Will anybody else be glad when Tiger retires ?...

WCDawg

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@Bankwalker said:
Of course Tiger will be featured. The networks would sacrifice a small child in a pool of goat's blood every week to have him consistently pushing the leaderboard. Ask the other players on tour if they secretly wish he would retire. I'd wager a near unanimous no. More viewers equals more money. It is incorrect to say Tiger wasnt directly responsible for a huge growth in golf revenue. Those dollars would have been divided among another sports.

The reason he increased ratings is because he drew an entire racial demographic to the sport. Those followers largely went away when Tiger left, so now the coverage is going to be skewed in an effort to gain back the attention of that 12.5% of the population. Two black dudes who frequent our restaurant for Sunday brunch and NEVER watch golf nor even play wanted to sit at the bar to watch the British that Sunday brunch. One graduated from UGA. I had to tell him he was rooting against a fellow Dawg. Didnt care.

Tiger didnt steal the spotlight from anyone deserving of more attention in his heyday. He was the best (at that time), and is one of the 3 best players ever. He wont catch Jack so Im not ever going to call him the best. He hasnt done much in 10 years.

Since 1996 ( before Tiger) golf purses for the 4 majors have increased about 500%.
During the same time period grand purses for grand slam tennis tournaments have increased about 500%.
I'm sure other players would garner at least as much indorsement money if Tiger was to retire, quite possibly more.

It’s not just the purses for the majors have increased dramatically. Purses for EVERY golf tournament have increased dramatically. I outlined earlier the number of golfers who now hit seven figures in golf winnings. This doesn’t include endorsements. I recall when it was a HUGE deal when Greg Norman earned one million in golf earnings AND $7 million in endorsements. The likes of Tiger and Phil hit $50+ million in endorsements annually. Tiger’s impact on golf is quite measurable and continues to be so. Numbers don’t lie. When he’s playing, viewership increases. Especially when he’s in contention. Will purses continue moving up even when Tiger is gone? Most likely. But it is in large part because of the impact he’s had.

As far as you comparing tennis purses to golf, there were a couple of dominant players who came along at a similar time to Tiger. Their names are Serena Williams and Roger Federer.

I just showed you purses in tennis have increased at virtually the same rate as golf in the period just before Tiger came onto the scene till now. I'm absolutely sure this trend will hold up when looking at other major sports as well. It wasn't because of Tiger, it is just the economics of sports in general.

gdawg4life

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@Bankwalker said:
Of course Tiger will be featured. The networks would sacrifice a small child in a pool of goat's blood every week to have him consistently pushing the leaderboard. Ask the other players on tour if they secretly wish he would retire. I'd wager a near unanimous no. More viewers equals more money. It is incorrect to say Tiger wasnt directly responsible for a huge growth in golf revenue. Those dollars would have been divided among another sports.

The reason he increased ratings is because he drew an entire racial demographic to the sport. Those followers largely went away when Tiger left, so now the coverage is going to be skewed in an effort to gain back the attention of that 12.5% of the population. Two black dudes who frequent our restaurant for Sunday brunch and NEVER watch golf nor even play wanted to sit at the bar to watch the British that Sunday brunch. One graduated from UGA. I had to tell him he was rooting against a fellow Dawg. Didnt care.

Tiger didnt steal the spotlight from anyone deserving of more attention in his heyday. He was the best (at that time), and is one of the 3 best players ever. He wont catch Jack so Im not ever going to call him the best. He hasnt done much in 10 years.

Since 1996 ( before Tiger) golf purses for the 4 majors have increased about 500%.
During the same time period grand purses for grand slam tennis tournaments have increased about 500%.
I'm sure other players would garner at least as much indorsement money if Tiger was to retire, quite possibly more.

It’s not just the purses for the majors have increased dramatically. Purses for EVERY golf tournament have increased dramatically. I outlined earlier the number of golfers who now hit seven figures in golf winnings. This doesn’t include endorsements. I recall when it was a HUGE deal when Greg Norman earned one million in golf earnings AND $7 million in endorsements. The likes of Tiger and Phil hit $50+ million in endorsements annually. Tiger’s impact on golf is quite measurable and continues to be so. Numbers don’t lie. When he’s playing, viewership increases. Especially when he’s in contention. Will purses continue moving up even when Tiger is gone? Most likely. But it is in large part because of the impact he’s had.

