The EA Sports - Tiger Woods Relationship: Conflicting ideals

As companies have disassociated themselves with Tiger Woods since he apologized for his "transgressions," inevitably the decision to end their respective corporate affiliations with Woods has been a result of diligence and concern over whether the company's image would be scarred by a man who has lost so much public face.

While the true negative value of a continued relationship with Woods is likely to remain contested, corporations can hardly be criticized for their concern over a potential public relations disaster.

Thogh it would seem that corporations would be reluctant to drop Woods, even amidst his transgressions, because of his former reputation and status as the world's most popular figure, several companies have ran away from him faster than Democrats left Joe Lieberman.

Both Accenture and AT&T ended their relationships, Tag Heuer dropped its US Woods campaign; Gillette said it would downscale Tiger's presence; Gatorade discontinued its Tiger Woods drink, but stated that the company had made the decision before the car accident; General Motors said Tiger will no longer loan vehicles to Tiger for free; and, Golf Digest suspended Tiger's monthly column.

Yet, some companies have formally  expressed statements of support for Tiger. Upper Deck said it "Stands by Tiger Woods;" NetJets is "proud to have him involved with NetJets;" TLC Vision said their "relationship with him continues without change;" and Nike said Tiger and his family "have Nike's full support."

Tiger's other significant endorsement, EA SPORTS -- maker of the internationally popular Tiger Woods PGA TOUR video game -- has faced a whirlwind of media coverage over the last 48 hours as a leaked survey seems to symbolize doubt of their future relationship.

Since 1998, the Tiger Woods PGA TOUR video game, which is released in new version every year, has been offered for PC, PlayStation, Game Boy, PlayStation 2, XBox, GameCube, Mac OS, Nintendo DS, XBOX 360, PSP, Wii, PlayStation 3, and the iPhone. The game has become the quintessential golf video game for all gamers -- it's yearly anticipation is perhaps only rivaled by the Madden football series of video games.

On December 2, EA SPORTS, in their original statement of support, stated: "Our relationship with Tiger for more than a decade remains unchanged. We respect Tiger's privacy, we wish him a fast recovery and we look forward to seeing him back on the golf course."

On December 17, an EA SPORTS spokesperson stated: "We respect that this is a very difficult,and private situation for Tiger and his family. At this time, the strategy for our Tiger Woods PGA Tour business remains unchanged."

On January 4, President of EA SPORTS Pete Moore wrote in his blog: "Our relationship with Tiger has always been rooted in golf. We didn't form a relationship with him so that he could act as an arm's length endorser. Far from it. We chose to partner with Tiger in 1997 because we saw him as the world's best, most talented and exciting golfer." Moore announced that EA SPORTS would continue with the new Tiger WOODAS PGA TOUR Online game.

Tuesday evening, it was revealed that Greenfield Online (via Kotaku) released a survey with the following two questions:

"EA SPORTS makes a Tiger Woods video game. Has the controversy made your impressions of EA SPORTS more or less favorable, or has it had no impact?"

"Has the controversy made you more or less likely to buy a Tiger Woods related video game in the future?"

Where many corporations may cite the immorality of Tiger Woods, specifically with reference to him as a role model for children, as rationale for terminating their relationship with him, EA SPORTS stands unique in the breadth of impact that the company alone has on children. Video games are the dominating hobby of today's generation - appropriate or not. While many adults do play video games, particular EA SPORTS' line of sports games, the dominating constituency for EA SPORTS is clearly children.


Parents buy Tiger Woods PGA TOUR golf. 

With this, it may be that EA SPORTS does "need" a morally clean spokesperson. While EA Sports does not make and distribute any other video games with a title name featuring an athlete, it's most popular games, Madden and NBA Live, feature athletes on their covers.

The Madden series of football games, since 2001 when it began using NFL players on its cover, has featured: Eddie George (2001), Daunte Culpepper (2002), Marshall Faulk (2003), Michael Vick (2004), Ray Lewis (2005), Donovan McNabb (2006), Shaun Alexander (2007), Vince Young (2008), Brett Favre (2009), and Troy Polamalu and Larry Fitzgerald (2010).

In 2005, Daunte Culpepper wash charged with indecent conduct, disorderly conduct, and lewd or lascivious conduct for the sex boat cruise scandal; in early 2004, two men were arrested for distributing marijuana in Michael Vick's car, in Oct. 2004 security cameras showed members of Vick's entourage taking a watch from an airport security screener, in 2005 a woman filed a civil suit against Vick claiming that she had contracted herpes from Vick, and in 2007 Vick was charged for operating an interstate dog fighting venture; in 1996 Brett Favre went into treatment and rehabilitation for an addiction to vicodin; and, in 2008, the mother of Larry Fitzgerald's child filed for an won an order of protection against Fitzgerald citing that she had been a victim of domestic abuse.

Since 1996, NBA Live has featured: Shaquille O'Neal (1996), Mitch Richmond (1997), Tim Hardaway (1998), Antoine Walker (1999), Tim Duncan (2000), Kevin Garnett (2001), Steve Francis (2002), Jason Kidd (2003), Vince Carter (2004), Carmelo Anthony (2005), Dwayne Wade (2006), Tracy McGrady (2007), Gilbert Arenas (2008), Tony Parker (2009), and Dwight Howard (2010).

In 2007, Tim Hardaway publicly made homophobic comments; in Jan. 2009 Antoine Walker was arrested for suspicion of drunk driving and again arrested in July 2009 for writing bad checks; in 2000, before Jason Kidd was on a cover, he was arrested and pleated guilty to a domestic abuse charge for ASSAULTING his wife; in 2004, Carmelo Anthony was cirted for marijuana posession, although his friend later signed an affidavit taking responsibility for the drugs, later in the same year he appeared in a documentary entitled "Stop Snitchin'" which showcased a culture of refusal to talk with police authorities, in 2006, Anthony's friend was cited for marijuana posession and three traffic violations in Anthony's vehicle, in 2008 Melo was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence; and Gilbert Arenas is currently suspended over a gun controversy.

This is not presented as a condemnation of athletes, but rather as precedent for EA SPORTS to maintain its relationship; although none of the aforementioned athletes are showcased with the same prominence in their respective games as Woods is in his.

