That Time of Year

For my money, the next two months are wonderful.  Hockey players, to say the least, bruise easily.  Their egos get ever so tender in April, as do their bodies that have endured a punishing six months of the regular season.  But the true awe-inspiring characteristic: playoff beards.

Still, I think it’s important to give my readers some insight into the goodness of the next two months, which will end with some non-Capital hoisting the Stanley Cup.

And yes, I'm not pleased that the guy I picked to miss the cut at The Masters ended up winning the dang Jacket.  But, gotta love Bubba for his genuine love of the game.

Now, onto hockey:

Eastern Conference

Boston Bruins vs. Detroit Red Wings

This is something of a tough draw for the Bruins, who finished with the best record in the league.  Detroit has been on a tear recently and ripped through the latter half of their schedule to continue their playoff streak.  We should also remember Detroit went up 3-1 last year on the eventual Cup champion Blackhawks, so disregard them at your own peril.

Detroit wins if:  The youth movement marches inexorably onwards and Henrik Zetterberg returns healthy.  Gustav Nyquist, Thomas Tatar, Thomas Jurco, Danny DeKeyser, and other juveniles have pushed Detroit across the finish line.  Without Pavel Datsyuk and Henrik Zetterberg for most of the post-Olympic games, Detroit didn’t miss a beat.  Nyquist in particular, played extremely well.  He scored 28 goals in only 57 games this season.

Zetterberg had a back injury take him out of the Olympics, and has not yet returned.  He’s been skating recently, and may be back, but I tend to think even if he returns, I expect his minutes won’t be too high.

Boston wins if:  Nothing changes.  Seriously, Boston is arguably one of the best teams I can remember.  None of their guys are in the top 20 of the scoring ranks in the NHL, yet they had the best record.  They roll four lines of forwards and bring the best goalie in the world to the table.  Tuukka Rask can singlehandedly keep the Bruins in any series if the scoring disappears.

X-Factor:  The question revolves around whether Detroit’s D-men can withstand the onslaught of forechecking that Boston will bring.  Niklas Kronwall will bring pressure and steady play, but guys like Brendan Smith and Brian Lashoff are wild cards that will play on the second and third defensive pairings.  The Bruins bring pressure and physicality, which may make mincemeat of the Wing defensive depth.

Prediction: Bruins in five.

 Pittsburgh Penguins vs. Columbus Blue Jackets

I can’t tell you how much I hoped Detroit would play Pittsburgh.  Alas, the Blue Jackets had the tiebreaker, and thus will go against the heavy guns.  When looking at the Pens, it’s tough not thinking about years past, as Pittsburgh has been a very quick out in the playoffs when compared to their prodigious talent level.  On the other side, Columbus has never won a postseason game, which I expect to change this year.

Both teams win depending on:  The play of the goalie.  Sure, Pittsburgh brings offensive firepower in Crosby, Malkin, Neal, etc. but the true depending factor of this series will be Marc-Andre Fleury.  Two years ago, Pittsburgh lost to a less talented team due to Fleury’s optional attitude towards goalie play.  This year might end similarly if Fleury can’t steady the ship.

Bobrovsky won the Vezina last year and, unlike last season, has a team in front of him that might provide him some support.  That said, the Blue Jackets have only one player with over 22 goals, so the offensive committee approach might create lots of pressure on Sergei Bobs, particularly if the quick Penguins move through the neutral zone with speed.

This will be a goaltending series, no doubt.  I should note also that while the Pens swept the season series with Columbus, they only beat Bobrovksy once.

X-factor: Sidney Crosby.  Best player in the world, and definite MVP this year.  No one else should be on the X-factor landscape.

Prediction: Pittsburgh in six.  This will be entertaining but I don’t see Columbus pulling it off.

 Tampa Bay Lightning vs. Montreal Canadiens

These two teams flew under the radar for much of the year.  That Tampa has home-ice advantage in any series was a huge shock to a daily follower of the sport like myself, but the storylines here are not as compelling as in other series. 

Tampa will win if:  Another goaltending question here.  Ben Bishop is, for my money, the Vezina winner this year.  When superstar Steven Stamkos went down with an injury early in the year, Bishop filled the void by registering top-10 numbers in all major goalie stats.

But, he missed the last three games of the year due to an upper body injury.  Behind him, Anders Lindback has not been any kind of reliable this season (8-12 with a .891 save percentage), and from there they Lightning will have a fairly empty cupboard for options.  That decides the series.

Montreal will win if:  The top line continues its tear.  The acquisition of Thomas Vanek from the Islanders revamped how Montreal runs its offense.  In 14 games together, the Vanek-Pacioretty-Desharnais line combined for 18 goals and 23 assists.  That’s exactly what the Canadiens need to advance past this series.

