OT: Tiger

[Nil Else]

Perhaps now he can concentrate on turning the economy around...

[BengeBoy]

Too little, too late.

However, the public has short memories -- he'll be back on a golf course by summer, winning tournaments by fall, have most of his endorsement deals back in 24 months.

Very happy he stood up for Buddhism, though. :banana: I thought Brit Hume was striking a low blow when he went after Buddha.

[gdw]

he needs to apologize to the women he wronged.....according to that ultra sleeze Gloria Allred. I don't quite understand how a women who knowingly has an affair with a married man has been wronged but he better apologize.

[rwsaunders]

Very happy he stood up for Buddhism, though. :banana: I thought Brit Hume was striking a low blow when he went after Buddha.

Buddha will kick his arse in Tiger's afterlife...

[Climb01742]

Buddha will kick his arse in Tiger's afterlife...

actually, in tiger's future lives, he'll kick his own arse. it's some strange karmic debt he's working out. :rolleyes:

[jpw]

He never was a role model, just a great golfer.
People should reach their dreams through themselves and not others.

[fiamme red]

What a joke that he's being treated for "sex addiction." Lots of men in his position (often away from his wife, with women throwing themselves at him) would have affairs all the time too, or at least be tempted to do so.

[97CSI]

He's an idiot. Who cares about his private life? Only other idiots. He should be out playing golf for our entertainment. Other than that he is a nobody and that is the way it should be. Now.............can we get back to our regularly scheduled looking at the snow?

[Lifelover]

He didn't say "Buddhism" he said "Bootyism".

Tha man made one mistake, he got married.

[snah]

He didn't say "Buddhism" he said "Bootyism".

Tha man made one mistake, he got married.

Too good and agree, nobody would care if he's a whore if he were still single.

[SoCalSteve]

Too good and agree, nobody would care if he's a whore if he were still single.

He'd be revered if he was a "single" womanizer (a la Joe Namath)...

Just sayin'

Steve

PS: On a whole other note, if this was Europe, it wouldn't have even made the paper. I sometimes wonder about our "puritanical" culture.

[Climb01742]

for him to not face questions was gutless...unless he never plays golf again and never appears as a public figure again.

you can either have a private life or a public life. but you can't take hundreds of millions in endorsements but then say, you have no right to ask me questions.

stay or go. public or private. choose, tiger. you have a right to one, not both.

[JMerring]

for him to not face questions was gutless...unless he never plays golf again and never appears as a public figure again.

you can either have a private life or a public life. but you can't take hundreds of millions in endorsements but then say, you have no right to ask me questions.

stay or go. public or private. choose, tiger. you have a right to one, not both.

completely disagree. if he cheated on the course or used peds (which i believe is a possibillity), then we could ask questions. but this matter concerns him and his family and nobody else. he never held himself out as a paragon of virtue. that his sponsors (or we) did is their (or our) issue, not his. they paid him lots of $$ and got a big return. simple business arrangement. we watched him perform to a level that almost no other athlete has, and were thrilled by it. that's all. but he shouldn't have to forgo his privacy because of it.

[Climb01742]

completely disagree. if he cheated on the course or used peds (which i believe is a possibillity), then we could ask questions. but this matter concerns him and his family and nobody else. he never held himself out as a paragon of virtue. that his sponsors (or we) did is their (or our) issue, not his. they paid him lots of $$ and got a big return. simple business arrangement. we watched him perform to a level that almost no other athlete has, and were thrilled by it. that's all. but he shouldn't have to forgo his privacy because of it.

i can appreciate your point of view, but respectfully disagree. i think the degree to which he availed himself of endorsement dollars (world's first billion dollar athlete), the number of endorsements he did, and the sheer amount of publicity and fame he reveled in -- as he admitted today -- points to the fact that he was a willing and guiding force in his public persona. advertising icons and control freaks like tiger has enormous say is their endorsements; he was a very active participant in reaping that billion.

to be clear, i feel for the pain he and his family are going through and i wish him well, and that he comes through this with his family together.

but i do think he is being a hypocrite. he wanted all the benefits of being a public person when it benefited him. but now that it doesn't benefit him, he's saying, whoa, my life is out of bounds.

i think he owes the public something. he took their money all those years. the odd thing is, if he answered the questions, he could begin to truly put this behind him. by not taking questions, he's prolonging the ordeal.

he always had a choice of taking the money or not. there are athletes who do truly shun the spotlight and keep their lives private. to_those_athletes, privacy is their full due. tiger sold his privacy years and a billion dollars ago.

