Jim Furyk wins—or if any of the 154 players in the field not named Woods or Mickelson wins—very few people will remember two weeks from now who the champion was in 2010.
But they’ll know there were Tiger Woods-used golf clubs on E-Bay this week. There’s no sense rolling our eyes about any of that, it’s just the way of the world. It was before November 27, 2009, it is now and it is going to be for a long time to come.
Tiger may not be the hero he used to be but he’s still the guy no one can take their eyes off.
-----------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
But I’m not sure anyone who isn’t a golf geek really cares that much. Oh sure, the whole world wants to know everything that Tiger Woods does all day, every day. But he could be playing in Charlotte, the way he was last week, or in Milwaukee—where he played his first tournament as a pro—and the same would be true.
There might be a little bit of extra interest in Phil Mickelson because, at least in theory, he has a chance to pass Woods as the world’s number one player this week. If Mickelson wins here and Woods finishes outside the top five, Mickelson will go to No. 1 in the world rankings.
Seriously though, if you aren’t a golf geek, do you really care about that? You might look up and take note of it, but if you stop and think about the fact that Woods has only played in three tournaments this year and his life is a complete mess, what’s the big deal? What Mickelson has done that’s truly important this year is win The Masters.
The next truly important moment in golf will come at Pebble Beach next month at the U.S. Open. If Woods doesn’t play well THERE, a place where he won the Open by fifteen shots 10 years ago, then it will be time to begin wondering if he’s going to make it back close to the level he was at as recently as two years ago when he won the Open while playing on one leg at Torrey Pines.
For now though, all the analysis of his swing and his mindset and his game and his life is kind of moot. As he correctly pointed out after shooting a two-under-par 70 on Thursday, he had only played six rounds of golf this year before arriving at The Players. So, to make any kind of judgment on his game RIGHT NOW, is just plain silly. Sure he was awful in Charlotte last week—all that does is prove that he’s human; that the carnage he has left in his wake the last six months has had some affect on him.
This week there are all sorts of rumors going around that he’s fired Hank Haney, his swing coach. It was the talk of the range on Wednesday and Woods’ denials don’t sound all that convincing. Maybe he hasn’t fired Haney, but technically he never fired Butch Harmon back in 2002. He just stopped working with him during The British Open and hasn’t worked with him since.
There was also a Woods-Haney joke making the rounds on the range on Thursday: “If Tiger keeps working with Hank for another few months, his swing will look like Ray Romano’s.” For those of you who aren’t Golf Channel geeks, Haney is involved in a show in which he is trying to coach Romano to the point where he can break 80. The good news in Charlotte was that one of his clients—Woods—did break 80, shooting 79 on Friday.
What is remarkable to me is the continuing fascination with all things Tiger. Maybe nowadays it is just people rubbernecking at the scene of a car accident but no one can seem to take their eyes off of Woods—regardless of how he’s playing or what he happens to be doing. Vanity Fair just came out with a SECOND story on Tiger’s various trysts (the first one did some serious damage to Mark Steinberg’s, “I know nothing,” claims not to mention to the late Earl Woods) and people are acting like the news that Woods is getting a divorce is going to be news.
It will be, sort of along the lines of tomorrow being Saturday.
On Thursday, I was on The Golf Channel set as part of their, “Live From,” show. We went into a break and the plan was to come back and talk about, I think, Vijay Singh, who has dropped to No. 42 in the world and could actually be in jeopardy of dropping out of the top 50 between now and May 23d—which would knock him out of the U.S. Open for the first time since 1994.
Suddenly, mid-break, the producer’s voice came into our ears saying, “Change of plan guys. We have video of Tiger walking in from the parking lot so we’re going to that.”
Yup, Tiger walking in from the parking lot. Look, I get why Golf Channel wants to cover every move he makes. It is what people want to see. I may have written this before but Tommy Roy, who has produced golf on NBC forever, once told me that a survey he’d seen showed that more golf fans would prefer to see Tiger Woods leaning on his bag than another golfer hitting a shot.
Last week in Charlotte, with Mickelson in contention, with Rory McIlroy playing a spectacular round of golf, ratings on CBS were down 37 percent from a year ago—when Woods was in contention. To we golf geeks that’s unfathomable. I sit here looking at the names in the field here at ‘The Players,’ and I can literally find 100 stories I find interesting. Most people would have little interest in at least 99 of them.
The Players, as I said, is a big-time tournament. But if Henrik Stenson defends his title or if my buddy Paul Goydos somehow wins or if Jim Furyk wins—or if any of the 154 players in the field not named Woods or Mickelson wins—very few people will remember two weeks from now who the champion was in 2010.
But they’ll know there were Tiger Woods-used golf clubs on E-Bay this week. There’s no sense rolling our eyes about any of that, it’s just the way of the world. It was before November 27, 2009, it is now and it is going to be for a long time to come.
Tiger may not be the hero he used to be but he’s still the guy no one can take their eyes off.
-----------
John's new book: "Moment of Glory--The Year Underdogs Ruled The Majors,"--is now available online and will be in bookstores nationwide May 13th. Visit your favorite retailer, or click here for online purchases
Monday, May 3, 2010
Rory McIlroy’s bravura performance; Tennis schedule reminds me of a player in the past
I’m not sure who to write about this morning: Rory McIlroy or Andrei Chesnokov.
Andrei Chesnokov?
Let me come back to him in a minute. It is impossible to ignore McIlroy this morning given his performance on Sunday at The Quail Hollow Club in Charlotte. Looking up at a leaderboard that included Phil Mickelson, Davis Love III, Angel Cabrera and Jim Furyk—to name a few—McIlroy went out on Sunday and shot 62—finishing his round with six straight 3’s—to win The Quail Hollow Championship by four shots over Mickelson and five over Cabrera.
It was a bravura performance, climaxing with a 40-foot birdie putt on 18 that was never going anywhere but the middle of the hole almost from the moment it left his putter. I just finished writing my weekly Golf Channel essay and the thing I kept coming back to wasn’t so much the brilliant golf but the absolute joy McIlroy clearly brings to the golf course.
The kid turns 21 on Tuesday, which means he’s about the same age that Tiger Woods and Mickelson were when they burst onto the scene—Mickelson by winning a tournament while still a junior in college; Woods by winning twice on tour at the end of 1996 a few months before his 21st birthday.
Woods was always a golf prodigy, a genius on the golf course—and still is in spite of his performance this past week—but one thing he never was going to be was fun. Mickelson tried a little harder. He’s always made a point of signing autographs and smiling back at people but it has never been something that has come naturally to him.
This kid has a little Arnold Palmer in him. He’s got all the shots but he’s also got a natural way of connecting with the fans that you rarely see on the golf course. A lot of players complain that it is unfair for fans to expect them to smile or acknowledge them when they’re working—which is what they’re doing on the golf course. I get that. But when a player is naturally inclined to be that way it is all the better for him, for the fans and for the game.
McIlroy walking up 18 on Sunday applauding for the fans was cool. It also was natural, not concocted in any way. Fans like him; other players like him; the media likes him and he can flat out play. If Tom Watson doesn’t win the U.S. Open at Pebble Beach next month, a McIlroy victory might be the next best thing. That’s no knock on Mickelson by the way, it would just be a fresh new story line.
Okay, onto Chesnokov. Unless you are a real tennis geek you have no idea who I’m talking about. In fact, unless you are a real tennis geek you are probably wondering why in the world tennis would be on my mind at all right now. I do keep up with the tour, at least enough to know who is winning week-to-week. This past week, the men were in Rome for what was once known as The Italian Open. Now, thanks to some marketing silliness it is called The Rome Masters or some such thing. Rafael Nadal won for, I think the sixth time.
