Boo, Tiger!

[NuggyBuggy 0]

Golf as a sport has been in a steady decline for about a decade. Golf rounds played in the United States have dropped each year since 2000. Interesting that the decline of golf seems to correspond with the arrival of Tiger on the scene.

I am not aware of these statistics, but even if true, you can't attribute them to one player. Correlation does not imply causation. Even if golf is in decline, who is to say how much further it would have declined without Tiger ?

And, golf viewership on television is shrinking.

It is well known that when Tiger Woods is not in the hunt, or even when he is not competing in a tournament, viewership goes down. So how do you blame declining golf viewership overall on Tiger ? Hockey's viewership IS pathetic. Is that the fault of Crosby and Ovechkin ?

The claims about Tiger doing so much for golf are a myth. Here's just one quote on point:

"According to the National Golf Foundation, the number of people playing golf has not risen in any year since 2000, and has fallen from 30 million at the start of the decade to 26 million now."

The quote is not on point if it doesn't address what, if anything, Tiger had to do with this decline, and how much farther the decline might have been without Tiger on the scene.

[mattzilla 0]

He's had awfully weak competition and has never won a single tournament when trailing entering the final round.

K, lets be honest here. the level of competition is probably better than ever. guys are better conditioned and just better atheletes in general, the guy is making them all look bad.

Did Michael Jordan ever say anything controversial? no. does LeBron? no. I dont think its these guys responsibility to speak up against everything. If they dont care, why should they say anything? If I had money, would i all the sudden give a shit about _____________( fill in the blank )? no.

That said, hockey isnt exactly a major sport in most parts of the US. Doesnt it rate behind afl? and even afl2?

[eric42434224 1]

Golf as a sport has been in a steady decline for about a decade. Golf rounds played in the United States have dropped each year since 2000. Interesting that the decline of golf seems to correspond with the arrival of Tiger on the scene.

I am not aware of these statistics, but even if true, you can't attribute them to one player. Correlation does not imply causation. Even if golf is in decline, who is to say how much further it would have declined without Tiger ?

And, golf viewership on television is shrinking.

It is well known that when Tiger Woods is not in the hunt, or even when he is not competing in a tournament, viewership goes down. So how do you blame declining golf viewership overall on Tiger ? Hockey's viewership IS pathetic. Is that the fault of Crosby and Ovechkin ?

The claims about Tiger doing so much for golf are a myth. Here's just one quote on point:

"According to the National Golf Foundation, the number of people playing golf has not risen in any year since 2000, and has fallen from 30 million at the start of the decade to 26 million now."

The quote is not on point if it doesn't address what, if anything, Tiger had to do with this decline, and how much farther the decline might have been without Tiger on the scene.

Well put. Logical. Sound reasoning. Articulate, intelligent, and to the point. Are you sure you are a Hockey player? LOL.

[AWE46M3 0]

Tiger avoids controversy most of the time because people tend to over react to what a premier athlete or someone with star power says. If you dont believe me, read the previous posts again. Tiger also enjoys his privacy, oddly enough - I mean it's not that important to have privacy is it? As for the comment about hockey, I'm sure he said it in jest, but even if he didn't does it REALLY matter?

Tiger has never won a major when coming from behind in the final round; so what's the point of bringing that up in this conversation? Why go off on a tangent because of a comment you dont like. Its obvious Tiger is in an elite league that very few can say they're a part of. Say what you will about Tiger, but he's done more for golf and the community than any single hockey player I can think of.

Say what you want about Tiger, but don't make up facts. Golf as a sport has been in a steady decline for about a decade. Golf rounds played in the United States have dropped each year since 2000. Interesting that the decline of golf seems to correspond with the arrival of Tiger on the scene. The claims about Tiger doing so much for golf are a myth. Here's just one quote on point:

"According to the National Golf Foundation, the number of people playing golf has not risen in any year since 2000, and has fallen from 30 million at the start of the decade to 26 million now."

There has also been a spate of golf courses being sold and redeveloped in recent times. And, golf viewership on television is shrinking. There is a series of articles on this in the Times and various business journals. Maybe some of that is because Tiger is more about himself than he is about the game. I don't know, but the stories would suggest that. Gretzky never struck me that way. What he did for hockey towers over what Tiger has "done" for golf, if you count reducing games played, the reducing development of courses, and reducing television viewership as doing something for the game.

Making facts up? Wow, ok. Go to any golf course and take a look at how many kids playing golf now and tell me none of that is Tiger's influence. In fact, you can probably ask most clubs pros and they'll tell you more kids play now because of people like Tiger in the game.