[toaster]

Only in America would so many have so much to say about a man's personal life.

To have an opinion or to judge Tiger Woods is your own business.

Almost as much attention here as there was during Monica Lewinsky affair. Most folks it seems like to peer into other's lives that are more interesting than their own.

Hell, there were times my own life has got pretty darn interesting but who the F**k cares about me?

[Ray]

but i do think he is being a hypocrite. he wanted all the benefits of being a public person when it benefited him. but now that it doesn't benefit him, he's saying, whoa, my life is out of bounds.

i think he owes the public something. he took their money all those years. the odd thing is, if he answered the questions, he could begin to truly put this behind him. by not taking questions, he's prolonging the ordeal.

he always had a choice of taking the money or not. there are athletes who do truly shun the spotlight and keep their lives private. to_those_athletes, privacy is their full due. tiger sold his privacy years and a billion dollars ago.
I think we had this discussion when his scandals first surfaced, but I'll say again, I really don't think he owes us anything. He was public in terms of his golf game and his endorsements, never in terms of his family. If he wasn't public with his family when things were going well, he doesn't have to be when they're not. If he was a public official and this somehow had bearing on his ability to do a job that we were paying him to do, then he'd owe us a press conference where he answered anything anyone wanted to throw at him. But on this, for a golfer, he can talk as much or as little as he wants to. If his sponsors decide to drop him, that's their right. if they decide he's still worth money to them, that's their call too. To the extent they felt like they were paying for the image of his golfing prowess, they'll probably start paying him again if he regains his form on the golf course whenever he comes back. To the extent they felt like they were paying for his squeaky clean image, they probably won't. He's been as public as someone was paying him to be. That was his choice. So is this. I just don't get this thing that he somehow owes us a pound of his flesh.

-Ray

[gone]

Hell, there were times my own life has got pretty darn interesting

Do tell!


who the F**k cares about me?

I do :D

[toaster]

Do tell!





PM me...ahahaha!

[Climb01742]

I just don't get this thing that he somehow owes us a pound of his flesh.

we shall have to agree to disagree. but as to your literary allusion, if asking tiger to answer questions from reporters is "a pound of flesh" then i misread shylock's speech and misunderstood "the merchant of venice".

[SamIAm]

I think we had this discussion when his scandals first surfaced, but I'll say again, I really don't think he owes us anything.-Ray

Clearly he doesn't owe us anything, but why put yourself in front of the camera then? What was he trying to give us? It might have been the lamest "press conference" I have yet seen. He did not help himself with it, that's for sure. He continued to lie about not being "hit" by his wife.

I would have preferred nothing to the half-ass something he delivered. He only feels bad because he was caught. And if you think he didn't carefully market himself as better than that, well come on.

[norcalbiker]

I think his press conference should have started as

"Hello I am Tiger Woods and I am a sex addict"

[Tobias]

Almost as much attention here as there was during Monica Lewinsky affair. Most folks it seems like to peer into other's lives that are more interesting than their own.

Completely different. That wasn't about sex but about lying under oath. Hell, if I was married to Hillary I'd try to screw Monica too. :rolleyes:

I take that back, that's a federal crime too. :crap:

[johnnymossville]

Tiger is a living breathing billboard for the products he endorses. Without his sponsors, he's just another guy who pays to play a round of golf. If you like what he does on the golf course or wherever else, for whatever reason, watch him play golf, and go buy the products he endorses. If you don't like what his billboard says, just drive past.