It seems EA SPORTS has the following options:

1) Drop the "Tiger Woods" in the video game's name.

2) Drop the "Tiger Woods" in the name and remove his prominence throughout the game.

3) Continue the series as before.

A prevailing issue here is that Woods has not been featured in a television commercial or "new" advertisement since the car accident; EA SPORTS is in the process of widely distributing its new Tiger Woods video game. EA SPORTS is not just a player in today's golf video game market; their Tiger Woods PGA TOUR video game is THE golf video game market. 

Obviously, EA SPORTS is asking themselves whether Tiger's transgressions are going to hurt the game's sales and whether a continued relationship with Tiger is going to hurt EA SPORTS' general sales?

I'm reluctant to say that EA SPORTS can simply offer a "PGA TOUR" video game, but, just the same, they already dominate the market and clearly can advertise the game as no different without the Tiger Woods affiliation. Yet, the culture clearly revolves around "the new T.Woods" video game.

My Recommendation:

I'd suggest that EA SPORTS maintains their affiliation with Tiger, but eliminates any reference to the game allowing users to walk in Tiger's shoes. Separate the idea of playing as Tiger Woods from being Tiger Woods. Further, while commercials/advertisements should include Tiger, EA SPORTS should explore showcasing multiple players on the cover as well as in its ads.

Photo(s): Tiger Woods PGA TOUR 2010, Madden 2004, NBA Live 2003,

The Sports PR Machine: Arenas & Tiger

On today's edition of the On the DL Podcast, Dan Levy is joined by Emil Steiner of the Washington Post's "The League" and "Off/Beat" to discuss yesterday's NFL action and, more importantly for our purposes, the continuing Gilbert Arenas saga. Their Arenas talk begins at the 26:40 mark.

Yesterday, Dan Steinberg wrote in the Washington Post's D.C. Sports Blog that Arenas' teammate DeShawn Stevenson had written "Agent Zero" (Arenas' nickname) on his ankle tape in Sunday's game and reported that Washington Wizards staff had confiscated "Free Gil" posters at the Verizon Center -- updates stated that Wizards PR staff admit that a security guard acting on his own accord had confiscated an Arenas poster.

Arenas did not have a public relations response, but rather made himself into a clown and made a mockery of public relations in general.

The NBA's response to the allegations surrounding Gilbert Arenas have been widely scrutinized -- an original inaction by the league office, followed by inabilities to curb the news story, followed by attempts to hide the story, and, for now, ending with an indefinite suspension and a multitude of questions left to be answered.

Rather than sculpting their response around a picture of Arenas as a rogue ball player (forgetting Javaris Crittenton altogether) -- a measure that leagues ALWAYS rely on -- in an attempt to diffuse a larger picture discussion, why not in a moment of proactivity admit to a -- real or not -- element of gun violence that permeates throughout the league, but more importantly throughout a culture that the NBA speaks to?

This "skeletons in the closet" doctrine of public relations can only be successful to an extent; ultimately the door is going to break and a profligatory portrait is going to be painted.

The NBA expects the public, once it has outcasted Arenas and the news story dies, to move past the incident and resume its normal fanhood. By diffusing and moving on, the NBA faces a not dissimilar journey to Tiger Woods.

With Tiger Woods return, either freshly divorced or not, the public will be left circumventing both fact and fiction while clinging to the remnants of one of sports' all-time dominant athletes. It will be expected that Tiger is accepted back into a conflicting golf culture by a generation of fans he molded and by a generation of fans that perhaps never accepted him and him as the catalyst for the game's changes; Tiger Woods Inc. will likely expect this, as will his endorsers, as will the PGA Tour, as will the game in general.

By remaining silent in the shadows of tabloid dreams, Tiger Woods continues to dehumanize himself in the midst of the most humanizing period of his (private and public) life. Vice, ostentatiousness, remorse, personal struggle, and demons are at the foreground of life; where we (fans) long for our superstars to be better than we are -- to fit into some exemplification of idealism/exceptionalism -- we also crave for those humanized moments: the losses, the tears, the scandals. Tiger's PR model has been to save grace by broadcasting him in such depths of regret that he's neither fit for public eyes nor concerned with anything aside from saving his family.

From an idealistic perspective there needs to be some connection with fans that, frankly, allows for some healing of a wounded relationship, from a pragmatic perspective the news story needs to be controlled when it can be. As there seems to be a widespread belief that Elin is going to ditch Tiger and head back to Sweden, what would be the fan response, today, if a post on TigerWoods.com read:

I'm doing what I can to save my family; I don't want my children growing up in a broken home. My apologies to Elin will never make up for what I've done, but for now they're what I have.

And, next week a post read:

I'm not certain that our marriage can survive the things that I've done, but I'm not going to back away from it. I took advantage of Elin and what I've done will forever embarrass my children, but I'm not ready for this to be its final chapter.

Why not be candid? Why not accept a forever change (maybe transmogrification) of an image and seize an opportunity to be human, not robotic, to have a face, not to be a corporate face?

Silence is a poisonous tree methodology.

Side Note:

I'll admit that I have presented conflicting perspectives on Tiger Woods, but, truthfully, it's because I'm conflicted. Where I wish he would have made a rare stop in Hawaii this past weekend in the SBS Championship and resumed his quest for history, I don't believe that a brash return would be in his long-term best interests or in the best-interests of golf and the PGA Tour. Tiger needs to save face if he doesn't want biographical book-jackets to mention the scandal in the third sentence, if he doesn't want to be a punch line as Wilt Chamberlain's 10,000 women are, and if the PGA Tour is to resume its exponential growth amidst a changed economic climate. But, I want to watch his mastery at work again, as soon as he'll be able to illustrate it again.

Soap Box Rant:

Regarding the NBA and Gilbert Arenas, there are the unmistakable racial undertones and supposed "hip hop" culture that NBA critics cite perpetuates throughout the league. Where many issues with similar black/white considerations may be an accurate lens, a racial perspective need not necessarily be the commanding perspective. Yet, the reluctance of the mainstream media/entertainment industry to give a racial lens its due platform seems persistent in the world of politically correct oversights -- where the fear of a Pandora's Box of racial considerations dominates the discussion.