When I was a kid, NBC used to televise The Italian Open, The French Open and Wimbledon. Only Wimbledon was actually on live, but I watched raptly anyway. Bud Collins called it, “The Old World Triple.” I still remember Vitas Gerulaitis winning The Italian one year and how big a deal it was back then.
I dreamed back then of someday doing the “Old World Triple,” in the same year. Not only did I get to do it in 1990 when I was researching, “Hard Courts,” I got to do it while hanging out with Bud a lot of the time which only made it about 1,000 times more fun. Bud believes he is part-Italian and traveling around Rome with him was a little bit like being with Vito Corleone at Connie’s wedding—except Luca Brasi was nowhere in sight.
My fondest memories of that week in Rome though center on Chesnokov—who liked to be called Chezzy. He was then a solid clay court player, the first really good player to come out of the Soviet Union in years. He liked to pretend he didn’t speak much English but in truth he spoke it about as well as I did. He and Natalia Zvereva were in a battle back then with the Soviet Tennis Federation about purses. The federation was getting about 90 percent of the money they were making on tour. Chezzy and Zvereva didn’t see that as fair.
It took a while for me to get Chezzy to trust me—which was understandable. At first when I told him I was writing a book on life on the tennis tour, he was suspicious. “Why do you want to talk to me?” he asked. “I never win anything important.”
He never did win a major, but he had beaten Mats Wilander at The French in 1986—the first time I encountered him—and had been in the French semis in 1989, losing in four sets to Michael Chang. He won at Monte Carlo in 1990 and made it to the Italian final a couple of weeks later. What was amazing was HOW he made it to the final. He kept losing the first set, falling behind in the second and then rallying—somehow—to win. The matches took longer and longer--Chezzy was a classic stay-back clay-courter who simply wore you down—but he kept winning.
Every time he was asked in a press conference what he was going to do to get ready for his next match he would smile and say, “I go to disco.”
He was joking. He was very serious about his tennis, but not about much else. When I finally got him to sit down and talk to me over a long breakfast that week, he talked in detail about how he had fallen in love with the game as a kid and had known early on that it was his ticket out of a rudimentary job in Moscow.
“I know this because of the Olympics,” he said. “Once they say tennis will be in Olympics (1988) I know the government will put serious money into the tennis programs and I will have a chance. If not for the Olympics, they don’t let us travel to compete.”
I like to think that Chezzy and I found common ground that year. He became one of the non-star stars of “Hard Courts,” much the same way Paul Goydos did in “A Good Walk Spoiled.” Unlike with Goydos, who I am still friends with and see all the time on tour, I haven’t seen Chezzy for years. There aren’t that many people I’d like to sit down with at length again from my years covering tennis, but Chezzy would be right near the top of that short list.
He was a very good player. And a better guy, though I doubt he ever did see the inside of a disco.
Andrei Chesnokov?
Let me come back to him in a minute. It is impossible to ignore McIlroy this morning given his performance on Sunday at The Quail Hollow Club in Charlotte. Looking up at a leaderboard that included Phil Mickelson, Davis Love III, Angel Cabrera and Jim Furyk—to name a few—McIlroy went out on Sunday and shot 62—finishing his round with six straight 3’s—to win The Quail Hollow Championship by four shots over Mickelson and five over Cabrera.
It was a bravura performance, climaxing with a 40-foot birdie putt on 18 that was never going anywhere but the middle of the hole almost from the moment it left his putter. I just finished writing my weekly Golf Channel essay and the thing I kept coming back to wasn’t so much the brilliant golf but the absolute joy McIlroy clearly brings to the golf course.
The kid turns 21 on Tuesday, which means he’s about the same age that Tiger Woods and Mickelson were when they burst onto the scene—Mickelson by winning a tournament while still a junior in college; Woods by winning twice on tour at the end of 1996 a few months before his 21st birthday.
Woods was always a golf prodigy, a genius on the golf course—and still is in spite of his performance this past week—but one thing he never was going to be was fun. Mickelson tried a little harder. He’s always made a point of signing autographs and smiling back at people but it has never been something that has come naturally to him.
This kid has a little Arnold Palmer in him. He’s got all the shots but he’s also got a natural way of connecting with the fans that you rarely see on the golf course. A lot of players complain that it is unfair for fans to expect them to smile or acknowledge them when they’re working—which is what they’re doing on the golf course. I get that. But when a player is naturally inclined to be that way it is all the better for him, for the fans and for the game.
McIlroy walking up 18 on Sunday applauding for the fans was cool. It also was natural, not concocted in any way. Fans like him; other players like him; the media likes him and he can flat out play. If Tom Watson doesn’t win the U.S. Open at Pebble Beach next month, a McIlroy victory might be the next best thing. That’s no knock on Mickelson by the way, it would just be a fresh new story line.
Okay, onto Chesnokov. Unless you are a real tennis geek you have no idea who I’m talking about. In fact, unless you are a real tennis geek you are probably wondering why in the world tennis would be on my mind at all right now. I do keep up with the tour, at least enough to know who is winning week-to-week. This past week, the men were in Rome for what was once known as The Italian Open. Now, thanks to some marketing silliness it is called The Rome Masters or some such thing. Rafael Nadal won for, I think the sixth time.
When I was a kid, NBC used to televise The Italian Open, The French Open and Wimbledon. Only Wimbledon was actually on live, but I watched raptly anyway. Bud Collins called it, “The Old World Triple.” I still remember Vitas Gerulaitis winning The Italian one year and how big a deal it was back then.
I dreamed back then of someday doing the “Old World Triple,” in the same year. Not only did I get to do it in 1990 when I was researching, “Hard Courts,” I got to do it while hanging out with Bud a lot of the time which only made it about 1,000 times more fun. Bud believes he is part-Italian and traveling around Rome with him was a little bit like being with Vito Corleone at Connie’s wedding—except Luca Brasi was nowhere in sight.
My fondest memories of that week in Rome though center on Chesnokov—who liked to be called Chezzy. He was then a solid clay court player, the first really good player to come out of the Soviet Union in years. He liked to pretend he didn’t speak much English but in truth he spoke it about as well as I did. He and Natalia Zvereva were in a battle back then with the Soviet Tennis Federation about purses. The federation was getting about 90 percent of the money they were making on tour. Chezzy and Zvereva didn’t see that as fair.
It took a while for me to get Chezzy to trust me—which was understandable. At first when I told him I was writing a book on life on the tennis tour, he was suspicious. “Why do you want to talk to me?” he asked. “I never win anything important.”
He never did win a major, but he had beaten Mats Wilander at The French in 1986—the first time I encountered him—and had been in the French semis in 1989, losing in four sets to Michael Chang. He won at Monte Carlo in 1990 and made it to the Italian final a couple of weeks later. What was amazing was HOW he made it to the final. He kept losing the first set, falling behind in the second and then rallying—somehow—to win. The matches took longer and longer--Chezzy was a classic stay-back clay-courter who simply wore you down—but he kept winning.
Every time he was asked in a press conference what he was going to do to get ready for his next match he would smile and say, “I go to disco.”
He was joking. He was very serious about his tennis, but not about much else. When I finally got him to sit down and talk to me over a long breakfast that week, he talked in detail about how he had fallen in love with the game as a kid and had known early on that it was his ticket out of a rudimentary job in Moscow.
“I know this because of the Olympics,” he said. “Once they say tennis will be in Olympics (1988) I know the government will put serious money into the tennis programs and I will have a chance. If not for the Olympics, they don’t let us travel to compete.”
