As Tiger Woods Fades, a Fear That Revenue Will, Too [NYT]

[nevets88]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/sports/golf/with-tiger-woods-in-decline-a-sport-and-its-sponsors-ponder-the-future.html?_r=0

Quote:

LOS ANGELES — Since joining the PGA Tour in 1996, Tiger Woods has been golf’s transcendent figure, credited with expanding the sport’s television audience, fan base, tournament purses and sponsorship deals. Over the last six years, he has missed chunks of time because of personal travails and injuries, enabling the tour to test its preparedness for life after the gold rush.

Now Woods, 39, has taken another leave of absence with his game in shambles and his body on the mend, and the end of his long, lucrative run feels nearer than ever. The tour, a multibillion-dollar industry, does not lack accomplished players and colorful characters. But for all the skill and social media savvy of players like Rory McIlroy and Bubba Watson, can they captivate as many people as Woods, who raised the level of athleticism in the game while remaking a sport known for its mostly white country-club composition?

The first thing that comes to mind w/regards to this piece is the NBA post Jordan has one thing I don't think golf has. China. The NBA is huge in China. It recently signed a $500m contract with Tencent (腾讯). However, golf is much more international now as mentioned in the piece - Europe, Asia, Australia, maybe there is a raising tide lifts all boats thing going on, synergies, as the business folk say. Dunno, right now, it would seem to me Fox and other companies may have overpaid for telecast and endorsement deals, how much remains to be seen, but then again, I'm no paid pundit.

[Patch]

Personally the best thing I think the PGA, and networks could do is come up with rule that all the better players should play against each other more often. At least 2 tournaments a month. Like the article mentioned there is too much "picking and choosing" which tournaments the better pga pros sign up for. Out side of the 4 majors, and the WGCs, you don't have many tournaments that show case the best of the best playing against each other. Then again, maybe 8 tournaments a year, where most of the best of the best show up is enough.

I also think the OWGR is out dated, and should  only use tournaments in a calender year. January 1st to December 31st. The idea that a top ranked player can take extended time off, and still hold their OWGR position, is just not right. It should coincide with the yearly money list, and that FedEx thing. If the OWGRs were a calender year type rating system, we might see more of the better players playing more often, against each other. This assuming the better players think their OWGRs are still worth something to them, and their endorsements.

[inthehole]

Personally the best thing I think the PGA, and networks could do is come up with rule that all the better players should play against each other more often. At least 2 tournaments a month.

I would support that

[jamo]

I would support that

The players wouldn't. Nor would I, frankly. It strikes me as forced and short-sighted.

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nevets88

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/24/sports/golf/with-tiger-woods-in-decline-a-sport-and-its-sponsors-ponder-the-future.html?_r=0

Quote:

LOS ANGELES — Since joining the PGA Tour in 1996, Tiger Woods has been golf’s transcendent figure, credited with expanding the sport’s television audience, fan base, tournament purses and sponsorship deals. Over the last six years, he has missed chunks of time because of personal travails and injuries, enabling the tour to test its preparedness for life after the gold rush.

Now Woods, 39, has taken another leave of absence with his game in shambles and his body on the mend, and the end of his long, lucrative run feels nearer than ever. The tour, a multibillion-dollar industry, does not lack accomplished players and colorful characters. But for all the skill and social media savvy of players like Rory McIlroy and Bubba Watson, can they captivate as many people as Woods, who raised the level of athleticism in the game while remaking a sport known for its mostly white country-club composition?

The first thing that comes to mind w/regards to this piece is the NBA post Jordan has one thing I don't think golf has. China. The NBA is huge in China. It recently signed a $500m contract with Tencent (腾讯). However, golf is much more international now as mentioned in the piece - Europe, Asia, Australia, maybe there is a raising tide lifts all boats thing going on, synergies, as the business folk say. Dunno, right now, it would seem to me Fox and other companies may have overpaid for telecast and endorsement deals, how much remains to be seen, but then again, I'm no paid pundit.

Yeah, golf can't be compared to NBA which is truly a global sport.   I compare Tiger to Magic/Bird who revived NBA.  Then came Jordan who took it to another level.   There is no Jordan equivalent in golf post Tiger.