While athletes should not be used as pawns of social change, sport most certainly can be a beacon of social responsibility and an instrument of social progress. In 2006, there were nine White deaths per 100,000 Americans by firearm, while there were 20 African American deaths by firearm per 100,000 Americans -- while African Americans only comprised 12.3 percent of the population, as opposed to 74.3 percent for Whites (Census).

The NBA's culture has an unquestionable African American influence, if not the predominant influence. Where the NBA collective bargaining agreement permits NBA players to legally own firearms, it does not permit them on NBA or team property. Why can't the NBA take measures to stem the tide of gun violence in this country, most specifically amongst the African American community, through policy and community relations?

Inevitably, any controversy surrounding an athlete is exacerbated by the "a hero is failing children" proclivity; a notion of "athletes as heroes" that professional sports has long exploited for its gain. With the election of Barack Obama, a conversation ensued that Black mothers may now take their child's hand and lead them to Obama as a Black role-model; a generation of young Black men may now have a like-raced hero that wasn't an athlete or entertainer (for some reason, Colin Powell and -- ugh -- Condoleeza Rice didn't fill the need).

It all relates to an ultimate discussion of heroism and leadership; the league can't permeate sentiments of responsibility and role-model-ship to its fans while remaining steadfast in its alienation of social concerns.

Photo(s): Washington Wizards Huddle

The last Tiger talk . . . . Rare NBA talk: (UPDATE)

It came to my attention that, for the first time, I mentioned a face-saving, sincere (not PR spun) apology within the context of Tiger Woods yesterday in my discussion of Tim Donaghy. Yes, I called for a more sincere apology of Donaghy than a retail book -- and an apology unlike the one that I expect [sic] from Tiger. As I didn't want to go off on a (another, perhaps) tangent than I already did in my Donaghy column, let me expand now.

Tim Donaghy bastardized an entire sport; he brought a grease stain to the NBA, the City Upon a Hill for basketball in the world, the very symbol of basketball excellence. He brought a question to the integrity of the game that (whether you are one or not, whether you disapprove of them or not) fans have wept over, have laughed over, have spent their paychecks on, have raised their children on. Dongahy didn't have fans, but he, essentially, by definition of a referee, served as a moral authority for the game -- it was his duty to make certain that the players adhered to the rules of the game. He wasn't in a position to let fans down, but rather to tarnish the very idea of competition that fathers fan hood.

Tiger Woods let wife down, he let his mother down, he let his father down, he permanently embarrassed his children, but he didn't defecate on a sport like Donaghy did. Tiger has fans, but fan hood is a choice, not a mandate.

Maybe Tiger did ask us to stand beside him as fans, but it was our mistake in doing so. If we didn't, we may have compartmentalized him -- kept him as a golfing admiration; a mastery of a game that we love. But, if Nike was in our golf bags and draped our bodies because of Tiger, if we drove a Buick because of Tiger, that is our fault. We were suckers for a clever marketing campaign; a physically drawing spokesperson; an arrogance that we enjoyed, not loathed.

In twenty years, I will tell my children that I saw Tiger Woods play in his prime; that I saw the greatest ever dominate at a time in golf when it no longer seemed possible. I will pull out my 1997 Masters highlight DVD (or whatever tech format is in then), I will hand them my PGA Tour Media Guide chronicling every one of Tiger Woods' 135 (???) career victories. But I won't tell them to read the unauthorized biography of Tiger Woods.

Tiger doesn't need to apologize to me. If there's an altruistic response that I would accept, it would be that Tiger disappears from popular culture, that Tiger doesn't ask us to play Nike, that he doesn't ask us to drink Tigorade; that he simply wins, and wins, and wins. That way, I'll take something from Tiger; I'll be able to say that I watched, definitely, the greatest ever. That would be an apology worth accepting.

Let's not feel sorry for ourselves because Tiger dissapointed us; let's feel sorry for Sam and Charlie Woods -- they will never know a moral father, they will never say that their father is their hero, they are just another victim of an irresponsible father, another statistic in a broken home.

A PGA Tour Response to Tiger (UPDATE I)

Just came across the PGA Tour statement regarding Tiger Woods' statement:

Tiger's statement speaks for itself. We offer our full support to Tiger and his family and will continue to honor and respect his request for privacy in this matter. We will have no further comment on Tiger's statement.

I consider this statement to echo some of the sentiments that I mentioned earlier, but more-well stated, perhaps, than the statement I recommended:

"The PGA Tour does not comment on the personal matters of its players. We support our players and if they desire will provide them with professional support. We will continue to support and privately provide them with any needs they may have in the future." 

I do like my sentiment about a comment pertaining to the general privacy of the Tour's players and I do believe from a public relations perspective the comment could have been written without mentioning "Tiger," but I really like the opening "Tiger's statement speaks for itself."

A take on Tiger Woods

Ordinarily, I wouldn't post an article by a basketball writer, but, I believe Bethlehem Shoals to be one of the best non-mainstream basketball writers today in his style and in his undoubted intellect. He echoed several of my attitudes in the following piece and I believe that he wrote them in better style and cadence than I would have.

Will Tiger Take the Kobe or MJ Road to Redemption?

Thursday, December 03, 2009

Posted By Bethlehem Shoals 

I'm not sure if Tiger Woods even cares about the NBA. I know he's been known to roll with Jordan and Barkley. But if he wants to make it through this sudden rough patch, he'd do well to look at a couple of examples from basketball's not-so-distant past. The advertising cult of personality surrounding him seems straight from the basketball superstar playbook. Thus, any attempt to salvage his public image necessarily relates to what happens with disgraced NBA players.

The poster child for image rehab is Kobe Bryant, who went from top pitchman, to celebrity indicted on sexual assault, to the more subtle, less ostentatious corporate presence we see today. Bryant's earning power certainly took a hit, but he's reconstituted himself as someone more concerned with basketball than celebrity—exactly what his career arc needed, and in fact, great for the public perception of him. Yet at the same time, plenty of people reviled Kobe Bryant before the Colorado case. His squeaky-clean image always rang hollow; anyone could tell the man has issues. Now, he earns grudging respect, since his rep is based largely on his performance on the court.