I like to think that Chezzy and I found common ground that year. He became one of the non-star stars of “Hard Courts,” much the same way Paul Goydos did in “A Good Walk Spoiled.” Unlike with Goydos, who I am still friends with and see all the time on tour, I haven’t seen Chezzy for years. There aren’t that many people I’d like to sit down with at length again from my years covering tennis, but Chezzy would be right near the top of that short list.
He was a very good player. And a better guy, though I doubt he ever did see the inside of a disco.
Monday, April 12, 2010
The Masters puts a cap on an amazing two weeks in sports
So what did we learn from The Masters?
First—and foremost—Phil Mickelson has put the ghosts of Winged Foot behind him once and for all. He put on a remarkable display on the back nine on both Saturday and Sunday to win going away after it appeared likely the tournament would be decided on the 18th green or in sudden death.
Second, Tiger Woods is still Tiger Woods: for good and for bad. There is not another player on the planet who could have come back after a five month layoff and all the self-created tumult in his life and figured out a way to tie for fourth in a major championship. He’s still the same golfer. He’s also still the same person: pitching himself to corporate America during his Monday press conference; authorizing the release of a creepy ad in which his dead father is used to try and sell product; slamming clubs and barking profanities (but no f-bombs) and then getting upset when Peter Kostis asked him about it.
If you expected different, I hope you weren’t disappointed. Those of us who didn’t expect different just sort of shrug, move on and focus on all the truly wonderful stories that made for a remarkable week at Augusta.
The weather was beyond spectacular, which—along with some very inviting pin placements—made for very low scoring. Think about this for a second: Mickelson’s winning score of 272 was two shots higher than Woods’ winning score of 270 back in 1997 when the golf course was 500 yards shorter. I wonder if The Lords of Augusta will lengthen the golf course to 8,000 yards before next year.
Actually, I doubt it. I think they learned a lesson when they went too far with their course alterations that—along with cold, windy weather—led to Zach Johnson winning with a one-over-par 289 three years ago. That was about as dreary a Masters as anyone could remember (no knock on Johnson) and I think the green jackets enjoyed all the roars echoing off the trees on Saturday and Sunday. So don’t expect anything more than the usual tweaks the club makes every year if only to figure out how to spend some of its endless supply of money.
The golf tournament had almost every possible story line imaginable: Tom Watson, who hadn’t made a cut since 2002, shot 67 the first day and finished tied for 18th with his son Michael caddying for him and reminding him constantly that he could still play the golf course even at 60. Fred Couples was in contention almost until the end, looking for all the world as if he was playing a casual round at dusk back home. It looked as if the most serious thing on his mind Sunday afternoon was wondering who was going to win the Rangers-Flyers showdown for the last playoff spot in The East.
Of course that’s not true. One thing people tend to miss about Couples is how competitive he is. Because he looks and sounds casual about his golf game, people think he’s just strolling around making birdies. I remember back in 1998 when I was working on “The Majors,” I spent a lot of time with Couples. That was the year he led The Masters almost the entire week before losing by a stroke to Mark O’Meara. I remember talking to him a month later at The Memorial and he still wasn’t over it.
“A bunch of us went to dinner that night (after The Masters) and I remember no one said a word,” he said back then. “I kind of felt bad because everyone was looking at me to see how I was doing and I was just too down to talk at all.”
You don’t win as much as Couples has won without caring. You don’t have to slam clubs or scream, “goddammit Tiger you suck,” to be competitive. I’m the last person in the world who should or will give anyone a hard time for using profanity. Those of us who use it too much try to control it and sometimes we fail—which is our fault. But when we’re called on it, the best thing to do is not to say, “I don’t think it’s a big deal,” especially if you’ve said a few days earlier that it’s a big deal.
Back to Mickelson: A lot of people, myself included, wondered if he’d ever recover from the Winged Foot meltdown and win another major. He was 36 at the time, two years older than Arnold Palmer was when he won his last major and three years older than Watson was when he won the British Open in 1983. Clearly, the loss scarred him and his attempt to declare his win at the 2007 Players a major win came off as kind of silly.
But he hung in there. One thing people miss about Mickelson is that he’s a grinder. For all the talk about his great talent and ability to pull of magical shots (or not pull off magical shots) he is constantly trying to figure out how to get better: changing swing coaches, bringing in different people to help with his short game and his putting, trying different routines to prepare for majors.
Of course everything in his life changed last year when his wife Amy and then his mother were diagnosed with breast cancer. If he had managed to win the U.S. open at Bethpage last June they would have started filming the movie the next day. He took a break from the tour while Amy underwent surgery and when he came back in August—to slightly less fanfare than Woods at Augusta—he lingered in the press room in Akron after his first meeting with the media, thanking people for their good wishes and trading jokes with writers he IS friendly with as opposed to his long-time rival.
“You know I hate to say this,” he said at one point, “but I think I actually missed you guys.”
He hadn’t played well this year prior to Augusta. Whether it was the genuine distraction of Amy’s continuing struggles to feel well because of the side-affects of her medication or missing the emotional jolt he gets when Woods is playing, he never seriously contended. In the end, none of those tournaments mattered and they certainly don’t matter now. He played memorably down the stretch and it is probably fair to say that his hug with Amy behind the 18th green will be replayed a lot more in the future than Woods’s hug with his father back in ’97 which feels a lot different now to many people than it did prior to November 27th.
In all, it was an amazing two weeks in sports. The Final Four produced a national championship game for the ages and The Masters had so much shot-making your head needed to be on a swivel to keep up. I’m always exhausted when I get home from The Final Four/Masters trip but I remind myself on the way home how incredibly lucky I am to get to go to both events every year.
This year, especially after what happened to me last June, I’ve never felt that way more than I did last night.
*****
Now that I am finally home after 29 of the last 42 days on the road, I’m going to try to take some time to get my life back in order. (You should see my office right now). So, I’m going to skip the blog on Tuesday and Thursday this week unless something monumental occurs—like a two-game Mets winning streak. I hope everyone understands.
First—and foremost—Phil Mickelson has put the ghosts of Winged Foot behind him once and for all. He put on a remarkable display on the back nine on both Saturday and Sunday to win going away after it appeared likely the tournament would be decided on the 18th green or in sudden death.
Second, Tiger Woods is still Tiger Woods: for good and for bad. There is not another player on the planet who could have come back after a five month layoff and all the self-created tumult in his life and figured out a way to tie for fourth in a major championship. He’s still the same golfer. He’s also still the same person: pitching himself to corporate America during his Monday press conference; authorizing the release of a creepy ad in which his dead father is used to try and sell product; slamming clubs and barking profanities (but no f-bombs) and then getting upset when Peter Kostis asked him about it.
If you expected different, I hope you weren’t disappointed. Those of us who didn’t expect different just sort of shrug, move on and focus on all the truly wonderful stories that made for a remarkable week at Augusta.
The weather was beyond spectacular, which—along with some very inviting pin placements—made for very low scoring. Think about this for a second: Mickelson’s winning score of 272 was two shots higher than Woods’ winning score of 270 back in 1997 when the golf course was 500 yards shorter. I wonder if The Lords of Augusta will lengthen the golf course to 8,000 yards before next year.
Actually, I doubt it. I think they learned a lesson when they went too far with their course alterations that—along with cold, windy weather—led to Zach Johnson winning with a one-over-par 289 three years ago. That was about as dreary a Masters as anyone could remember (no knock on Johnson) and I think the green jackets enjoyed all the roars echoing off the trees on Saturday and Sunday. So don’t expect anything more than the usual tweaks the club makes every year if only to figure out how to spend some of its endless supply of money.