[inthehole]

Quote:

Originally Posted by inthehole

I would support that

The players wouldn't.

Nor would I, frankly. It strikes me as forced and short-sighted.

would put ass in seats though ... win win for the venues and television

[jamo]

would put ass in seats though ... win win for the venues and television

Maybe in February and March it would, but then you'd get guys like Rory and Phil backing out of July, August, and September events because they're worn down. The players almost certainly would not support any plan that requires them to play more events than they want to. The guys who make a ton of money won't want to be forced to play events they don't like, and the guys who don't make a lot of money won't want guys like Phil and Rory being taking up spots in events they're forced to play.

[boston blackie]

Yea, they should play more.  They make too much money, as all pro athletes do. At least the elite ones.  We love to watch them play.  But why should they?  Hell, win one tournament and walk off into the sunset with more money than most of us will accumulate over a lifetime.

[jbishop15]

Yea, they should play more.  They make too much money, as all pro athletes do. At least the elite ones.  We love to watch them play.  But why should they?  Hell, win one tournament and walk off into the sunset with more money than most of us will accumulate over a lifetime.

They're independent contractors with no job security and no union, so they should make zero concessions. No tournaments they don't want to play in. Plus, they don't make nearly as much money as they bring in. Tiger Woods is worth a hell of a lot more than any tournament could ever pay him.

[ChrisP]

Golf just needs an American player to step up and dominate. There is really nobody right now that's an American that is even close to being a dominant figure. Rickie Fowler has the "pizazz" and likability, but one tournament win is far from dominating. Jordan Spieth shows flashes, but just hasn't broken through yet. Kuch, DJ and Sneds are already in their 30s and they're just not going to be those dominant players.

If Rory was an American, it'd be a totally different story because he would be able to move the needle, but he's just not as a Euro. He'll move it some, but not nearly to the extent Tiger did. The game's in a little bit of a funk right now. I really think Rickie-Rory would be great for golf and is what it needs, but Rickie has been a major letdown and we're just waiting for someone in red, white and blue to take the torch Tiger has passed down. It's probably going to take some time....just like the 15 years in between Jack's regression to Tiger's progression.

[iacas]

Golf just needs an American player to step up and dominate. There is really nobody right now that's an American that is even close to being a dominant figure. Rickie Fowler has the "pizazz" and likability, but one tournament win is far from dominating. Jordan Spieth shows flashes, but just hasn't broken through yet. Kuch, DJ and Sneds are already in their 30s and they're just not going to be those dominant players.

It's going to take a heck of a lot more than that.

Plus, it's unlikely anyone will dominate to the level Tiger did. He did so through the junior ranks, did well at college winning the U.S. Am three times in a row, and won the Masters in his first major as a pro… Plus he was "cablinasian" (a minority) which added to the discussion.

Nobody has had anything close to the amateur career Tiger has, there aren't many minorities with a chance to dominate, and virtually nobody - including perhaps even Rory - might dominate to the level Tiger Woods did anyway.

That's a LOT of missing pieces.

[NJpatbee]

I don't see anyone on the PGA Tour today that is going to generate the amount of interest that Tiger did.  There are lots of great players and the true golf fans will have plenty to watch and cheer about, but the loss of the global social appeal of Tiger will cause TV ratings, and perhaps purses, to drop.  Even when Tiger withdraws it generates more national news coverage than the actual tournament.

[chriskzoo]

Golf just needs an American player to step up and dominate. There is really nobody right now that's an American that is even close to being a dominant figure. Rickie Fowler has the "pizazz" and likability, but one tournament win is far from dominating. Jordan Spieth shows flashes, but just hasn't broken through yet. Kuch, DJ and Sneds are already in their 30s and they're just not going to be those dominant players.

If Rory was an American, it'd be a totally different story because he would be able to move the needle, but he's just not as a Euro. He'll move it some, but not nearly to the extent Tiger did. The game's in a little bit of a funk right now. I really think Rickie-Rory would be great for golf and is what it needs, but Rickie has been a major letdown and we're just waiting for someone in red, white and blue to take the torch Tiger has passed down. It's probably going to take some time....just like the 15 years in between Jack's regression to Tiger's progression.