Kobe had the advantage of only having so far to fall; you could argue that, had it not been for a certain massive criminal charge, his commercial viability would've collapsed at some point anyway. The bubble had to burst; there was too much tension between Kobe's supposed likeability and the vibe he gave off. The better point of comparison might be Michael Jordan himself, who incidentally, is the only living athlete who can claim Tiger's level of greatness. For advertisers, Jordan was the original anodyne African-American athlete, a man whose skin color never got in the way of his capitalizing on his achievements. In large part, that was because MJ portrayed himself as the nicest, and possibly most boring, guy you'd ever meet.

But for all that's come out over the court of Jordan's career—for starters, the gambling problem, womanizing, ruthless competitiveness and arrogance in every situation, and inability to accept failure in himself or others—that public Jordan has remained largely unchanged. To a large degree, MJ has served as a model for Tiger. And as with pre-Jordan Rules Jordan, we pretty much figured Woods was that nice guy. Hook, line and sinker, it just seemed to make sense. Unlike Kobe, who was miscast from the beginning, this week's revelations force us to rethink Tiger Woods. And that's never fun, or good for the famous person involved.

Why doesn't Jordan ever change his advertising face? He has nowhere to go. Those ads with Charlie Sheen today make him look like a boor, but to change course would be an admission of defeat—an admission that he'd lied to the public. He's just gambling on the fact that he can continue to keep enough people in the dark about what a difficult person he really is. At the same time, Jordan has taken things a step further than Kobe. Bryant seems to have issues that extend far beyond simply wanting to be the best. As Jordan showed at his Hall of Fame speech, it might be impossible to separate his bad behavior from his athletic excellence—the very same thing that makes people pay attention in the first place.

Jordan doesn't lose ground, but he makes us inclined to see athletes as pathologies, not heroes. And isn't that the slippery slope Tiger's so afraid of? That it could all come crashing down and we might actually be surprised? If he goes the Kobe route, he risks only his short-term reputation. But if he toughs it out, and glosses things over, like Jordan, then the ultimate prize might no longer be there when he finally works his way back.

My only qualm with the article, is that I don't believe he stated his conclusion well enough. I would have added:

"Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods share an uncommon competitiveness and self-confidence that has propelled them to achieve, perhaps, unprecedented success in their respective sports and commercial interests. Where their persona is the epitome of athletic excellence to some, it is viewed as narcissistic by others. Based on incidents in their off the course/court lives, it may be appropriate to say that they each struggle to turn their respective "game faces" off when not in competition -- it's as if they are always proving their infallibility, their superiority to themselves and whoever is watching in some fashion."

A PGA Tour Response to Tiger

As allegations have morphed into seemingly factual claims, the Tiger Woods aura going forward is going to be somewhat tarnished as he will likely go from a private family man to a man with a reputation of promiscuity and profligatory behavior.

Unlike team sports like football, baseball, soccer, etc., golf institutionalizes its players; where no single football player is larger than the NFL or no baseball player is larger than the MLB; the PGA Tour is not as much a "league" (in that sense) as it is a competitive home for the world's best individuals (golfers). Basketball and golf are related in that commercial success is found in its superstars (visibility, marketability, public perception). The revelations of a less-than sound moral compass for Tiger Woods is, obviously, a knock to the PGA Tour's marketability of its best player, most famous star.

Tiger will need to be active going forward in restoring his public perception; although I believe that this will be best accomplished by a strict "no comment" policy on the matter. When probed about it, Tiger should respond with ambiguous, bland statements; "It's a family matter between Ellin and I. I apologize. Her and I are working forward together."

But, let's not for a second forget the greatest recipe for alleviation in controversy surrounding sports, winning.

However, the PGA Tour will need a response. With calls for the Barbara Walters, half-hour prime-time tell-all, conversations breaking out in talk show and radio circles from The View and Glenn Beck to jokes made during half time of NBA games, with sports and editorial writers alike calling for a moral response from Tiger, the Tour has found itself in a public relations whirlwind -- one that I'm sure they are hoping fades further into the depths than the Tim Donaghy scandal, Kobe or Ben Roethlisberger's rape allegations.

The exact predicament that the Tour needs to avoid is the Pete Rose saga -- where a league related backlash and censure (band from the Hall of Fame) recycles the story.

Perhaps the Tour, if they haven't before, needs to set a precedent with regard to the personal lives of its players; "The PGA Tour does not comment on the personal matters of its players. We support our players and if they desire will provide them with professional support. We will continue to support and privately provide them with any needs they may have in the future."

Photo(s): Tiger Woods

Tiger Woods' 2000-2009 Dominance. . . .

Great observation by ESPN's Jason Sobel on his twitter feed:

@JasonSobel: Tiger Woods led the PGA Tour with 121 top-10s this decade. Three more than No. 2 man Vijay Singh . . . in 95 fewer starts.

So, I thought I'd do a little research into the subject . . .

Tiger Woods:
       2009 - 17 events, 14 top-10s, 6 wins
       2008 - 6 events, 6 top-10s, 4 wins
       2007 - 16 events, 12 top-10s, 7 wins
       2006 - 15 events, 11 top-10s, 8 wins
       2005 - 21 events, 13 top-10s, 6 wins
       2004 - 19 events, 14 top-10s, 1 win
       2003 - 18 events, 12 top-10s, 5 wins
       2002 - 18 events, 13 top-10s, 5 wins
       2001 - 19 events, 9 top-10s, 5 wins
       2000 - 20 events, 17 top-10s, 9 wins

      * 121 top-10s in 169 starts (72 percent), 54 wins (32 percent)

Phil Mickelson
      2009 - 18 events, 7 top-10s, 3 wins
      2008 - 21 events, 8 top-10s, 2 wins
      2007 - 22 events, 7 top-10s, 3 wins
      2006 - 19 events, 8 top-10s, 2 wins
      2005 - 21 events, 9 top-10s, 4 wins
      2004 - 22 events, 13 top-10s, 2 wins
      2003 - 23 events, 7 top-10s, 0 wins
      2002 - 26 events, 12 top-10s, 2 wins
      2001 - 23 events, 13 top-10s, 2 wins
      2000 - 23 events, 12-tops 10s, 4 wins

