Wow, Tiger got Dissed by Dan Jenkins?

[iacas]

Judging by comments by many in the sports writing business, over this and other incidents with Tiger, I think there is a lot of resentment towards him over the way he answers questions and generally is not as open with other people like other players.

On behalf of those who want the truth, and consider themselves, on the subject of Tiger Woods, rather objective… please show me evidence of this. Please show me enough examples of other top players being significantly more "open."

Tiger, by and large, is quite literally 100x more likely to be asked for interviews, etc. than anyone else alive. He gives them, answers the questions, jokes with reporters, talks with them afterward, etc. Do reporters want MORE still, sure? Are they entitled to more? I say no, but that's veering into opinion-land.

Seriously, everyone in sports answers in clichés and stuff. Tiger does too, but Tiger grants a higher percentage of interview requests when he's at the golf course than almost anyone else, in spite of the fact that he's asked for hundreds of times as many .

Jenkins has written about this before, and I think it bothers him that Tiger won't sit down for an interview.

Jenkins is bitter that he was spurned by Tiger, and this is his retribution. So what if a reporter is "bothered"? Does that give them license to produce this type of stuff? It was un-funny, un-original, and petty and personal.

My only real gripe with Tiger is that he was such a liar about who he was so that he could shill for companies.

Why did you care?

I don't understand why anyone cares about this kind of stuff. He's a golfer - isn't it kind of assumed that marketing is a bunch of polished shit? Why did anyone assume that the picture he projected in order to make money was the exact truth of who he is (off the course)? Why did they care?

[iacas]

Quote:

With Dan Jenkins’ parody column ‘ My (Fake) Interview with Tiger ’ from this month’s issue of Golf Digest , Tiger’s subsequent reaction to it and the fallout from both, questions about the piece were clearly requisite. And with the so-called fifth anniversary of Woods’s fire hydrant episode back in the news, Foley did not pull many punches.

“It’s a classless article,” he said, “and I didn’t even think it was funny. I used to read Dan Jenkins’ stuff. He’s a brilliant writer and a Hall of Famer but maybe its time for him to move on. If he does this in 2010 at least it’s timelier but it’s the end of 2014. It’s obvious to everyone Tiger’s never given you an interview and everyone in golf history before him has. That’s Tiger’s prerogative. It seemed personal. Jenkins is a beautiful writer, a legend in this game, but what good does this article do? I mean really, what purpose is it?”

Asked specifically about Tiger’s apparent lack of decorum for tipping, Foley laughed.

“They can talk about how he doesn’t tip or whatever but it’s just more bullshit. I’ve seen him tip caddies at local clubs $400 so I don’t know where that comes from,” he said. “Seriously, saying he doesn’t tip? How come he (Jenkins) doesn’t mention Tiger raising $300 million for kids? Tiger is the epitome of the double-edged sword. Anything he does great doesn’t get mentioned. Anything he doesn’t it’s all over the place. Can you even imagine what the fallout would be if it was him and not Mickelson who called out Tom Watson at the Ryder Cup?”

Named in the piece as one of the people ‘Tiger likes to fire,’ Foley once again takes Jenkins to task. He does so through his own form of comparative analytics.

“If you think about it he really hasn’t fired that many people,” Foley said. He’s been playing the PGA Tour for 20 years. He has the same agent; he’s had three caddies and three swing coaches. Look at other players who have been out there for 20 years. Some of them have been through 17 caddies, 14 managers and 30 coaches. Look I’m about inclusion, and I’m about love and I’m about lifting people up. All stuff like this does is tear people down. It serves zero purpose. The golf industry in North America is hurting right now so why do more things to tear it down when you could write about positive stuff and lift people up. I’m not saying anyone has to be a cheerleader. But at least be fair, have some respect. I think when he came on the tour the purse was about $70 million and this year it’s $297 million. That escalation over 20 years is attributable to one person’s influence.”

http://scoregolf.com/blog/rick-young/2014/november/foley-fired-up

[Spitfisher]

Was this a real or fake interview with Foley.......... sorry couldn't resist

[imsys0042]

On behalf of those who want the truth, and consider themselves, on the subject of Tiger Woods, rather objective… please show me evidence of this. Please show me enough examples of other top players being significantly more "open."