Rory is potentially transcendent enough that he can carry the mantle going forward - anyone with a legitimate chance of catching Jack will be enough to carry the Tour and maintain most of the money that Tiger has pumped into the game.  The only thing that would absolutely kill the tour would be if something like the LPGA Tour occurred and tournaments were dominated by Asians that did not speak English.

[jbishop15]

It's going to take a heck of a lot more than that.

Plus, it's unlikely anyone will dominate to the level Tiger did. He did so through the junior ranks, did well at college winning the U.S. Am three times in a row, and won the Masters in his first major as a pro… Plus he was "cablinasian" (a minority) which added to the discussion.

Nobody has had anything close to the amateur career Tiger has, there aren't many minorities with a chance to dominate, and virtually nobody - including perhaps even Rory - might dominate to the level Tiger Woods did anyway.

That's a LOT of missing pieces.

I think people are starting to forget how dominant Tiger was at his peak. It's like nothing we've ever seen before. Rory's been extraordinary, but he'll disappear for stretches at a time and miss cuts. He's already missed ten cuts in his career; Tiger's missed only twelve. And maybe Peak-Rory will be as good as peak Tiger, but the odds are heavily stacked against it.

Also, I don't think Rory being European hurts him. If he ends up with the kind of dominance that Tiger had, he'll move the needle. The world is too global now to separate it neatly into Americans or Europeans or Asians. Things like Twitter make it easier than ever to get news from quote-unquote 'remote' parts of the world. Golf needs a super duper star, regardless of race or national heritage.

Rory is potentially transcendent enough that he can carry the mantle going forward - anyone with a legitimate chance of catching Jack will be enough to carry the Tour and maintain most of the money that Tiger has pumped into the game.  The only thing that would absolutely kill the tour would be if something like the LPGA Tour occurred and tournaments were dominated by Asians that did not speak English.

Kill it how? There is many more Asians than Europeans. Golf might experience a downturn in the States, but it will do very well in Asiatic countries.

[3putter]

I think people are starting to forget how dominant Tiger was at his peak. It's like nothing we've ever seen before. Rory's been extraordinary, but he'll disappear for stretches at a time and miss cuts. He's already missed ten cuts in his career; Tiger's missed only twelve.

That is just ridiculous, if it's accurate. (Sorry, I didn't double check it)

As for the ratings, I'll advice networks to try selling the game itself post Tiger. It's a beautiful game in many ways, but selling it with a "likeable' face is an easier, age-old marketing technique that should perhaps wait till another dominant figure emerges in the game. Calling a 1-time winner in x years the next best thing is an  insult to the word "dominant"

[Wally Fairway]

It's going to take a heck of a lot more than that.

Plus, it's unlikely anyone will dominate to the level Tiger did. He did so through the junior ranks, did well at college winning the U.S. Am three times in a row, and won the Masters in his first major as a pro… Plus he was "cablinasian" (a minority) which added to the discussion.

Nobody has had anything close to the amateur career Tiger has, there aren't many minorities with a chance to dominate, and virtually nobody - including perhaps even Rory - might dominate to the level Tiger Woods did anyway.

That's a LOT of missing pieces.

Are you taking into account that the field is much deeper and it is harder to win for Rory than it was for Tiger {wink}

[iacas]

Are you taking into account that the field is much deeper and it is harder to win for Rory than it was for Tiger {wink}

Yes. I've already said that Rory might only have to win 12 majors to be considered GOAT IMO.

#backfire

[ChrisP]

Even if Rory were to win 14 majors....and I honestly do think he can do it......he's still not going to move the needle like Tiger did. I think he needs a rivarly with someone, kinda like Jack had Arnie and Watson, to really push the game more. Like iacas said, I don't think it'll ever peak to where Tiger had it and we'll never see a player dominate like that again when he was in his prime, and if anyone is waiting for that to happen, they'll be waiting into their next lifetime and then some. The best we can hope for is an American figure to really step up and challenge Rory's game...someone with a personality and flare about them. Jordan Spieth is a great player, but I'm not sure he has that flare about him to motivate people to watch him on TV.