As already mentioned, when Tiger is not in contention or at an event period, it's very well known TV viewership is considerably lower as opposed to when he is.

Look at the Tiger Woods Foundation, First Tee Program, TW Learning Centers, and he's done nothing for golf or the community? Ok, if you say so...

What I don't fully understand is, does anyone know, with certainty, that the comment was not a joke of some sort? If you've ever see Tiger in a press conference or interview, he can be fairly sarcastic...

Golf, like other sports, is different now compared to when the past "greats" played. So let's not compare eras and say competition is weak now; would it be appropriate to say that because no one will ever likely amass 200+ points again in the NHL? I wouldn't think so - different ears, different games.

[NuggyBuggy 0]

He's had awfully weak competition and has never won a single tournament when trailing entering the final round.

Or to put it another way, out of the 64 tournaments (including 13 majors) he won, he lead everybody else in the field going into the final round, and never gave up that lead. The convoluted logic you need to go through to diminish his accomplishments is completely beyond me.

[psh 25]

Golf as a sport has been in a steady decline for about a decade. Golf rounds played in the United States have dropped each year since 2000. Interesting that the decline of golf seems to correspond with the arrival of Tiger on the scene.

I am not aware of these statistics, but even if true, you can't attribute them to one player. Correlation does not imply causation. Even if golf is in decline, who is to say how much further it would have declined without Tiger ?

And, golf viewership on television is shrinking.

It is well known that when Tiger Woods is not in the hunt, or even when he is not competing in a tournament, viewership goes down. So how do you blame declining golf viewership overall on Tiger ? Hockey's viewership IS pathetic. Is that the fault of Crosby and Ovechkin ?

The claims about Tiger doing so much for golf are a myth. Here's just one quote on point:

"According to the National Golf Foundation, the number of people playing golf has not risen in any year since 2000, and has fallen from 30 million at the start of the decade to 26 million now."

The quote is not on point if it doesn't address what, if anything, Tiger had to do with this decline, and how much farther the decline might have been without Tiger on the scene.

Understood, NB. Post hoc ergo propter hoc. However, I was responding to the guy who claimed Tiger has done more for golf and the community than any hockey player ever has [presumably for hockey, but that was never stated].

So, I wanted to point out that the NHL and amateur hockey were clearly better off at the end of 99's tenure than before. The PGA and amateur golf appear to be trending toward decline during Tiger's tenure. Of course we can't prove causation, but given the data we have, it's absurd to argue that Tiger has done more for golf than any hockey player has done for his sport.

I love hockey and enjoy golf--have played both sports since shortly after I could walk. To me, this thread borders upon absurd, but I wanted to correct some misperceptions about golf since I've casually followed the industry for a few years.

My guess is that what is fueling this thread, at least from an American perspective, is the fact that the media is persistently anticipating the funeral of hockey and the NHL. Good or bad, Tiger is the media as Jordan was the media in his time. They own their sports and can drive the coverage of not only their sports but others. For Tiger to casually dismiss hockey plays right into the historical trend of burying hockey. Hockey players and fans want recognition for the game. And more than anything, they hate the perpetuation of obvious myths, especially about the death of the game and to a lesser extent about the myth that all hockey games end with a Bertuzzi/Simon type incident. Amateur hockey is booming in the US. There are vibrant and rapidly growing leagues in Dallas and L.A. and the Carolinas that barely existed a decade ago. Adult women are a growing demographic in amateur leagues. And, even though the playoffs were largely on Versus, television viewing of the playoffs is way, way up from the years immediately preceding the lock out. And NHL receipts are up, the cap is going up. The NHL won't ever be the NFL (and god forbid it ever is--the NFL is more of a marketing agency than a sports league anymore and so it's product is well nigh unwatchable to me), but it is doing well and growing. Too bad the media can't seem to acknowledge that. And now Tiger perpetuates the problem with a petty, uneccessary dig.

[eric42434224 1]

What Tiger said, jokingly or not, is really quite true. I stopped playing Hockey for 20+ years, and was involved with many other things (College, band, carrer, wife, house, baby). I lost Hockey, was unaware of who the players were, who were the good teams, and who even won the cup. The point is that Hockey was out of sight and out of mind. Tiger says, "does anyone watch Hockey anymore?" I think the answer is no, they dont. We all know it. Hockey has a horrible presence outside of particular markets, and atrocious on any national level in respects to media or viewership. I decided to play now, on a whim, and am addicted to it. But ask anyone who isnt even into sports about other sports. They know Jordan, Shaq, Kobe....they know Jeter, A-Rod, Big Papi....they know T.O, Brady, Manning brothers.....do they even have a frickin clue who Crosby and Ovechkin are? But I bet EVERYONE knows who Tiger is. It may be sad, but it is most assuredly true. Was Tigers comment a joke? Perhaps. was it not necessary? Perhaps. Is he an elite Athelete? Yes. Is golf a legitimate sport? Yes. Should Hockey Players live up to their reputation and be a little tough and stop the "he hurt my feeewings" attitude? Absolutely.