Tiger is a brand. Whether he likes it or not his personal life will have an effect on it. He might lose Buick, Tag Heuer, etc,... but who knows, he might gain Trojan, or the Playboy Channel, or some Heavy Duty Mattress company. Who knows.

[Elefantino]

At 11 a.m. Eastern Standard Time today, the world stopped. And watched. And kept watching.

In Hong Kong. In London. In Johannesburg. And right here in River City, the heart of it all. Everyone had their eyes glued to a Stepford golfer/product/robot/whatever.

Tiger is, above all, a creation. Of his father. Of the media. Of his sponsors. Of the PGA Tour. He is somewhat akin to Mike Tyson, a perfect machine that somehow broke inside and went all wonky. And the world is shocked, shocked to find out that he's not perfect. And the world can't get enough of his mea culpas and self-flagellation.

I'm sorry. Maybe it's because I've been all Tiger all day long as our newsroom has gone barf-on-your-shoes overboard with the Escapades of Eldick.

Thank goodness we had a double first-degree murder conviction of two brothers today to break the insanity.

[Lifelover]

... Without his sponsors, he's just another guy who pays to play a round of golf......

I think this is a little over stated. He is still the BEST golfer in the world with or without his sponsors.

Truly being the "best", at anything, is something very. very, very few can claim.

[rounder]

I don't think Tiger owes us anything either, and i think we do not owe Tiger anything. The guy obviously did what he did. I do not buy Tiger anything...don't play golf so no Tiger golf clubs, never would wear a Tiger hat, far as i know, he does not ride serottas, so do not have to dispose of any bikes. I think it is entirely possible that Tiger wiil slough off the bad press, straighten out his game, and go on to win endless majors. Doesn't matter to me. I think the guy is a jerk. What ever happens, happens.

I think we had this discussion when his scandals first surfaced, but I'll say again, I really don't think he owes us anything. He was public in terms of his golf game and his endorsements, never in terms of his family. If he wasn't public with his family when things were going well, he doesn't have to be when they're not. If he was a public official and this somehow had bearing on his ability to do a job that we were paying him to do, then he'd owe us a press conference where he answered anything anyone wanted to throw at him. But on this, for a golfer, he can talk as much or as little as he wants to. If his sponsors decide to drop him, that's their right. if they decide he's still worth money to them, that's their call too. To the extent they felt like they were paying for the image of his golfing prowess, they'll probably start paying him again if he regains his form on the golf course whenever he comes back. To the extent they felt like they were paying for his squeaky clean image, they probably won't. He's been as public as someone was paying him to be. That was his choice. So is this. I just don't get this thing that he somehow owes us a pound of his flesh.

-Ray

[Bradford]

This is not news, it is gossip.

I think this kind of stuff is in bounds for politicians who get elected on family values platforms, but for everyone else, it is just gossip.

He doesn't owe me an apology or anybody else outside of his family.

[Ahneida Ride]

fractional reserve wife-ing :rolleyes:

[SoCalSteve]

At 11 a.m. Eastern Standard Time today, the world stopped. And watched. And kept watching.

In Hong Kong. In London. In Johannesburg. And right here in River City, the heart of it all. Everyone had their eyes glued to a Stepford golfer/product/robot/whatever.

Tiger is, above all, a creation. Of his father. Of the media. Of his sponsors. Of the PGA Tour. He is somewhat akin to Mike Tyson, a perfect machine that somehow broke inside and went all wonky. And the world is shocked, shocked to find out that he's not perfect. And the world can't get enough of his mea culpas and self-flagellation.

I'm sorry. Maybe it's because I've been all Tiger all day long as our newsroom has gone barf-on-your-shoes overboard with the Escapades of Eldick.

Thank goodness we had a double first-degree murder conviction of two brothers today to break the insanity.

I thought the Menendez brothers are still in jail :confused:

[gearguywb]

I think he should have started with "this is between my wife and myself, go away". Then turn and leave.