      * 96 top-10s in 218 stars (44 percent), 24 wins (11 percent)

Vijay Singh
     2009 - 21 events, 3 top-10s, 0 wins
     2008 - 23 events, 8 top-10s, 3 wins
     2007 - 27 events, 7 top-10s, 2 wins
     2006 - 27 events, 13 top-10s, 1 win
     2005 - 30 events, 18 top-10s, 4 wins
     2004 - 29 events, 18 top-10s, 9 wins
     2003 - 27 events, 18 top-10s, 4 wins
     2002 - 28 events, 11 top-10s, 2 wins
     2001 - 26 events, 14 top-10s, 0 wins
     2000 - 26 events, 8 top-10s, 1 win

    * 118 top-10s in 264 starts (45 percent), 26 wins (10 percent)

Jack Nicklaus:
      1962 - 26 events, 16 top-10s, 3 wins
      1963 - 25 events, 17 top-10s, 5 wins
      1964 - 26 events, 17 top-10s, 4 wins
      1965 - 24 events, 20 top-10s, 5 wins
      1966 - 19 events, 13 top-10s, 3 wins
      1967 - 23 events, 15 top-10s, 5 wins
      1968 - 22 events, 13 top-10s, 2 wins
      1969 - 23 events, 11 top-10s, 3 wins
      1970 - 19 events, 12 top-10s, 2 wins
      1971 - 18 events, 15 top-10s, 5 wins

      * 149 top-10s in 225 starts (66 percent), 37 wins (16 percent)

Lessons learned:

- Tiger simply dominated the PGA Tour in the 2000s. Consider how often he won -- 32 percent of the time . . . are you kidding me?

- Don't ever say that Nicklaus dominated more than Tiger did; just compare the numbers. Oh, by the way, I chose Jack's best 10 year period of his career.

Side note:
 I wanted to compare the figures against Arnold Palmer, Sam Snead, and Ben Hogan but I was unable to find adequate statistics. If anybody finds them, send me a link.

Statistics via: PGA Tour & Nicklaus

What to do without Tiger Woods . . .

VIEWERSHIP OF PGA TOURNAMENTS MISSED BY TIGER WOODS DUE TO INJURY IN 2008-09 (via: Nielsen)

TOURNAMENT	NETWORK	# OF VIEWERS P2+, 2007-08	# OF VIEWERS P2+, 2008-09	% CHANGE
BRITISH OPEN-SAT	ABC	3,040,000	3,278,000	7.8%
BRITISH OPEN-SUN	ABC	5,147,000	4,463,000	-13.3%
AT&T NATIONAL-SAT	CBS	2,630,000	1,442,000	-45.2%
AT&T NATIONAL-SUN	CBS	3,615,000	2,164,000	-40.1%
NEC WORLD SERIES GOLF-SAT	CBS	3,250,000	1,793,000	-44.8%
NEC WORLD SERIES GOLF-SUN	CBS	**4,541,000	3,018,000	-33.5%
PGA CHAMPIONSHIPS-SAT	CBS	5,947,000	^^1,298,000	-78.2%
PGA CHAMPIONSHIPS-SUN	CBS	**9,165,000	3,885,000	-57.6%
BUICK INV PGA GOLF-SAT	CBS	3,761,000	1,601,000	-57.4%
BUICK INV PGA GOLF-SUN	CBS	**6,193,000	2,868,000	-53.7%
DEUTSCHE GOLF CHAMP-SUN	NBC	3,658,000	1,960,000	-46.4%
DEUTSCHE GOLF CHAMP-MON	NBC	4,936,000	2,116,000	-57.1%
BMW GOLF CHAMPIONSHIP-SAT	NBC	3,113,000	1,091,000	-65.0%
BMW GOLF CHAMPIONSHIP-SUN	NBC	**4,358,000	1,678,000	-61.5%
TOUR CHAMPIONSHIP-SAT	NBC	3,573,000	1,372,000	-61.6%
TOUR CHAMPIONSHIP-SUN	NBC	**4,231,000	2,183,000	-48.4%
TOTAL		4,567, 000	2,430,000	-46.8%
source: The Nielsen Company 2009 ** – tournament won by Tiger Woods ^^ – play suspended by inclement weather

As anyone who followed golf during the 2008-09 season can attest, the noticeable lack in the intensity of media coverage of the PGA Tour, the lack in water-cooler discussions about the PGA Tour, and the general dwindled interest of professional golf were directly caused by an absence of the world's number one player, who happens to be the world's most popular athlete, the world's first athlete-billionaire, and one of the world's most recognizable people.

But, none of this is news. 

As someone who came of age in the Tiger-era, witnessing, firsthand, the impact that he had on a generation of young golfers has been profound.

Where I started playing golf perhaps before I could stand, watching, as a child, as my friends became intrigued by the game, began to notice the game -- I should say notice Tiger -- and began to take an interest in a game so long associated with everything non-progressive and non-youthful. As a generation of fist-pumping golfers emerged, so did an obvious resentment from the golfing status quo. Where much of the ambivalence surrounding Tiger has since disappeared, at times a certain negative cloud surrounds him -- whether it's racial considerations, doubting his accomplishments as he's never faced, what many consider, a single formidable opponent (Hogan vs. Snead, Nicklaus v. Palmer, etc.), or questions regarding the contemporary, distance-driven characterizations of golf (while some say this is a transmogrification of the game, I consider it progress).

Yet, as golf's popularity has seemingly dwindled over the past few years, a certain question has arisen, at least in my mind. What is golf going to do when Tiger is no longer able to capture the world's youth?

In ten years, Tiger will be 44-years-old and, at least in the opinion of some, he will likely continue his worldwide dominance of the game. But, it's doubtful that Tiger will remain the imposing force in drawing new (young) golf fans that he currently is (although, arguably, he's already lost some of his allure). What 14-year-old is going to idolize a 44-year-old?

My question, and the basic premise behind much of the conversation on this blog, is how is the PGA Tour going to reestablish a youthful audience without Tiger -- someone that has escalated the PGA Tour greater than anyone before him, with the possible exception of Arnold Palmer?