As far as you comparing tennis purses to golf, there were a couple of dominant players who came along at a similar time to Tiger. Their names are Serena Williams and Roger Federer.

I just showed you purses in tennis have increased at virtually the same rate as golf in the period just before Tiger came onto the scene till now. I'm absolutely sure this trend will hold up when looking at other major sports as well. It wasn't because of Tiger, it is just the economics of sports in general.

And I just told you that two star tennis players hit the tennis scene around the time Tiger hit the golf scene. It’s called correlation. Look it up.

gdawg4life

Hmmm. I wonder who didn’t play in the 2017 PGA Championship?

https://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-sports/releases/view?id=50733

Ratings up 54% from last year.

Edit to say - I’m guessing the ratings for today will be up compared to the final round of last year as well.

WCDawg

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@Bankwalker said:
Of course Tiger will be featured. The networks would sacrifice a small child in a pool of goat's blood every week to have him consistently pushing the leaderboard. Ask the other players on tour if they secretly wish he would retire. I'd wager a near unanimous no. More viewers equals more money. It is incorrect to say Tiger wasnt directly responsible for a huge growth in golf revenue. Those dollars would have been divided among another sports.

The reason he increased ratings is because he drew an entire racial demographic to the sport. Those followers largely went away when Tiger left, so now the coverage is going to be skewed in an effort to gain back the attention of that 12.5% of the population. Two black dudes who frequent our restaurant for Sunday brunch and NEVER watch golf nor even play wanted to sit at the bar to watch the British that Sunday brunch. One graduated from UGA. I had to tell him he was rooting against a fellow Dawg. Didnt care.

Tiger didnt steal the spotlight from anyone deserving of more attention in his heyday. He was the best (at that time), and is one of the 3 best players ever. He wont catch Jack so Im not ever going to call him the best. He hasnt done much in 10 years.

Since 1996 ( before Tiger) golf purses for the 4 majors have increased about 500%.
During the same time period grand purses for grand slam tennis tournaments have increased about 500%.
I'm sure other players would garner at least as much indorsement money if Tiger was to retire, quite possibly more.

It’s not just the purses for the majors have increased dramatically. Purses for EVERY golf tournament have increased dramatically. I outlined earlier the number of golfers who now hit seven figures in golf winnings. This doesn’t include endorsements. I recall when it was a HUGE deal when Greg Norman earned one million in golf earnings AND $7 million in endorsements. The likes of Tiger and Phil hit $50+ million in endorsements annually. Tiger’s impact on golf is quite measurable and continues to be so. Numbers don’t lie. When he’s playing, viewership increases. Especially when he’s in contention. Will purses continue moving up even when Tiger is gone? Most likely. But it is in large part because of the impact he’s had.

As far as you comparing tennis purses to golf, there were a couple of dominant players who came along at a similar time to Tiger. Their names are Serena Williams and Roger Federer.

I just showed you purses in tennis have increased at virtually the same rate as golf in the period just before Tiger came onto the scene till now. I'm absolutely sure this trend will hold up when looking at other major sports as well. It wasn't because of Tiger, it is just the economics of sports in general.

And I just told you that two star tennis players hit the tennis scene around the time Tiger hit the golf scene. It’s called correlation. Look it up.

Stop with the nonsense.
The increase in payouts for major sports has been across the board. It has everything to do with the proliferation of media, look it up.

gdawg4life

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@Bankwalker said:
Of course Tiger will be featured. The networks would sacrifice a small child in a pool of goat's blood every week to have him consistently pushing the leaderboard. Ask the other players on tour if they secretly wish he would retire. I'd wager a near unanimous no. More viewers equals more money. It is incorrect to say Tiger wasnt directly responsible for a huge growth in golf revenue. Those dollars would have been divided among another sports.

The reason he increased ratings is because he drew an entire racial demographic to the sport. Those followers largely went away when Tiger left, so now the coverage is going to be skewed in an effort to gain back the attention of that 12.5% of the population. Two black dudes who frequent our restaurant for Sunday brunch and NEVER watch golf nor even play wanted to sit at the bar to watch the British that Sunday brunch. One graduated from UGA. I had to tell him he was rooting against a fellow Dawg. Didnt care.