As far as his life being "public". Nope. No more so than your employer would have the "right" to dig into you private life. The media needed someone (something) to blast and he got caught in the limelight. Made a good story for all of the people with no life to worry about.

[rwsaunders]

I was riding the trainer, unfortunately, when I saw a replay of his apology. I thought about this a bit....if he didn't care about the money, then he wouldn't have gone public with the apology, and kept it between he and his wife. Too many references to my business partners and such in the speech. Unless his wife made him go public as a condition of getting out of the dog house. Who knows....The National Enquirer of course.

[Ti Designs]

Do you think sheep laugh at us for being so human?

[Ray]

Do you think sheep laugh at us for being so human?
I'm not sure sheep know how to laugh. But they damn sure count us when they're trying to fall asleep. Because I don't think anyone's developed sheep ambien yet.

The whole Tiger thing really kind of baffles me. We KNOW exactly two things. First, he's an amazing golfer. Second, he WAS a terrible husband who cheated a lot. We don't know ANYTHING else about his private life. We don't know whether he or his wife ever hit each other. We don't know if they're earnestly trying to work on their marriage or if its all show. We don't know if he's any kind of father. We don't know whether he's truly sorry or just sorry he got caught. We don't know what his future holds, either personal or public. I assume he'll try to get back to golf at some point and if he does well, he'll make a lot more money, get a lot of endorsements back, and lots of his fans will cease to care about anything else. If not, none of that may happen. Whether he can, will, or wants to work things out with his wife (and visa versa) is something we don't have the smallest clue about, is none of our business, and probably matters not in terms of how the public receives him when he re-starts his very public career.

I don't make decisions about what I buy based on who endorses it, or if I do, its happening totally on a subliminal level, which its probably supposed to. I don't believe I ever have consciously decided to buy something or NOT to buy something because Tiger endorsed it. Or Lance. Or Brett Favre. Or whoever.

I wish the guy and his family the best. How he/they get from here to there is of absolutely no concern to me.

-Ray

[Len J]

I think we had this discussion when his scandals first surfaced, but I'll say again, I really don't think he owes us anything. He was public in terms of his golf game and his endorsements, never in terms of his family. If he wasn't public with his family when things were going well, he doesn't have to be when they're not. If he was a public official and this somehow had bearing on his ability to do a job that we were paying him to do, then he'd owe us a press conference where he answered anything anyone wanted to throw at him. But on this, for a golfer, he can talk as much or as little as he wants to. If his sponsors decide to drop him, that's their right. if they decide he's still worth money to them, that's their call too. To the extent they felt like they were paying for the image of his golfing prowess, they'll probably start paying him again if he regains his form on the golf course whenever he comes back. To the extent they felt like they were paying for his squeaky clean image, they probably won't. He's been as public as someone was paying him to be. That was his choice. So is this. I just don't get this thing that he somehow owes us a pound of his flesh.

-Ray


Here is the thing. Everyone is making the mistake of thinking that this statement and any other public apology/statement/action re this is about what happened in the past, about how he somehow betrayed the public...it's not. Anything that is done publicaly is about the future, it's about how much he can make in the future. To think otherwise is naive. Do you think there would be any public statements if he wasn't going to attempt to maximize his future endorsements?

The below sums up who I think he owes and what he owes them.

Len

[Ray]

The below sums up who I think he owes and what he owes them.
Perfect!

[Climb01742]

i know others disagree, but i think people are misunderstanding the nature of endorsements. if an athlete NEVER accepts and endorsement deal, then he or she has a right to complete and utter privacy.

but i believe once you trade on your celebrity for money, you enter into some sort of "contract" with the public. this belief is based, in great part, on my first hand experience in dealing with celebrity endorsers. when someone has script approval, casting approval, image approval, wardrobe approval, location approval, schedule approval and essentially final cut approval, they are an active participant in trading on their "life" for money to get the public to take a certain action. i have seen the degree to which celebrities seek to control all this and reap rewards from it. which is fine, totally cool, but it comes with a price. which i would argue they enter into voluntarily and with full knowledge of the celebrity culture and its ramifications.

everyone is entitled to fame and fortune. or privacy. i personally believe, from things i've seen, that to ask for both is hypocritical, particularly due to personal actions you also undertook voluntarily.

