U.S. Open Ramblings

It's been four days since I left the 2010 U.S. Open at Pebble Beach. Needless to say, it was a grand and memorable experience. Back to the real world now. I'm still relatively exhausted, a little sun and windburned and still in awe of the experience. I've been collecting my thoughts on the storied venue and the tournament itself and I thought I would share the stream-of-consciousness ramblings of a first time attendee:

• Tom Watson - Television doesn't do the man justice. Not only does he crush the ball at 60 years old giving hope to those that still haven't found their game, but he does so with unparalleled grace. As Red said of Andy Dufresne in Shawshank, Tom "strolls the course like a man in a park without a care or a worry in the world." I found so much comfort in watching him play the game. Didn't expect that. And on Father's Day, with his son, Michael, on the bag, it was a real treat.


• The GolfWorld Is Flat - Flatter now more than ever. We've known for quite some time that major fields traditionally carry an international flavor, but have the foreigners ever been so prevalent on the leaderboards as they are now? Of the 26 events in the U.S. this year, 12 were won by foreign players. I even spoke French with some spectators on Saturday (I never thought to ask if they were with Havret groupies or not) It will be interesting to see how the flattening shapes future developments of the tour(s) and the industry as a whole. I strongly believe we're headed for a Global Tour at some point.
  
• Russell Henley and Scott Langley - Had Justin Leonard not birdied the 72nd hole, the co-low amateurs would have been exempt from next year's open. Bummer. Maybe the low amateur(s) should auto-qualify for the following year's open? How could that be a bad thing? Both were favorites of the galleries and unlike Sergio Garcia, who continuously whining his way around the golf course, it's refreshing to see these young guys bask in the beauty of the tournament and it's setting. Like Watson, they were a joy to watch.


• Pebble Beach - Aside from trying to score well on the open setup, if there ever was a place where a golfer could be at peace with themselves and God, Pebble is the place. The Cliffs of Doom are downright heavenly if you don't have to hit golf balls around them. Standing between the 9th fairway and the 10th tee was my favorite place all week. In the sun, close to the ocean and allowing you to watch approach shots on nine and tee shots on 10. Not crowded either. More on the crowds in a second.



17th hole - When standing by the green, it was simply a beautiful hole with a storied past. It didn't look that long either. Nicklaus needed a 1-iron here? Really? It's down-hill. Harmless really, especially when the pin is front right (as it was on Saturday). Then I walked back to the tees and lost any romantic feeling for this hole I previously had. The green was somewhere down there, but all I could see was sand traps, rough and ocean. Couple the wind and a back-left pin placement, and it's no wonder why it got so much criticism. But it's the U.S. Open, fellas. Quit complaining. The USGA gave you the shortest hole ever at a U.S. Open in 7 and a driveable par 4. And Ryan Moore? Ryan, we get it. You'd be more comfortable if the USGA had a Wyndam Championship setup, so you could fire a -16? (like he did in his only PGA Tour victory).


Tiger's almost there. His charge on Saturday was incredible. He's definitely got the look and the swagger back. Anyone who witnessed his 2nd shot on 18 on Saturday knows that. It's only a matter of time for his game to get back to form. And the crowds loved him more than ever. Go figure.


Ernie - As much as we tend to feel sorry for him, he does bring this on himself. I think he needs an on-course additude adjustment at these majors. Maybe put some vodka in that water bottle of his? He mopes around the course like he's Ior making bogeys, missing putts and feeling sorry for himself. Listen, if you're not happy, you're not relaxed, right? And if you're not somewhat relaxed, how are you going to make big putts in a major? He wasn't this tense when he was winning majors. The miss on 15 said it all. It's clearly all 'between the ears' for the South African and he's running out of time.

Dustin Johnson - Until Sunday, he was living proof of how certain players can feel so comfortable on certain courses. Regardless of the changes since February, he was dominating Pebble once again. But as great as his 66 was on Saturday, I think the young gun would've been in better position if he was two back of the lead and NOT in the last group... on Sunday with a 3 shot lead...in the U.S. Open... The pressure of the major and the marquee names coming after him proved to be too much. It was a shame, but no one's counting this kid out any time soon.

Graeme McDowell - Like last year, this year's U.S. Open proved to be a Darwinian test of survival. McDowell was clearly the fittest and he survived the onslaught of the world's best players in some of the most pressing conditions. Congrats to Graeme. My wife saw him on Leno and thinks he's hot.....so do I. Golfer? check. Accent? check. Loves beer? Check. Style and class? check. What's not to like?