The golf tournament had almost every possible story line imaginable: Tom Watson, who hadn’t made a cut since 2002, shot 67 the first day and finished tied for 18th with his son Michael caddying for him and reminding him constantly that he could still play the golf course even at 60. Fred Couples was in contention almost until the end, looking for all the world as if he was playing a casual round at dusk back home. It looked as if the most serious thing on his mind Sunday afternoon was wondering who was going to win the Rangers-Flyers showdown for the last playoff spot in The East.
Of course that’s not true. One thing people tend to miss about Couples is how competitive he is. Because he looks and sounds casual about his golf game, people think he’s just strolling around making birdies. I remember back in 1998 when I was working on “The Majors,” I spent a lot of time with Couples. That was the year he led The Masters almost the entire week before losing by a stroke to Mark O’Meara. I remember talking to him a month later at The Memorial and he still wasn’t over it.
“A bunch of us went to dinner that night (after The Masters) and I remember no one said a word,” he said back then. “I kind of felt bad because everyone was looking at me to see how I was doing and I was just too down to talk at all.”
You don’t win as much as Couples has won without caring. You don’t have to slam clubs or scream, “goddammit Tiger you suck,” to be competitive. I’m the last person in the world who should or will give anyone a hard time for using profanity. Those of us who use it too much try to control it and sometimes we fail—which is our fault. But when we’re called on it, the best thing to do is not to say, “I don’t think it’s a big deal,” especially if you’ve said a few days earlier that it’s a big deal.
Back to Mickelson: A lot of people, myself included, wondered if he’d ever recover from the Winged Foot meltdown and win another major. He was 36 at the time, two years older than Arnold Palmer was when he won his last major and three years older than Watson was when he won the British Open in 1983. Clearly, the loss scarred him and his attempt to declare his win at the 2007 Players a major win came off as kind of silly.
But he hung in there. One thing people miss about Mickelson is that he’s a grinder. For all the talk about his great talent and ability to pull of magical shots (or not pull off magical shots) he is constantly trying to figure out how to get better: changing swing coaches, bringing in different people to help with his short game and his putting, trying different routines to prepare for majors.
Of course everything in his life changed last year when his wife Amy and then his mother were diagnosed with breast cancer. If he had managed to win the U.S. open at Bethpage last June they would have started filming the movie the next day. He took a break from the tour while Amy underwent surgery and when he came back in August—to slightly less fanfare than Woods at Augusta—he lingered in the press room in Akron after his first meeting with the media, thanking people for their good wishes and trading jokes with writers he IS friendly with as opposed to his long-time rival.
“You know I hate to say this,” he said at one point, “but I think I actually missed you guys.”
He hadn’t played well this year prior to Augusta. Whether it was the genuine distraction of Amy’s continuing struggles to feel well because of the side-affects of her medication or missing the emotional jolt he gets when Woods is playing, he never seriously contended. In the end, none of those tournaments mattered and they certainly don’t matter now. He played memorably down the stretch and it is probably fair to say that his hug with Amy behind the 18th green will be replayed a lot more in the future than Woods’s hug with his father back in ’97 which feels a lot different now to many people than it did prior to November 27th.
In all, it was an amazing two weeks in sports. The Final Four produced a national championship game for the ages and The Masters had so much shot-making your head needed to be on a swivel to keep up. I’m always exhausted when I get home from The Final Four/Masters trip but I remind myself on the way home how incredibly lucky I am to get to go to both events every year.
This year, especially after what happened to me last June, I’ve never felt that way more than I did last night.
*****
Now that I am finally home after 29 of the last 42 days on the road, I’m going to try to take some time to get my life back in order. (You should see my office right now). So, I’m going to skip the blog on Tuesday and Thursday this week unless something monumental occurs—like a two-game Mets winning streak. I hope everyone understands.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Updated -- This week's radio segments (Sports Reporters, Gas Man, Tony Kornheiser Show):
Today I joined The Sports Reporters' Steve Czaban and Andy Pollin in the normal timeslot (5:25 ET on Wednesday's). Click the permalink, then the link below, to listen to the segment. This week we spent a great deal of time talking about the PGA Tour controversy around Mickelson and McCarron and touched on Tom Watson's recent comments on Tiger Woods and his on-course behavior.
Click here to listen to the segment: The Sports Reporters
----------------------
I also made my regular appearance on The Gas Man at 5:25 PT on Wednesday. In this segment, we spoke spent most of the time talking about college basketball and the NCAA's apparent move to expand the tournament.
Click here to listen to the segment: The Gas Man
---------------------
On Thursday I joined the newest The Tony Kornheiser Show in my normal Thursday slot (11:05am). We had the usual banter with maybe just a little extra thrown in, and talked about the 'star-power' in the upcoming Olympics and goings on in the PGA Tour...with too many details on the square groove controversy.
Click here to listen to the segment (starts within 1st minute): The Tony Kornheiser Show
Click here to listen to the segment: The Sports Reporters
----------------------
I also made my regular appearance on The Gas Man at 5:25 PT on Wednesday. In this segment, we spoke spent most of the time talking about college basketball and the NCAA's apparent move to expand the tournament.
Click here to listen to the segment: The Gas Man
---------------------
On Thursday I joined the newest The Tony Kornheiser Show in my normal Thursday slot (11:05am). We had the usual banter with maybe just a little extra thrown in, and talked about the 'star-power' in the upcoming Olympics and goings on in the PGA Tour...with too many details on the square groove controversy.
Click here to listen to the segment (starts within 1st minute): The Tony Kornheiser Show
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Gilbert Arenas’s Op-Ed; Quick note on the Mickelson-McCarron controversy
Gilbert Arenas just doesn’t get it—which hardly makes him unusual in jock-world.
This morning, on the op-ed page of The Washington Post, there’s a column with his name on it (I say that because it was so clearly written by a lawyer) in which he expresses his sorrow about all that he’s done wrong in the last couple of months. He knows now—or so he says—that it was wrong to illegally bring guns into The District of Columbia and into The Verizon Center and that his response to the incident was also wrong.
Right there though, in the second paragraph of his “apology,” is this sentence: “I reacted badly to the aftermath and made fun of inaccurate media reports, which looked as though I was making light of a serious situation.”
Inaccurate media reports? This is still the media’s fault? The guy has pleaded guilty to a felony in a desperate attempt to stay out of jail and this is about inaccurate media reports?
Let’s see, the media reported that he brought guns into the locker room because of a gambling dispute with teammate Javaris Crittenton.
Is that true? Yes.
The media reported that he was twittering about the incident after it became public and joking about it.
True? Yes.
Arenas said ON CAMERA that he was going to be “myself,” and continue to joke about what had happened and not taking it seriously. Was that an imposter, ala Tiger Woods at the sex clinic, saying those things?
And then there was the now infamous photo of Arenas making shooting gestures with his fingers during pre-game introductions that forced NBA Commissioner David Stern to finally say, “enough,” and suspend Arenas. Another inaccurate media report?
Arenas can go on and on—as he does in the piece—about how sorry he is for letting people down, especially the kids who have been fans of his in the past. I don’t think anyone questions Arenas’s desire to help kids; he’s gone out of his way to do so in the past. In fact, almost no one who knows Arenas or has been around him even a little bit thinks he’s a bad guy or a mean guy or a malicious guy.
He simply doesn’t get it. Apparently, neither do his lawyers. If they did, that sentence would never have appeared in the piece. If you say, “I’m sorry,” to someone you do NOT say, “I’m sorry BUT…” You just say you’re sorry.
Regardless of what Arenas said today, many people, if not most people, would see the op-ed as an attempt to mollify the judge who will sentence him on March 26th and, perhaps, a last ditch attempt to convince the Wizards that they shouldn’t terminate the remaining $80 million they will owe on his contract once his suspension is over at the end of the season.
