252 replies to this topic

[hogans71]

kellygreen, on 01 May 2012 - 09:13 AM, said:

hogans71, on 29 April 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

triplebogeyblues, on 29 April 2012 - 11:20 AM, said:

Frankly, I would rather listen to him field "scripted" fan questions than the predictable junk the media would ask.

If you already know what the media is going to ask, as well as Tiger's "stock" answers, then it is the same boring press conference.

The media members are upset because they can't interrogate him for kicking his club at Augusta, and asking how his knee feels for he 2,001st time.

Tiger brings a breath of fresh air to an otherwise stale media day.

What's the difference?

The fans won't be asking "gotcha" questions, looking for a cheap by-line and to advance their own careers.

After 15 years on Tour, Tiger has earned the right to skip ONE pre-tournament press conference.  The media just resents being reminded that THEY need HIM more than he needs them.  That's he's STILL the story that sports fans care about where the Tour is concerned.

That's all fine and well- he's going to give the same measured responses whether or not he has control of the environment. And I have absolutely no problem with that.

As far as I'm concerned, he can skip 'em all. I neither watch nor care- and that goes for 99% of these pressers involving ALL of them...

Side note-  of COURSE the fans are going to lob 'em in! If the subject matter turns even slightly difficult, the question would not be asked and the guilty party would be labeled a "hater".

Can' get enough of that cute little moniker- sadly, it turns far too may threads here to unreadable junk...

[exquisitechip]

tbowles411, on 01 May 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

He's going to do what he wants to do, and no one is going to tell him otherwise.  John Hawkins said so last night (which we knew this was the case).  He went further to say that the Media know's Tiger's the needle, and Tiger knows it too.  They need him.  He talked up the tournament and will show up and play.  "A" for effort.  People are upset that he's "not in touch with his fans."  Now they're upset that he's in touch with fans, and ignoring the media.  I say you can't have it both ways.

"The food here is so terrible. And the portions are so small!"

[TheDarkOne]

geesecougar2, on 01 May 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

At this point the media can do no worse to him than they already have.

What exactly has the media done to Woods?
I mean besides the obvious like promoting the sport he is involved with, giving him soft ball questions for over a decade, protecting him in many instances even post scandal etc? I mean yeah one or two guys have had the audacity to ask him the occasional tough but fair question, besides that what agenda are they trying to use against him that you have discovered this time?

[geesecougar2]

TheDarkOne, on 01 May 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

geesecougar2, on 01 May 2012 - 09:10 AM, said:

At this point the media can do no worse to him than they already have.

What exactly has the media done to Woods?
I mean besides the obvious like promoting the sport he is involved with, giving him soft ball questions for over a decade, protecting him in many instances even post scandal etc? I mean yeah one or two guys have had the audacity to ask him the occasional tough but fair question, besides that what agenda are they trying to use against him that you have discovered this time?

We can go back and forth on what is "fair", whether or not they "protected" him, and how much value they add in "promoting" the sport, but I think it would suffice to say that from Charles P. Pierce in 1997 to Alex Micelli in 2012, the media has shown that what they did to/for Tiger has always been out of self interest, to get eyeballs by whatever means necessary. They have demonstrated that they have not and will not be doing Tiger any favors, so I say that he is smart for re-appropriating the power in this relationship and showing them who the important one is here.

Edited by geesecougar2, 01 May 2012 - 10:29 AM.

[kellygreen]

tbowles411, on 01 May 2012 - 09:25 AM, said:

He's going to do what he wants to do, and no one is going to tell him otherwise.  John Hawkins said so last night (which we knew this was the case).  He went further to say that the Media know's Tiger's the needle, and Tiger knows it too.  They need him.  He talked up the tournament and will show up and play.  "A" for effort.  People are upset that he's "not in touch with his fans."  Now they're upset that he's in touch with fans, and ignoring the media.  I say you can't have it both ways.

You can't have it both ways IF your goal is to look at a situation through the prism of principle.

But you can certainly "have it both ways" if your only goal is to sling mud, be critical of the man no matter what he does...

Those who are critical of everything aren't really being critical of anything in particular.

[kellygreen]

hogans71, on 01 May 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

That's all fine and well- he's going to give the same measured responses whether or not he has control of the environment. And I have absolutely no problem with that.

As far as I'm concerned, he can skip 'em all. I neither watch nor care- and that goes for 99% of these pressers involving ALL of them...