[gemship]

i know others disagree, but i think people are misunderstanding the nature of endorsements. if an athlete NEVER accepts and endorsement deal, then he or she has a right to complete and utter privacy.

but i believe once you trade on your celebrity for money, you enter into some sort of "contract" with the public. this belief is based, in great part, on my first hand experience in dealing with celebrity endorsers. when someone has script approval, casting approval, image approval, wardrobe approval, location approval, schedule approval and essentially final cut approval, they are an active participant in trading on their "life" for money to get the public to take a certain action. i have seen the degree to which celebrities seek to control all this and reap rewards from it. which is fine, totally cool, but it comes with a price. which i would argue they enter into voluntarily and with full knowledge of the celebrity culture and its ramifications.

everyone is entitled to fame and fortune. or privacy. i personally believe, from things i've seen, that to ask for both is hypocritical, particularly due to personal actions you also undertook voluntarily.


Who cares? what questions are there to answer? He just wants those endorsements not to mention his family ,and success back. Its all about the money, probably a contributing attraction for his wife to marry him in the first place for that matter. I mean she's pretty and a good person, I figure she could of done just as well lover wise with a man from her homeland with the exception that Tiger is so rich and famous

Did he really give her 100 million for christmas? wow. I only remember that because some news article on tv said that was his repsonse when asked what he gave her and I think that is just a awesome amount of money. If he gave that to me I could do so much more good helping people including myself than she could but I ain't no hot euro blond mother of his babies so naturally my opinion doesn't count.

[Len J]

i know others disagree, but i think people are misunderstanding the nature of endorsements. if an athlete NEVER accepts and endorsement deal, then he or she has a right to complete and utter privacy.

but i believe once you trade on your celebrity for money, you enter into some sort of "contract" with the public. this belief is based, in great part, on my first hand experience in dealing with celebrity endorsers. when someone has script approval, casting approval, image approval, wardrobe approval, location approval, schedule approval and essentially final cut approval, they are an active participant in trading on their "life" for money to get the public to take a certain action. i have seen the degree to which celebrities seek to control all this and reap rewards from it. which is fine, totally cool, but it comes with a price. which i would argue they enter into voluntarily and with full knowledge of the celebrity culture and its ramifications.

everyone is entitled to fame and fortune. or privacy. i personally believe, from things i've seen, that to ask for both is hypocritical, particularly due to personal actions you also undertook voluntarily.

Only if he wants future endorsments..........if someone is stupid enough to buy something because of Tiger's endorsement...because of how they percieve him, then that is on them not him. He got paid to endorse, he endorsed, any psycological baggage that someone attachs to that is their responsibility.

To ask for it is not hypocriticial...to expect it might be. at the end of the day, we all have choices....he to kowtow to the public or not, and the public to change the way they perceive him or not. But, it's not about what he did in the past, it's about what he wants in the future. If he wasn't interested in future endorsements, we would never hear from him.

He let no one down but his wife..........anyone else who feels let down should look in the mirror for the cause.

IMO

len

[1centaur]

i know others disagree, but i think people are misunderstanding the nature of endorsements. if an athlete NEVER accepts and endorsement deal, then he or she has a right to complete and utter privacy.

but i believe once you trade on your celebrity for money, you enter into some sort of "contract" with the public. this belief is based, in great part, on my first hand experience in dealing with celebrity endorsers. when someone has script approval, casting approval, image approval, wardrobe approval, location approval, schedule approval and essentially final cut approval, they are an active participant in trading on their "life" for money to get the public to take a certain action. i have seen the degree to which celebrities seek to control all this and reap rewards from it. which is fine, totally cool, but it comes with a price. which i would argue they enter into voluntarily and with full knowledge of the celebrity culture and its ramifications.

everyone is entitled to fame and fortune. or privacy. i personally believe, from things i've seen, that to ask for both is hypocritical, particularly due to personal actions you also undertook voluntarily.