But that one sentence is SO revealing about his true feelings. You see, deep down, it’s still not his fault. That’s the way it is with most athletes and coaches in jock-world. They’re never wrong. The media’s wrong or out to get them. Or people don’t really understand them. I’ve said this before: To this day Bob Knight doesn’t think he did a thing wrong the day he threw that chair at Indiana. I’ve heard him go on about how lousy the refereeing was that day and how “no one was hurt,” when he threw the chair. Remember, he threatened to quit when Indiana President John Ryan had the nerve to bring up the idea that the school should suspend him. When Knight said he might quit, Ryan backed down so quickly I think he may still be back-pedaling.
Right now, as we speak, I guarantee you Tiger Woods thinks he’s been hammered unfairly by the media. If you read Jaime Diaz’s recent piece in Golf Digest on Woods, there’s a quote from Woods in which he tells Diaz that he’s really sick and tired of the media hounding him and treating him unfairly.
The conversation took place WEEKS before his post-Thanksgiving dinner car crash. I’ve been around Tiger and the golf media. The way he’s treated is so reverential I once asked a PR guy who was reciting the “rules,” of a Tiger press conference if we were all supposed to stand when he entered the room. And yet, Tiger has always thought most of the media has been unfair to him. When he was talking to Diaz, he must have been referring to those “inaccurate,” reports that he didn’t win a major in 2009.
What’s also remarkable is how much sports fans want to defend their heroes. Right now there are people out there who think Woods has somehow been wronged in all this. This morning on sports-talk radio shows in Washington there are callers saying today’s Op-ed is proof that Arenas is genuinely remorseful, truly sorry for what he did. He’s sorry—that he got caught.
One caller to a radio show opened with this comment: “I don’t think people should be judged by what they say or by what they do. Gilbert’s no different than the rest of us.”
First: What else should we judge people by if not their actions or their words? Second: Gilbert IS different than the rest of us. Putting aside how much money he makes, most of us don’t illegally carry four guns across a state line and then act as if the whole thing was a joke.
That said, the biggest idiot in all of this may have been Crittenton’s lawyer, who claimed after his client’s plea bargain that Crittenton carried his gun into the locker room because he “feared for his life.” Please. Maybe there was an inaccurate media report that made him fear for his life. Some of the things these guys say would be laugh out loud funny if they weren’t so sad.
-------------------------------------
One note on the Phil Mickelson-Scott McCarron square grooves controversy over the weekend. For those not into golf minutia, the U.S. Golf Association banned square grooved clubs this year (because they allow pros to spin the ball too easily from the rough) with the exception of one old wedge—the PingEye2. The reason for that was a lawsuit 20 years ago in which the USGA agreed as part of a settlement to never ban that one club.
Mickelson—and a few other players including John Daly—dug out old PingEye2’s they had and brought them to their first tournament, in Mickelson’s case San Diego. McCarron, a 16-year tour veteran who is a smart guy said that using the PingEye2 “cheated,” the spirit of the new rule—which it does. Technically, it isn’t cheating because the club isn’t banned, but clearly it violates the spirit of the rule.
Mickelson isn’t used to being publicly criticized by another player. He reacted angrily saying that McCarron had “publicly slandered,” him. For the record, you can’t privately slander someone but that’s another story.
The tour needs to make this go away and it appears likely that it will, perhaps as early as today. It was not part of the Ping law suit and can pass a rule banning the club. It isn’t likely that Ping will turn around and take the tour to court over a golf club it doesn’t make anymore. Even if it does, the tour needs to get this one in its rear view mirror so everyone can focus on when Tiger is going to come back to the tour and tell us everything that happened was caused by inaccurate media reports.
This morning, on the op-ed page of The Washington Post, there’s a column with his name on it (I say that because it was so clearly written by a lawyer) in which he expresses his sorrow about all that he’s done wrong in the last couple of months. He knows now—or so he says—that it was wrong to illegally bring guns into The District of Columbia and into The Verizon Center and that his response to the incident was also wrong.
Right there though, in the second paragraph of his “apology,” is this sentence: “I reacted badly to the aftermath and made fun of inaccurate media reports, which looked as though I was making light of a serious situation.”
Inaccurate media reports? This is still the media’s fault? The guy has pleaded guilty to a felony in a desperate attempt to stay out of jail and this is about inaccurate media reports?
Let’s see, the media reported that he brought guns into the locker room because of a gambling dispute with teammate Javaris Crittenton.
Is that true? Yes.
The media reported that he was twittering about the incident after it became public and joking about it.
True? Yes.
Arenas said ON CAMERA that he was going to be “myself,” and continue to joke about what had happened and not taking it seriously. Was that an imposter, ala Tiger Woods at the sex clinic, saying those things?
And then there was the now infamous photo of Arenas making shooting gestures with his fingers during pre-game introductions that forced NBA Commissioner David Stern to finally say, “enough,” and suspend Arenas. Another inaccurate media report?
Arenas can go on and on—as he does in the piece—about how sorry he is for letting people down, especially the kids who have been fans of his in the past. I don’t think anyone questions Arenas’s desire to help kids; he’s gone out of his way to do so in the past. In fact, almost no one who knows Arenas or has been around him even a little bit thinks he’s a bad guy or a mean guy or a malicious guy.
He simply doesn’t get it. Apparently, neither do his lawyers. If they did, that sentence would never have appeared in the piece. If you say, “I’m sorry,” to someone you do NOT say, “I’m sorry BUT…” You just say you’re sorry.
Regardless of what Arenas said today, many people, if not most people, would see the op-ed as an attempt to mollify the judge who will sentence him on March 26th and, perhaps, a last ditch attempt to convince the Wizards that they shouldn’t terminate the remaining $80 million they will owe on his contract once his suspension is over at the end of the season.
But that one sentence is SO revealing about his true feelings. You see, deep down, it’s still not his fault. That’s the way it is with most athletes and coaches in jock-world. They’re never wrong. The media’s wrong or out to get them. Or people don’t really understand them. I’ve said this before: To this day Bob Knight doesn’t think he did a thing wrong the day he threw that chair at Indiana. I’ve heard him go on about how lousy the refereeing was that day and how “no one was hurt,” when he threw the chair. Remember, he threatened to quit when Indiana President John Ryan had the nerve to bring up the idea that the school should suspend him. When Knight said he might quit, Ryan backed down so quickly I think he may still be back-pedaling.
Right now, as we speak, I guarantee you Tiger Woods thinks he’s been hammered unfairly by the media. If you read Jaime Diaz’s recent piece in Golf Digest on Woods, there’s a quote from Woods in which he tells Diaz that he’s really sick and tired of the media hounding him and treating him unfairly.
The conversation took place WEEKS before his post-Thanksgiving dinner car crash. I’ve been around Tiger and the golf media. The way he’s treated is so reverential I once asked a PR guy who was reciting the “rules,” of a Tiger press conference if we were all supposed to stand when he entered the room. And yet, Tiger has always thought most of the media has been unfair to him. When he was talking to Diaz, he must have been referring to those “inaccurate,” reports that he didn’t win a major in 2009.
What’s also remarkable is how much sports fans want to defend their heroes. Right now there are people out there who think Woods has somehow been wronged in all this. This morning on sports-talk radio shows in Washington there are callers saying today’s Op-ed is proof that Arenas is genuinely remorseful, truly sorry for what he did. He’s sorry—that he got caught.
One caller to a radio show opened with this comment: “I don’t think people should be judged by what they say or by what they do. Gilbert’s no different than the rest of us.”
First: What else should we judge people by if not their actions or their words? Second: Gilbert IS different than the rest of us. Putting aside how much money he makes, most of us don’t illegally carry four guns across a state line and then act as if the whole thing was a joke.