Side note-  of COURSE the fans are going to lob 'em in! If the subject matter turns even slightly difficult, the question would not be asked and the guilty party would be labeled a "hater".

Can' get enough of that cute little moniker- sadly, it turns far too may threads here to unreadable junk...

The moniker sticks because it fits many people who are critical of the man no matter what he does...and even if they have to contradict themselves in order to do it.

It not that they don't approve of his actions..and therefore don't like him.

They don't like him..and then scrape around for something to criticize in order to justify their hostility.

[jabrch]

It's an easy way for Tiger to control the discourse without looking like a Pud.  I don't blame him.  How many times can he really get in a pissing contest with the media?  This way, if he doesn't like a question, he (his handlers) just delete it.  It isn't a bad idea - as long as he can get away with it.  Other sports don't let their athletes skip out on significant press events.  And many big athletes, who have had their off the field careers made by the media, try to be more media friendly, knowing that the media plays a key role in interfacing between them and the fans.

I would actually like to see Tiger be a bit more honest.  This was not an attempt to have a meaningful dialogue with fans on their terms - it was about being able to only hear/respond to what he wanted to hear/respond.  Otherwise the questions he answered would have been totally different.  That's not a bad thing - it's just a bit intellectually dishonest of TW to try and spin it as a Fan Chat.  Allow ALL the questions to be seen somehow....then we see what you choose to answer and what you choose to ignore...  that MIGHT be a bit more realistic.

[kellygreen]

TheDarkOne, on 01 May 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

What exactly has the media done to Woods?

That post just destroyed what little credibility you had left.

Other than drag his personal life and marital problems through a public cricus that would make even the Hollywood tabloids and paparazzi blush?

Oh....nothing...


Other than forcing him to have to put his life back together in a goldfish bowl of public scrutiny that no other golfer, and few other sports celebrities have had to endure?

Oh...nothing.

Please.

[kellygreen]

geesecougar2, on 01 May 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

We can go back and forth on what is "fair", whether or not they "protected" him, and how much value they add in "promoting" the sport, but I think it would suffice to say that from Charles P. Pierce in 1997 to Alex Micelli in 2012, the media has shown that what they did to/for Tiger has always been out of self interest, to get eyeballs by whatever means necessary. They have demonstrated that they have not and will not be doing Tiger any favors, so I say that he is smart for re-appropriating the power in this relationship and showing them who the important one is here.

Bingo.

I find it fascinating how the haters demand that Woods shoulder ALL the burdens and responsibilties that come with his place in the game, and in the golf marketplace.

But never avail himself of any of the powers and privilieges that go along with it.

He's shouldered the burden for 15 years of being at the media's beck-and-call during these tournaments.  Doing more of these press conferences than any other player.

Well this week, he flexed some of his muscle....and the media started whining like a bunch of schoolgirls who didn't get asked to the prom.

[jabrch]

If TW did this LIVE, I'd be all for it.  If fans want to ask the Qs to his face - that would be fine.  I just don't like the simulation of interaction when really it is just prescripting a generic statement of nothingness.  

TW has lots of opportunity.  He can, someday, be a top 5 golfer again on the course - if his game improves.  He can, someday, become the fan favorite, if he can connect with enough of us.  There's no reason both of those can't happen.  But not winning, or even being relevant on Sundays every week, and not having open dialogue either with the media, or the fans, won't help.  The Qs will suck.  He will have to eat some of the pain.  That's just how it is after stuff like what happened.  But what he puts into this., and then how he comes out of this is up to him...

[kellygreen]

jabrch, on 01 May 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

If TW did this LIVE, I'd be all for it.  If fans want to ask the Qs to his face - that would be fine.  I just don't like the simulation of interaction when really it is just prescripting a generic statement of nothingness.  

TW has lots of opportunity.  He can, someday, be a top 5 golfer again on the course - if his game improves.  He can, someday, become the fan favorite, if he can connect with enough of us.  There's no reason both of those can't happen.  But not winning, or even being relevant on Sundays every week, and not having open dialogue either with the media, or the fans, won't help.  The Qs will suck.  He will have to eat some of the pain.  That's just how it is after stuff like what happened.  But what he puts into this., and then how he comes out of this is up to him...

Yes.

The crowds have to see bloodshed....they must have their bread-and-circuses.

How dare, Mr. Woods not offer himself up as a sacrifice for our amusement and to slake our appetites.

The nerve....