Is Ricky Fowler, Anthony Kim, Jamie Lovemark, or Rory McIlroy going to fill his shoes?

This is a conversation that golf's leading institutions need to have.

It is my belief that the advents of technology in the media are going to prove to be the greatest tools in golf's arsenal, assuming that golf embraces them. Today, golf needs to establish young stars that are, at least in a small possibility, able to serve as a fan's "favorite golfer." These young stars need to have their characters established throughout the golfing community; they need to not have yachts named "Privacy,"they need to provide an unlimited access to their fans, and they need to embrace stardom in a fashion that both the young and old, progressive and conservative can invest themselves in.

Tiger = Professional Javelin Thrower

At the Australian Masters on Saturday, Tiger had a . . . well, temper tantrum on the 13th tee box.

Via: PGA of Australia

Woods played down an incident on the 13th tee where his driver ended up in the gallery after a wayward drive.
"I was spinning the ball quite a bit with the driver today and I didn't quite have it right," he said. "On 13 it was my mistake there, I got hot after a bad tee shot and let go of the club."

Throughout his career, Tiger has had a history of showing his emotions, which are often unpleasant, on the course.

Obviously, it would be inappropriate to excuse Tiger's actions, but they should at least be presented within context.

There is not something afoul in Tiger Woods-land. Tiger Woods is receiving unprecedented stardom from golf; he's positioning himself as one of the quintessential global icons of our time. Not only did he recently establish himself as the world's first athlete billionaire, not only will he likely eclipse all essential golf records within the next few years, not only is he the best golfer in the world and seemingly the most dominant athlete today, but he's one of the most influential, visible, and recognizable figures in the world.

"One day, when Tiger was just a kid, he was throwing his clubs around in a fuming fit when his dad said something like "Tiger, golf is supposed to be fun." And Tiger said, "Daddy, I want to win. That's how I have fun.""

Tiger does obviously need to be aware of his behavior because he is such an influential figure. But, ultimately, it is Tiger's temperament, his tightly-wound personality, and his unquestionable driving temperament that has made him the greatest ever. Tiger seems to expect more from himself than his peers; he openly states that, when he arrives on the first tee on Thursdays, he expects, not believes, not hopes, but EXPECTS to win.

I hope in the future that Tiger will curb his temper. As someone who has been unprecedentedly influenced by Tiger Woods in his golf and as someone who has witnessed (and, at times, participated in) the immature behavior, cattiness, and volatility that is junior golf, Tiger does need to accept his platform as golf's leading role-model.

However, I'm always willing to give the man a break as he keeps winning, keeps serving as a sports paradigm both on and off the course, and keeps doing this . . .

Play peacefully, not violently . . .

-Michael

Stop hating on Phil. . .

Jason Sobel, who I will be interviewing tomorrow, blogged yesterday about the potential Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson rivalry which may unfold this year:

"That leaves Mickelson, one of the most accomplished players in the game's history who often receives criticism simply for the fact that he isn't Tiger Woods. At his best, though, Lefty can hang with his adversary on any given Sunday, as evidenced by victories at the Tour Championship two months ago and the WGC-HSBC Champions tournament this past weekend in China."


"He has now finished off the 2009 campaign playing his best golf since winning back-to-back titles at the BellSouth Classic and Masters three-and-a-half years ago, if not the best golf of his career. Thanks to assistance with the forward-press putting stroke from two-time major winner Dave Stockton, Mickelson is rolling his rock with the utmost confidence -- something he can only hope remains during the offseason."


Though many are quick to criticize Mickelson, he truly has been Tiger's most formidable opponent throughout the last decade. While he's battled inconsistency, off-the-course circumstances, and a seeming reputation as one who folds under pressure, he continues to prove his mastery at times.


But, there are a few certainties about Mickelson which the golfing community fails to fully acknowledge:


1) Mickelson is every bit as physically talented as any one to have ever played the game. (Here, Here, or Here). He has an uncanny sense for trickery and short-game mastery -- although, interestingly, his technique is noticeably different to that of Woods (Tiger v. Phil).


2) Mickelson's golf career has been filled with as much success as almost anyone in history. 


College/Amateur - (won 16 college events, 1990 Porter Cup, 4-time first-team All American, 3 NCAA Individual Champions, 3 Haskins  Awards, 1990 US Amateur, Won 1991 PGA Tour event as an amateur)


Professional (45 wins, 3 majors)


3) His game is better today than it ever has been. . . 


A few years ago I spoke with a friend and former teammate of Mickelson's at Arizona State. Ironically, we had dinner the night that Mickelson lost the U.S. Open at Winged Foot.


**Phil's 18th debacle starts at the 3:30 mark.

Phil's former teammate spoke of how even in college Phil had tendencies to play overly brash at the end of competition. My favorite anectode from the night concerned Phil's idea of shaping shots. When trying to either draw or fade a ball, the major focus needs to be in three regards: one) what line does the shot need to start on, two) what line do I want the ball to end up curving to, and three) is it more essential to start the ball on line and over/under curve the shot (say, when trying to curve it out of trees and you want to make certain that you don't hit a tree) or to make certain that the shot curves in its intended direction (say, when curving the ball away from a hazard).


Phil, as evident in the 18th hole at Winged Foot (and, truthfully, throughout his career) has struggled with this at times, perhaps focusing too much on executing the "perfect shot."


As a junior golfer, I was fortunate to attend a banquet for the 2004 U.S. Open which featured Arnold Palmer, Phil Mickelson, and was hosted by Jim Nantz (I blogged about it last month). While in the audience, I was offered an opportunity to ask Phil and Mr. Palmer a question. I asked them to comment on their shared aggressive playing style -- this was during the time that Tiger was battling off the tee (not that he still doesn't at times) and was playing with unbelievable conservatism. Phil made a joke, and Palmer told a wonderful story. Obviously, I find ways to tell that story often -- but I'm always certain to include that Phil was a true gentleman. I attended the banquet because Rolex, who hosted it, had invited the top juniors from the area (AJGA members). Phil, who has the most decorated AJGA career in history, spoke directly to a group of us candidly and sincerely -- he told us how he had never believed that he would accomplish all that he had and that one of us would one day play against him on Tour.