That said, the biggest idiot in all of this may have been Crittenton’s lawyer, who claimed after his client’s plea bargain that Crittenton carried his gun into the locker room because he “feared for his life.” Please. Maybe there was an inaccurate media report that made him fear for his life. Some of the things these guys say would be laugh out loud funny if they weren’t so sad.
-------------------------------------
One note on the Phil Mickelson-Scott McCarron square grooves controversy over the weekend. For those not into golf minutia, the U.S. Golf Association banned square grooved clubs this year (because they allow pros to spin the ball too easily from the rough) with the exception of one old wedge—the PingEye2. The reason for that was a lawsuit 20 years ago in which the USGA agreed as part of a settlement to never ban that one club.
Mickelson—and a few other players including John Daly—dug out old PingEye2’s they had and brought them to their first tournament, in Mickelson’s case San Diego. McCarron, a 16-year tour veteran who is a smart guy said that using the PingEye2 “cheated,” the spirit of the new rule—which it does. Technically, it isn’t cheating because the club isn’t banned, but clearly it violates the spirit of the rule.
Mickelson isn’t used to being publicly criticized by another player. He reacted angrily saying that McCarron had “publicly slandered,” him. For the record, you can’t privately slander someone but that’s another story.
The tour needs to make this go away and it appears likely that it will, perhaps as early as today. It was not part of the Ping law suit and can pass a rule banning the club. It isn’t likely that Ping will turn around and take the tour to court over a golf club it doesn’t make anymore. Even if it does, the tour needs to get this one in its rear view mirror so everyone can focus on when Tiger is going to come back to the tour and tell us everything that happened was caused by inaccurate media reports.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Review of the sports weekend; Snowy drive to Holy Cross
So here’s some of the news of the weekend:
--Serena Williams and Roger Federer won Australian Open titles in matches that tipped off at 3:30 a.m. on the east coast because the Aussies like to play their finals at night to avoid the searing heat that often hits Melbourne in January.
--They played The Pro Bowl. Somebody won. Driving home from the Holy Cross-Lehigh game (more on that later) I could not find a single sports-oriented radio station that was NOT broadcasting the damn game. My God, someone please help me.
--The ACC is a complete mess. Duke, which everyone in the league alleges is the most talented team the ACC has to offer this season got smushed—to use my daughter’s word—by Georgetown on Saturday. The final was 89-77 only because Duke finished the game on a 16-5 run. North Carolina was embarrassed at home by Virginia on Sunday night. Maryland, a team Virginia Tech’s Seth Greenberg said was, “playing as well as anyone in the country,” turned the ball over 26 times and lost to a Clemson team that shot 32 percent. Hey ACC fans, the league is still REALLY good in soccer.
--Ben Crane won the golf tournament in San Diego. Someone wake me when LA starts on Thursday. Crane is one of those guys the Rules Officials like to say takes a lantern with him as his 15th club. Meanwhile, Phil Mickelson is using a wedge with square grooves that is legal in spite of square grooves being outlawed by the USGA because of a court case settled more than 20 years ago. Scott McCarron says Mickelson is “cheating,” the spirit of the new rule. Mickelson says that McCarron has “publicly slandered,” him and is threatening legal action. One thing worth noting: you can’t PRIVATELY slander someone.
--The Islanders have tanked. Five straight losses with six goals scored in those games. Even their last win was 2-1 in a shootout. That makes seven goals in six games. That’s okay in soccer. Not so much in hockey. Meanwhile, the Capitals have won 10 in a row and I think the average score has been something like 14-2. Prediction: Barring injury, they win The Stanley Cup although I’m still not sure about the goaltending. It may not matter if they continue to score 14 goals a night.
--The NBA is still going on. At least I think it is. ESPN is still running those silly commercials so I guess it’s going on. No reported arrests in the Wizards locker room last week. Great line by a radio guy in New York before the Wiz and the Nets played Friday night: “The Nets are going for one for the thumb tonight.” That would have been their fifth win of the season. They didn’t get it. The announced attendance in the Meadowlands was 11,384 that night. Yeah, right. I believe the 384 part.
--I was listening this morning to a radio show and the subject of Cornell came up. I’m amazed sometimes that people who call themselves college basketball fans think that only the teams from the BCS conference matter or are any good—especially since that’s disproven every March. Someone had the temerity to call in and say Cornell deserved some respect and attention. The hosts started laughing at him, saying Cornell couldn’t possibly compete in the ACC. Guess what? The Big Red might not be able to keep up with the entire league for 16 games but one game on a neutral site? There’s not a soul in the ACC that wants to play them. This is a team that’s won At Alabama, At Massachusetts, At St. John’s and almost beat Kansas at Kansas. Its other two losses are at Syracuse and to Seton Hall—very early in the season. One host said, “yeah, I guess they’ll be a No. 14 seed.” Guess what: If they aren’t at least a single digit seed (assuming they win out which they should) the committee should be investigated.
Now, a few words on my weekend. After getting home late Friday night from the Florida trip for the ‘Caddy For Life,’ documentary, I had to drive Saturday to Worcester to do Lehigh-Holy Cross on Sunday. I enjoy doing The Patriot League games on TV. I like my partner, Bob Socci and we’ve worked together for 13 years on Navy games and eight years on The Patriot League games. I enjoy the coaches and the players and the people I’ve come to know through the years at the eight schools.
I don’t usually mind the drive to Holy Cross. I know it in my sleep, I even know exactly where I want to stop to eat and to get gas. I can usually make it in seven hours or a little less if I’m lucky.
Saturday was a nightmare. We were supposed to get a couple of inches of snow in the Washington area. Not exactly. Closer to 10. There was supposed to be no snow north of Baltimore. Not exactly. It stopped snowing when I got to the George Washington Bridge. There wasn’t a plow in sight on I-95. The road was treacherous. There were people spinning out and pulled over everywhere. It took me two hours and 20 minutes—normally 45 minutes—to get to Baltimore. It took four hours—normally two hours—to get to The New Jersey Turnpike. It took more than two hours to get up the Turnpike—normally 1:45 at most. In all, it was just under 10 hours. I think I’m getting too old for this. Maybe I’ll tell The Patriot League it should hire Pete Gillen to do the games next season.
I enjoyed the game. I always like being inside The Hart Center, which is a classic old GYM—not an arena with some stupid corporate name on it. The atmosphere is relaxed. There’s not a single yellow-jacketed security person to be found. I felt for Sean Kearney, who is in his first year at Holy Cross after 22 years as an assistant and is struggling with a team trying to learn a completely different style of play at both ends of the court. There’s not a nicer person in hoops than Sean. I think—and hope—things will get better for him.
The trip home was easy—seven hours on the dot. The only problem was not being able to escape The Pro Bowl. At least that’s over. Now we have seven days of Super Bowl hype to look forward to. Oh joy.
--Serena Williams and Roger Federer won Australian Open titles in matches that tipped off at 3:30 a.m. on the east coast because the Aussies like to play their finals at night to avoid the searing heat that often hits Melbourne in January.
--They played The Pro Bowl. Somebody won. Driving home from the Holy Cross-Lehigh game (more on that later) I could not find a single sports-oriented radio station that was NOT broadcasting the damn game. My God, someone please help me.
--The ACC is a complete mess. Duke, which everyone in the league alleges is the most talented team the ACC has to offer this season got smushed—to use my daughter’s word—by Georgetown on Saturday. The final was 89-77 only because Duke finished the game on a 16-5 run. North Carolina was embarrassed at home by Virginia on Sunday night. Maryland, a team Virginia Tech’s Seth Greenberg said was, “playing as well as anyone in the country,” turned the ball over 26 times and lost to a Clemson team that shot 32 percent. Hey ACC fans, the league is still REALLY good in soccer.