The man already has more money that he (or his kids) can spend in their lifetimes.  He's not obligated to offer himself up for anyone else's sport.  He knows it.  The media knows it (and is rankled about it)...and the haters in the crowd know it too.

Edited by kellygreen, 01 May 2012 - 10:57 AM.

[bscinstnct]

kellygreen, on 01 May 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

jabrch, on 01 May 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

If TW did this LIVE, I'd be all for it.  If fans want to ask the Qs to his face - that would be fine.  I just don't like the simulation of interaction when really it is just prescripting a generic statement of nothingness.  

TW has lots of opportunity.  He can, someday, be a top 5 golfer again on the course - if his game improves.  He can, someday, become the fan favorite, if he can connect with enough of us.  There's no reason both of those can't happen.  But not winning, or even being relevant on Sundays every week, and not having open dialogue either with the media, or the fans, won't help.  The Qs will suck.  He will have to eat some of the pain.  That's just how it is after stuff like what happened.  But what he puts into this., and then how he comes out of this is up to him...

Yes.

The crowds have to see bloodshed....they must have their bread-and-circuses.

How dare, Mr. Woods not offer himself up as a sacrifice for our amusement and to slake our appetites.

The nerve....


The man already has more money that he (or his kids) can spend in their lifetimes.  He's not obligated to offer himself up for anyone else's sport.  He knows it.  The media knows it (and is rankled about it)...and the haters in the crowd know it too.

Yes, live, unscreened question for Tiger, that's the ticket!>>

Tiger, our first question is from an internet forum member known as "Tiger killed Lassie".  He asks,

Hey ELDRICK, what's it like to be so evil?

And a follow up question, ELDRICK, if you would not mind.

Is it true that Satan is playing you in the Lifetime Channel Movie:

"Tiger Woods, he made shaving cream commercials based on his fake image and everyone wants their money back"

[hogans71]

kellygreen, on 01 May 2012 - 10:31 AM, said:

hogans71, on 01 May 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

That's all fine and well- he's going to give the same measured responses whether or not he has control of the environment. And I have absolutely no problem with that.

As far as I'm concerned, he can skip 'em all. I neither watch nor care- and that goes for 99% of these pressers involving ALL of them...

Side note-  of COURSE the fans are going to lob 'em in! If the subject matter turns even slightly difficult, the question would not be asked and the guilty party would be labeled a "hater".

Can' get enough of that cute little moniker- sadly, it turns far too may threads here to unreadable junk...

The moniker sticks because it fits many people who are critical of the man no matter what he does...and even if they have to contradict themselves in order to do it.

It not that they don't approve of his actions..and therefore don't like him.

They don't like him..and then scrape around for something to criticize in order to justify their hostility.

I must say, no one runs to his defense with such determination quite like you...

Sadly, those in your camp toss that little label around as if there is an expiration date just around the corner. Its just not that black and white- as much as you try to make people believe otherwise. I'm not a fan. Nor do I care about his personal life one bit. In these parts, that's good enough to be placed in the "hating" camp. Why? There can't be any other explanation, he just hates!

Its funny how a few posts up you suggest one has lost credibility with a certain post. Its the same way so many people here feel when any variation of hater enters the thread...

Back on topic- as I said, he owes no one anything in these little pressers. You're fooling yourself if you feel add if this isn't scripted from beginning to end. And thats fine too- just call it what it really is at the onset...

[kellygreen]

bscinstnct, on 01 May 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Yes, live, unscreened question for Tiger, that's the ticket!>>

Tiger, our first question is from an internet forum member known as "Tiger killed Lassie".  He asks,

Hey ELDRICK, what's it like to be so evil?

And a follow up question, ELDRICK, if you would not mind.

Is it true that Satan is playing you in the Lifetime Channel Movie:

"Tiger Woods, he made shaving cream commercials based on his fake image and everyone wants their money back"

Seriously.

Only an idiot hands someone a loaded pistol and doesn't take precautions that it doesn't get pointed back at them.

[zerofade]

because it's tiger this topic will digress into the usual bs .. but my thought was more focused on what john hawkins and that bozo feinstein had to say in reaction.

i guess i would be upset too if i basically got bypassed and my job as a "journalist" was being threatened.. print media is dying as it is .. add to the fact that these guys use social media to control their image and how they connect to the public and i would be thinking maybe the press is feeling a little nervous that they eventually won't have anything to do .. why let the media break a story .. when you can use twitter or facebook to control the story yourself .. i would .. wouldn't you?

Edited by zerofade, 01 May 2012 - 11:30 AM.