Tiger, by and large, is quite literally 100x more likely to be asked for interviews, etc. than anyone else alive. He gives them, answers the questions, jokes with reporters, talks with them afterward, etc. Do reporters want MORE still, sure? Are they entitled to more? I say no, but that's veering into opinion-land.

Seriously, everyone in sports answers in clichés and stuff. Tiger does too, but Tiger grants a higher percentage of interview requests when he's at the golf course than almost anyone else, in spite of the fact that he's asked for hundreds of times as many.

Jenkins is bitter that he was spurned by Tiger, and this is his retribution. So what if a reporter is "bothered"? Does that give them license to produce this type of stuff? It was un-funny, un-original, and petty and personal.

Why did you care?

I don't understand why anyone cares about this kind of stuff. He's a golfer - isn't it kind of assumed that marketing is a bunch of polished shit? Why did anyone assume that the picture he projected in order to make money was the exact truth of who he is (off the course)? Why did they care?

I think the best answer to your questions is that Tiger has a perfect right to act how he does, but that doesn't mean that people are going to like it, or him because of it.   I try not to be critical when I hear bad stories about him because he does have more pressure on him than any other golfer.   That aside, there are plenty of complaints about how he acts.   Many people can keep it solely about the golf.   Many people form opinions on the overall person, and I think through his career he's gotten more than his fair share of detractors from various incidents.   Note, not the scandal, but strictly golf related incidents.

I can understand why some reporters would be bitter about him not opening up or giving them the access that they want, when most golfers are dying for more attention to get more exposure.   I don't think they should be bitter and mean, but I can understand the dynamic.  Does it give license for the GD piece?   No.   For general criticism, yes.

Personally I think he's hurting himself by not opening up.   I can appreciate Tiger's golf, as you suggest, on it's own merits.   he *is* awesome.   I don't pull for him like I do other players.   Here's my list of answers to golfers who are more open, or at least we know more about their struggles and what it means to them as a player.

Fred Couples (back problems and finding happiness with his second wife)

Davis Love III (how much his father impacted his life and career)

Tom Watson (initially wasn't a closer and hated British golf -- look at his great career)

Steve Stricker (isn't led solely by money, career and will miss tourneys for other important things)

These things humanize and make me want to pull for them when they play.   Much like news stories have to have a "human interest" angle, many people respond to the overall picture of a golfer, or celebrity.   You have a logical argument that it's all about the golf, and that's fine.   But many people, myself included, gravitate to more open individuals.

WRT why I care that he was a fake to sell things.   You know, it's like politics.   Don't make the lies you tell me to vote for you too obvious.  I get he never drove a Buick (so what?   he liked them enough to endorse them).   I want to be clear that I'm not condemning him for it, but it's a trait that really rubs me the wrong way.  And I don't like it.  Part of my make-up is that I cannot stand lying and when confronted with that, it really puts a negative opinion in my head.  and that's for anyone, not just Tiger.

And to really be clear, it's solely about the marketing.   I'd feel the same way if someone I personally knew did that to influence me and then found out they were completely different to how they presented themselves.   Except I'd be mad as well because it wasn't some distant golfer I will probably never meet in real life.   it'd be someone I knew.

[Elmer]

Personally I think he's hurting himself by not opening up.   I can appreciate Tiger's golf, as you suggest, on it's own merits.   he *is* awesome.   I don't pull for him like I do other players.   Here's my list of answers to golfers who are more open, or at least we know more about their struggles and what it means to them as a player.

Fred Couples (back problems and finding happiness with his second wife)

Davis Love III (how much his father impacted his life and career)

Tom Watson (initially wasn't a closer and hated British golf -- look at his great career)

Steve Stricker (isn't led solely by money, career and will miss tourneys for other important things)

These things humanize and make me want to pull for them when they play.   Much like news stories have to have a "human interest" angle, many people respond to the overall picture of a golfer, or celebrity.   You have a logical argument that it's all about the golf, and that's fine.   But many people, myself included, gravitate to more open individuals.