Finally, Size Matters - It sucks being short at the U.S. Open. My 5-foot 7 stature can battle the crowds of a St. Jude Classic or even a FedEx Cup Playoff event, but to brave the Tiger-roaring crowds on Saturday and Sunday at major? Never has my vertical limit been so challenged. When Tiger pummeled his 2nd shot on 18 on Saturday, I had to balance myself on an elevated plank that supported a hospitality tent to even catch a glimpse. As always, there are options to accommodate . American Express was again giving out the "Champtionship Vision" TV's, the hand-held, portable devices that show live video coverage of the marquee groups. They also had the ear pieces streaming the action on ESPN Radio. The radio device makes sense in order to keep up with the leader board, but if you're going to watch it on TV, why even come to the course ? Then there are the golf periscopes and as much as I want to ridicule these submarine captains (above), they're practical as hell. Yes, I could weasel my way through the crowd in some instances, but in the future, when the galleries are as testing as the rough, I'll embrace my inner Captain Nemo and get my hands on one of these puppies. The Mickelson Group, out of San Diego, CA, has them at decent prices.

Personal Branding and Tiger's Online Brand Buzz

Corporations are constantly paying large sums on money to be associated with elite athletes. Is it really worth forking over that much money? It must be. Why else would they do it? In the past ten years, we've seen more and more athletes establishing a personal brand. Personal branding leans on the tenant that success - either social or economic - comes from self-packaging. From Michael Jordan to Tiger Woods, we've seen the power of personal branding in sports as billion dollar companies shape their marketing campaigns around just a few individual personalities. These campaigns have lasting impressions and continue to engage multiple generations of consumers. Michael Jordan hasn't played basketball in eight years, but if you type in the word "air" into Google's search bar, the first suggestion/drop down is "Air Jordan." For us consumers, it's sometimes less about the product than it is about the person pushing the product.

In his heyday (before last November), Tiger Woods was perhaps the most lucrative personal brand ever and we understood why. He was the best. His crisp, clean, diverse image brought youthful dominance to a wrinkled sport. He was a no-brainer for marketers and ad agencies alike. But what about now? How is he being perceived after all of....THAT. Can he still demand that “billion-dollar athlete” respect from advertisers? Internet Marketing guru Jeff Bullas addressed this very question, specifically in terms of social media and the online community's perception of Tiger.

In comparing Tiger’s "Brand Buzz" to the buzz of the number one global brand, Coca Cola, he found that Tiger generated 437% more buzz on social media and online than the #1 brand in the world in a 24 hour period. Incredible. In short, Bullas suggested little has changed and that sponsors would be wise to keep Tiger in their foursome as even the world’s #1 brand couldn’t keep up. The analysis demonstrates that Tiger is still is one of the world’s largest athletes and most widely discussed icons. He generates a ton of buzz and can swing demand for product. But wait a second. There's two problems with Bullas analysis: First, he snagged his data just two days after Tiger announced his return to competitive golf at Augusta, when Tiger’s trending online had peaked. Second, his data doesn’t take into account the “sentiment” of said buzz. Sponsors aren't going to stick around simply because there's a lot of buzz. They need positive buzz. Just ask Accenture, Gatorade or BP.

So now it’s the middle of June, and most of Tiger's transgressional dust in the blogosphere has settled. Deciding to take Tiger's buzz-temperature myself, I included a “sentiment” metric as well as a comparison of Tiger’s buzz to that of other elite athletes (just for kicks). The analysis comes directly from socialmention.com. While it doesn't contain complex algorithms and may not be as credible as Nielsen. However, this convenient analytical tool does a fine job of capturing the volume and mood of a brands' online buzz.
Not surprisingly, the buzz about Tiger has retreated to more natural levels, but now carrying a more negative sentiment than most of his fellow athletes. *(See below for an explanation of the metrics.) Tiger still has huge reach (more than any golfer ever) and when an athlete is discussed as much as the #1 global brand, it's no wonder why sponsorship dollars are so huge. He appears to be on par with elite athletes in terms of buzz volume (reach, strength and passion) as well as mention frequency. On the other hand, the 3:1 Sentiment ratio suggests the sponsors that dropped him are justified in doing so. This sentiment could explain why we haven't seen Tiger sign on with a new sponsor. Companies could be waiting both his swing and his sentiment to return to form. Then again, with the divorce still being settled, Team Tiger probably halted all business negotiations.