[kellygreen]

hogans71, on 01 May 2012 - 11:20 AM, said:

I must say, no one runs to his defense with such determination quite like you...

Sadly, those in your camp toss that little label around as if there is an expiration date just around the corner. Its just not that black and white- as much as you try to make people believe otherwise. I'm not a fan. Nor do I care about his personal life one bit. In these parts, that's good enough to be placed in the "hating" camp. Why? There can't be any other explanation, he just hates!

Its funny how a few posts up you suggest one has lost credibility with a certain post. Its the same way so many people here feel when any variation of hater enters the thread...

Back on topic- as I said, he owes no one anything in these little pressers. You're fooling yourself if you feel add if this isn't scripted from beginning to end. And thats fine too- just call it what it really is at the onset...

1. What "camp" might that be, exactly.

2. I don't "run" to anyone's defense.  When Tiger does something that I consider out-of-bounds among PROFESSIONAL GOLFERS.. or unacceptable in a general sense...I don't hesitate to criticize him.

3. What I don't do, is blow anything that he has done out of proportion...as many around never seem to miss an opportunity to do.

4. I have no patience for double-standards and other forms of hypocrisy...and understand that they are often the Trojan Horse that conceals hostility that finds its root in other things.

5. OF COURSE the thing is going to be scripted.  Someone of his public profile would be a FOOL NOT to screen the questions.  Otherwise, he'd simply invite all manner of crazies and any bomb-thrower with an agenda to take advantage of the situation.   If you don't think that Woods doesn't exert similar control over the press conferences by parsing his answers, it is you who are fooling yourself.

The whole point of this was to give himself a break from the canned or deliberately controversial questions that career-building, and attention-seeking journalists will ask and wind up taking attention away from the tournament....and give fans a chance to ask questions that aren't "juicy" enough for professional journalists.

[psd]

Ironically, to me at least. Tiger seemed so much more animated in front of the golf press than he did in that dull, prefab Q&A session.  He just doesn't look like a very happy person, albeit based on a two-dimensional, pre-recorded clip.

[kellygreen]

psd, on 01 May 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

Ironically, to me at least. Tiger seemed so much more animated in front of the golf press than he did in that dull, prefab Q&A session.  He just doesn't look like a very happy person, albeit based on a two-dimensional, pre-recorded clip.

Probably just tired from all the demands on his time.

...and tired of all the people who feel compelled to micro-analyze his life and his game.

[bscinstnct]

psd, on 01 May 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

Ironically, to me at least. Tiger seemed so much more animated in front of the golf press than he did in that dull, prefab Q&A session.  He just doesn't look like a very happy person, albeit based on a two-dimensional, pre-recorded clip.

He is dull, especially in front of the camera.

It's on the course that he can get excited.

As far as being a "happy person".

What does that mean?

Was Hogan a "happy person"?

Is Greg Norman a "happy person"?

I know that I am not a "happy person".

Happy people scare me.

Their neighbors end up being interviewed by news crews and they always say "Gee, he seemed like such a happy person"

Edited by bscinstnct, 01 May 2012 - 12:02 PM.

[geesecougar2]

kellygreen, on 01 May 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

jabrch, on 01 May 2012 - 10:50 AM, said:

If TW did this LIVE, I'd be all for it.  If fans want to ask the Qs to his face - that would be fine.  I just don't like the simulation of interaction when really it is just prescripting a generic statement of nothingness.  

TW has lots of opportunity.  He can, someday, be a top 5 golfer again on the course - if his game improves.  He can, someday, become the fan favorite, if he can connect with enough of us.  There's no reason both of those can't happen.  But not winning, or even being relevant on Sundays every week, and not having open dialogue either with the media, or the fans, won't help.  The Qs will suck.  He will have to eat some of the pain.  That's just how it is after stuff like what happened.  But what he puts into this., and then how he comes out of this is up to him...

Yes.

The crowds have to see bloodshed....they must have their bread-and-circuses.

How dare, Mr. Woods not offer himself up as a sacrifice for our amusement and to slake our appetites.

The nerve....


The man already has more money that he (or his kids) can spend in their lifetimes.  He's not obligated to offer himself up for anyone else's sport.  He knows it.  The media knows it (and is rankled about it)...and the haters in the crowd know it too.

Indeed, Kells. Indeed. Are we not entertained?

Edited by geesecougar2, 01 May 2012 - 12:03 PM.