I would also point out that Watson is recovering addict, as is Feherty. Both of them have discussed their issues and injuries. And it is indeed very humanizing. Even Lefty's wife had medical issues and they addressed it.
But not everyone is as comfortable speaking about personal issues, and neither of the above listed 2 are a corporations like Tiger is. But woods comes off like Belechick or Jeter, they only talk about winning and moving on!

Not that there is any comparison, but atleast with John Daley, we knew  he lived his live a little off kilter. Tiger we have been led to believe he was the model of perfection and he wasnt.

However my issue with Tiger has been, if he was willing to cheat on his wife would he be willing to cheat on the game?

and this counts from everything from his blood spinning doctor, to steroid allegations to taking a drop he was not due!

[iacas]

I think the best answer to your questions is that Tiger has a perfect right to act how he does, but that doesn't mean that people are going to like it, or him because of it.

My question is not "why don't you like Tiger?" My question is more "why do you care?" Why does anyone care about off-the-course stuff? It's his personal life. I think people would be surprised at the number of guys on the PGA Tour who cheat.

I can understand why some reporters would be bitter about him not opening up or giving them the access that they want, when most golfers are dying for more attention to get more exposure. I don't think they should be bitter and mean, but I can understand the dynamic.  Does it give license for the GD piece?   No.   For general criticism, yes.

Personally I think he's hurting himself by not opening up.   I can appreciate Tiger's golf, as you suggest, on it's own merits.   he *is* awesome.   I don't pull for him like I do other players.   Here's my list of answers to golfers who are more open, or at least we know more about their struggles and what it means to them as a player.

Tiger doesn't want to, and never has, talk about his personal life much. It's irrelevant stuff to me. But it doesn't change the fact that, particularly given his standing in the game, he accepts more media requests at the golf course than anyone else.

If you want him to talk about his personal life, or the media does, well, that ship sailed a loooooooooong time ago.

[9iron]

Erik, is posting on an internet site the definition of "caring"? It isn't in my book. You created a msg. board where people talk. That is all this is. Talk. Bar stool talk. Nothing more or less.

You asking the other guy why he cares strikes me as placing more import on his msg. board post than he'd probably give it in the big scheme of things, but he can answer that for himself.

[imsys0042]

My question is not "why don't you like Tiger?" My question is more "why do you care?" Why does anyone care about off-the-course stuff? It's his personal life. I think people would be surprised at the number of guys on the PGA Tour who cheat.

Tiger doesn't want to, and never has, talk about his personal life much. It's irrelevant stuff to me. But it doesn't change the fact that, particularly given his standing in the game, he accepts more media requests at the golf course than anyone else.

If you want him to talk about his personal life, or the media does, well, that ship sailed a loooooooooong time ago.

And I don't care how many, including Tiger, do cheat on their wives.   That's irrelevant.   I happen to like him more than I dislike him, but for someone who has moved the golf needle as much as he has and the stellar play when he's on...I see someone who acts badly sometimes and that takes away from my opinion of him.   I'm strictly talking about what I see on the golf course, in interviews and in direct quotes.   There is plenty there to pull examples (and plenty of complimentary things too).

I don't really care how many media requests he answers.   That's not really a good measure either.   He's a cold fish, and I doubt that's who he really is.   Let me flip it around.   I don't like the lying about who he was so that he could sell stuff.  Ok, that pushes my button...agree or disagree, that's how I'm wired.   But why would he do that, unless it was a way to reach a broader audience and be able to sell more?

It's because image and more personal contact matters.   It makes people feel better about the product when someone they hold in some regard endorses it.   People should not buy xyz product just because a celeb says so, but that's not really the point.   The point is that celebs and athletes with good standing have a halo effect on what they promote.   it's a positive association.   He and his team felt they could make more money, and the companies paying them as well, by being this family friendly person.   Now the reverse is true.   People will gravitate more to people that they have these positive associations with.   Tiger has a lot of baggage and none of it has to do with his scandal.   He has a harshness to him that comes out and a lot of people count it against him.   If only the golf really mattered, then why did sponsors drop him?   (for the record, I don't think they should have just dropped him like that)

