The Masters 2019

[MorseMoose]

Uhhhh...if you're not watching the Masters, you might want to turn it on before it's too late to watch history.

[MorseMoose]

Wow...

[Cobra Mgr]

[ry1220]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

Wow...

What a weekend!

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by ry1220

What a weekend!

I was never a Tiger fan. From when he arrived on the scene, never got excited about him winning. I felt justified in this thinking with his downfall. But dang if I haven't cheered from his success the last couple years!

[Cobra Mgr]

No longer a Tiger fan. I was in favor of a minority breaking thru barriers in the sport. But I hate that the media has made the sport into Tiger....then anything else. Everytime they talk golf its "what happened w/Woods" and then "oh yeah, some other people were involved." Same reason why I got tired of Jordan/LeBron dominated NBA coverage & the Zion-only reporting in the NCAA this season. It's a disservice to the sport & an insult to the other competitors.

And now the PGA is going to turn into the Tiger Tour once again. So, not as if anyone cares, I'm not thrilled.

[MorseMoose]

How dare they be good and make everyone cover what they do!

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by MorseMoose

How dare they be good and make everyone cover what they do!

If that's what you took from my post, then you completely missed the point.

[cephasjames]

From your post, it sounds like you don't like when a player (or team?) is overexposed by the media. Which is completely valid. But the reason they are overexposed is because they're really good and/or because they hike ratings. That's why MM's point makes sense even if that wasn't the intent of your post.

[cephasjames]

As for the 2019 Masters, I've always liked Tiger. I wrestled with whether I wanted him to succeed again or be that once great star that just fell short because of life/injuries/etc. Either would be historic, but I wasn't sure which I wanted to see happen most. I'm glad I got to watch him win. It was intense and fun.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by cephasjames

From your post, it sounds like you don't like when a player (or team?) is overexposed by the media. Which is completely valid. But the reason they are overexposed is because they're really good and/or because they hike ratings. That's why MM's point makes sense even if that wasn't the intent of your post.

"Overexposed" by definition, means the exposure is too much. There is no reason to go overboard. They can highlight their greatness without almost completely dismissing everything else.

There is a reason why the NFL ratings don't collapse when the Mannings, Favres, & Gronks retire. Because the NFL doesn't allow the media to focus on one player/team. Every team HAS to have a nationally broadcast game. They aren't allowed to put the Cowboys on @ 8:30 pm each time. Therefore, their broadcast partners must put some balance to their coverage, less they damage their own interests.

But when Woods isn't involved? Rankings tank. When Jordan retired? Rankings tanked. I bet when the season ratings come out this year, the NBA's ratings will drop because James was injured & then shut down. All those times ESPN & TNT scheduled the Lakers did them in.

PUTTING ALL FOCUS ON ONE SMALL PART OF THE SPORT, NO MATTER HOW GOOD, DAMAGES THE SPORT IN THE LONG RUN.

They aren't creating golf fans. They are creating Tiger Woods fans. They aren't creating NBA fans, they are creating LBJ fans. I don't fault the athlete for being dynamic & entertaining. I fault the media for being myopic. Therefore, in the big picture, Tiger winning is good for Tiger. Not golf. Therefore, MM's post was totally irrelevant to the point I was making and completely missplaced. It was a sarcastic retort to a position that had never been presented.

[pgjocki]

I want to know when they are going to make the Tiger movie. It can be a feel good story while mentioning the hooks he hit both on the course and in hotel rooms.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

"Overexposed" by definition, means the exposure is too much. There is no reason to go overboard. They can highlight their greatness without almost completely dismissing everything else.

There is a reason why the NFL ratings don't collapse when the Mannings, Favres, & Gronks retire. Because the NFL doesn't allow the media to focus on one player/team. Every team HAS to have a nationally broadcast game. They aren't allowed to put the Cowboys on @ 8:30 pm each time. Therefore, their broadcast partners must put some balance to their coverage, less they damage their own interests.

But when Woods isn't involved? Rankings tank. When Jordan retired? Rankings tanked. I bet when the season ratings come out this year, the NBA's ratings will drop because James was injured & then shut down. All those times ESPN & TNT scheduled the Lakers did them in.

PUTTING ALL FOCUS ON ONE SMALL PART OF THE SPORT, NO MATTER HOW GOOD, DAMAGES THE SPORT IN THE LONG RUN.

They aren't creating golf fans. They are creating Tiger Woods fans. They aren't creating NBA fans, they are creating LBJ fans. I don't fault the athlete for being dynamic & entertaining. I fault the media for being myopic. Therefore, in the big picture, Tiger winning is good for Tiger. Not golf. Therefore, MM's post was totally irrelevant to the point I was making and completely missplaced. It was a sarcastic retort to a position that had never been presented.

