Mickelson > BMW Champ.

[FireStorm]

Shemp, you are talking about two different things. the benefit of people continuing to talk about this is to Fedex itself, they are reaping the advertising benefits. The Fedex Cup however is a problem tied in to actual golf. People's opinions of the Tour and it's players will go down due to issues with the format. Fedex itself is happy right now regardless.

[shemp]

If the sponsors of events after the PGA are happy and not to the detriment of sponsors of other events-- then the Tour and it's players are happy where it counts. (And I don't like this whole thing, think it is stupid and contrived, and am only begrudgingly trying to give it a chance, but there it is. They have my eye balls either way.)

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I can't stop chuckling about you calling Sooners a troll, LMAO.

[/ QUOTE ]

The position BSF has staked out strikes me as so preposterously silly it is hard to believe he actually believes what he's saying. I don't recall Euro, despite using humour, sometimes outrageously, ever doing any such thing-- taking a stand where you wondered if he could possibly be as stupid as the position he'd taken (I gather you imply he is a troll).

[/ QUOTE ]

Huh? My position is that Phil is taking the week off because (A) He's pissed at the commish and (B) He hates Cog Hill and knows he won't play well. You think that's outrageously stupid?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nice. When questioned regress to the defensible terrain and pretend that is the only ground you've ever occupied.

Can't remember you whining about Tiger missing Westchester, but do look forward to your attack on Verplank for skipping on the theory that he really likes Atlanta and thinks he can compete there, but knows he can't without rest.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahh, so my position is ridiculous for criticizing Phil but not Tiger (at the time). That's very funny.....and a reach.

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
BSF,

I think basically the vociferousness of your Phil rampages is what stands out among anything else. It's either that you aren't very good at internet discussion and feel the need to dig in and lash out with ad hominem attacks, or that you really hate Phil to a degree that's unhealthy. I can't remember your other arguments just that they occurred in the Sports forum and were similar in nature.

I don't think you're a troll so much as not very good at civilized debate on this matter, and possibly others.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's very funny, especially considering the nature of most internet discussions. I don't particularly consider my characterization of Phil as a "pussy" to be that over-the-top. It was mostly an exaggeration to prove a point, but not particularly that harsh considering the comments usually made about Phil by his bashers.

As for other discussions, they were mainly about Barry Bonds. I dislike him. I think he's an (cheating) [censored] and wish he would go away. End of story (for me).

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
You guys do realize that Sooner means Oklahoma? And that people from there are generally morons?

[/ QUOTE ]

As opposed to Kansas (State)? Now that's funny.

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
that's obviously not true, but equally untrue is the fact that Phil wouldn't play well this week had he remained in the field.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? Did you actually look at the results before you posted this? Phil hasn't finished in the top 25 there, EVER.

[/ QUOTE ]


did you read my post where I acknowledged immediately that Phil did not ever play well at the Western Open? However, I'm not just going to expect him to play poorly there just because his track record isn't stellar. He's playing incredibly well right now. Look back to 2004 when he finished 3rd in the Open after winning the Masters and finishing 2nd at the US Open. He had a lot of confidence and went into Troon and almost got into the playoff.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're going to have a hard time convincing me that a guy who hasn't placed in the top 25 in about ten attempts at a course is going to do much better than that just because he's playing well. I don't have access to his finishes before the previous Western Opens, but I'm sure he was playing well at least a few times before he went there.

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I love the backhanded compliment how Phil just won because "Tiger putted like a blind man."

[/ QUOTE ]

I almost commented on this the first time someone offered it immediately after Phil won. Apparently it is ho-hum that Phil managed to play just well enough to win (66) while no one else could put anything together-- just able to hit a shot when he needed it and stay one ahead of competitors who weren't quite able to rise to the occasion.

Well. I guess? And yeah, if Tiger makes a bunch of putts, he wins. Okay? Isn't that how some other folks have won tournaments. You know, posting the lowest score and stuff while the chasers run out of holes of just-not-quite-good-enough golf...

And when Phil is the guy who trails because he doesn't make those big shots and putts when he needs them it is simultaneously a matter of his general lack of heart and a reflection of the winner's grace/dominance.

[/ QUOTE ]

The reason that ALL, not just Phil, players don't get as much credit as Tiger when they win is because Tiger is the best player in the world, most likely of all time. Just like when Jack was the best, the first step to predicting a winner is how Jack/Tiger plays. If they play their best, they win, no matter what anyone else does. Consider how well Tiger has been playing, any win by someone else requires poor play by him.

As for Phil not having heart, I don't think that's a usual criticism. The usual criticism is that he doesn't use his brain, or doesn't have much of one. He has as much heart as just about anyone, except Tiger of course.

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think Tiger should've been at the Buick...er Barclays as well, but at least his excuse looked legitimate. He actually had the stress of being in contention the two weeks prior, unlike Phil.

[/ QUOTE ]


so what you're saying here is that Tiger's excuse for missing the Barclays event was legitimate because he was in contention the two weeks prior to that event, UNLIKE PHIL.

So in the two events prior to Phil missing the Western Open, you're implying he wasn't in contention? Is that correct?

So T7 at Westchester which could have easily been better had Phil made a few more putts (which is difficult for Phil, because we know he loves to make bogey almost more than he loves lobster ravioli) and then winning the Deutsche Bank isn't "being in contention the previous two (2) weeks?" So?

[/ QUOTE ]

First, I'm not sure Phil was really in contention last week since he was seven shots out going into the weekend and had to shoot 67 on Sunday to get within 5 shots of the lead. Btw, what was the temperature the last two weeks compared to the PGA and the week before?

[BigSoonerFan]

[ QUOTE ]
I pretty much get rock hard any time the chance to bash Phil comes up, but 1- BSF is acting like clownshoes 2- this isn't really a good reason to bash Phil. I actually respect his gangsta for this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

You respect him for skipping the tournament because he didn't get a free pass for the pro-am from Finchem? My memory may be incorrect, but I thought this was essentially a set-in-stone requirement for all events. If Tiger (or any other player) ever got a pass, then he has an argument. Otherwise, too bad, especially considering he had a corporate outing on Tuesday, in Chicago no less.

[JTrout]

Article
on the players missing fedex events.

I don't think that Phil skipped the Western because he couldn't skip the pro-am. I might believe that one of his problems with the Fedex playoff system was that there was a pro-am on Wednesday, and that there shouldn't be. And I might believe that one of his problems was that the payout wasn't in cash, but in retirement dollars.
It seems he isn't alone.