That's human dynamics.  I don't cry when he wins and I won't kill myself if he passes Jack's records in the majors.   Maybe naively, I'd like to have the great golfer in a generation be someone who looked happy at playing golf for a living and not frequently act like he's so put on.   I care because, like many people and many sports writers, I'd like to better know the greatest golfer in a generation.   And if he doesn't want to share, then that is ok and 100% he is doing nothing wrong.   But when the whining about not having a normal life, the getting angry because you don't win and any number of the frequent flyer complaints from the anti-Tiger camp come around, people are going to be quicker to assume the worst about you.   I think he does himself a disservice by not sharing himself with the world.   Spare a couple of other people in the golf world, I'd really like to see him by himself, one on one with me playing golf and no fear of me ever trying to sell him out.  I still bet he'd be a pretty cool guy to hang with.

[Gunther]

My question is not "why don't you like Tiger?" My question is more "why do you care?" Why does anyone care about off-the-course stuff? It's his personal life. I think people would be surprised at the number of guys on the PGA Tour who cheat. Tiger doesn't want to, and never has, talk about his personal life much. It's irrelevant stuff to me. But it doesn't change the fact that, particularly given his standing in the game, he accepts more media requests at the golf course than anyone else. If you want him to talk about his personal life, or the media does, well, that ship sailed a loooooooooong time ago.

You keep asking the same question around Tiger, why do you care about his personal life? I, much like you, don't have a great interest in what Tiger does off the course but you have to understand that we are in the extreme minority. Most people want to know what celebs are up to 24/7. Hence the popularity of Twitter, reality TV, TMZ, etc. This is a human condition from which you do not suffer. Even I suffer from it to a small degree as I follow about 50 people on Twitter, including Tiger (I don't watch reality TV or TMZ). Understand there's a component of human nature that drives this curiosity and you won't have to continue asking that question.

[boogielicious]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

My question is not "why don't you like Tiger?" My question is more "why do you care?" Why does anyone care about off-the-course stuff? It's his personal life. I think people would be surprised at the number of guys on the PGA Tour who cheat.

Tiger doesn't want to, and never has, talk about his personal life much. It's irrelevant stuff to me. But it doesn't change the fact that, particularly given his standing in the game, he accepts more media requests at the golf course than anyone else.

If you want him to talk about his personal life, or the media does, well, that ship sailed a loooooooooong time ago.

And I don't care how many, including Tiger, do cheat on their wives.   That's irrelevant.   I happen to like him more than I dislike him, but for someone who has moved the golf needle as much as he has and the stellar play when he's on...I see someone who acts badly sometimes and that takes away from my opinion of him.   I'm strictly talking about what I see on the golf course, in interviews and in direct quotes.   There is plenty there to pull examples (and plenty of complimentary things too).

I don't really care how many media requests he answers.   That's not really a good measure either.   He's a cold fish, and I doubt that's who he really is.   Let me flip it around.   I don't like the lying about who he was so that he could sell stuff.  Ok, that pushes my button...agree or disagree, that's how I'm wired.   But why would he do that, unless it was a way to reach a broader audience and be able to sell more?

It's because image and more personal contact matters.   It makes people feel better about the product when someone they hold in some regard endorses it.   People should not buy xyz product just because a celeb says so, but that's not really the point.   The point is that celebs and athletes with good standing have a halo effect on what they promote.   it's a positive association.   He and his team felt they could make more money, and the companies paying them as well, by being this family friendly person.   Now the reverse is true.   People will gravitate more to people that they have these positive associations with.   Tiger has a lot of baggage and none of it has to do with his scandal.   He has a harshness to him that comes out and a lot of people count it against him.   If only the golf really mattered, then why did sponsors drop him?   (for the record, I don't think they should have just dropped him like that)

That's human dynamics.  I don't cry when he wins and I won't kill myself if he passes Jack's records in the majors.   Maybe naively, I'd like to have the great golfer in a generation be someone who looked happy at playing golf for a living and not frequently act like he's so put on.   I care because, like many people and many sports writers, I'd like to better know the greatest golfer in a generation.   And if he doesn't want to share, then that is ok and 100% he is doing nothing wrong.   But when the whining about not having a normal life, the getting angry because you don't win and any number of the frequent flyer complaints from the anti-Tiger camp come around, people are going to be quicker to assume the worst about you.   I think he does himself a disservice by not sharing himself with the world.   Spare a couple of other people in the golf world, I'd really like to see him by himself, one on one with me playing golf and no fear of me ever trying to sell him out.  I still bet he'd be a pretty cool guy to hang with.

