bzarcher | Ugh.

Because I wasn't that interested in listening to the Classic Games replay of the '95 SCF (though I admit that hearing Bettman say "The Hartford Whalers are staying put. New Jersey is going to move before they'd relocated!" was kind of amusing), I decided to flip over to ESPN radio.

I got there just in time to hear the guest host on Mike and Mike (Josh something?) say that Tiger Woods would be treated just like Barry Bonds when he got close to breaking Nicklaus' record. Which, quite frankly, just isn't going to happen.

It ticked me off a bit, and it's just annoyed me today, so I thought I'd write it out.

1) Barry Bonds -has admitted to taking steroids-. Oh, sure, he "didn't really know what they were", "Flaxseed oil", etx. But he admitted, on the record, that he took substances that were later proven to be performance enhancing drugs. (And, y'know, unusual and rapid muscle growth at a later age where that does -not- happen in a normal human being) Tiger Woods has never even been accused of drug use, let alone done anything to suggest that he might be taking drugs of any sort.

2) Tiger is not the best in the world because he hits the long ball. His game relies on a lot of mental work, a lot of very close precision work, and careful attacks on the course. Nothing that a performance enhancing drug would improve. Even the general purpose of steroids - to force the body to heal faster - doesn't meet what he's doing. He works out to keep himself in good trim, but he isn't trying to bulk himself up or force himself back out onto the course more often. If anything, notice that he's actually taking time off more, lately.

3) Tiger is on a much younger, faster pace to meet Nicklaus' record than Bonds was to meet Aaron, or even to meet Ruth's, and his pace didn't suddenly jump to a higher curve after a much lower point of his career. If anything, he's more comparable to a younger Ken Griffey Jr. or A-Rod, who show a great deal of promise early in the career and are capitalizing on it. (Also, while he has to beat out a -lot- more people each time to get there, I think it's worth admitting that it's a much lower number. Even if they only play 4 Majors a year, if he averages at least 1 Major win each year of his career, it's very likely that he will not only beat the record, but set it much higher...)

4) Much as it's rude to say, Tiger is a hell of a lot more media friendly / family friendly / approachable than Bonds ever was. He was a jerk when he played in Pittsburgh, he was a jerk when he left for San Francisco, and he's been a constant source of negative soundbytes for the media. He was played up as a goon, and even his "attempts to dispel my bad image" have mostly just come off as being callous, at best.

Tiger, on the other hand, is a very smooth operator who comes off as warm and approchable off the course, and while he gets very cold and professional in the moment, he's generally clear with "Please don't bother me when I'm working, but otherwise I'm happy to talk to you." He's been a media darling, and generally I think more people would say that he's a nice person than not. He's had a decent amount of PR coaching and he tends to mix the pride he has in his skill with a good bit of on-camera humility.

5) Bonds is a symbol of an era. It's not just that he was trying to break the record, it's that he's become the boogeyman for all the cheating that we know, with almost dead certainty, occured under the MLB and MLBPA's "See no evil, hear no evil" attitude towards steroids, ampethamines, HGH, etx, and he makes it workse because he Just Won't Go Away. Love him or hate him, he's everything about that late mid to late-90s that's so controversial in one neat package.

If Tiger's the symbol for an era in Golf, it's an era where golf really recconnected with people again. It stopped being a game for a bunch of fat white guys, and started being people that a lot of the public could get behind, even if they didn't always understand the game, or care that much about the lower tier players. Ratings, merch, ticket prices all went up, and the Tiger Tide raised up the PGA boats. Even the scandals that have touched the PGA have been personal ones - drinking, gambling, domestic issues, and all with players who are generally regarded as good, but not at Tiger's level.

If he has any problem in the sport, it's that nobody -is- percieved to be at his level, when he is on top of his game. Sometimes they shine close, but never just as bright, and when he's beaten, it's looked more as being "what's wrong with Tiger?" than "Wow, that guy did great!"

6) The timing. Like I mentioned earlier, there's only 4 Majors a year. Even if ESPN wants to do some kind of "Chasing Nicklaus" like they did with "Chasing Aaron/Ruth", it's not going to be an every night thing, and since each Major is a 4 day event, about the best I think they could do, as he gets close, would be a nightly recap, and maybe doing a "view in" when he plays a hole. Nothing like the "Every night, Game by Game, Inning by Inning, Pitch By Pitch" Instant Coverage/Analysis they were doing. I just can't see the format of golf sustaining that kind of hype.

One other thing he said also bugs me, and I can't decide if I'm ticked at how cynical the guy's attitude is, annoyed that ESPN's letting him go off like this, or maybe just worried that both of them might be right.

"Every sport is being touched by drugs, right now."

I just don't see that being the case. I don't see most sports being a giant dope fest, regardless of what guys like Dick Pound want us to believe.

Maybe it's naieve, but I like my Pollyanna world where the majority of athletes are naturally gifted people who compete because they love the game and drive themselves to do better, without resorting to cheating.