--Ben Crane won the golf tournament in San Diego. Someone wake me when LA starts on Thursday. Crane is one of those guys the Rules Officials like to say takes a lantern with him as his 15th club. Meanwhile, Phil Mickelson is using a wedge with square grooves that is legal in spite of square grooves being outlawed by the USGA because of a court case settled more than 20 years ago. Scott McCarron says Mickelson is “cheating,” the spirit of the new rule. Mickelson says that McCarron has “publicly slandered,” him and is threatening legal action. One thing worth noting: you can’t PRIVATELY slander someone.
--The Islanders have tanked. Five straight losses with six goals scored in those games. Even their last win was 2-1 in a shootout. That makes seven goals in six games. That’s okay in soccer. Not so much in hockey. Meanwhile, the Capitals have won 10 in a row and I think the average score has been something like 14-2. Prediction: Barring injury, they win The Stanley Cup although I’m still not sure about the goaltending. It may not matter if they continue to score 14 goals a night.
--The NBA is still going on. At least I think it is. ESPN is still running those silly commercials so I guess it’s going on. No reported arrests in the Wizards locker room last week. Great line by a radio guy in New York before the Wiz and the Nets played Friday night: “The Nets are going for one for the thumb tonight.” That would have been their fifth win of the season. They didn’t get it. The announced attendance in the Meadowlands was 11,384 that night. Yeah, right. I believe the 384 part.
--I was listening this morning to a radio show and the subject of Cornell came up. I’m amazed sometimes that people who call themselves college basketball fans think that only the teams from the BCS conference matter or are any good—especially since that’s disproven every March. Someone had the temerity to call in and say Cornell deserved some respect and attention. The hosts started laughing at him, saying Cornell couldn’t possibly compete in the ACC. Guess what? The Big Red might not be able to keep up with the entire league for 16 games but one game on a neutral site? There’s not a soul in the ACC that wants to play them. This is a team that’s won At Alabama, At Massachusetts, At St. John’s and almost beat Kansas at Kansas. Its other two losses are at Syracuse and to Seton Hall—very early in the season. One host said, “yeah, I guess they’ll be a No. 14 seed.” Guess what: If they aren’t at least a single digit seed (assuming they win out which they should) the committee should be investigated.
Now, a few words on my weekend. After getting home late Friday night from the Florida trip for the ‘Caddy For Life,’ documentary, I had to drive Saturday to Worcester to do Lehigh-Holy Cross on Sunday. I enjoy doing The Patriot League games on TV. I like my partner, Bob Socci and we’ve worked together for 13 years on Navy games and eight years on The Patriot League games. I enjoy the coaches and the players and the people I’ve come to know through the years at the eight schools.
I don’t usually mind the drive to Holy Cross. I know it in my sleep, I even know exactly where I want to stop to eat and to get gas. I can usually make it in seven hours or a little less if I’m lucky.
Saturday was a nightmare. We were supposed to get a couple of inches of snow in the Washington area. Not exactly. Closer to 10. There was supposed to be no snow north of Baltimore. Not exactly. It stopped snowing when I got to the George Washington Bridge. There wasn’t a plow in sight on I-95. The road was treacherous. There were people spinning out and pulled over everywhere. It took me two hours and 20 minutes—normally 45 minutes—to get to Baltimore. It took four hours—normally two hours—to get to The New Jersey Turnpike. It took more than two hours to get up the Turnpike—normally 1:45 at most. In all, it was just under 10 hours. I think I’m getting too old for this. Maybe I’ll tell The Patriot League it should hire Pete Gillen to do the games next season.
I enjoyed the game. I always like being inside The Hart Center, which is a classic old GYM—not an arena with some stupid corporate name on it. The atmosphere is relaxed. There’s not a single yellow-jacketed security person to be found. I felt for Sean Kearney, who is in his first year at Holy Cross after 22 years as an assistant and is struggling with a team trying to learn a completely different style of play at both ends of the court. There’s not a nicer person in hoops than Sean. I think—and hope—things will get better for him.
The trip home was easy—seven hours on the dot. The only problem was not being able to escape The Pro Bowl. At least that’s over. Now we have seven days of Super Bowl hype to look forward to. Oh joy.
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Final Event of PGA Tour ‘Playoffs’---And My Suggestion; Yesterday’s Radio Hosting
One of the notes that came in yesterday about the blog--I try to read the posts every day and e-mail as often as possible--expressed some disappointment that I wasn't, "telling more stories." To be honest, I was a little surprised because I've wondered from time to time these past three months if I should focus more on the news and less on telling stories about my experiences past and present with some of those I've encountered along the road. I would be very curious to hear from more of you whether you prefer more news, more stories or blogs like yesterday where I combined writing about the weekend's news with a couple of anecdotes about my misadventures on the road to and from Pittsburgh.
I am not going to mimick Ken Beatrice, a long time sportstalk host in Boston and Washington who used to always say, "This is YOUR show." This is my blog but if I'm going to keep doing it you readers have to enjoy it. So, needless to say, input is welcomed.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled blog.
I watched some of The Monday Night Football game last night. I missed the finish because I just can't stay up that late and then get up at 7 to start getting my son ready for school. I noticed Tiger Woods on the Colts sideline. One thing that told me was just how important the upcoming Tour Championship in Atlanta this week is to him. I know he knows the golf course (East Lake) well and I'm not saying he won't win--to quote Lefty Driesell, "I may be dumb, but I ain't stupid,"--but if this FedEx Cup thing really mattered to him do you think he'd be standing on a sideline in Miami less than three days before he tees it up? Don't think so.
That's the problem with these so-called 'playoffs,' they concocted on The PGA Tour three years ago, mostly because Woods and Phil Mickelson told Commissioner Tim Finchem they weren't going to show up for the season ending event if it was still played in early November. It's kind of tough for golf to have a "climactic," event without Woods and Mickelson so Finchem managed to get FedEx to put up big money to sponsor the "FedEx Cup," and tried to create drama with the four tournament "playoffs."
There are problems with this that may be unsolvable because golf just doesn't lend itself to this sort of format. For one thing, how big a deal can 'playoffs,' be when 125 players make it? That makes the NBA and NHL playoffs look elite. No knock on Heath Slocum but he gets in at No. 124--his key points coming at a tournament played opposite a World Golf Championship event meaning none of the top guys were in the field--then wins the first playoff event and goes to number FIVE on the list?
If they want to shorten the season, that's fine. But just throwing more money at a bunch of rich guys in order to get them to tee it up a few extra times--during football season--isn't going to generate interest no matter how much you try to hype the thing, and God knows the tour has tried to hype it. My suggestion is this: Let the first three tournaments that are currently, 'playoff,' events be the last three events of the so-called regular season. Inch the points up as little--but not too much--and then send the top 32 guys to East Lake and have them play MATCH play.
The TV folks might have a heart attack at the thought of a Mark Leishman-Retief Goosen final (no offense to either guy) but the fact is their ratings are nowhere right now anyway. And, if some year you did get Tiger-Phil in the final or Tiger-Ernie Els or how about this: Tiger-Y.E. Yang this year in a PGA rematch, you might get a few people to watch. Plus, it would be far more dramatic.
That's my suggestion for the day. Oh, in case you were wondering why Woods was hanging out on the Colts sideline, it's because he's friendly with Peyton Manning. They played together in the pro-am this year in Charlotte. Like a lot of elite athletes, Manning loves to play golf and is a good player. I was the MC for the pro-am draw party for the tournament and ran into Manning before dinner started. I was curious about how things were going during the offseason with Tony Dungy gone and Jim Caldwell taking his place. Manning wanted to talk about golf--tour golf and his own golf. I got a detailed description of his off-season regimen--on the golf course.