[Hockeydog 8]

but he's done more for golf and the community than any single hockey player I can think of.

He's done more for golf than any hockey player has done for golf, I will agree!

To say he's done more for the community than any hockey player would be hard to fathom. Hockey players give to the community as much as any pro athletes do, maybe more. ( my opinion not based on hard numbers)

[AWE46M3 0]

but he's done more for golf and the community than any single hockey player I can think of.

He's done more for golf than any hockey player has done for golf, I will agree!

To say he's done more for the community than any hockey player would be hard to fathom. Hockey players give to the community as much as any pro athletes do, maybe more. ( my opinion not based on hard numbers)

Ok, this caused me to have to edit the post... haha

[FCHC53 0]

Tiger Woods certainly is a fine golfer. The problem I have is that it's simply silly to compare a golfer to an athlete, any golfer for that matter.

[Cleophus 0]

Lots of provocative comments here.

But nobody commenting yet on the worst part of Tiger's quote!: He's a f***ing Dodger fan.

Dodger fan = scum, regardless of the hockey comments. ;)

[eric42434224 1]

Tiger Woods certainly is a fine golfer. The problem I have is that it's simply silly to compare a golfer to an athlete, any golfer for that matter.

There is no doubt what so ever that he is an athelete.

There is no doubt what so ever that golf is a sport.

Perhaps you need to re-visit the definition of the word, as well as familiarize yourself with what it takes to be a pro golfer, much less the best golfer.

Saying Tiger is not an athelete is like saying David Ortiz is not an athelete. Ortiz as a DH sits on the bench 98% of the game, and gets up 3-4 times to hit a white ball with a stick. ATiger hits a white ball with a stick too....at least Tiger isnt sitting on the bench for 98% of the game.

[mrusse01 0]

Tiger Woods certainly is a fine golfer. The problem I have is that it's simply silly to compare a golfer to an athlete, any golfer for that matter.

You don't play golf, do you?

If golfers aren't athelets, then neither are major league pitchers or race car drivers. All three require ridiculous co-ordination and skill, but perhaps not the traditional 'athletic' aspects of being able to run fast, jump high, or be physically strong.

[chippa13 1844]

He can fuck himself

That man is talented.

Tiger avoids controversy most of the time because people tend to over react to what a premier athlete or someone with star power says. If you dont believe me, read the previous posts again. Tiger also enjoys his privacy, oddly enough - I mean it's not that important to have privacy is it? As for the comment about hockey, I'm sure he said it in jest, but even if he didn't does it REALLY matter?

Tiger has never won a major when coming from behind in the final round; so what's the point of bringing that up in this conversation? Why go off on a tangent because of a comment you dont like. Its obvious Tiger is in an elite league that very few can say they're a part of. Say what you will about Tiger, but he's done more for golf and the community than any single hockey player I can think of.

Say what you want about Tiger, but don't make up facts. Golf as a sport has been in a steady decline for about a decade. Golf rounds played in the United States have dropped each year since 2000. Interesting that the decline of golf seems to correspond with the arrival of Tiger on the scene. The claims about Tiger doing so much for golf are a myth. Here's just one quote on point:

"According to the National Golf Foundation, the number of people playing golf has not risen in any year since 2000, and has fallen from 30 million at the start of the decade to 26 million now."

There has also been a spate of golf courses being sold and redeveloped in recent times. And, golf viewership on television is shrinking. There is a series of articles on this in the Times and various business journals. Maybe some of that is because Tiger is more about himself than he is about the game. I don't know, but the stories would suggest that. Gretzky never struck me that way. What he did for hockey towers over what Tiger has "done" for golf, if you count reducing games played, the reducing development of courses, and reducing television viewership as doing something for the game.

I'm sure none of that has to do with golf being a somewhat expensive sport and the economy being in a bit of a downswing for the last 7-8 years. Context people, context.

[psh 25]

Chippa,

Your point about the economy is a good one, but is not necessarily responsive. Hockey is equally if not more expensive than golf. Yet it is growing on the amateur and pro level. Golf is on the decline on both levels. In light of those trends, it is hard to argue that Tiger has somehow done more for his sport than any hockey player--and that is the statement I was addressing.

