Looks like Michelle Wie decided...

[crazy_horst]

However, what if she still hurts her wrist while jogging and then plays the way she did in 2007. Good bye 20 million. I also said that I would find someone who is good at helping young athletes. If he said he didn't want to turn pro I would respect his decision. At the same time I would tell him that there are no guarantees in life.

You can (and should) get insurance for stuff like that. Most big-time college athletes have rather hefty insurance policies (some ranging into the millions) to account for career-ending injuries.

One point I would make is, perhaps if the $20 million in endorsements weren't hanging over their heads, they may have made different decisions. BJ, for all the marketing genius he claims to have, did a lot of damage to his "product" this year. She would have been better off taking the entire year off. Now she's damaged goods (figuratively, as well as perhaps literally). I agree about the agent thing - there you've got a leg up on BJ. They did get one - two in fact - but both of them left after the Wie's continually refused their advice.

She hurt the wrist in January 2007 and then fell while jogging in February and hurt the other one. Her 2006 season was just fine for someone that could only play 7 times on tour. She played in a few men's tournaments where she did not do well but her last 5 LPGA tournaments before the injuries were T3, T5, T2, T26 and 17. Add in the two before that which were T2 and T3 (both Majors) and she was far from the crapper before getting hurt.

Last 4 events of 2006:

Omega European Masters: last 84 Lumber: last Samsung (LPGA Tour): 17th out of 20, 21 shots off the lead Casio World Open: last Her play was in the crapper before she hurt her wrists.

[Jeepthrills]

Last 4 events of 2006:

3 of the 4 were men's events. Tougher courses and higher caliber of competition. Is it safe to say that if those were women's tournaments on courses that fit her game she would have shot about 5 shots better per round.

The Samsung was just not good.

[crazy_horst]

3 of the 4 were men's events. Tougher courses and higher caliber of competition. Is it safe to say that if those were women's tournaments on courses that fit her game she would have shot about 5 shots better per round.

Hey, I didn't sign her up for the men's events. You can't take the exemption, go out and stink it up, and then say it doesn't count because the competition was too good. Besides, it isn't like she just missed the cuts. She was shooting in the 80's, hitting 4 fairways a round; she was getting beat by club pros for God's sake.

Her poor play in 2007 was simply a continuation of her poor play from the previous year, and to be honest, I don't believe a thing they say anyway. Who knows if the wrist injury was even real. How many times did she declare herself fit to go this year, then go out and shoot an 81 and then all of the sudden it's "my wrist hurts" again?

[Jeepthrills]

Hey, I didn't sign her up for the men's events. You can't take the exemption, go out and stink it up, and then say it doesn't count because the competition was too good. Besides, it isn't like she just missed the cuts. She was shooting in the 80's, hitting 4 fairways a round; she was getting beat by club pros for God's sake.

No doubt. She has no business playing against the men. It's not good for her mind frame now. She needs to use the exemptions she can get on the LPGA Tour and the European LPGA Tour next year. Maybe throw in a few from the Futures (this might be below BJ) and Asia. Play against other top female pros. Get her body and head right.

As far as the wrist goes, only she really knows if and how badly it was injured. I don't trust camp Wie either. I don't know the Wie family but with their Far East heritage it is not uncommon for the father to be the dominant one in the family. What he says goes. It may be like that there. Unfortunately if he is the stubborn ass that he comes off as, he is likely to push harder in the opposite direction if people say he is wrong. I hope for her sake she is able to say "Dad, I love you, but it's time for me to run my own life."

[crazy_horst]

No doubt. She has no business playing against the men. It's not good for her mind frame now. She needs to use the exemptions she can get on the LPGA Tour and the European LPGA Tour next year. Maybe throw in a few from the Futures (this might be below BJ) and Asia. Play against other top female pros. Get her body and head right.

I couldn't agree more. Aside from not playing this event, I can't think of the last good decision these people made. And it's unfortunate, because without all the playing the PGA Tour silliness, she could probably be throwing down on the LPGA Tour right now. But alas, Nike and Samsung didn't give her $20 million because they thought she'd be a good LPGA player.

The root of all evil... $.

[iacas]

Her play went in the crapper long before her "injuries". Just an aside.

And an incorrect aside at that.

[crazy_horst]

And an incorrect aside at that.

Already demonstrated. Her results at the end of 2006, i.e. prior to the injury, stunk. No two ways about it.

[g-funk13]

Well, yeah--throwing away 20 million is hard to do, and nobody knows how they will react to that until it is offered to them--I have my doubts about my ability to turn that down, and I love my kids A LOT. Michelle can justify all of the endorsement money over the years by winning which she WILL do.

Here's what I notice: When she has a media conference, she is generally adept at both handling the media, and showing her focus on improving her game. At times she has shown this poise in some uncomfortable positions i.e. right after she plays like crap. To me this indicates that she is smart and focused in spite of substantial antagonism that is just as much caused by her father's overbearing demeanor as it is by jealousy by other golfers, both male and female.

[iacas]

Already demonstrated. Her results at the end of 2006, i.e. prior to the injury, stunk. No two ways about it.

Yes, let's base our decisions on the results she had in one or two LPGA tour events.

