Tiger Woods and the PGA Tour's Failure to Promote the Lesser-Knowns

[robert]

The casual golf fan is the decider when it comes to ratings, Tiger Woods is in contention = They Watch. This is no different in any other sport. Tiger Woods = Michael Jordan = Wayne Gretzky = Dale Earnhardt ... etc. I feel often that the failure within golf is that the announcers are not trying to create a connnection between the fans and the other players.

It is Tiger's job to make people watch, therefore the networks must show him. It is the announcer's job to create an atmosphere which allows the sport to grow, they must promote the other players so that someone home watching who is only there because Tiger is playing becomes interested. Maybe then they can identify with someone else besides the number one star in the sport.

For me (and as many others have mentioned) it is the constant promotion of Tiger within the broadcasts which disappoints me, it is highly unnecessary to use air time to run a bio on Tiger Woods when this could be used to run a bio on other lesser known players. How is anyone going to think "Wow, that guy Bubba is fun to watch" if they just show him firing at a pin and don't tell the guys story, sure we the "Golf Fans" know about him or we know about Aaron Baddeley or Charles Howell III but the casual fan doesn't. People are going to watch Tiger ANYWAYS.

I think this is where golf differs from other sports, there is almost an air of desperation for ratings, a "we better show Tiger or people are going to get bored" attitude is presented. There were millions of people who only started watching basketball because Michael Jordan was playing, but after a while these people gradually saw other players that were great and this is what allows for the growth of any sport.

I give huge recognition to the Golf Channel for shows like Quest for the Card or Playing Lessons from the Pros which don't have on Tiger but show you how entertaining some of these guys on tour can be, the problem is it's mostly golf fans who have the Golf Channel. The Golf Channel producers can't be blamed for this but I do blame someone like NBC or CBS for not taking 20 seconds to show how entertaining some of these guys on tour are in their natural environments.

It was only last week that I realized how funny Colin Montgomerie is, I was watching the Telus Skins Game on TSN (the canadian equivalent of ESPN) and they had him mic'd up and I couldn't believe how entetaining this guy could be and I'm someone who watches golf every week, sure I knew people always said he's funny, but this was my first time actually SEEING it, pretty sad when you think about it.

As a HUGE NFL fan I would urge any golf fan to look at how th NFL promotes it's players of lesser known hype and the correlation there in of the constant expanding fan base. Simple things like having players introduce themselves, players interviewed during games that they are playing well in, not during the post game show, during THE GAME. Allowing the announcer to tell a story about the lesser known player and how entertaining and hard working they are. There are millions of football fans, myself included, who started off as fans of simply one player and grew to make there own decisions about who and what they like within that sport.

This is NOT Tiger Woods fault, he brings the fans in everytime he plays. He can not be blamed for being great or having endorsements and in no way does he damage the sport of golf. It IS the fault of the PGA for allowing their broadcast providers to feed solely on the Tiger Woods publicity and not allow the promotion of the lesser-knowns. The PGA should really look at building a future beyond Tiger Woods. One day he will be gone and where will the game be then if no one knows who else is playing.

Sorry about the long rant, I know everyone will not agree with my thoughts, but the topic about Tiger dropping out of the Buick really got me thinking about this idea and as a fan of all competitive sports and a big fan of golf it is something I see every day and wonder if anyone else sees it like I do.

[Norm66]

I can see your point and agree though I think it's partly just the nature of the game. As a newcomer to the sport (late last summer) and especially to watching it on TV I find it tough to get into some of the golfers because all you ever see is their on-course persona. Golf is the kind of game where most guys don't really show their emotions or personality on the course during competitive rounds very much and that hurts.

Though a lot of folks think it's gimmicky or whatever, I really enjoyed the Skins Game and whatever the other one was with the only the winners of Majors played in. The small "field" allowed more coverage of each player and each of them wore microphones so we were treated to their banter which really isn't all that different from our own on-course banter with our buddies.

[golfchief]

That sounds pretty nice to show the players at the end and middle of the leader board, when most of the viewers that really care about them are their family and friends. The sponsors want their ads on when the most viewers are infront of the TV's watching the top leaders. I would be willing to bet when you get up to get something to eat or go to the bathroom it would not be when the leaders are hitting but when they do show the shot of an unknown player. If you had to pee really bad and tiger was putting you'd wait till he putted, if it was the guy in 60 th place you'd be headed to the bathroom.

[p_funk]

I would be willing to bet when you get up to get something to eat or go to the bathroom it would not be when the leaders are hitting but when they do show the shot of an unknown player. If you had to pee really bad and tiger was putting you'd wait till he putted, if it was the guy in 60 th place you'd be headed to the bathroom.

Actually I would just hit pause if I really wanted to see Tiger putt that bad (DVR is the greatest thing ever). I wouldn't even do that because god knows they would show the replay of the putt about 60 times in a row. I believe this is why I can only watch a few holes at a time, because it is Tiger this and Tiger that and Tiger, Tiger, Tiger.

[kevin]

Agree with robert on this one.

Tiger is and will continue to be the big media draw. I don't fault the networks for promoting him like this. However, it is a golden opportunity to showcase the new talent out there now. I suppose the 80/20 rule could be applied here. 80% of those new fans watching a promo on someone new or breaking through are just going to yawn through it or get up and get something from the fridge and wait for Tiger to come back on. On the other hand the 20% that would actually listen and take an active interest in a compelling story about Bubba Watson, Aaron Baddeley or someone like that are the building blocks the PGA needs to expand the fan base.