I guess what I don't is see how Tiger's behavior differs from most other players on the course.  He's on camera 100X more than others. The media wants to show his good and his bad, which is fine.  But they have a greater sample to work with because he is always on camera.

I think we tend to forget that former players also had tempers on the course.  None of them, including Jack, had nearly the camera time that Tiger has had.

[imsys0042]

Erik, is posting on an internet site the definition of "caring"? It isn't in my book. You created a msg. board where people talk. That is all this is. Talk. Bar stool talk. Nothing more or less.

You asking the other guy why he cares strikes me as placing more import on his msg. board post than he'd probably give it in the big scheme of things, but he can answer that for himself.

It's an interesting rabbit hole to go down, thinking about some of these issues.   It's hard to get the level of how you feel in a message board post.   I think the main gist of it is that I like Tiger, but some of the things he's done, strictly wrt golf, take away from that.   I'd like to think that I don't base those feelings on the wrong things.   I think what someone posted after my last post about human nature is pretty spot on.   It's natural to have an interest about the people behind the clubs (or public figures in general).   Best not to completely lose your lunch when you find out someone you admire has some skeletons.

[imsys0042]

I guess what I don't is see how Tiger's behavior differs from most other players on the course.  He's on camera 100X more than others. The media wants to show his good and his bad, which is fine.  But they have a greater sample to work with because he is always on camera.

I think we tend to forget that former players also had tempers on the course.  None of them, including Jack, had nearly the camera time that Tiger has had.

As a funny aside to all of this...and since Jenkins is part of the topic and a Ben Hogan devotee.   I forget where I read it, but someone had the comment that Hogan wasn't as put together as history remembered him.   The quote was "there were a lot of sand traps that had a club bashed into the lip on his way out.", IIRC.

[iacas]

Erik, is posting on an internet site the definition of "caring"? It isn't in my book. You created a msg. board where people talk. That is all this is. Talk. Bar stool talk. Nothing more or less.

You asking the other guy why he cares strikes me as placing more import on his msg. board post than he'd probably give it in the big scheme of things, but he can answer that for himself.

He cares enough to spend time commenting on it.

Some people care enough to be genuinely mad about it, or develop feelings that border or even cross the "hate" barrier.

That's "caring" in my book. It's almost the opposite of apathy.

The only time I care about Tiger off the course is when it affects what he can or can't do on the course. Otherwise, I'm apathetic to his personal life.

[Crim]

Quote:

Originally Posted by iacas

Quote:

With Dan Jenkins’ parody column ‘ My (Fake) Interview with Tiger ’ from this month’s issue of Golf Digest , Tiger’s subsequent reaction to it and the fallout from both, questions about the piece were clearly requisite. And with the so-called fifth anniversary of Woods’s fire hydrant episode back in the news, Foley did not pull many punches.

“It’s a classless article,” he said, “and I didn’t even think it was funny. I used to read Dan Jenkins’ stuff. He’s a brilliant writer and a Hall of Famer but maybe its time for him to move on. If he does this in 2010 at least it’s timelier but it’s the end of 2014. It’s obvious to everyone Tiger’s never given you an interview and everyone in golf history before him has. That’s Tiger’s prerogative. It seemed personal. Jenkins is a beautiful writer, a legend in this game, but what good does this article do? I mean really, what purpose is it?”

Asked specifically about Tiger’s apparent lack of decorum for tipping, Foley laughed.

“They can talk about how he doesn’t tip or whatever but it’s just more bullshit. I’ve seen him tip caddies at local clubs $400 so I don’t know where that comes from,” he said. “Seriously, saying he doesn’t tip? How come he (Jenkins) doesn’t mention Tiger raising $300 million for kids? Tiger is the epitome of the double-edged sword. Anything he does great doesn’t get mentioned. Anything he doesn’t it’s all over the place. Can you even imagine what the fallout would be if it was him and not Mickelson who called out Tom Watson at the Ryder Cup?”