As someone with a vested intrinsic interest in Tiger Wood's history breaking career, at times I want Phil to come into his own for no purpose other than providing Tiger with that single formidable opponent which some overzealous commentators seem to use as a condemnation of Tiger's greatness.


Look forward to this PGA season. Tiger is going to be better this year than he ever has before, as will Phil, there's a generation of young players who are blossoming, and there's the old guard that isn't ready to go silently into the night.


-Michael


P.S. Check out Geoff Shackelford's excellent post on Tiger Woods and his golf course design business.
Photo(s):

Sunday bits. . .

Tiger had a lackluster even-par 72 in the final round of the HSBC Championship to lose by five strokes to Phil Mickelson. (Yahoo Sports)

Tiger has failed to win in 3 of his last four attempts when playing in the final group at the HSBC.

Tiger has finished in the top-10 28/31 times he has played in a World Golf Championship.

Ryan Moore, one of my favorite PGA Tour stars, who has repeatedly denied sponsor requests and chosen to remain sponsorship-less, just became partners with Scratch Golf  (ESPN Golf) (Bloomberg).

"Researchers found that golfers could reduce their handicap after a few months of using a night-time device that provides nasal positive airway pressure (NPAP) – a treatment that has been shown effective for curbing sleep apnea." (Irish Times)

Stephanie Wei, the former Duke University Women's golf standout, recently blogged on meeting Rickie Fowler (Wei Under Par).

TaylorMade is struggling to get their new wedge-line which feature exchangeable faces passed by the USGA. (Golfweek via Geoff Shackelford) See my previous post on the USGA's new wedge guidelines.

Check out The Golf Channel's new series, "Project '99," devoted to chronicling the major golf events from 1999 (The Golf Channel).

Gary Player is horse racing fan (LA Times). And, he's as cool as he has always been . . .

Jay Busbee of Yahoo Sports' Devil Ball Golf prepared a compilation of the 10 best shots of the decade from the LPGA Tour (Devil Ball Golf)

The Irish Supreme Court ruled in favor of exclusive membership at men's only country clubs (Yahoo Sports).

And, check out the 2010 PGA Tour Schedule.

Golf Advertising . . .

I've seen this new Callaway Golf commercial floating around the internet the past few days, yet I haven't seen it on television yet -- although I'll admit my Golf Channel viewing has been scarce.

While I appreciate the humorous sentiment, I do question the . . . well, class of the advertisement.

A great interest of mine is in sports advertising, particularly in a grandeur thematic idea of perpetuating and exploiting the athlete - fan relationship as a means to further the sport (and the athlete). As I've made abundantly aware (particularly in with regards to social media), the ability to facilitate a connection between an athlete (golfer) and his/her constituency is prerequisite for commercial success.

Where television commercials do not provide direct insight into the lives of athletes, they do provide a symbolic entrance into the personality (even if that personality is fabricated by an advertising agency / public relations department) of an athlete.

Hence, I present a collection of my favorite golf commercials -- albeit the Tiger Woods version . . .

As a compliment, my favorite sports commerical following the similiar competition, athlete - driven theme.

Immaturity in reporting on immaturity...

Rick Reilly, the noted former Sports Illustrated columnist who went to ESPN in 2008, wrote a column during the summer that truly made me cringe. Following the British Open, Reilly wrote this condemnation of Tiger Woods:

"He spent most of his two days at Turnberry last week doing the Turn and Bury. He'd hit a bad shot, turn and bury his club into the ground in a fit. It was two days of Tiger Tantrums -- slamming his club, throwing his club and cursing his club. In front of a worldwide audience."

"This isn't new. Woods has been this way for years: swearing like a Hooters' bouncer, trying to bury the bottom of his driver into the tee box, flipping his club end over end the second he realizes his shot is way offline."

"I know what you're saying. We see more Tiger tantrums because TV shows every single shot he hits. And I'm telling you: You're wrong. He is one of the few on Tour who do it. And I keep wondering when PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem is going to have the cojones to publicly upbraid him for it."

I in no way say that there aren't aspects of Tiger's life to criticize, as there are (Nike, UAE), but the issue here is both journalistic credibility and inconsequential reporting. Yes, Tiger does have a bad temper, yes he does curse, and yes he does throw clubs, but he's not the only one. Reilly tries to make the case that Woods is an anomaly, but that's blatantly false. I will admit that I did some research and struggled to find any media coverage of poor PGA Tour behavior--maybe this is because today's golf media is so heavily dominated by Tiger Woods coverage, I rely on my first hand account of attending professional golf events. Players get upset and men often revert to machismo sports behavior; swearing, pouting, and overt temperamental displays.

As a kid, I volunteered for, the former, LaSalle Bank Open, a Chicago Buy.com (Nationwide, Nike Tour) event. In my three days one year, I witnessed 3 broken clubs, 2 outright swearing fits, a broken flag stick, and countless club slamming. By the way, much of that occurred on Saturday as one player in my group, Doug Barron, had an 8-under streak in a 7-hole stretch.

There isn't just one instance; I've attended almost a dozen PGA Tour events in my lifetime, and there are moments of questionable behavior that I recall from every event.

And Reilly calls on PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem to respond, which is absurd.

"Tiger is teaching them that if he can be a hissy hothead on the course, they can, too."

Please . . .

You're really going to criticize Tiger Woods as a role-model for children. . .

I was fortunate enough to attend a Chicago banquet for the 2004 U.S. Open at Olympia Fields that featured Arnold Palmer, Phil Mickelson, and Jim Nantz. As nothing more than a precocious 17-year-old, I asked Mr. Palmer about his brash playing style. He responded by telling a story: as a young man, Mr. Palmer was playing golf with his father when, after he hit a poor shot, Arnold threw a club. Arnold's father, Deacon, told Arnold that golf was a game and that it was meant to be played as a game. For that reason, Arnold treated golf as a game and he, seemingly, enjoyed every moment of his career.

While I will never criticize Arnold Palmer's contributions to the game, let's not forget that 41 of Palmer's 62 career victories were from 1955 - 1963, from ages 26 to 34. Palmer's last major, the 1964 Masters, came at age 35. While Mr. Palmer's technical flaws eventually caught up with his age, there is room for discussion regarding Palmer's drive. In the era of Hogan -- a meticulous practicer, a man seemingly possessed with the drive to perfect his golf wing, Palmer never worked on his.

