I Wish I Could Like Phil Mickelson, But I Can’t

[iacas]

A new Thrash Talk by Ben: I Wish I Could Like Phil Mickelson, But I Can't .

[supersport]

I find my self in the same shooz. ;)

[Chief Broom]

I've always liked him. Sure he isn't as charasmatic as Tiger, but who is? Tiger is one of those sports phenoms that comes along once every few generations. Tiger is an icon like a Babe Ruth or an Ali. A sports figure that is universally recognized beyond their sport. That comes from exhibiting ability that is far beyond the norm even at their top professional level, and having a presence, a personality that creates this mystique. Tiger has all that in spades so naturally all of his competition pales in the comparrison. This is both good and bad for the sport of golf. Good because Tiger introduces more people to the sport due to his notoriety, but bad for his contemporaries because Tiger can't help but make them all look bad. You might wonder what a post regarding Phil and his likability has to do with Tiger, but I believe that the general negative impression many seem to have of Phil today has everything to do with Tiger.

My liking Phil goes back to when he first came on the golf stage and won a tournamnet as an amature (a fact that I recall created some ire within the professional community at the time due to them being somewhat upstaged when that happens). I've always admired Phil's swing and game from seeing it up close and insofar as I can admire any sports figure I like Phil.

[Zeph]

He's a nice guy and a good player, but these little things here and there contribute to how many see him. Tiger is also sort of his nemesis, as most people love Tiger, Phil gets a few cold shoulders.

I don't dislike Phil, but he's not what I would call charismatic from the footage I've seen on TV and the internet. It's not impossible that this effects his play. Take a guy like Garcia, very nice, always pleasant, nobody holds a grudge on him. But Phil doesn't fall into the same category.

Still, that's how he is and he play, everyone can't be a favourite, he's still a great player and one of the best in the world. As I've discussed in another thread, golf needs different type of players, if everyone was as nice as Garcia it would be dull. The relationship between Tiger and Phil, or Steve and Phil is just another perk for the audience to colour the game.

[uttexas]

Don't like Phil due to his early habit of wearing the collar up. The only thing worse than playing with the collar up is playing with a multithousand dollar watch on......oh wait, he does that........and he still wears metal spikes, which must be another one of his status symbols.......trophy wife.....check.

He is however polite and well behaved in that smirky/awe shucks way, just like the spoiled goody goody in highschool that wore neatly pressed polo shirts and clean shoes every day.

[Chas]

" Mentioning Lefty in my column last week seems to have a beneficial effect on the golfer's play. When, last week, I jokingly suggested Mickelson had lost the ability to compete at the highest level, he went out and won the Northern Trust Open, collecting a cool 1.1 million dollars in the process. '


I suppose Ben thinks this makes him sound cool - instead of which he sounds like some little idiot fresh out of grade school. He obviously doesn't get it, which is that Phil is his own man, has the talent to win HIS OWN WAY and doesn't care a Monkey's **** what some bozo like our miserable little blogger thinks. Yes, he just picked up the 1+ mill you m*r*n, and stuck it to dimwits like you in the process. Gotta love him for that as well.

OK he can be a bit stubborn at times (e.g. the 13th at the US Open), but his aggressive style of play has won him a few tournaments and a tidy sum along the way, and let's face it he's far and away one of the most compelling players to watch - not a grinding robot like so many out there.

Any half-baked scribbler can pick out a few regrettable misses - name a top player who doesn't have them - but I can think of a few stunning high-pressure shots that payed off big for the fellah. He didn't achieve the game he has now, with his style of play, without taking risks, meathead.

What a narrow minded, weasely sort of writer. No wonder Phil has nothing but contempt for people like that - at least I would assume that he has if he has any sense. He must really enjoy it when they make fools of themselves like Ben-zo just did. He's under no obligation whatsoever to talk to someone like this - myself, I'd be imagining a nice little duck hook with the big stick - or the 2i, take your pick.

Ahhhh, that feels so much better ....

[Spackler-esque]

I suppose Ben thinks this makes him sound cool - instead of which he sounds like some little idiot fresh out of grade school. He obviously doesn't get it, which is that Phil is his own man, has the talent to win HIS OWN WAY and doesn't care a Monkey's **** what some bozo like our miserable little blogger thinks. Yes, he just picked up the 1+ mill you m*r*n, and stuck it to dimwits like you in the process. Gotta love him for that as well.

Not to be a bigger dick than you, or Phil for that matter... But Phil sure didn't "win" the Northern as much as other golfers worked harder than he did to gave it away.