Companies that don’t value buzz sentiment as much as they value pure buzz volume will be lining up to carry Tiger's clubs in no time. We'll see who he chooses to align himself with. Sooner or later, he'll start winning golf tournaments, but winning those lucrative sponsorships? I don't think he can return to that 'billion dollar athlete' until he's mentioned in a more positive light. At least that's what social media and the online community are saying.

-Via theflopshot.net

*Strength - Likelihood the brand is being discussed
Passion - Measure of the likelihood that individuals talking about your brand will do so repeatedly
Sentiment - Ratio of mentions that are generally positive to those that are generally negative
Reach - Measure of Influence; # of unique authors divided by total mentions

Google Suggests Golf

As Google continues to take over the world, we're constantly reminded of how they collect and store everything we do on the world wide web. Aside from privacy issues, there are obvious benefits for marketers and even us commoners. Take the Google Suggest feature. Google Suggest returns search queries based on other users' search activities. These searches are algorithmically determined based on a number of purely objective factors (including popularity of search terms) without human intervention. All of the queries shown in Suggest have been typed previously by other Google users. This is great for market researchers, but it also has the makings of an endlessly fun parlor game. It offers answers to what are on people's minds and what the masses are really interested in. So what does it suggest about golf? What can it tell us about the game and some of it's personalities? Take a look.

Tiger Woods - No surprise. Still, I can't help but wonder what it suggested last October.


Camilo Villegas - Workout, Girlfriend, Clothes.


Arnold Palmer - Womanizer? Yep.


Why Is Golf... They pretty much nailed it.

Why Do Golfers... - What? two pairs of pants?

Colin Montgomerie - There's a video of him cheating? No thanks.

Sergio Garcia - Prom Queen? While Google is suggesting a different SG, they still might be on to something here.

Natalie Gulbis - Stretching....She just can't shake that stretching photo.

Kelly Tilghman - Interesting.

Have You Heard The Newsy?

I recently read about a startup called Newsy. Located in Columbia, MO - right across the street from Mizzou's School of Journalism - Newsy is the brainchild of Jim Spencer, a Mizzou alum and a former exec at AOL, NBC and AskJeeves. Most would call it a news aggregator in video form, but Newsy would prefer to be dubbed a news "analyzer." It attemps to address our frustrations with the possible biases of a single news source by painting the whole story with a number of different brushes. The folks at Newsy splice and dice video clips from multiple sources across the political spectrum and put it all together. Instead of flipping back and forth between FOX News and MSNBC, why not watch a condensed version of both? As a friend of mine might say, "Not too shabbs!" Take a look.....



While this is supposed to be a golf blog, I have to post something that was tangentially related to golf....Cougar was the best I could do.

Multisource political news, world news, and entertainment news analysis by Newsy.com

Between Tiger's Ears

Jack Nicklaus was a great golfer, perhaps the best the game has ever seen. He practically invented course management and his incredibly smooth swing tempo was the key to both his unmatched ball-striking and distance control, helping him capture 18 career majors and 72 professional wins. While not the greatest putter, he came through when it counted. In addition to his golf talent, Jack has publicly and repeatedly credited his family and friends as integral pillars that supported his illustrious career. We see this time and time again with successful people.

In 2001, when it became public that Tiger was dating Jesper Parnevik's Swedish nanny, critics argued that such a relationship would be a detriment and distraction to his golf game. Jack silenced these critics though by citing the crucial role his wife, Barbara, and his four children played in his storied career. He could not have done it alone.


Nine years later, the world’s #1 golfer is faced with losing what Jack had claimed to be so integral to his success, yet most of the media is concerned with his neck and his coach. Tiger has experienced loss before - be it his father in 2006 or even a golf tournament here and there - but in the past, he's always had a club in his bag that got him out of those hazards. He's now lost sponsors, fans and a coach, but he'll win back his sponsors, most of his fans, and find a new coach in no time. But losing his wife....for good?? and what that means for his children? He just can’t walk into a golf tournament and forget that his kids might be moving to Sweden.