Her results were nowhere near as bad pre-injury as post-injury.

[mybloodinvt]

i think that once she has matured a little, jettisoned her parents, and picked her competition more wisely, she will do just fine. that is way too much talent to just go to hell like that.

[g-funk13]

Yes, let's base our decisions on the results she had in one or two LPGA tour events.

Sarcastic point taken. The standard she is held to reflects her endorsements, which aren't a fair indicator.

I think, as others have said, that the big mistake is Wie taking the exemptions into Men's events. I think its a great idea AFTER YOU DOMINATE the ladies tour. Sorenstam did that, and still stuggled against the men's field!

[crazy_horst]

Yes, let's base our decisions on the results she had in one or two LPGA tour events.

Depends on how far back pre-injury you go. If you say two years, sure. If you say 3 or 4 months... 8 straight rounds over par on the LPGA Tour. Her game was most certainly on the decline before the injury.

[Jeepthrills]

Depends on how far back pre-injury you go. If you say two years, sure. If you say 3 or 4 months... 8 straight rounds over par on the LPGA Tour. Her game was most certainly on the decline before the injury.

This argument is totally subjective. It's all based on when people consider her down turn to have taken place. She played poorly in her last LPGA event of 2006. No question. However to look at the 4 rounds prior to that on the LPGA Tour and call them bad is not fair. She was playing in the Womens British Open where more than 1/2 the field finished over par. She finished a respectable 26th at +6. One shot ahead of Anikka.

Her terrible play has mostly been in 2007. All post injury. In the LPGA Tournament prior to that in 2006 her results were: Fields Open 3rd 1 shot out of playoff Kraft Nabisco T3rd 1 shot out of playoff LPGA Championship T5 2 shots behind winner US Womens Open T3rd 2 shots out of playoff Evian Masters T2nd 1 shot behind winner In that stretch she made a cut on the Asian Tour against men and finished T35. I am not trying to say Michelle Wie is the best player on the LPGA. Far from it. She has be bad to terrible in 2007. I am simply trying to point out to all the people that seem to think she does not belong on the LPGA Tour that she has more than proven that she has or at least had the ability to do it last year. Only time will tell if she can regain her old game. I never heard anyone say that Nattalie Gulbis didn't belong on tour because she had not won until this year.

[crazy_horst]

This argument is totally subjective. It's all based on when people consider her down turn to have taken place. She played poorly in her last LPGA event of 2006. No question. However to look at the 4 rounds prior to that on the LPGA Tour and call them bad is not fair. She was playing in the Womens British Open where more than 1/2 the field finished over par. She finished a respectable 26th at +6. One shot ahead of Anikka.

Anyone who doesn't think she has the

potential to play on the LPGA Tour is nuts, plain and simple. But I don't think anyone's saying that. I, for one, would love to see her actually earn her way into a field for once and qualify like the rest of the world, but hey... There seems to be this feeling that she deserves to get to play the LPGA Tour, and the majors, when and where she pleases. The word "deserves" doesn't exist in professional golf. But to the original point, she made a cut on the Asian Tour. Woo wee, so did Se Ri Pak. And I guess people weigh the men's events differently, but she played poorly at the Samsung and finished last, last, last and last in the 4 men's events she played during that time period. That's bad golf, no matter how you look at it.

[g-funk13]

But to the original point, she made a cut on the Asian Tour. Woo wee, so did Se Ri Pak. And I guess people weigh the men's events differently, but she played poorly at the Samsung and finished last, last, last and last in the 4 men's events she played during that time period.

I guess if I were pressed, I wouldn't care if a female golfer WHO WAS A GREAT PLAYER received many exemptions on the PGA---Except Majors, and pseudo-Majors events like the player's, and world championships, etc. Fedex cup would be out obviously.

But hey, a GREAT female golfer competing in say, the Colonial. . . sure I'll buy it. Michelle Wie may be there someday. It would be exciting. Imagine Wie placing ahead of, say, Vijay Singh or Rory Sabbatini?? It would be priceless. AND GREAT PRESS FOR GOLF.

[iacas]

Anyone who doesn't think she has the

She's qualified for several events simply based on her high finishes in majors, some of which she got into based on sponsor exemptions to other tournaments, admittedly - but once she finishes T2 at a U.S. Women's Open or whatever, she moves from "exemption" to "earned" real fast.

[crazy_horst]

She's qualified for several events simply based on her high finishes in majors, some of which she got into based on sponsor exemptions to other tournaments, admittedly - but once she finishes T2 at a U.S. Women's Open or whatever, she moves from "exemption" to "earned" real fast.

That's fine for the following year, but an exemption's an exemption. She's not qualified for any of the majors this year, which likely won't stop the LPGA Tour bending the rules into pretzels to get her in.

[Jeepthrills]

That's fine for the following year, but an exemption's an exemption. She's not qualified for any of the majors this year, which likely won't stop the LPGA Tour bending the rules into pretzels to get her in.

That's the business side of it. Right or wrong, a tournament is better off with her than without her. She is arguably the biggest draw in golf outside of Tiger. Next year she will be huge simply because of the type of stuff we have all spent the better part of two days debating. She already has the name recognition thing, now she will also have the people that want to see if she is done or not.