Dan Shanoff's Daily Quickie from ESPN:
"Dominance has its drawbacks.
"How much will Tiger win by?" is simply not nearly as dramatic as "Will Tiger pull it out?"
Tiger winning the British Open in a 5-shot runaway, leading nearly wire-to-wire, is -- speaking for casual golf fans -- less interesting than a fight.
Here's the problem with golf's "Big One" phenomenon: It's boring.
Tiger's dominance has no novelty anymore; frankly, it peaked with his epic Masters blowout more than a half-decade ago.
To maintain fan interest, Tiger's main competition can't be Nicklaus -- can't be history.
It's just too much delayed gratification to wait for: Only 8 more to go!
Tiger is the best golfer of our generation; perhaps even the best of all time. But even in a setting like Old Europe, coronations are a snoozer.
The "Big Four" is a marketing gimmick; we all know it's Big Tiger, alone at the top. His competition doesn't have to be Vijay or Phil or Ernie. It could be anyone; Tiger simply needs someone else to make things interesting."
I couldn't agree more. I liked when Vijay was winning alot. And Phil had his game on. And guys like David Toms and Chris Dimarco were making things interesting almost every week. I liked it when Tiger was in the tank.
As good as he is, I think his dominance becomes old quick. I'm sure during Jack's reign he had stellar competition that could at least step up (Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Arnie, Watson, ect)
What the hell has happened to golf? On sunday, I found myself changing the channel at least 3 times a hole. I would never, ever do that in the past. It seems when Tiger dominates, it just turns off my interest button.
He's the best in the game, but it doesn't take my breathe away on Sunday when he's up by 4 and everyone else goes into this "I'm playing for second" persona.
Just my thoughts.
R35
"Dominance has its drawbacks.
"How much will Tiger win by?" is simply not nearly as dramatic as "Will Tiger pull it out?"
Tiger winning the British Open in a 5-shot runaway, leading nearly wire-to-wire, is -- speaking for casual golf fans -- less interesting than a fight.
Here's the problem with golf's "Big One" phenomenon: It's boring.
Tiger's dominance has no novelty anymore; frankly, it peaked with his epic Masters blowout more than a half-decade ago.
To maintain fan interest, Tiger's main competition can't be Nicklaus -- can't be history.
It's just too much delayed gratification to wait for: Only 8 more to go!
Tiger is the best golfer of our generation; perhaps even the best of all time. But even in a setting like Old Europe, coronations are a snoozer.
The "Big Four" is a marketing gimmick; we all know it's Big Tiger, alone at the top. His competition doesn't have to be Vijay or Phil or Ernie. It could be anyone; Tiger simply needs someone else to make things interesting."
I couldn't agree more. I liked when Vijay was winning alot. And Phil had his game on. And guys like David Toms and Chris Dimarco were making things interesting almost every week. I liked it when Tiger was in the tank.
As good as he is, I think his dominance becomes old quick. I'm sure during Jack's reign he had stellar competition that could at least step up (Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Arnie, Watson, ect)
What the hell has happened to golf? On sunday, I found myself changing the channel at least 3 times a hole. I would never, ever do that in the past. It seems when Tiger dominates, it just turns off my interest button.
He's the best in the game, but it doesn't take my breathe away on Sunday when he's up by 4 and everyone else goes into this "I'm playing for second" persona.
Just my thoughts.
R35