Golfdigest's Sr. Writer, Ron Sirak, recently discussed the mental, physical and mechanical pieces of the Tiger Puzzle While all three elements may be struggling in their own right, the loss of those closest to him has proved to be a migrane headache for his mental game and the ultimate challenge to his golf game. His life off the course must start to repair and rebuild itself for his swing to come back to form. A mentally stable Tiger doesn't miss cuts or withdrawl from tournaments. I think Tiger would admit he returned before he was mentally ready. He's won on a broken leg before and contended on Sundays when his mechanics were all but in order. A WD and MC in back-to-back starts proves that what is so paramount to all our golf games -the game between our ears - holds true for Tiger and is undoubtedly the true source of all his struggles.

As independenetly successful Tiger might have been, he's faced with losing what helped propel Jack to all his victories. Tiger did dominate the tour while transgressing and leading a wild double life on the side. But he still had a home, wife and children to lean on when he needed it. Jack needed that support and Tiger needs it now. Unfortunately, and at no fault but his own, it is possibly gone.

Posting from Geoff Shackelford.com

This post is a follow up to a thread from Geoff Shakelford's blog discussing Steve Elling's Up and Down piece. You can see the full thread here.

I think both Steve E and BenSeattle touched on some the silver-lining surrounding this TW fiasco that many in the golfworld overlook: the groupthink tendencies of the game's hierarchy are prohibiting the game's organic growth that it so desperately needs. With all the eyes on the golf world, it's a huge opportunity to grow the game and capture a new audience. Filtering the media might ensure some degree of decency and integrity (which is fine), but the extent to which and how they have controlled the media and one's access to the game will undoubtedly keep potential golf consumers outside the ropes. It leaves a bad taste in people's mouths when the 'prince' doesn't have to answer the tough questions....Maybe I'm reading into it far too much, but I think it reminds people of all the reasons why they haven't picked up a golf club or watched on Sundays: it's a country-club sport where the game, the venues and its players are protected from the outside world. Does the game lose integrity when Tiger answers these questions? I'd argue it promotes integrity, if anything.
They might be protecting a product that's responsible for the game's growth the past ten years, but they're making a long-term mistake by turning fans away and clinging to their self-prescribed etiquettes and integrities. How do they plan to capture a progressive generation? These are their future consumers. Adapt a little. I wonder how - and to what extent - they would filter the media if we were in Phoenix this week. Some of this needs to change or we'll have all these new courses with no one to play them. Hey, at least it won't be backed up!

Two Golfers; Two Images

When the Tiger Woods Nike ad first aired during the Masters, it was only hours until it went viral on the 'net. It currently holds the #2 spot on Ad Age's Viral Video Chart.
However, of the 11.2 million total views thus far, 51% are of parodies. Nike's Stefan Olander claims that "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. We love when people engage and participate in the storytelling. Any confident brand should be." I'll agree that there's some good in engaging consumers on multiple levels as such, but I also think that the ad had a John Daly-esque engagement that is very un-Tiger. People were making fun of Tiger and Nike. Not normal. Remember this ad? It also included Tiger's deceased father's voice. Up until Saturday afternoon at the Masters, Tiger and his new Nike ad - along with his newly branded on-course demeanor - were the talk of the tournament. Tiger was smiling and shaking hands with the galleries all while hitting fairways and making putts. He was playing great golf and everything was under control. But when the putts didn't drop and the curse words did, the critics of both his brand and his game were left with more questions than answers. Similarly, his new ad engaged consumers, but it left a new and unkown taste in their mouth for the Tiger brand. Tiger is still one of the world's most recognized brands, but his brand's identity or what it represents is not clear to the the consumer and Nike definitely faces an up-hill battle to redefine his image.

Enter Phil Mickelson.

As Tiger's chances faded and his brand became harder to interpret, Phil's chances were realized and his sponsor was rewarded. Everything..and I mean EVERYTHING went right for Phil in his well-deserved victory at Augusta. From the 5-under stretch on Saturday to his second shot at 13 on Sunday, his on-course performance was the perfect pairing for what he was dealing with in his personal life. It was a Disney movie in HD, a feel good ending that couldn't have worked out better for Billy Payne and golf's traditionalists who desperately needed a feel-good story. It was also great for Phil's sponsors. Words like mistress, scandal and bootyism were replaced by family, integrity, and focus. Those are great words for your spokesperson to be associated with. Turning the first couple pages of the post-Masters Golf World issue last week, I wasn't suprised to see a Barclay's ad congratulating Phil and leveraging this picture perfect ending, but I was suprised to see how direct some of the verbage was. (An identical, full-page ad appeared in the WSJ the following week). Both ads depict an emotional Phil embracing his cancer-stricken wife just off the 18th green. They read:

"Congratulations to Phil Mickelson and his family on his victory ... Phil demonstrates why he is a great ambassador and role model for the game of golf. He personifies the game's values of integrity, focus, and precision, which are at the core of how we at Barclays are committed to earning success every day for our clients.”