The truth is that when Phil plays "his way" he often blows it. He didn't win "his way" because he didn't play "his way." He didn't take driver off the tee at 18, instead taking a 3-wood off the tee. He won because he used his brain instead of his gut. And boy, his gut is a lot larger than his brain so I have no clue how the brain won out! Besides that, get a f'n life, man. It was a fun article. It made sense. You have no reason to be this offended by it. You're not Phil, so half the stuff you've spewed forth is conjecture at best. The other half doesn't make a lot of sense and is barely readable. You may as well be speaking olde tyme frontier gibberish for all I care. There are other threads discussing the merits of liking/disliking Phil. Personally, I think he's a twerp and am in the Steve Williams camp on this, except I extend it to Phil's zealots, too: Phil's a dick and so are his zealots. Lighten up, dude.

[zeg]

Not to be a bigger dick than you, or Phil for that matter... But Phil sure didn't "win" the Northern as much as other golfers worked harder than he did to gave it away.

Bah, unless cheating involved, a win is a win. Every golfer has crap rounds, not every golfer can win in spite of them. If some guy on the tour wins one tournament by going 63-72-62-72, then yeah, say those two low rounds were flukes. When he wins his 35th that way, it's a little different.

[Big_M]

I am a Phil fan...

I understand why some people might not like him, but there's plenty of reasons to dislike many golfers... my list and reasons follow...

1) Rory Sabbatini - just comes off as an ass
2) Ben Curtis - wearing stupid football stuff all the time
3) Ian Poulter - see #1 and add dresses like a fruit

I'll think of others later, but you get the idea... we all have our own tastes... and I like Phil, I also like Tiger, but will always root for Lefty in those occasional head to head situations.

[BASHERBAKER69]

..Wouldn't it be nice if Phil won again this week in the matchplay?

Hes got a good chance of picking up another title... Hopefully it will be his year, and actually he is more interesting to watch than Tiger.

Tend to think that some people do not like him simply because he is very wealthy, has a great looking wife, a lovely family, can really play golf, and is a gentleman. I find the blanket Tiger coverage quite nauseating and its great to see other players get more attention and praise.

Perhaps Phil surfs the internet and even pays attention to this website?..... bloggers blog (not many can actually play the game properly), golfers play-'those who can do, ....those who can't just talk about what others are doing!'.

[iacas]

Not to be a bigger dick than you, or Phil for that matter... But Phil sure didn't "win" the Northern as much as other golfers worked harder than he did to gave it away.

Indeed, a final-round 72 (+1) isn't exactly "going out and winning it."

Besides that, get a f'n life, man. It was a fun article. It made sense. You have no reason to be this offended by it.

Yep.

I suppose Ben thinks this makes him sound cool - instead of which he sounds like some little idiot fresh out of grade school.

I'm going to quote something else from Ben that you seem to have missed:

Source: Ben's Article Recent history, and the fallacy of false cause, suggest it will.

Put another way, maybe you simply lack this type of sense of humor. It's a blend-up of self-deprecating and sarcastic (and a few other things). Or your reading comprehension is lacking... or you skimmed the first paragraph and fired up your comment before you'd actually read the whole article. Whatever way you slice it, you seem to be the only person who thinks Ben is "taking credit" or anything of the sort. Your post continues to berate Ben, all from a position of ignorance, which begs the question: who looks like a "little idiot fresh out of grade school," a "dimwit," or a "m*r*n" now? And then you "imagine" bodily harm coming to Ben? Wow, buddy, that takes the cake. To others, please comment on the article itself .

[Chas]

So let's see then, Phil is such a big loser that he even loses when he doesn't win going away. Come on Erik, be reasonable - you know and I know that golf scores are all relative, you gotta compare them with how others are doing out there on the same track ..... The guy who's left standing coming down the stretch is the blasted WINNER, whatever the blasted score

I suspect what we have here is a case of severely disappointed expectations, the unrealized genius of the guy etc etc, resulting in a backlash when he doesn't come through as often as people would like. That's an unreasonable burden to place on a professional golfer, especially one who has proven himself as much as Phil has. Get real.

"Put another way, maybe you simply lack this type of sense of humor. It's a blend-up of self-deprecating and sarcastic (and a few other things)."
Well, that would characterize my own sense of humor rather well actually. But I have learned, unlike Ben it seems, to make sure that the sarcasm and self-deprecation come through fairly clearly, because not doing so can get you into trouble - as it has done me on occasion I might add. If that was indeed a good example of Ben's sense of "humor", you're right - I aint getting it. I suspect that it wasn't.

The level of criticism on this thread against Phil is best represented by the "trophy wife" and the upturned collar remarks - absolutely brilliant, and where would I be indeed with the profound insights of Sand Trap posters like that?
[heavy sarc., in case that wasn't clear to all of youse .....]
I suspect there's more than the usual level of psychological projection going on - nothing surprising about that I suppose. As to "squeeky clean" or whatever it was - GMAB.

