Does The Masters NEED Tiger?

[Mr_Theoo 3,213]

 

What do you think? Does the masters need Tiger?

[revkev 23,142]

The PGA Tour does, the Masters? Not so much IMO. It's the one tournament that people will watch. It just proves that it's all about the buzz and not the substance because its field is no where near as strong as the World a golf events or the other majors. But it's the week after the NCAA tournament so CBS gets to plug the heck out of it and it reminds folks that spring is here.

 

The Bayhill event whatever it's called needs Tiger, the other majors need him but not the

Asters even though his presence would boost TV ratings some beyond a doubt.

[TIBA_Putt - Kyle 139]

Like the guy in the video said, writers grasping for story lines early in the event probably really hope he is there. But the Masters itself, nope. It's bigger than Tiger.

Would it be nice if he is there? Absolutely. I'm sure we will hear about him whether he is there or not. But there are plenty of good story lines coming into this year even with Tiger being absent on the tour.

[hckymeyer 6,336]

Agree with Tiba and Rev, The Masters doesn't need Tiger.  It's the first major of the year and it's The Masters.  People will watch no matter who is playing.

 

The funny part though is that he will be in the headlines either way.  Either for missing it or playing in it.

[whiskey golf 61]

The Masters does not need Tiger, it'll be just as good of a tournament without him. 

[westy 523]

Kind of agree with Rev, the tournaments week in week out on the PGA tour need Tiger (or perhaps more accurately - top quality fields).

 

Of the majors only the PGA needs any sort of boost and even then I'm not sure.

 

The Open and US open are special without Tiger; the Masters is just special full stop.

 

Tiger will still make headlines whatever happens, Which is a shame because there's so much good stuff going on in golf that we should focus on.

[jmwils81 102]

I agree with TIBA, that tournament is way bigger than tiger. I just hope that if he doesn't play the announcers don't go all ESPN talking about LeBron and mention tiger every minute.

 

What the Masters needs and I think what golf needs is an amateur to contend on Sunday. That would be an epic story.

[PlaidJacket 7,728]

The Masters will be just fine without Tiger. I'm officially stating the Tiger era is over. Oh sure, he'll be around from time to time and perhaps win again.? I didn't get to really observe the Hogan period or the Sneed period, etc but somehow golf survived and so did I. I was around but too young then and didn't really pay attention. I lived through and watched the Palmer, Nicklaus eras. Again, golf survived and prospered. Tiger is exceptional. However, the "media" created their monster called Tiger Woods and now they are in a freak out to discover he's only human. Human nature always wrecks the media's defined narrative. Tiger doesn't owe the Media anything. They built their business around and assumed he'd be Tiger forever. Sorry... he's just a golfer. A very good one in fact. But at the end of the day he's just a guy. It's been fun but it's over.

[Bogey in The Woods 428]

Real easy answer. Whats the event name? The Tigers? Tigers Master's?

 

nope.

 

its The Masters.

 

Period

[apprenti23 604]

I honestly feel that The Masters Tournament and the ProV1 golf ball are the ONLY two things golf related that do not need Tiger Woods.

[mr_divots 247]

Tiger only needs to be there if and only if the media can control themselves and ignore him completely if he's 20 shots out of the lead or misses the cut. To date, they have proven they just can't help themselves. And it really strengthens my perceptions of how many "hangers-on" there are in golf and especially the golf media.

 

Did anyone else ever elicit a "Tiger-proofing" of Augusta? Anyone? He was special. Was being the operative word. Now its devolved into a sideshow more akin to Daly than the former world #1.

[Kor.A.Door 5,843]

It would be nice to see him there, but there are so many golfers that are playing really well right now, that I don't think any tournament "needs" him to attend. He is on his way down, that doesn't mean he won't win again, he just won't be on top anymore

[Severtheties 823]

If he's playing well - he's always an asset to a tournament. If he's not - I think he can take away from good coverage of the tournament. Instead of talking about whose playing well or showing great shots, they tend to only talk about Tiger and his game and ALLLLLLL the speculations that swirl when that happens.

[RoverRick 1,569]

The Masters and PGA Tour need Tiger to win. They don't need him to show up and miss the cut. if he doesn't show up, who cares, there are other stories.

[silver & black 5,808]

I don't think any specific Tournament "needs" Tiger... especially the Masters. I think golf needs Tiger, still, at this point. In the very near future?.... I think not so much.

[RookieBlue7 1,692]

In a word?  NO.  Augusta doesn't need anyone.  It's a spectacle in and of itself.  The Masters will always draw viewers, you could have a field full of amateurs.  It's the biggest spectacle in golf, and it's got the best coverage on the planet.  Does the Tour even need Tiger at this point?  I'd say no, not really.  He does help with some casual fans, but as a whole, the Tour doesn't really need him now with the depth of the fields week in and week out.

[GolfSpy MBP 2,280]

Yes and no