Named in the piece as one of the people ‘Tiger likes to fire,’ Foley once again takes Jenkins to task. He does so through his own form of comparative analytics.

“If you think about it he really hasn’t fired that many people,” Foley said. He’s been playing the PGA Tour for 20 years. He has the same agent; he’s had three caddies and three swing coaches. Look at other players who have been out there for 20 years. Some of them have been through 17 caddies, 14 managers and 30 coaches. Look I’m about inclusion, and I’m about love and I’m about lifting people up. All stuff like this does is tear people down. It serves zero purpose. The golf industry in North America is hurting right now so why do more things to tear it down when you could write about positive stuff and lift people up. I’m not saying anyone has to be a cheerleader. But at least be fair, have some respect. I think when he came on the tour the purse was about $70 million and this year it’s $297 million. That escalation over 20 years is attributable to one person’s influence.”

This is absolutely fantastic. Cheers to Foley.

[phan52]

He cares enough to spend time commenting on it.

Some people care enough to be genuinely mad about it, or develop feelings that border or even cross the "hate" barrier.

That's "caring" in my book. It's almost the opposite of apathy.

The only time I care about Tiger off the course is when it affects what he can or can't do on the course. Otherwise, I'm apathetic to his personal life.

So, you honestly don't think that what happened in November of 2009, and the resulting sh*t storm, has had any affect on what he did or didn't do on the course after that?

[Ernest Jones]

So, you honestly don't think that what happened in November of 2009, and the resulting sh*t storm, has had any affect on what he did or didn't do on the course after that?

Jesus, you guys are like a dog with a bone. Let it go already...

[9iron]

You keep asking the same question around Tiger, why do you care about his personal life? I, much like you, don't have a great interest in what Tiger does off the course but you have to understand that we are in the extreme minority.

Most people want to know what celebs are up to 24/7. Hence the popularity of Twitter, reality TV, TMZ, etc. This is a human condition from which you do not suffer. Even I suffer from it to a small degree as I follow about 50 people on Twitter, including Tiger (I don't watch reality TV or TMZ).

That sounds like hyperbole.  Most people fall into the great middle ground between not caring at all, and caring so much they need to know everything. I know there are TV shows devoted to what celebs do, but they cater to housewives sitting at home on their couches eating bon bons. I doubt many care what Tiger is doing 24x7, but to the extent anyone here does care that much they probably need to adjust their priorities.

It's an interesting rabbit hole to go down, thinking about some of these issues.   It's hard to get the level of how you feel in a message board post.   I think the main gist of it is that I like Tiger, but some of the things he's done, strictly wrt golf, take away from that.   I'd like to think that I don't base those feelings on the wrong things.   I think what someone posted after my last post about human nature is pretty spot on.   It's natural to have an interest about the people behind the clubs (or public figures in general).   Best not to completely lose your lunch when you find out someone you admire has some skeletons.

I don't like the cursing, but I can compartmentalize that. I think most people never had a ton of interest in his private life until it got splashed on TV and the news media 24x7, but for all the wrong reasons. This is where it is human nature to take a moment and think about the things he was doing and form an opinion of those actions and how they fit the picture he was selling. You don't let it overwhelm you, but you also don't pretend nothing a man can do should make you ask yourself how a life would be best led.

Quote:

He cares enough to spend time commenting on it.

Some people care enough to be genuinely mad about it, or develop feelings that border or even cross the "hate" barrier.

That's "caring" in my book. It's almost the opposite of apathy.

The only time I care about Tiger off the course is when it affects what he can or can't do on the course. Otherwise, I'm apathetic to his personal life.

And some people throw the hate card as casually as they put on their socks and shoes. If it were not for claims of racism and Hitler references, the hate card would probably be the most overused claim on the internet.

[iacas]

So, you honestly don't think that what happened in November of 2009, and the resulting sh*t storm, has had any affect on what he did or didn't do on the course after that?

Of course I do…  But I've never said any differently. I couldn't care less about what affected his golf, only that his golf was affected.

I've said this or things like it many, many times.

And some people throw the hate card as casually as they put on their socks and shoes. If it were not for claims of racism and Hitler references, the hate card would probably be the most overused claim on the internet.

On this, I believe I used the word "care."