Sports versus games: I start with the premise that any activity that John Daly or C.C. Sabbathia or David Wells can perform at a truly exceptional level can't be a sport. It is a game. For me, a sport must require high degrees of strength, agility, endurance, and dexterity. Sports usually also require high degrees of rapid cognition, whether in the form of reacting to plays or anticipating plays, but not always, such as in pure endurance sports like marathon running. I say that rules out golf, baseball, and driving a car in circles over and over again. I'm open to an argument that sports include other types of car racing, but am not sure. Of course, it's impossible to come up with a perfect definition, but the one above works pretty well for me.

[dcdot377 0]

tell tiger to go fuck him self

[Monty22 832]

Tiger Woods certainly is a fine golfer. The problem I have is that it's simply silly to compare a golfer to an athlete, any golfer for that matter.

You don't play golf, do you?

If golfers aren't athelets, then neither are major league pitchers or race car drivers. All three require ridiculous co-ordination and skill, but perhaps not the traditional 'athletic' aspects of being able to run fast, jump high, or be physically strong.

I play golf, and consider it an activity rather than a sport.

[eric42434224 1]

Chippa,

Your point about the economy is a good one, but is not necessarily responsive. Hockey is equally if not more expensive then golf. Yet it is growing on the amateur and pro level. Golf is on the decline on both levels. In light of those trends, it is hard to argue that Tiger has somehow done more for his sport than any hockey player--and that is the statement I was addressing.

Sports versus games: I start with the premise that any activity that John Daly or C.C. Sabbathia or David Wells can perform at a truly exceptional level can't be a sport. It is a game. For me, a sport must require high degrees of strength, agility, endurance, and dexterity. Sports usually also require high degrees of rapid cognition, whether in the form of reacting to plays or anticipating plays, but not always, such as in pure endurance sports like marathon running. I say that rules out golf, baseball, and driving a car in circles over and over again. I'm open to an argument that sports include other types of car racing, but am not sure. Of course, it's impossible to come up with a perfect definition, but the one above works pretty well for me.

That is obviously your opinion of a sport, but 99% of the educated population would disagree with you, especially on Baseball.

Here is the definition of the word sport:

Main Entry: sport

Function: noun

Date: 15th century 1 a: a source of diversion : recreation b: sexual play c (1): physical activity engaged in for pleasure (2): a particular activity (as an athletic game) so engaged in

Here is the definition of the word athlete:

Main Entry: ath·lete

Pronunciation: \ˈath-ˌlēt, ÷ˈa-thə-ˌlēt\

Function: noun

Etymology: Middle English, from Latin athleta, from Greek athlētēs, from athlein to contend for a prize, from athlon prize, contest

Date: 15th century

: a person who is trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina

By definition, which is how the educated world derives meanings from words, Golf, Baseball, and Race car driving are all indeed sports.

Also, by definition, John Daly or C.C. Sabbathia or David Wells are all athletes. An athelete needs to participate in sports that require strength, agility, or stamina. The operative word is OR. all are not required, nor does it specify any threshold of competence.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but perhaps you need to come up with a new word to describe your particular views of these sports and athletes.

Tiger Woods certainly is a fine golfer. The problem I have is that it's simply silly to compare a golfer to an athlete, any golfer for that matter.

You don't play golf, do you?

If golfers aren't athelets, then neither are major league pitchers or race car drivers. All three require ridiculous co-ordination and skill, but perhaps not the traditional 'athletic' aspects of being able to run fast, jump high, or be physically strong.

I play golf, and consider it an activity rather than a sport.

You would be wrong then, but one is always free to be wrong, right? :)

[dcdot377 0]

Also, by definition, John Daly or C.C. Sabbathia or David Wells are all athletes

all right

thats a stretch i dont know if i would go that far. they play a sport, true

but come on thoes guys are not in any particular shape other than round

[eric42434224 1]

Also, by definition, John Daly or C.C. Sabbathia or David Wells are all athletes

all right

thats a stretch i dont know if i would go that far. they play a sport, true

but come on thoes guys are not in any particular shape other than round

The physical appearance does not preclude one from being an athelete.

50% of the Offensive line in the NFL look like they live their life at an All-you-can-eat Chinese Buffet!

They look fatter than the three afore mentioned, but could probably out run anyone here!

My point is that they are all sports, and are all athletes.

One may have an opinion as to which sports are "manly", or "tough", or ones that are "wimpy" or "lame".....but those are all just opinions from one persons point of view filtered through their own experiences and predjuices.