Maybe semantics, but "right" is a legal term even though it's often used as an assertion before it is made legal. There is no such thing as a universal "right." As for the contract of the endorsement, I'd say that is also a legal construct, which is why so many contracts specify that there are no implied "rights" beyond those spelled out in the contract. Further, I'd say an endorsement contract is with the sponsor, not the public. A celebrity controls his image to maximize his value to sponsors, but there's no implied contract to tell the truth about that image to the public. Michael Jordan is reputed to have had tons of female companions in cities around the league but that did not stop him playing the smiling good guy for his fans. It's interesting the difference between two well known athletes in how the media treated their multiple "alleged" affairs. Without the traffic accident, would the Tiger thing have become what it did? If Tiger had not seemed so milk toast would the public have shrugged it off, or if they had not "known" him since his teenage years?

Tiger has no right to privacy from intrusive questions because privacy is not a legal right, but he's welcome to assert it as others assert their rights all the time as a kind of emotional cudgel. He's free to talk or not talk and accept the consequences of either; I agree that yesterday's event was designed for the business aspects of his life rather than the personal. Beyond current and future endorsements, he kinda needs the galleries not to heckle him mercilessly if he's to keep making a great living. He and his handlers started the road back to commercial success yesterday. The personal road is unknown and short of biographies from Tiger or Elin may stay that way.

[I Want Sachs?]

There are many posts mentioning how nice the framemakers are within this forum and some are eccentric. I have even met some at NAHMBS who are frankly as-h-les. They tend to not get as much praise/business within this forum even though their work might be revered by other standards. I think we gravitate towards those who are nice to boot. Similarly, when an athlete is pitching a product, we do care about the character of the athlete. Who they are does not affect the performance of the product, but we want to be associated by the image brought about by the athlete.

For reliability and family value, Tiger lost that edge, but this might open up another opportunity for him in other ways. Bad boy, Dennis Rodman Golf anyone?

After all, many Americans are proud of JFK for his private life instead of being embarassed by the infidelity.

[I Want Sachs?]

I think his press conference should have started as

"Hello I am Tiger Woods and I am a sex addict"
I think many of us would have to introduce ourselves with that. It is just a matter of whether we have the will and the mean to indulge in it. For many, the will is there, but the mean is not. The athletes/politicians possess the means, but are asked to curb their will. In America, some succeed, some do not; and in some parts of the world, some are proud to fail. :p

Lago from Olympics is the most recent example of "disgrace" by US athlete, whereas Tomba from quite a few years back was quite proud of his conquests and attempts.

[NRRider]

Perfect!
+1

[Nil Else]

Beyond current and future endorsements, he kinda needs the galleries not to heckle him mercilessly if he's to keep making a great living.


That is the key. I have no argument about how incredible golf player he is however I never liked his personality much. Whether he gets heckled from the galleries would be highly entertaining and there'll be national interest at least for the first few games. I remember Colin Montgomerie refusing to play in US because he couldn't deal with all the heckling. I'm sure there will be heckling unless his team pulls off a miracle campaign changing public sentiment and instill pervasive air of self-policing refrain into the galleries; we are easy. I'd assume he'll handle it like Tiger that he is and let his golf shots do the talking...ideally, but who knows how these things will turn out... may be he'll freak out, lose control, attack the gallery with his driver. Depression doldrums... we need entertainment. However the boat is still sinking meanwhile there is fist fight going on by the hull over who and how best the holes be plugged... and all the major stations cuts into their regularly scheduled programs to broadcast *a golfer's press conference* regarding his sex addiction/infidelity.

[Ahneida Ride]

it's about how much he can make in the future.
Len

Bingo .. !!!!!