Tiger didnt steal the spotlight from anyone deserving of more attention in his heyday. He was the best (at that time), and is one of the 3 best players ever. He wont catch Jack so Im not ever going to call him the best. He hasnt done much in 10 years.

Since 1996 ( before Tiger) golf purses for the 4 majors have increased about 500%.
During the same time period grand purses for grand slam tennis tournaments have increased about 500%.
I'm sure other players would garner at least as much indorsement money if Tiger was to retire, quite possibly more.

It’s not just the purses for the majors have increased dramatically. Purses for EVERY golf tournament have increased dramatically. I outlined earlier the number of golfers who now hit seven figures in golf winnings. This doesn’t include endorsements. I recall when it was a HUGE deal when Greg Norman earned one million in golf earnings AND $7 million in endorsements. The likes of Tiger and Phil hit $50+ million in endorsements annually. Tiger’s impact on golf is quite measurable and continues to be so. Numbers don’t lie. When he’s playing, viewership increases. Especially when he’s in contention. Will purses continue moving up even when Tiger is gone? Most likely. But it is in large part because of the impact he’s had.

As far as you comparing tennis purses to golf, there were a couple of dominant players who came along at a similar time to Tiger. Their names are Serena Williams and Roger Federer.

I just showed you purses in tennis have increased at virtually the same rate as golf in the period just before Tiger came onto the scene till now. I'm absolutely sure this trend will hold up when looking at other major sports as well. It wasn't because of Tiger, it is just the economics of sports in general.

And I just told you that two star tennis players hit the tennis scene around the time Tiger hit the golf scene. It’s called correlation. Look it up.

Stop with the nonsense.
The increase in payouts for major sports has been across the board. It has everything to do with the proliferation of media, look it up.

Media is a part of it, but there has to be something (somebody) worth watching (and advertisers to spend dollars on). You won’t find a single pro golfer who has been around since the 90’s who won’t say Tiger is the reason purses have increased the way they have.

When more people watch something, there is a higher cost for advertisers which means more money for the “athlete”. If that concept escapes you then I can’t help you.

WCDawg

@gdawg4life said:
Hmmm. I wonder who didn’t play in the 2017 PGA Championship?

https://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-sports/releases/view?id=50733

Ratings up 54% from last year.

Edit to say - I’m guessing the ratings for today will be up compared to the final round of last year as well.

This is why the sport needs to promote THE SPORT, it's become little more that The Tiger show. That is not healthy long term.
The NBA went through a period of adjustment when Jordan retired, but it has had huge revenue growth this century.

gdawg4life

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:
Hmmm. I wonder who didn’t play in the 2017 PGA Championship?

https://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-sports/releases/view?id=50733

Ratings up 54% from last year.

Edit to say - I’m guessing the ratings for today will be up compared to the final round of last year as well.

This is why the sport needs to promote THE SPORT, it's become little more that The Tiger show. That is not healthy long term.
The NBA went through a period of adjustment when Jordan retired, but it has had huge revenue growth this century.

It’s a wonder they’ve made it this far without your help.

WCDawg

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:
Hmmm. I wonder who didn’t play in the 2017 PGA Championship?

https://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-sports/releases/view?id=50733

Ratings up 54% from last year.

Edit to say - I’m guessing the ratings for today will be up compared to the final round of last year as well.

This is why the sport needs to promote THE SPORT, it's become little more that The Tiger show. That is not healthy long term.
The NBA went through a period of adjustment when Jordan retired, but it has had huge revenue growth this century.

It’s a wonder they’ve made it this far without your help.

I bet you have a Tiger poster in your bedroom.

WCDawg

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@Bankwalker said:
Of course Tiger will be featured. The networks would sacrifice a small child in a pool of goat's blood every week to have him consistently pushing the leaderboard. Ask the other players on tour if they secretly wish he would retire. I'd wager a near unanimous no. More viewers equals more money. It is incorrect to say Tiger wasnt directly responsible for a huge growth in golf revenue. Those dollars would have been divided among another sports.