What happens if Tiger suffers a major injury and can't play anymore? Without a strong fan base the number of viewers will definitely take a hit.

[lamebums]

I think I mentioned it in the Buick Open thread-- but I actually watched the Buick Open more than I usually watch an event, precisely because Tiger wasn't playing. It's all Tiger this, Tiger that, Tiger everything. I know he's a great golfer and all, but come on guys. Throw in the commentary's kissing the guy's ass every three minutes or so, and it gets old fast.

[Ogg]

It is the "all your eggs in one basket" cliche in real life. I HATE when I hear people say, "If Tiger's not playing, then I don't watch". Just look at last week's Traveler's Championship for a great finish and yesterday's birdie finish for Brian Bateman. Great golf with no Tiger. There really does need to be some better cross-promotion so that golf does not suffer.

[p_funk]

I think I watch more of the Nationwide tour on the Golf channel because of this also. I would like to see the broadcasters go 1 event, hell one round would be great, without talking about Tiger.

[cbe_golfer]

Sometimes I think all this Tiger talk by the commentators is going to cause him to not reach the levels he might go to otherwise.
On another note, what a fine win for Bateman. That's the nicest winner I have seen for a while.

[tejama]

It was only last week that I realized how funny Colin Montgomerie is, I was watching the Telus Skins Game on TSN (the canadian equivalent of ESPN) and they had him mic'd up and I couldn't believe how entetaining this guy could be and I'm someone who watches golf every week, sure I knew people always said he's funny, but this was my first time actually SEEING it, pretty sad when you think about it.

I thought the same thing about Monty. I always thought he was boring, and would rather turn the TV off when he was in contention as he just seemed lifeless. But at the Skins game he was an absolute laugh. I've got a newfound appreciation of him now.

[Big Lex]

I think the sponsors have more to do with who gets shown than any of us realize. I was shocked to learn a few years ago that network TV shows with excellent ratings are often cancelled simply because the viewership does not fit the demographic requirements of the sponsors for a particular time slot. As an example, "Murder, She Wrote" was a consistent, highly rated show, but was eventually cancelled because most of the viewers were over 40, and the golden, 18-40 demographic that sponsors want for selling stuff wasn't there.

But I agree that the constant Tiger exposure gets old. They even find a way to put him on the leaderboard when he isn't near the lead, as a "notable" or something similar.

We're a tough crowd to please, us golf viewers. We're either complaining about the announcers saying too much, or showing Tiger too much, or boring us with stories about Luke Donald's painting.

The golf is good enough all by itself, but we may be killing it with overexposure and the perceived need by TV to hype it.

[iacas]

I made this point in the podcast: the average TV viewer who may watch golf wants to see Tiger Woods. He's expressive, and to borrow something I heard from someone else, "a fist pump transcends sport." It means "I did something good and I'm excited." You don't have to understand golf or know what an eagle is - when someone fist pumps and jumps around, like Tiger does rather frequently, you "get" it.

For the more involved golf fan, like anyone who would join a forum, we have the avenue to learn more about other players. We can google or use the Internet or talk to each other and find out about Ted Purdy or Jay Williamson or Hunter Mahan or whomever. The power exists for us to do that.

So I see the networks as being in a bit of a hard spot. We complain that they talk too much and don't show enough golf, then we complain that we're not getting "exposure" to other players (when we can look that stuff up ourselves, and without Gary McCord cracking wise the whole time). We complain about seeing Tiger, but golf may not even be on TV if networks weren't allowed or chose not to show Tiger as frequently as they show him.

Frankly, so long as the leaders aren't being ignored (which I admit sometimes happens), I'll take all the Tiger I can get. He's dominant, and he's the best in the world, and perhaps the best ever. If you can't learn something by watching Tiger Woods, even on days when he's struggling, you aren't really paying attention. I'd much rather be able to tell my grandkids how much golf I saw Tiger Woods play some day than to tell them "yeah, I saw him win a lot of tournaments, but I would have seen more if the announcers hadn't been busy telling me all about Tom Pernice, Jr."

[samyosemite]

i think that tiger is one of the greatest players to ever play the game . that being said,i find it irritating while watching golf on just about any channel that they show tiger playing even when he is not in contention and no where near the top of the leaderboard.the same is not true for most players not in contention unless they have a great shot.i know he is a great draw for the networks but i would rather watch the players in the hunt for the title battle it out and give them their time in the spotlight,rather than analizing what went wrong with tigers game.i think that the interest in golf is stronger now than it ever has been and it is not all because of tiger.

[Cleveland Gunmetal]

Frankly, so long as the leaders aren't being ignored (which I admit sometimes happens), I'll take all the Tiger I can get.

I completely agree with this. Unfortunately, I think more times than not the leaders, or players who still have a chance to win are often ignored so the network can show Tiger on the back nine 10 shots (or whatever) out of the lead. Watching the AT&T; National yesterday made me think of this... I think they did a good job of still showing Tiger Woods (even when he wasn't going to win) for the casual fan without ignoring the leaders. Of course Appleby helped them out... I don't think anyone wanted to watch him on the front so really they only had to worry about Stricker, Choi, Weir and Furyk. They could have showed Furyk more... but that's the same ole story for Jim. Also, they stopped showing Tiger's every shot pretty early and showed mostly approach shots and some putts. And it seemed a lot of his shots were on tape. Good job.

[golfchief]

As much as some don't like them showing Tiger all the time, remember if Tiger,Phil, VJ,Arnie and Jack only showed up for the Majors the sponsors would drop all the other tournaments and you would not have any Golf to watch but the Majors.