Posted on 09/12/2010 11:14:31 AM PDT by MostlyAnti-Lib
Should Tiger be included on the Ryder Cup Team?
Is he a former PGA phenom? Without question. Did he have an exceptional 2010 season? No, he had a decidedly lackluster 2010 season. Was he the first African-American golfer to achieve superstar status and retain it over several seasons? Aha! I think that could be the key!
When we put together an Olympic hockey or soccer team, we don’t select a player who is the first Croatian-American who plays a mediocre hockey or soccer game, and who happens to be grappling with some emotional problems. No, we go for the guys who will best represent the USA and bring back the gold!
Everybody knows why Tiger may have had a bad season. Blonde bimbos, divorce, huge settlement… yada, yada, yada.
Hey, guys screw up! Especially, young guys who are sports superstars or Hollywood matinee idols with a seemingly endless supply of money. The “groupies” come out of the woodwork when they catch the scent of the large green. This is nothing new.
Should sports fans forgive him? We’ve forgiven worse.
Should he be given an honorary spot on the Ryder Cup Team because he’s a former phenom, or because there’s a good reason why he had a dismal season? Probably not.
Hell, Arnold Palmer is a former phenom; let’s get him!
But then, there’s that African-American thing…
I think it depends on how the Rider Cup works. For example, if it is an award for entire career than perhaps he should be chosen. If it is just for 2010, then why not wait until he has a good year. Why was he not picked last year? Arnold Palmer should be chosen this year if it is for entire career.
Tiger... Douchebag sex addict that he is can still play some golf... And unless you have a specific person you’d put in his place you just might be a race baiting little troll.
Tiger... Douchebag sex addict that he is can still play some golf... And unless you have a specific person you’d put in his place you just might be a race baiting little troll.
Former? He's the current #1 rated player in the world, and had two top-4 finishes in majors (the Masters and U.S. Open) this year. ...his worst year ever.
Sorry meant to tag original poster.
No, he was the typical choice. They’re always sticking him on the Ryder team, and he always stinks at the Ryder, but he’s Tiger Woods, so they hope that this time he won’t stink.
No problem...I have done that before many times...lol.
Since your start date, January 19, 2009, you’ve had exactly 9 posts on this forum. Eight of them were new threads in which you never posted responses to subsequent posts.
I call TROLL on you, trying to do a little race baiting in the meantime with this post.
Do you play golf as well as Tiger? Do you know the reasoning behind player selections for the Ryder Cup? If not, I’d say your “opinion” isn’t worth the keyboard it was typed on.
I’m not a Tiger fan (Used to be until his personal life fiasco...), but I think your little foray into his skin color is a bait.
the tv bunch probably put some (thumb rubbing against index and middle finger) in Pavin’s pocket...
They were all vanities, too.
Who cares what color he is? Why would you even bother with this nonsense?
And where are the responses and interchange?
Go Freeper Sleuths>>>>” clean up on aisle 5 ..”
Yep. Not only that, but between the start date, 1/19/09, and August 11, 2010, he was a sleeper with no posting whatsoever. Suddenly, on August 11th, he begins his foray of eight vanities in a row, most of which involved few responses, to which he never replied one time.
TROLL!
This isn’t an honorary spot, it is the Captain’s Choice.
You are a moron.
He is still the Number One player in the world rankings, and has never lost a singles match in Ryder Cup play.
IIRC, he's one of the better match play competitors on the PGA. Your point is a good one. All other Ryder Cup competitions are team events. His being picked because of his singles play is a pretty obvious one.
Tiger Woods is the choice for a number of reasons:
1. Ratings, the networks likely demanded the captain pick him.
2. He has the highest upside. Thus a risk averse captain would rather pick Woods in case you lose. If you lose without Woods, you get crticism for leaving him off. If you lose with Woods, you only get criticism if he plays very poorly.
3. Woods is very good at match play. He has not played that well in stroke play tourneys recently. But he may play very well when a bad swing costs him a hole not several strokes.
So I think Woods as a captian’s pick was a no brainer for any risk averse captain. Now maybe point 1 is in part due to his mixed race, but I think in similar situations Nicholas or Palmer would have been taken.
How would you like to be the captain that left Nicholas off, lost the cup and then had him a few years later become the oldest winner to that time of the Masters? You know you that would raise the controversy yet again. Well Woods certainly could and probably will win a major later, making leaving him off very high risk for the captain.
Tiger is 3-1-1 in RC singles matches. ....still pretty good.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.