You dont have to hold Pro-Wrestling, NASCAR, or golf in the same high esteem or respect them as much as Hockey, Football, etc...but they are all from the same family of Sport.

You can call it a "fake" sport, a "pussy" sport, a "redneck" sport, etc....but in the end, they are all a sport.

I dont mean to come across as condescending, and I apologize if I am.

I personally do not hold certain sports is as high a regard as others. Everyone else does the same. JMHO

[psh 25]

Of course, when discussing sports vs. games or activities, what we are trying to do is to define the philosophical essence of "sport." That requires a deeper examination than a reference to Webster, but I think your post did advance the discussion. I suppose we could concede that any of the activities mentioned are sports, and then to continue the conversation we could try to identify tiers of activities, the highest requiring the greatest amounts of athleticism and the lowest requiring the least amounts of athleticism to perform well. But, I prefer coming up with a more strict definition of "sport." It's simpler, and it's easier to debate.

I'd say John Daly is not an athlete. There is no way he could run half a mile without requiring medical attention. If he can perform his activity at a world class level, but is so unhealthy that if he ran or tried to change directions rapidly he would risk bodily injury, I can't call his activity a sport. I think most of the public would agree. But I could be wrong. I'd say the same about Wells and Sabathia. You could add that none of these three would ever survive for a minute on an offensive line. I doubt they have the dexterity or the strength.

Offensive line men. I'd say they are athletes and that football is therefore a sport. They may not be able to run a marathon, but as you point out, they CAN run. And they display dexterity on every play, not to mention strength, and they also display endurance on long offensive drives.

I doubt I can make it back to the conversation today, but it has been interesting.

Curious: how would those reading the thread vote? Of golf, baseball, football, hockey, race car driving, and I'll throw in competitive swimming for kicks, which are definitively "sports," or maybe more precisely, which require that one be an "athlete" to be performed well?

I'd say sports include: football, hockey, and swimming. No to golf, baseball, and race car driving.

Maybe more interestingly, what is the definitive sport, what takes the most athletic abililty to perform well?...

[patty2109 0]

After Ovechkin wins the Hart, he should just say Tiger who? What does he play?

that would be funny as hell

[gxc999 7]

After Ovechkin wins the Hart, he should just say Tiger who? What does he play?

that would be funny as hell

I bet you Ovechkin outdrives Tiger any day of the week if he plays golf for 4 or 5 months. Modano was crushing 390 yard drives back in his heyday. Yes, Tiger might've initially brought back previous fans into golf and even a few new ones, but that novelty has long worn off. Golf is NOT a sport, sorry.

[patty2109 0]

Wow.

I am a bit floored by some of these comments. Hockey fans all tout how tough they are, or their sport is....but some here start crying like babies because someone said something negative about their sport.

Suck it up and grow a pair please. Or better yet, ignore it.

As far as Tiger goes, he is entitled to his opinion, which isnt far off from the truth. As a spokesperson for many products, it probably isnt wise to talk negatively about anything at all. He is however, without a doubt, an athelete. And not just an athelete, but the type that completely dominates his sport. Like it or not, he is in the same ranks as Jordan, Gretzky, etc.....period.

I just find it ironic that HOCKEY PLAYERS have their panties in a bunch over this. Dont be the same way and bash golf and Tiger. It is a legitimate and difficult sport, and he may be the best golfer ever.

Hockey is my favorite sport, and more people go to Hockey Games on average than NBA games (17k ish, with NHL averaging 5 more).

Hockey is great and relevant....why would a pro golfer, or anyone for that matter, expressing a mildly negative comment on Hockey mean anything at all to any hockey player anywhere?

JMHO

End rant.

I think that hockey players are sick of people ripping on hockey in general. So many people poke fun at how "easy" it is. Tiger just pushed it over the edge. Hockey involves the precision of golf, the grace of ballet (sounds lame but it's true), the toughness of football and extreme patience and mental toughness. I think people like Tiger should get off their high horse and actually watch a full season of hockey and see just how hard it is on a person. All Tiger does is hit a ball and jump in his golf cart and at the end of the day he goes to his 5 star suite after hardly breaking a sweat and then rips on other athletes and hockey fans everywhere for that matter. Fuck him.

[AWE46M3 0]

^^^ You've never played golf have you? FYI No carts on PGA Tour... IIRC no one said hockey was easy though many people assume golf is, until they try it that is.

MANY people hit the ball as far, if not further, than Tiger - that's obvious. The difference is none are mentally as tough and disciplined; so whether Ovechikin or anyone else could outdrive him is meaningless. Tiger won a major championship last year hitting driver only one (1) time in 72 holes of play.