The reason he increased ratings is because he drew an entire racial demographic to the sport. Those followers largely went away when Tiger left, so now the coverage is going to be skewed in an effort to gain back the attention of that 12.5% of the population. Two black dudes who frequent our restaurant for Sunday brunch and NEVER watch golf nor even play wanted to sit at the bar to watch the British that Sunday brunch. One graduated from UGA. I had to tell him he was rooting against a fellow Dawg. Didnt care.

Tiger didnt steal the spotlight from anyone deserving of more attention in his heyday. He was the best (at that time), and is one of the 3 best players ever. He wont catch Jack so Im not ever going to call him the best. He hasnt done much in 10 years.

Since 1996 ( before Tiger) golf purses for the 4 majors have increased about 500%.
During the same time period grand purses for grand slam tennis tournaments have increased about 500%.
I'm sure other players would garner at least as much indorsement money if Tiger was to retire, quite possibly more.

It’s not just the purses for the majors have increased dramatically. Purses for EVERY golf tournament have increased dramatically. I outlined earlier the number of golfers who now hit seven figures in golf winnings. This doesn’t include endorsements. I recall when it was a HUGE deal when Greg Norman earned one million in golf earnings AND $7 million in endorsements. The likes of Tiger and Phil hit $50+ million in endorsements annually. Tiger’s impact on golf is quite measurable and continues to be so. Numbers don’t lie. When he’s playing, viewership increases. Especially when he’s in contention. Will purses continue moving up even when Tiger is gone? Most likely. But it is in large part because of the impact he’s had.

As far as you comparing tennis purses to golf, there were a couple of dominant players who came along at a similar time to Tiger. Their names are Serena Williams and Roger Federer.

I just showed you purses in tennis have increased at virtually the same rate as golf in the period just before Tiger came onto the scene till now. I'm absolutely sure this trend will hold up when looking at other major sports as well. It wasn't because of Tiger, it is just the economics of sports in general.

And I just told you that two star tennis players hit the tennis scene around the time Tiger hit the golf scene. It’s called correlation. Look it up.

Stop with the nonsense.
The increase in payouts for major sports has been across the board. It has everything to do with the proliferation of media, look it up.

Media is a part of it, but there has to be something (somebody) worth watching (and advertisers to spend dollars on). You won’t find a single pro golfer who has been around since the 90’s who won’t say Tiger is the reason purses have increased the way they have.

When more people watch something, there is a higher cost for advertisers which means more money for the “athlete”. If that concept escapes you then I can’t help you.

Of course golfers lavish praise on all things Tiger, it would be career suicide to do otherwise.
I've shown to anybody with common sense that revenue increases in major sports has been across the board.
If it wasn't Tiger the big bucks would have been distributed among a handful of other players.
The personal indorsement money is different, that is specific to Tiger.

DawginSC

@WCDawg said:
He's 8 shots off the lead today, yet he's the top story ?
The guy hasn't won a major since WWII..or there about.
It's past time to promote the top players today.

Honestly, he's the only player I've ever been interested in golf. I haven't watched much recently obviously. When he's done I'm not sure I'll bother watching at all. Even the secondary guys aren't interesting anymore... I was interested in Vijay, Els, Phil and Sergio.

Everyone who's any good is kind of cookie cutter now. It's like your choices are all Jordan Speith or Jordan Spieth clones/wannabe's. And Speith is boring to begin with.

gdawg4life

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:

@WCDawg said:

@gdawg4life said:
Hmmm. I wonder who didn’t play in the 2017 PGA Championship?

https://www.cbspressexpress.com/cbs-sports/releases/view?id=50733

Ratings up 54% from last year.

Edit to say - I’m guessing the ratings for today will be up compared to the final round of last year as well.

This is why the sport needs to promote THE SPORT, it's become little more that The Tiger show. That is not healthy long term.
The NBA went through a period of adjustment when Jordan retired, but it has had huge revenue growth this century.

It’s a wonder they’ve made it this far without your help.

I bet you have a Tiger poster in your bedroom.

Is your real name Richard Cranium?

I’m out man. Keep hating.

gdawg4life

@DawginSC said:

@WCDawg said:
He's 8 shots off the lead today, yet he's the top story ?
The guy hasn't won a major since WWII..or there about.
It's past time to promote the top players today.