[gators78]

kellygreen, on 01 May 2012 - 11:21 AM, said:

bscinstnct, on 01 May 2012 - 11:15 AM, said:

Yes, live, unscreened question for Tiger, that's the ticket!>>

Tiger, our first question is from an internet forum member known as "Tiger killed Lassie".  He asks,

Hey ELDRICK, what's it like to be so evil?

And a follow up question, ELDRICK, if you would not mind.

Is it true that Satan is playing you in the Lifetime Channel Movie:

"Tiger Woods, he made shaving cream commercials based on his fake image and everyone wants their money back"

Seriously.

Only an idiot hands someone a loaded pistol and doesn't take precautions that it doesn't get pointed back at them.

Sort of like telling racist jokes with a reporter right next to you?

[teejaywhy]

kellygreen, on 01 May 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

TheDarkOne, on 01 May 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

What exactly has the media done to Woods?

That post just destroyed what little credibility you had left.

Other than drag his personal life and marital problems through a public cricus that would make even the Hollywood tabloids and paparazzi blush?

Oh....nothing...


Other than forcing him to have to put his life back together in a goldfish bowl of public scrutiny that no other golfer, and few other sports celebrities have had to endure?

Oh...nothing.

Please.

Brings to mind the old adage - "Be careful whose toes you step on on your way up because they may be connected to the butt you have to kiss on the way back down."

[psd]

bscinstnct, on 01 May 2012 - 11:57 AM, said:

psd, on 01 May 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

Ironically, to me at least. Tiger seemed so much more animated in front of the golf press than he did in that dull, prefab Q&A session.  He just doesn't look like a very happy person, albeit based on a two-dimensional, pre-recorded clip.

He is dull, especially in front of the camera.

It's on the course that he can get excited.

As far as being a "happy person".

What does that mean?

Was Hogan a "happy person"?

Is Greg Norman a "happy person"?

I know that I am not a "happy person".

Happy people scare me.

Their neighbors end up being interviewed by news crews and they always say "Gee, he seemed like such a happy person"

Not happy as in unenthusiastic, a bit glum.

[biolagolfer]

From a fan's perspective, I think we get to see more of Tiger in these home Q & A's rather than the press conferences which seem to consist of the same questions every time . ..

Funny, the media is so obsessed with Tiger. . if they don't have the press conference to write about, they write about him not holding a press conference

[geesecougar2]

gators78, on 01 May 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

Sort of like telling racist jokes with a reporter right next to you?

Definitely was a brain fart on the part of a 22 year old Tiger Woods to do that. And it set the tone for his relationship with the media for the rest of his career. One of many examples of the media not doing him any favors, and he more or less learned his lesson quickly.

teejaywhy, on 01 May 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

Brings to mind the old adage - "Be careful whose toes you step on on your way up because they may be connected to the butt you have to kiss on the way back down."

This private Q&A video is a demonstration of exactly how little of the media's collective butts Tiger needs to kiss.

Edited by geesecougar2, 01 May 2012 - 01:15 PM.

[kellygreen]

zerofade, on 01 May 2012 - 11:27 AM, said:

because it's tiger this topic will digress into the usual bs .. but my thought was more focused on what john hawkins and that bozo feinstein had to say in reaction.

i guess i would be upset too if i basically got bypassed and my job as a "journalist" was being threatened.. print media is dying as it is .. add to the fact that these guys use social media to control their image and how they connect to the public and i would be thinking maybe the press is feeling a little nervous that they eventually won't have anything to do .. why let the media break a story .. when you can use twitter or facebook to control the story yourself .. i would .. wouldn't you?

Agreed.

Woods is reminding these guys--who often carry themselves with a swagger that they "make" these guys in the public eye---that they need him, more than he needs them....and they don't like it.

Their reaction is understandable..but their agenda is clearly a self-serving, self-promoting one.

[kellygreen]

geesecougar2, on 01 May 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

gators78, on 01 May 2012 - 12:03 PM, said:

Sort of like telling racist jokes with a reporter right next to you?

Definitely was a brain fart on the part of a 22 year old Tiger Woods to do that. And it set the tone for his relationship with the media for the rest of his career. One of many examples of the media not doing him any favors, and he more or less learned his lesson quickly.

teejaywhy, on 01 May 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

Brings to mind the old adage - "Be careful whose toes you step on on your way up because they may be connected to the butt you have to kiss on the way back down."

This private Q&A video is a demonstration of exactly how little of the media's collective butts Tiger needs to kiss.