The basis for Reilly's comments is, ultimately, that there's something afoul in Tiger Woods-land. That's blatantly absurd; not only is Tiger Woods receiving unprecedented stardom from golf, but, arguably, he's positioning himself as one of the quintessential global icons of our time. Not only did he recently establish himself as the world's first athlete billionaire, not only will he likely eclipse all essential golf records within the next few years, not only is he the best golfer in the world and seemingly the most dominant athlete today, but he's one of the most influential, visible, and recognizable figures in the world. Well argued Rick Reilly. . .

Reilly is one of the great sports columnists in history, he's responsible for one of my favorite articles, he's undeniably funny, but, when it comes to sports, specifically golf, he doesn't have any sort of reasonable frame to use.

"One day, when Tiger was just a kid, he was throwing his clubs around in a fuming fit when his dad said something like "Tiger, golf is supposed to be fun." And Tiger said, "Daddy, I want to win. That's how I have fun.""

Tiger is right, winning is fun. I used to use a classic sporting cliche when it came to my golf; how do you spell "fun?" . . ."W . I . N."

Tiger does obviously need to be aware of his behavior because he is such an influential figure. But, ultimately, it is Tiger's temperament, his tightly-wound personality, and his unquestionable driving temperament that has made him the greatest ever. Tiger seems to expect more from himself than his peers; he openly states that, when he arrives on the first tee on Thursdays, he expects, not believes, not hopes, but EXPECTS to win.

Photo(s): Rick Reilly, Tiger Woods, Arnold Palmer

If you're going to attack his character, at least beat him. . .

Always gracious in defeat, Robert Allenby attacked the character of Anthony Kim following his massive 5 and 3 defeat to Kim Sunday at the Presidents Cup.

Via: Golfweek

"Allenby said friends here witnessed Kim getting back to the team hotel, in Allenby’s words, “sideways” at 4 in the morning, less than five hours before his scheduled tee time against Allenby at Harding Park."

“Maybe we should all take the theory of Anthony Kim,” Allenby said. “Get home at 4 o’clock (in the morning) and then go shoot 6 under."

Allenby, who is 38, has four PGA Tour Victories, compared to Anthony Kim, age 24, who has two career victories, both coming in 2008. While Anthony is currently ranked 23rd in the official World Golf Rankings, to Allenby's 33rd place position, Allenby was a top 10 player in a brief period in the early 2000s; Kim's high career ranking is 14tth.

Unfortunately, Allenby often does not get the credit for his game that he deserves. His abilities are clearly limited and his game is tailored for a specific type of golf; his lower ball flight, steeper angles, and volatile temper clearly make him a hard, fast golf course player where birdies are often. Kim, on the hand, is more rounded (literally in his golf swing and in his game) and has more potential, seemingly, than Allenby ever had.

In college, Anthony was. . .well, known to enjoy himself, particularly because others did not really enjoy him. He was notoriously conceded, his demeanor was often brash and flashy, and his fellow competitors didn't really like him -- but that's potentially as much due to the fact that he beat them so often.

Anthony behaves like a kid who has always been talented, who has repeatedly won in his career. He walks with less restraint than his peers, he acknowledges the crowds, he continues to treat golf as a game. I'm not saying he doesn't work as absolutely hard as his peers, but he seems to be as concerned with maintaining his enjoyment for it as anything else.

However, all of that is inconsequential to the statements at hand. While it's difficult to discern fact from fiction -- I would not be surprised to hear that Anthony had been out the night before, Allenby's discourse are unprofessional and un-PGA Tour like. I was disappointed to see this story get so much coverage; I even saw it in a segment on ESPN's Pardon the Interruption.

But, keeping with typical Anthony, he responded to Allenby by saying:

“If Robert had that to say,” Kim said, “he may need to go practice a little bit more.”

Photo(s): Anthony Kim & Robert Allenby, Anthony Kim

Redefining Excellence (#1)

In keeping with the attention that he deserves, I'm going to be keeping a running-series devoted exclusively to the worlds greatest golfer, perhaps the greatest the game has ever witnessed, Tiger Woods.

On Sunday, Tiger Woods added a footnote to his history books and a second chapter to Y.E. Yang's future autobiography

Tiger's 6 & 5 thumping should not come as a surprise and that is no way meant to be critical of Yang. It's a matter of fact; Y.E. Yang, who is 37, has two career PGA Tour victories (The Honda Classic and the PGA Championship, both this year) and Tiger Woods, who is 33, has 71 Pga Tour victories (14 of which are majors). Tiger is considered one of the most decorated junior golfers, amateur golfers, college golfers, and professional golfers in history; Y.E. Yang is just another one-time major champion who rose from obscurity to temporary fame.

The story here is not that Tiger beat Yang, but rather that Tiger, as he so often has, made the first, and only, putt that mattered, the one to win. As it has been widely reported and discussed, Tiger's missed putt on the 16th green was the first putt of note that he's ever missed. Think about that. . .

Tiger had led 14-times going into Sunday at a major and had won every time. On Sunday, with the lead, Tiger averaged 69.5. . .his playing partners averaged 73.14 (PGA Tour). Every golf fan can think of a putt Tiger made when he had to (2008 US Open, 1997 Masters, 2005 Masters, etc.), but golf fans can't think of when that he had missed because he had not.

Don't for a moment think that this has some larger connotation, Tiger will again make the putts he needs to and, most likely, he will miss another one (don't tell him that though).

While I typically find ease in analyzing other golfers, even the best, and, if necessary, being critical of them, with Tiger, he's, simply, rewritten the game. When I watch Tiger, I believe that he simply thinks differently than those before him, that he knows not just one thing, but so many things that those before him didn't, that he, somehow, has captured the power of his temperament, of his drive.

One of the greatest golfing honors and privileges of my life is that I have always known of Tiger, that I have witnessed him first hand go from a 3-time USGA Junior champion to the winner of 71 PGA Tour events and the eventual greatest champion in history.

Photo(s): Tiger Woods, Young Tiger