Tiger Woods brought millions of new fans to the sport.

That's a fact you cannot deny.


I get your point how sports over hype certain players, how some get too much attention in the media while many others get little or none. I agree, they should promote other players more, because it does create imbalance otherwise.

At the end of the day though, it's like I said in the thread about baseball attendance - All that matters in this day and age is the WOW factor and the Mega $$$$ that follow it in the door.

It pisses me off to no end, because it's ruined sports, among many other things, imo.

But it is what we have today isn't it. Make $$$ - push what sells - yadda yadda yadda. Can you look at anything today, can you glance anywhere without some advertisement being shoved in your face?

Here, look at this - this guy just won the Masters, oh and BTW - He uses Nike Clubs and clothes, drives a BMW, wears brown socks on Mon. Can I interest you in some new Nike Gear Sir or Ma'am? Some new brown socks maybe???

There's no end to it....

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

Tiger Woods brought millions of new fans to the sport.

That's a fact you cannot deny.

I don't. I don't criticize Woods in any form. He's done nothing wrong. I have a problem with the media and what has resulted from Tiger's dominance.

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

I don't. I don't criticize Woods in any form. He's done nothing wrong. I have a problem with the media and what has resulted from Tiger's dominance.

No, you didn't deny it, but you certainly made a point about how it creates Tiger fans, not golf fans. Well, you're wrong. Tiger's presence has created millions of new Golf fans. Sure, they're fans of Tiger, but they've also become fans of the sport. The ratings don't drop when he's not there, they rise when is there. Ratings have done fantastic the past 15 yrs without Tiger and with players like McIlroy, Spieth, Day, Fowler, Johnson to name just a few.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

No, you didn't deny it, but you certainly made a point about how it creates Tiger fans, not golf fans. Well, you're wrong. Tiger's presence has created millions of new Golf fans. Sure, they're fans of Tiger, but they've also become fans of the sport. The ratings don't drop when he's not there, they rise when is there. Ratings have done fantastic the past 15 yrs without Tiger and with players like McIlroy, Spieth, Day, Fowler, Johnson to name just a few.

In the greater scheme of things, I disagree. I certainly hope we don't think I'm talking absolutes here. But I truly believe the larger percentage of fan increase post-Tiger are interested in him and him alone. Initially, that is to be expected. But afterward, it is the duty of the powers that be to take that initial interest and grow it. And the ESPN's of the world have not done that. Golf is still viewed as a white man's sport w/one black guy in it. And once he is gone, any AA interest in the game will dissipate. Any reports from the rounds will fall back to the last 10 minutes of the highlight shows. And the top players in the sport will have as much world recognition as the cafeteria lady @ your local elementary school.

[MorseMoose]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

No longer a Tiger fan.

^^

[Bluenoser]

Originally Posted by Cobra Mgr

In the greater scheme of things, I disagree. I certainly hope we don't think I'm talking absolutes here. But I truly believe the larger percentage of fan increase post-Tiger are interested in him and him alone. Initially, that is to be expected. But afterward, it is the duty of the powers that be to take that initial interest and grow it. And the ESPN's of the world have not done that. Golf is still viewed as a white man's sport w/one black guy in it. And once he is gone, any AA interest in the game will dissipate. Any reports from the rounds will fall back to the last 10 minutes of the highlight shows. And the top players in the sport will have as much world recognition as the cafeteria lady @ your local elementary school.

Really? I'd like to see your substantiation for that comment, because it is far from true. There are plenty of players from all over the world that play on the PGA Tour, and they aren't all "white" except for one.

Ever heard of Vijay Singh? How about Angel Cabrera? K.J. Choi?

No? Didn't think so.

[Cobra Mgr]

Originally Posted by Bluenoser

Really? I'd like to see your substantiation for that comment, because it is far from true. There are plenty of players from all over the world that play on the PGA Tour, and they aren't all "white" except for one.

Ever heard of Vijay Singh? How about Angel Cabrera? K.J. Choi?

No? Didn't think so.

I know it aint true. Doesnt mean that isnt the perception. When u have Augusta having a women's tourney for the first time in 2019, it is easy to see why that perception still exists. We are a long way from Charlie Sifford. But Tiger winning the Masters hasnt changed golf's rep anymore than Reconstruction turned the ex Confederacy from being a bunch of racist states. Golf is still seen as a rich white man's sport.

[cephasjames]

Wow! You love broad brushes and hyperbole.