Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

PGA Tour: The Barclays in New Jersey


Anybodyhome

Recommended Posts

 

 

Look, golf would have nowhere near the popularity it currently has if not for Tiger.  As a matter of fact before Tiger came on the scene I would bet professional golf was on the way out.  It had reached it's popularity height years before and was rapidly on the way down to obscurity.

 

 

 

 

 

Not sure where you get this.  Golf was on it's way out?  How?

 

I'm not denying that Tiger had an impact on the popularity of the game, especially for young people, but on it's way out?  Hardly.

 

 

People love a winner.  Tiger came on the tour and dominated for years, people love that...  see also Michael Jordan and guys of that type for proof of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My issue isn't with Tiger himself because I do not know the guy. As a matter of fact, I'm sure the vast majority of people don't know him. I have the same reaction and feelings about a lot of celebs/people and their almost cult-like following.

 

People love Tiger and will follow him to the ends of the Earth, or a golf tournament. But he's far from being approachable, likeable, friendly or even human.

 

People love Dale Earnhardt, Jr. too, and he seems to be a nice guy and somewhat approachable and friendly. But his level of success in his chosen profession is nowhere close to Tiger, relatively speaking. 

 

So, is it that people love a winner? Because Dale Earnhardt, Jr. certainly isn't a winner.

 

Kobe Bryant is another winner who is loved by fans, but is very much like Tiger in that he's very aloof, not real friendly and is sometimes a downright arrogant a$$ during pressers and interviews.

 

Then, on the opposite side of that coin is a guy like Phil Mickelson, who has drawn the ire of more than a few posters on this board even. But he's also a winner and a genuinely nice guy. Some have claimed he's a jerk around his competitors, but hey, when I'm competing, I'm there to win, not make friends.

 

So, yes, while the fans simply dictate via TV viewership and ratings who the media covers, I'm still trying to figure out what the viewing public uses as criteria when choosing their sports idols. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So, yes, while the fans simply dictate via TV viewership and ratings who the media covers, I'm still trying to figure out what the viewing public uses as criteria when choosing their sports idols. 

 

When I decide whether or not I like a sports player, or an actor or actress, I base it on their performances in their craft.

 

I couldn't care less what they do in the hours I am not watching them work. 

 

I have a friend who refuses to watch Tom Cruise because she doesn't agree with his religion, she won't watch Susan Sarandon because she doesn't agree with her politics.

 

You know the only thing I care about Tom & Susan?  What they do during that 2 hours I am watching them work.  I'd rather know my neighbors opinions on politics rather than Susan Sarandon or Bruce Springsteen.

 

I like Tiger because I enjoy watching him play and compete on the golf course.  As far as I'm concerned, I shouldn't even KNOW what his relationship is with his wife, or girlfriend, or a friggin goat for that matter.

 

Whether or not Tiger gives to the United Way, or signs 10 autographs instead of 100, or smiles like a goofy dickhead after hitting a poor shot is of no concern to me.

 

I'm part of the viewing public and I choose my favorite athletes based on past and present performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you get this.  Golf was on it's way out?  How?

 

I'm not denying that Tiger had an impact on the popularity of the game, especially for young people, but on it's way out?  Hardly.

 

 

People love a winner.  Tiger came on the tour and dominated for years, people love that...  see also Michael Jordan and guys of that type for proof of this.

 

Ratings were stagnant.  Purses were stagnant.

 

The number of younger golfers entering the game was shrinking.

 

Arnold, Gary, Jack were pretty much finished.

 

Tiger energized everything having to do with the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ratings were stagnant.  Purses were stagnant.

 

The number of younger golfers entering the game was shrinking.

 

Arnold, Gary, Jack were pretty much finished.

 

Tiger energized everything having to do with the game.

 

Again, I'm not denying Tiger had an effect...  but to say that golf was dying?  I think you're dead wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, FYI... it's not just Tiger that brings in the ratings...

 

 

http://blogs.golf.com/presstent/2013/02/tv-ratings-plunge-without-tiger-mickelson.html

 

 

 

Of course, before Pebble Beach, weekend golf ratings were off the chart as viewers tuned in to watch Phil Mickelson's win at the Phoenix Open (up 65 percent) and Tiger Woods's win at the Farmers Insurance Open (up 85 percent). The downward trend continued at the Accenture Match Play Championship last weekend after Woods and Rory McIlroy lost in the first round. (Mickelson didn't play the event.) 
 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, instead of splitting hairs, the sport was not growing.

 

Yeah I can agree with that.  But I suspect that had been the case for many years.

 

Before Tiger there were plenty of stars playing... Tom Watson, Ernie Els, David Duval (at the time)... hell, even John Daly.

 

Phil was up and coming then too...

 

 

Tiger just came in and dominated like no one had done since Nicklaus and it did garner a lot of attention, particularly since he was so young.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...