My own concern with Phil is whether he will bounce back after one of his melt-downs - he's a gutsy, emotional sort of player and it's an inherent risk. But he always seems to do it rather nicely - could have something to do with his family life, the wife and kids - you know guys, that whole other side of life than frikkin GOFF. At least he doesn't carry a huge chip on his shoulder like you-know-who did until not so long year ago (what's Spanish for chip, anyway?). Our Spaniard has indeed shown that a person can change for the better under all that pressure, can mature in the klieg lights etc etc - bravo!

Erik: I took Ben at face value, having read the whole piece. I haven't read anything else of his so my words should be taken in that limited context. Ben's next piece might indeed be the soul of wit and profundity. Such is life in the blogosphere .....

[Chas]

"What irked me, specifically, was Phil's answer when asked what his thoughts were as Cabrera began making a charge and the Mickelson lead vanished. I don't remember his specific words, after an initial "you don't want to know." The point is, the right answer would have been something like "Well, you never know what will happen in match play, you just have to stay patient, confident and capitalize on opportunities as they present themselves." Which is a polite way of saying, "I knew I was going to put this guy away." I heard nothing of the sort from Phil."

So Phil is berated by our hyper-judgmental commentator for not giving the stock answer, which (as Ben himself admits) bears little relationship to his true feelings. He should have said just what Ben wanted him to say apparently - anything less was "irksome". There's a word for that attitude, which I won't share here on the thread - perhaps some can figure it out for themselves. Let's be as civil as possible and just call it "unbecoming" ......

How much better for Phil to give a candid response than the sort of pre-fabricated remark that Ben was expecting. THAT's why Phil is interesting to observe, unlike too many out there plodding along.

The more "irked" Ben feels when talking to golfers about their experiences out there, the better as far as I'm concerned.

Is that article-specific enough for you Erik?

[iacas]

Come on Erik, be reasonable - you know and I know that golf scores are all relative, you gotta compare them with how others are doing out there on the same track ..... The guy who's left standing coming down the stretch is the blasted WINNER, whatever the blasted score

That doesn't change the fact that it's commonly asked whether one person or team "won" the game or another team or person "lost" it. We all understand what that means, and I'm not really interested in debating the connotations.

That's an unreasonable burden to place on a professional golfer, especially one who has proven himself as much as Phil has. Get real.

And I don't care to debate what others assume to be my position. That's not what I think or how I feel. Probably isn't how Ben feels either, but he can speak for himself, and I won't presume to.

But I have learned, unlike Ben it seems, to make sure that the sarcasm and self-deprecation come through fairly clearly, because not doing so can get you into trouble

It came through pretty clearly to me.

and where would I be indeed with the profound insights of Sand Trap posters like that?

So because of what forum posters say you feel the need to call Ben, a real-life person I spent two hours with today at the golf dome here in town, names?

So Phil is berated by our hyper-judgmental commentator for not giving the stock answer

No, he's criticized for not giving ANY answer; for perhaps belying that he lacks the killer instinct. It's one thing to be thinking "I want to end this guy now" and just hit some bad shots. It's another to perhaps lack that instinct altogether, to have your mind wandering in a daze...

And enough with the name calling. You seem to have missed the point that "Thrash Talk" is the friggin' op-ed column. You disagree with Ben. You don't get to call him a "m*r*n" or anything else.

[mirv]

i've got what might be a silly question.

why is the thread here - as well as a duplicate thread in the golf section - if we're not supposed to comment in it? why not just post an exerpt from the article, and say "got a comment? post it over here on this other page." and then lock the thread right from the get-go so people don't get the wrong idea and think, hey, look - a thread! i'll comment in it.

[iacas]

i've got what might be a silly question.

Because shortly after adding this thread, I turned on the feature that posts items from our RSS feed as threads on the forum. Someone suggested I do that since so many people seem to forget that we have more than a forum.

[Awsi Dooger]

The problem with that article is it blatantly flunks truthfulness in the opening headline. Ben has never wished he could like Phil Mickelson. Exactly the opposite. He's exactly where he's always thrilled to be, in terms of opinion of Mickelson. That article is like a cheap and gleeful no-risk reaching out, to others with shared viewpoint.

My dad was a psychology professor for 40+ years. I've read his work and at least a dozen books on the subject. You don't nitpick for obscure excuses to dislike someone, as Ben did in multiple lists, while bottom line embracing terms like "tough to stomach" and "can't stand," if your long held intention is to boost and applaud the person.

Ben may be trying to fool himself. He flunks, massively, in his own wobbly words. I have much more respect for those who say they hold Mickelson in disfavor, always have and always will.

[Grndslmhttr3]

I honestly never minded Phil. He is exciting to watch, with his wildness and how he is so unpredictable. Not to mention that I don't really mind seeing his wife by the 18th green, y'know what I'm sayin'?