Wow. They might as well have said, "We're really glad that Tiger is not our spokesperson." Considering the moral scrutiny that financial institutions are under, this couldn't have worked out better for the limey asset manager. Despite some gambling rumors, Phil has shown himself to be an honest gentlemen both on and off the course. Good for him and good for Barclays. He's been a great investment and what happened at the Master's took his brand to the next level.
Moreover, this all makes for more storylines, better competition and highly entertaining golf for ther rest of us. We'll be watching Tiger and Phil do battle at the PLAYERS and the year's remaining majors. I can't wait. It's gonna be great competition and we'll be watching every swing. But we'll also be watching their sponsors...to see how they react to the victories and failures of their most valuable and dynamic spokesmen.

Laughing Out Loud - PGA Tour Edition

So the other day a couple of buddies and I were discussing the glorious instance that is laughing out loud or "LOL," as it's commonly used in the electronic parlance of our times.* Well, we concluded that it's extremely underrated - whether you're the one laughing or the one causing the laughter - and that most people forget the value it can add to the rat race that is their daily lives. It can turn a bad day into a good one. I thought about this in the context of sports, specifically the PGA Tour and how seriously the game is presented to us. Other sports have embraced the light-hearted elements of their games, why not the PGA? We see baseball players playing clubhouse pranks on one-another, pre-game shows with comedians and guys snappin' towels at each other's derrieres in the lockerroom. We love it. We can see it on the field and in the broadcast booth. Whether it's baseball players supermanning across the infield tarp during a rain delay or Charles Barkley making inappropriate comments, we're happily engaged with the sport on multiple levels. The LPGA even has it, why not the PGA? At the Kraft Nabisco Championship (one of the LPGA's majors), the winner and her caddie traditionally jump into the water hazard adjacent to the 18th green to celebrate their victory. Augusta? Probably not, but you get the idea.
Basically, the PGA Tour needs a jagerbomb....from the broadcast booth to the personalities on the course. The answer isn't more Hank Haney projects and Pro-Ams. It's more Phoenix Opens and a bunch of happy people enjoying a 'la vida loca' golf experience. The game's frustrating enough, guys. Oh, and a reminder, it's still a game. Help us relax, laugh a little and have some good ol' fashion fun. The raucous 16th hole in Phoenix draws the biggest crowd on tour. Hmmm... you don't need an MBA to see the business connection here. Would more Phoenix Opens make the sport LESS marketable? I don't think so. Doesn't everyone involved want to grow the game, widen the audience and get more eyeballs on the product? Absolutely. I can't think of one good reason why this is a bad idea. Cheers.

And now....a conversation about laughter that will make you laugh.....

*It should be noted that using "LOL!" when you aren't actually LOLing is a haphasard misrepresentation of your self and only dilutes the true value of real laughter. Think before you "LOL."

JERRY: So the roommate laughed at everything I said.

GEORGE: Wow.

JERRY: It was a great sounding laugh too, kind of lilting and feminine--none of those big coarse "ha's." You know those?

GEORGE: Oh yeah: HA-A-A, HA-A-A.

JERRY: Yeah.

GEORGE: Hate the big coarse "ha." Hate those.

JERRY: And the worst part of course is that she also possessed many of the other qualities prized by the Superficial Man.

GEORGE: I see.

JERRY: So as you can see, I've got a bit of a problem here.

GEORGE: Well, if I hear you correctly--and I think that I do--my advice to you is to finish your meal, pay your check, leave here, and never mention this to anyone again.

JERRY: Can't be done, huh?

GEORGE: The Switch?

JERRY: "The Switch."

GEORGE: Can't be done.

JERRY: I wonder.

GEORGE: Do you realize in the entire history of western civilization no one has successfully accomplished the Roommate Switch? In the Middle Ages you could get locked up for even suggesting it!

JERRY: They didn't have roommates in the Middle Ages.

GEORGE: Well, I'm sure at some point between the years 800 and 1200--somewhere--there were two women living together.