Changing subjects...I hosted Jim Rome's radio show yesterday. I've been an occasional guest host for about 10 years now and Jim has always had me on whenever I have a book out. People have asked in the past how I became friends with Jim. It's a pretty simple story. Twenty (or more) years ago a friend of mine named Judy Carlough was running the new all sports station in San Diego. She called and told me she had a young overnight host she thought was talented and he was hoping I'd go on with him and that he could pre-tape before I went to bed so I wouldn't have to stay up half the night to be on.
I was happy to do it--I never could turn Judy down under any circumstances--and then the young host turned out to be very bright and asked very good questions. We hit it off. I became a semi-regular having no idea that Jim would end up not long after with national shows on radio and then TV. I know Jim can be an acquired taste. To be honest I could live without most of the "clone takes," and when I host I tell the call screeners to tell callers I'm looking for questions and discussion, not takes. Every once in a while someone starts in on a take and someone presses a button in LA and they're gone.
I enjoy hosting although I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to do three hours a day alone in a studio, five days a week. That's work. If I ever did radio on a regular basis I would want someone in studio with me--preferably someone I liked. In the past I've been approached on a number of occasions about hosting a show and the conversation usually goes something like this:
"We've heard you when you've hosted shows in the past and really like what you do."
"Thanks. It's fun, I just wouldn't want it to interfere with my writing because that's what I like to do the most."
"Oh, of course. We could work something around your schedule."
"Great."
Things usually go well until the forbidden subject comes up: money. Most radio programming guys (not to mention my old friends at ESPN) always count on ego to get them past the money issue. As in: you'll have your own radio show (!!) so you don't need to be paid very much. (Or in the case of ESPN, 'you're on ESPN, that should be honor enough for you.'). I have as much ego as anybody but I also am lucky enough to have a very busy writing life for which I'm well paid. I don't NEED my own radio show (or to be on ESPN) although I'd do it under the right circumstances for reasonable money.
So, it always comes down to this. "We couldn't pay you very much--but you wouldn't be doing this for the money."
"Really? Why else would I do it?"
That usually brings negotiations to a screeching halt. One guy at a national radio network (no, NOT ESPN in fact) must have called me a half dozen times to discuss his philosophy of radio. I listened and listened and finally brought up the subject of money. He said he would get back to me, "within a week."
That was exactly a year ago.
Thank God I didn't sit and wait by the phone.
I am not going to mimick Ken Beatrice, a long time sportstalk host in Boston and Washington who used to always say, "This is YOUR show." This is my blog but if I'm going to keep doing it you readers have to enjoy it. So, needless to say, input is welcomed.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled blog.
I watched some of The Monday Night Football game last night. I missed the finish because I just can't stay up that late and then get up at 7 to start getting my son ready for school. I noticed Tiger Woods on the Colts sideline. One thing that told me was just how important the upcoming Tour Championship in Atlanta this week is to him. I know he knows the golf course (East Lake) well and I'm not saying he won't win--to quote Lefty Driesell, "I may be dumb, but I ain't stupid,"--but if this FedEx Cup thing really mattered to him do you think he'd be standing on a sideline in Miami less than three days before he tees it up? Don't think so.
That's the problem with these so-called 'playoffs,' they concocted on The PGA Tour three years ago, mostly because Woods and Phil Mickelson told Commissioner Tim Finchem they weren't going to show up for the season ending event if it was still played in early November. It's kind of tough for golf to have a "climactic," event without Woods and Mickelson so Finchem managed to get FedEx to put up big money to sponsor the "FedEx Cup," and tried to create drama with the four tournament "playoffs."
There are problems with this that may be unsolvable because golf just doesn't lend itself to this sort of format. For one thing, how big a deal can 'playoffs,' be when 125 players make it? That makes the NBA and NHL playoffs look elite. No knock on Heath Slocum but he gets in at No. 124--his key points coming at a tournament played opposite a World Golf Championship event meaning none of the top guys were in the field--then wins the first playoff event and goes to number FIVE on the list?
If they want to shorten the season, that's fine. But just throwing more money at a bunch of rich guys in order to get them to tee it up a few extra times--during football season--isn't going to generate interest no matter how much you try to hype the thing, and God knows the tour has tried to hype it. My suggestion is this: Let the first three tournaments that are currently, 'playoff,' events be the last three events of the so-called regular season. Inch the points up as little--but not too much--and then send the top 32 guys to East Lake and have them play MATCH play.
The TV folks might have a heart attack at the thought of a Mark Leishman-Retief Goosen final (no offense to either guy) but the fact is their ratings are nowhere right now anyway. And, if some year you did get Tiger-Phil in the final or Tiger-Ernie Els or how about this: Tiger-Y.E. Yang this year in a PGA rematch, you might get a few people to watch. Plus, it would be far more dramatic.
That's my suggestion for the day. Oh, in case you were wondering why Woods was hanging out on the Colts sideline, it's because he's friendly with Peyton Manning. They played together in the pro-am this year in Charlotte. Like a lot of elite athletes, Manning loves to play golf and is a good player. I was the MC for the pro-am draw party for the tournament and ran into Manning before dinner started. I was curious about how things were going during the offseason with Tony Dungy gone and Jim Caldwell taking his place. Manning wanted to talk about golf--tour golf and his own golf. I got a detailed description of his off-season regimen--on the golf course.
Changing subjects...I hosted Jim Rome's radio show yesterday. I've been an occasional guest host for about 10 years now and Jim has always had me on whenever I have a book out. People have asked in the past how I became friends with Jim. It's a pretty simple story. Twenty (or more) years ago a friend of mine named Judy Carlough was running the new all sports station in San Diego. She called and told me she had a young overnight host she thought was talented and he was hoping I'd go on with him and that he could pre-tape before I went to bed so I wouldn't have to stay up half the night to be on.
I was happy to do it--I never could turn Judy down under any circumstances--and then the young host turned out to be very bright and asked very good questions. We hit it off. I became a semi-regular having no idea that Jim would end up not long after with national shows on radio and then TV. I know Jim can be an acquired taste. To be honest I could live without most of the "clone takes," and when I host I tell the call screeners to tell callers I'm looking for questions and discussion, not takes. Every once in a while someone starts in on a take and someone presses a button in LA and they're gone.
I enjoy hosting although I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to do three hours a day alone in a studio, five days a week. That's work. If I ever did radio on a regular basis I would want someone in studio with me--preferably someone I liked. In the past I've been approached on a number of occasions about hosting a show and the conversation usually goes something like this:
"We've heard you when you've hosted shows in the past and really like what you do."
"Thanks. It's fun, I just wouldn't want it to interfere with my writing because that's what I like to do the most."
"Oh, of course. We could work something around your schedule."
"Great."
Things usually go well until the forbidden subject comes up: money. Most radio programming guys (not to mention my old friends at ESPN) always count on ego to get them past the money issue. As in: you'll have your own radio show (!!) so you don't need to be paid very much. (Or in the case of ESPN, 'you're on ESPN, that should be honor enough for you.'). I have as much ego as anybody but I also am lucky enough to have a very busy writing life for which I'm well paid. I don't NEED my own radio show (or to be on ESPN) although I'd do it under the right circumstances for reasonable money.
So, it always comes down to this. "We couldn't pay you very much--but you wouldn't be doing this for the money."
"Really? Why else would I do it?"
That usually brings negotiations to a screeching halt. One guy at a national radio network (no, NOT ESPN in fact) must have called me a half dozen times to discuss his philosophy of radio. I listened and listened and finally brought up the subject of money. He said he would get back to me, "within a week."
That was exactly a year ago.
Thank God I didn't sit and wait by the phone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)