Always follow the federal reserve non-redeemable shopping coupon

[Len J]

That is the key. I have no argument about how incredible golf player he is however I never liked his personality much. Whether he gets heckled from the galleries would be highly entertaining and there'll be national interest at least for the first few games. I remember Colin Montgomerie refusing to play in US because he couldn't deal with all the heckling. I'm sure there will be heckling unless his team pulls off a miracle campaign changing public sentiment and instill pervasive air of self-policing refrain into the galleries; we are easy. I'd assume he'll handle it like Tiger that he is and let his golf shots do the talking...ideally, but who knows how these things will turn out... may be he'll freak out, lose control, attack the gallery with his driver. Depression doldrums... we need entertainment. However the boat is still sinking meanwhile there is fist fight going on by the hull over who and how best the holes be plugged... and all the major stations cuts into their regularly scheduled programs to broadcast *a golfer's press conference* regarding his sex addiction/infidelity.

Nope...tournament direstors won't allow it......it happens = ejection. Tiger's presence makes too much money for everyone to risk him not coming back to certain tournaments.

Len

[Bradford]

There is no such thing as a universal "right."
Seems like this country was founded on the concept of universal rights. It is in the second sentence of the Declaration of Independence:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

I just disagree with Climb on rights take precedence here.

[1centaur]

Len J - one or two hecklers get tossed. A gallery full of mutterers is something else, a different level of psychological pressure on the back swing and an unprecedented problem for tournament directors. No more "You the man!" and a lot more "Give it to her hard!" derisive laughs to follow. Tiger needs to get it back to one or two negatives and a lot more positives to make the most of the psychology of the game.

Bradford - law makers holding truths to be self-evident (and mentioning a Creator yet) is exactly what I mean. Without them viewing the world that way, those "rights" would not be ours, just as they are not elsewhere.

[Ti Designs]

My only question in this whole thing is why must I hear about it. I've tried to live my life untouched by Britney Spears or Lance Armstrong or Tiger Woods, and it's just not working! So, if it must be the top story in the news on all three networks, if it must be the top thread on this forum, I'm going to be the guy to ask the really tough questions.

My first question is which sport is gonna get me laid. I see Lance has a new blonde every third week, so I thought I had a chance there. But have you ever seen pro golfer's wives? They're all smokin hot southern women - and they still cheat! So what is it about golfers? In Tiger's case I'm guessing it had something to do with his net worth. So [some] women go for the guys with money - that in itself is hardly news worthy... Meanwhile all the pro cyclists are taking drugs that make them ride faster while killing off any sex drive ('cept for Floyd), so cyclists are idiots - also not news worthy. Clearly, this is going nowhere...

So, why did all three networks cover the story? ABC and NBC were all over it, do you think there was anybody at CBS that didn't know it was on the other two??? Is there any reason for that? Does it make any difference to anyone which network you saw it on? During the whitehouse sex scandal as they called it, I got my news from Comedy Central 'cause they asked the hard questions. While the other networks covered a story I couldn't care less about, they asked "why can't the leader of the free world get better women?" So what if one of the networks ran an episode of the Simpsons instead of covering the Tiger story? Would people complain? It's kinda like going to the one cart that sells somthing other than pretzels at Fenway Park and complaining that you wanted a pretzel...

OK, my real question is why don't you stop and ask why? What does who Tiger wronged have to do with you? (see flow chart) If someone endorses a product, why would that make you buy it? Endorsements cost money, and you the consumer pay the price for that, and let's be honest here - you're not that guy they're paying... If you're a network exec, why would you cover Tiger? Why did you cover OJ driving down the freeway? You're doing it 'cause somewhere someone told you to, over and over again. That's called marketing...


Lastly, I would like to say I'm sorry to all those people I've hurt by my actions, and you can bet I'm gonna do it again on the next ride.

[Nil Else]

Nope...tournament direstors won't allow it......it happens = ejection. Tiger's presence makes too much money for everyone to risk him not coming back to certain tournaments.

Len

Probably... However there is such thing as imperceptible yet deafening collective noise coming from the mass; I can't see tournament directors ejecting everyone. Even if a bunch of people gets ejected that in itself wouldn't be a positive echo. This could get interesting... it'll have to be played just so right.