Honestly, he's the only player I've ever been interested in golf. I haven't watched much recently obviously. When he's done I'm not sure I'll bother watching at all. Even the secondary guys aren't interesting anymore... I was interested in Vijay, Els, Phil and Sergio.

Everyone who's any good is kind of cookie cutter now. It's like your choices are all Jordan Speith or Jordan Spieth clones/wannabe's. And Speith is boring to begin with.

You kinda prove the point that Tiger brings “casual” eyes to golf. Not that you have said otherwise. It also explains the increased ratings when he’s playing. Especially when he’s playing well. Certain people on the forum can’t seem to grasp that.

What made Tiger so unique is that he was dominant and a person of color in a sport that didn’t have many people of color. He was a once in a generation talent. Much like Michael Jordan was.

WCDawg

@DawginSC said:

@WCDawg said:
He's 8 shots off the lead today, yet he's the top story ?
The guy hasn't won a major since WWII..or there about.
It's past time to promote the top players today.

Honestly, he's the only player I've ever been interested in golf. I haven't watched much recently obviously. When he's done I'm not sure I'll bother watching at all. Even the secondary guys aren't interesting anymore... I was interested in Vijay, Els, Phil and Sergio.

Everyone who's any good is kind of cookie cutter now. It's like your choices are all Jordan Speith or Jordan Spieth clones/wannabe's. And Speith is boring to begin with.

There are young players just as interesting as most of those guys. Phil being a possible exception, Lefty is an interesting dude with a daring game.
There were predictions of stagnation in The NBA when MJ retired, but people got over their singular focus and the league has thrived.

donm

@WCDawg said:
He's 8 shots off the lead today, yet he's the top story ?
The guy hasn't won a major since WWII..or there about.
It's past time to promote the top players today.

@WCDawg said:
He's 8 shots off the lead today, yet he's the top story ?
The guy hasn't won a major since WWII..or there about.
It's past time to promote the top players today.

PLEASE. avoid WWII references!> @WCDawg said:

@DawginSC said:

@WCDawg said:
He's 8 shots off the lead today, yet he's the top story ?
The guy hasn't won a major since WWII..or there about.
It's past time to promote the top players today.

Honestly, he's the only player I've ever been interested in golf. I haven't watched much recently obviously. When he's done I'm not sure I'll bother watching at all. Even the secondary guys aren't interesting anymore... I was interested in Vijay, Els, Phil and Sergio.

Everyone who's any good is kind of cookie cutter now. It's like your choices are all Jordan Speith or Jordan Spieth clones/wannabe's. And Speith is boring to begin with.

There are young players just as interesting as most of those guys. Phil being a possible exception, Lefty is an interesting dude with a daring game.
There were predictions of stagnation in The NBA when MJ retired, but people got over their singular focus and the league has thrived.

Not doubting you statement about thriving....but they are thriving w/o me. I can't really enjoy NBA games. I'll take a good college game anytime. At least they don't travel/carry the ball 83% of the time.

WCDawg

@gdawg4life said:

@DawginSC said:

@WCDawg said:
He's 8 shots off the lead today, yet he's the top story ?
The guy hasn't won a major since WWII..or there about.
It's past time to promote the top players today.

Honestly, he's the only player I've ever been interested in golf. I haven't watched much recently obviously. When he's done I'm not sure I'll bother watching at all. Even the secondary guys aren't interesting anymore... I was interested in Vijay, Els, Phil and Sergio.

Everyone who's any good is kind of cookie cutter now. It's like your choices are all Jordan Speith or Jordan Spieth clones/wannabe's. And Speith is boring to begin with.

You kinda prove the point that Tiger brings “casual” eyes to golf. Not that you have said otherwise. It also explains the increased ratings when he’s playing. Especially when he’s playing well. Certain people on the forum can’t seem to grasp that.

What made Tiger so unique is that he was dominant and a person of color in a sport that didn’t have many people of color. He was a once in a generation talent. Much like Michael Jordan was.

You can't seem to grasp the fundamentals.
What part of across the board growth in revenues for major sports confuses you ?
I've shown that this trend is not dependent on Tiger or any other single athlete. It's being driven by the proliferation of advertising dollars, tv money, milking more cash from live gates, etc.