COMMUNITY

I would like to add that if Ryo Ishikawa wins this week, it'll be the closest thing golf will ever get to Tiger in 1997. The guy who's 4-5 years older than me just announced all his winnings this year is going to the earthquake/tsunami relief fund. Unbelievably class act, and I gained a ton of respect for him. If he does win, golf will be set to go in a great direction. Much like what happened with Tiger 14 years ago.

Obviously the PGA tour isn't going to disappear, but without a Tiger or Phil type of star purses are going to shrink, the sport will see less TV exposure and some of the smaller tournaments could fall by the wayside. This is a peak, there wil be valleys just like anything else golf is cyclical.

Everyone likes the old they did it before Tiger they'll still do it after and that's true to a point. There is hard evidence that with the rise of Tiger came an influx of money and increased interest. Professional golf has reached it's high water mark duringthe Tiger era, there is going to be a drop off when Tiger leaves the game. I know most of the Tiger haters are to blind to see it but Tiger Woods impact on the sport has been far more positive than negative.

That's ridiculous! I'd like to know who it was that said this and which idiots out there agree with him. Even Tiger or Phil will tell you truthfully that this is BS.

Baseball is doomed if the Yankees or Red Sox don't win. Basketball is doomed if the Lakers or Celtics don't win. BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.
The problem lies with the "reporting", not the sport.

What a Joke. It's not about Tiger or Phil,

opps Golf

Gold survived prior to them and will survive without them. it may be less prestigiuos but it will survive!

With the US economy in trouble, and getting worse every day with oil prices maybe going to record highs, etc. etc. What will happen without a Tiger or Phil standard bearer is that tournaments will draw fewer sponsors and purses will get smaller. None of that will really affect us hard core golfers or hard core golf watchers, but it will put a damper on big tournament purses and play. No matter whether you are a Tiger hater or Tiger lover, you will have to admit Tiger was a major factor in golf paying so well these last 10-12 years.

It's a little extreme but I see their point. With the amount of sports coverage there is now days golf could start to fall by the wayside if things don't get more exciting to the casual fan in a hurry. There is always going to be the core audience that will watch golf no matter who is on top of the leader board. Phil is on the back 9 of his career and Tiger is having his problems and won't play forever either.

The bigger issue is that there hasn't been anyone that has stepped up and started to make the transition into being the next Tiger or Phil. I don't mean that the player has to have the success of either of those two but they just have to capture the interest of the fan like those guys.

If you start at the beginnings of professional golf there has always been an established star or stars and a pretty seamless transition to the next player or group. Hagen and Sarezen to Nelson, Snead and Hogan to Palmer and Player, to Nicklaus and Watson, to Faldo and Norman to Phil and Tiger. that we will be entering a period much like the 1990's where interest in golf diminishes some until that next phenom comes along.

It's a little extreme but I see their point. With the amount of sports coverage there is now days golf could start to fall by the wayside if things don't get more exciting to the casual fan in a hurry. There is always going to be the core audience that will watch golf no matter who is on top of the leader board. Phil is on the back 9 of his career and Tiger is having his problems and won't play forever either.

The bigger issue is that there hasn't been anyone that has stepped up and started to make the transition into being the next Tiger or Phil. I don't mean that the player has to have the success of either of those two but they just have to capture the interest of the fan like those guys.

If you start at the beginnings of professional golf there has always been an established star or stars and a pretty seamless transition to the next player or group. Hagen and Sarezen to Nelson, Snead and Hogan to Palmer and Player, to Nicklaus and Watson, to Faldo and Norman to Phil and Tiger. There has always been some overlap.

The 1960 US Open is a good example: Hogan, Palmer and Nicklaus all contended for the title with Palmer winning. But the important part is you had that passing of the torch so to speak from the Hogan era o Palmer with Nicklaus foreshadowing what was to come.

There hasn't really been a guy or two that have stepped up and started to play like they want to take the torch from Phil and Tiger. There are some good players no doubt but not really anyone that stands out as the torch bearer of the next generation. Take Martin Kaymer, he definitely has the talent but he lacks the charisma to really capture the audience, on the other hand you have Bubba Watson, who certainly has the personality but lacks a little in the win department.

I think this is going to be a nebulous time for professional golf. The younger talent like Fowler and McIlroy doesn't seem to have the drive for greatness and I think that to an extent typifies this crop of players. I believe

Golf will survive even if either one don't win the Masters. I would like more coverage of the other players as well. Maybe then they would get followers and fans of their game. No one is irreplaceable.

I cant see that comment being correct to me. Yes golf would get better ratings if Eldrick or Phil are near the top of the leader board as they are the face of golf the last 10 or so years. But as a die hard golf fan, I actually like watching golf a little more when neither are actually playing.

They actually cover more of the field that n when those 2 guys are in the field which I like. There are more golfer on the PGA Tour other than Eldrick and Phil. I happen to like Phil and his playing style but I dont need to see him every other shot at a tournament either.

And again I will say it's probably better for golf overall that Eldrick or Phil are near the top, but it doesn;t mean when these guys are done golf will fall off the face of the map either. Far from it most likely.

To me there are 3 types of golf fans...

Eldrick fans - Only if Eldrick is playing and sometimes only if he is playing well
Those who just watch the majors because they are majors
Die hard fans - (like me) who will watch no matter what

I happen to think golf is in good shape right now with so many young talented players stepping up and playing well against some of these veteran players and winning.

So, to take his argument out to its illogical extreme (in debate/philosophy classes, this technique is known as reductio ad absurdum)... when Tiger and Phil retire or die, does professional golf go belly-up with them? Does he think there'll never be another Tiger? Yes, he's an once-in-a-generation type talent, but remember, they used to say that there'll never be another Jack, UNTIL Mr. Woods came bursting onto the scene.

That's a bunch of crap! The only thing that will be doomed if Tiger or Phil don't win the Master's is my Pick 4 game this week! I will still continue to follow and play golf just like I always have.

He's wrong. Let's tear this apart bit by bit. For those who don't like watching golf on TV it is already as boring as bowling. For the die hard golf fan, we'll watch it even if there isn't a superhero/villian battle that is on going. Phil and Tiger haven't won in quite a while (the die hard Tiger fans probably have the date and tournament memorized but I dont and Phil went a entire year between the Masters and this past weekend). So golf isn't boring without those two holding the trophy. But I do agree that Sundays are more exciting when Tiger is lurking...

Next, why this year? why is it doomed this year if those two don't win? Is it because they are American? Can't be....The Europeans have dominated the WGR for the most part and golf is just fine even though Americans would like to see a few more of our boys up there. This angle has been analyzed to death and, while we want the Americans to dominate in golf, this doesn't seem to be his point for claiming golf is dead without a Phil/Tiger win.

More than likely he's just drumming up the same ole rantings to get the Tiger/Phil fans to call his show.