Straight from Lyle's post: I saw that headline, as well as the multiple stories about Tiger leading up to Sunday's round, and all the tweets about Tiger, and I saw all of it on espn.com. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to make the reasonable assumption that the coverage of the live event is probably focusing a lot of its time talking about Tiger as well.
It sounds to me like you tried to call me out on something and were just flat wrong. It's okay to be wrong, but you should try to just own up to it when it happens. Unless, again, there's something I'm missing and you'd like to enlighten me? Exactly. Nobody cares about "guy who watched golf before Tiger" because that guy isn't what's driving these ratings. They tailor their content to bring in people who want to see Tiger win, because that's what drives golf's numbers to these levels. It's kinda like snapchat posting a bunch of articles about the Jenners and Kardashians. It annoys the shit out of me, but I understand why they do it and don't blame them for it. If it ever starts bothering me too much, I'll just delete the app. No one is forcing anyone to watch Tiger mania, just like no one is forcing me to use snap chat.
All while running off your clientele that would have stayed around after Woods retirement. I would hate to see you running a company
And that is the whole point. People gravitate to watch him play, and thus they are going to cover it. Supply and demand.
I tuned in to watch koepka go for two this year and got all tiger all the time. I can’t watch any more of that
Congrats, you all are the golf equivalent of people that keep the kardashians at the forefront of the news
I like to drink Arnold Palmers. Thus, golfers pre-tiger, and their fans, have done more for me and the quality of my life than tiger and his fans ever have. In conclusion: [uck fay] you, Indy.
I had a good time watching it yesterday. Buddy on text string is like lyls. Brooks is a machine. Hes got every shot.
Damn it, Indy you aren't supposed to like that post. You are supposed to feel shame that tiger hasn't invented a delightful reimagining of a cool summer beverage
This isn't news, this is entertainment. That is all sports is. And thus, the people are going to get what they want. I have watched golf for decades, and will watch Tiger play over just about anyone else because he is interesting to watch. If you cannot stand it, I am sorry, but he is big and will draw the biggest crowds. I honestly don't know why it bothers people so much, as long as Keopka had all of his shots put on TV, which to my understanding, it was. Tiger hasn't won anything in almost a decade, and him being in contention two major Sundays in a row is big news, whether you think it is or is not. I just don't understand the hate. But to each their own.
While the reasons for covering both are similar, I would say there is a slight difference between the followers of Tiger and the followers of the Kardashians. Tiger, in his prime, played some of the best golf anyone has ever seen and added a certain excitement to the game that hadn't really been seen before. He wasn't the "typical" professional golfer. People who had never cared about golf were drawn into the sport by his uniqueness and dominance. I don't really understand why people care about the Kardashians, but I don't think it's really the same thing. I just think the reasons they are covered are the same (i.e. people want to read about/watch them).
So because people are entertained by fist pumps, and not the most skill or by winning, I have to watch coverage of a has been. Time to get rid of TV
I've asked you multiple times to explain yourself, and in 3 responses, you still have yet to do so. Everyone knows what that means.
Has been? Tiger was in the lead on the back nine at the British Open and came in third in the PGA. I think you are overreacting, if you pardon me saying. EDIT: Correction, Tiger placed 2nd in the PGA yesterday.