1. I seem to remember that Tiger said that at a point in the interview when he thought he was off-the-record.   If the reporter did lead him to believe that, and then went behind and published what he said when his guard was down...then shame on him.   Though Tiger did learn from the experience, that the media simply wanted to use him.

2. Yep.  As wealthy as Tiger is, he doesn't have kiss anyone's backside.  Financially, he could walk away from the game of golf today, and not miss it.

[kellygreen]

teejaywhy, on 01 May 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

Brings to mind the old adage - "Be careful whose toes you step on on your way up because they may be connected to the butt you have to kiss on the way back down."

Also brings to mind the equally acient truism..."If you decide to go after a giant, you had better make sure that you kill it.  Otherwise, all you are going to do is make him angry."

...and these guys are being shown what can happen if they decide to push him too far.

He is showing them, that he doesn't need them.   That he is not public property...and that both professionally and financially he can give all of them the big F-U, if it comes to that.

[Awsi Dooger]

TheDarkOne, on 01 May 2012 - 10:10 AM, said:

What exactly has the media done to Woods?
I mean besides the obvious like promoting the sport he is involved with, giving him soft ball questions for over a decade, protecting him in many instances even post scandal etc? I mean yeah one or two guys have had the audacity to ask him the occasional tough but fair question, besides that what agenda are they trying to use against him that you have discovered this time?

Exactly. It's more than amusing that so many posters can't differentiate between the sports media, which has been ridiculously tame to Tiger, and the tabloid types, which Tiger purchased atop his doorstep via the Thanksgiving episode. Anyone with that much fame and star power would be treated similarly (I'd argue much worse, if a non-athlete) after a scandal like that, with so many layers and box loads of material for the late night comedians.

A Tiger press conference will ramble through trivia as petrified reporters, or PR types, avoid the topic that begs to be asked. Alex Micelli is the only competent golf journalist out there, in terms of a regular voice in the room. Feinstein is an author/columnist, an observer from afar. Micelli poses the question, always well phrased and hardly confrontational, and the look on Tiger's face switches to how-dare-you. Seldom can he avoid the little dig, sometimes taking it too far, to the edge of low class. Meanwhile, if he'd respected the media throughout his career and recognized those sessions as an opportunity, he'd be deflecting the Micellis with charm and built up good will within the room.

Tiger's camp brings it upon itself so regularly. That's the baffling aspect. Astonishingly inept timing and PR skills. Once Tiger left Augusta he wasn't the obsession. Bubba grabbed the spotlight, and three weeks lag naturally removes attention from the drop kick. The #1 ranking bounced back and forth. We were willing to wait for Tiger's return, and whether the game resembles Bay Hill or Augusta.

Then genius Sean Foley decided to inject a whine.

Tiger follows with a hide.

Whine and hide. That's Tiger's camp, post-Augusta. Apparently we're supposed to be impressed, to twist in Tiger's favor like a Bubba draw.

[jabrch]

psd, on 01 May 2012 - 11:35 AM, said:

Ironically, to me at least. Tiger seemed so much more animated in front of the golf press than he did in that dull, prefab Q&A session.  He just doesn't look like a very happy person, albeit based on a two-dimensional, pre-recorded clip.

Given the nature of the Qs he chose to answer, I'm not at all surprised.  The majority of the mainstream media is already so soft on him - only a few are not afraid and pander to him...but when he gets to go ahead and have his people pre-screen the questions, and only has to answer ones that he is prepped to answer, of coruse he's going to be bored.  I would too.  

I don't care much for him...never did frankly...I didn't know how much of a "work" his image truly was - but he just never was my type of golfer.  I like the everyday Joes a lot more than the "molded" images.  But it will be very interesting watching how he handles his next step after this session.  I think the response from fans and media alike, for different reasons, appears fairly negative.  Reminds me of the story I heard about the old soviet union  newspapers...(not sure if this is true or not - but it sounds good.)  There were two main papers...their names tranlated to "The Truth" and "The News".  In "The Truth", you found no news and in "The News", you found no truth.  (again - no idea if that is true or not - but it sounds nice)

I'm hoping he's a happy person.  He's got a lot going for him.  And he should be able to find whatever it is that makes him happy.  I just hope his own selfsatisfaction isn't tied only to being Tiger Woods the golfer who blew away 50% of the fields he played against...that's a pretty tough standard to hold himself to.  It's unreasonable, unrealistic, and likely unattainable.