X-factor:  There are a few here, but I’m going to pick Carey Price, the Montreal goalie.  He wasn’t very good last postseason against Ottawa, and also got hurt in that series.  But, since then, Price has backstopped an Olympic Gold Medal team.  He’s firmly in the elite goaltender conversation.

There’s another one though, and that’s the rookies for Tampa.  Ondrej Palat and Tyler Johnson are contenders for the Rookie of the Year award.  Combined, they are a gaudy plus-55 this season, meaning their two-way play is top notch.  While Steven Stamkos will receive lots of media attention for his goal scoring tendencies, don’t discount the young guys, especially Johnson who, with five shorthanded goals all season, might just pot one at the right time for Tampa.

Prediction: Canadiens in seven.

 New York Rangers vs. Philadelphia Flyers

The East is usually good for one tradition-laden first round series.  This year, the two division rivals face off, and the interesting subplot is how teams play away from home.  The Flyers haven’t won in New York since February 2011, and the home team won every game in the season series.

Either teams wins if:  They win the physical battle.  These teams are very similar in their make-up, as each will roll four lines with contributors on each line.  For me, the series will depend on how well the respective defensive units handle the physical pressure.  When analyzing each, it’s hard not to think Philly has more question marks on the back end.  Andrew McDonald has been a minor disappointment since coming over in a trade, and Kimmo Timonen is 39 years old.  That said, the Rangers also do not bring the kind of forward depth that Philly possesses, so it would seem this series will even out on the ice as of now.

X-factors:  Steve Mason and Henrik Lundqvist.  When presented with two well-matched teams, the series changers become the goalies.  Mason gained over 30 wins for the first time since his rookie season and is, for what seems like the first time a while, the unquestioned starter.  Lundqvist is the same guy he’s always been…rock solid.  There’s no real question about his abilities in the postseason, and I bet he will decide this series.

Prediction:  There will be one game in this series with over 100 penalty minutes combined.  I think it’s gotta be a bruising one, but the Rangers prevail in seven.

 Western Conference

Anaheim Ducks vs. Dallas Stars

The Stars have beaten the Ducks two out of three times this season, meaning the top record in the West won’t provide gobs of benefits for Anaheim.  Tough to dismiss is the loss by Anaheim in last year’s playoffs as a two-seed, but the hope is the Duck youth will be more familiar with postseason play this time around.  The Stars, meanwhile, finally managed to make it into the postseason after multiple seasons of just missing out on the final tournament.  It’s safe to say their rebuilding effort looks to be progressing well.

Dallas wins if:  Goalie Kari Lehtonen stands on his head.  He won 33 games this season and become a workhorse in Dallas.  While the speed of Dallas forwards like Tyler Seguin will have an effect, Anaheim still brings way more offensive clout, meaning Lehtonen will need to be as good as possible for his team to prevail over seven games.

Anaheim wins if:  Corey Perry and Ryan Getzlaf show up, and Jonas Hiller is somewhat solid.  The depth of Anaheim is immense, and the same goes for the  defensemen.  Cam Fowler made the U.S. team this year, and Francois Beauchemin is a plus/minus machine.

X-factor:  Bearing in mind Lehtonen will truly decide this series, Tyler Seguin could theoretically put together a gaudy series to give the Stars some hope.  This is especially true on the power play, as Seguin had 11 goals this year with the man advantage.  He might score a big one in a key game.

Prediction: Ducks in five.

 Coloarado Avalanche vs. Minnesota Wild

This will likely be the series I see the least of, since it will be relegated to CNBC or worse on television.  But, we should not look askance at how this series might play out.  Colorado shocked everyone by being this good in 2013-14, even if they needed a significant St. Louis collapse to grab the division title. 

Minnesota wins if:  They score at all.  The Wild have only three players with over 20-goal scorers.  Zach Parise and Jason Pominville have played well getting the Wild this far, and Ryan Suter mainstays a really shutdown Minnesota defense, but if the bottom-six forwards don’t score this will be a short series for the Wild.

Colorado wins if:  They make up for the absence of Matt Duchene.  He is the team’s leading scorer who suffered a knee injury and is questionable for this series.  Besides him, the Avs have some serious young talent in Gabriel Landeskong, Ryan O’Reilly, and the talented Nathan MacKinnon, all of whom are under 24.  These guys should be able to paper over what is an uninspiring defensive corps in Colorado.

X-factor:  Since coming over in a trade, goalie Ilya Bryzgalov has gone 7-0-3 with three shutouts for the Wild.  He will be a difference maker here.  While Bryz has a spotty playoff history in recent years, he has shored up the Minnesota net to the point where the Wild can play to their defensive strengths.  The Wild have gained 21 points when entering the third period behind, so they are gritty, which only is helped by a goalie playing his best.

Another note here: the Avs are immensely young.  I realize that doesn’t sound like much, but to last two months requires deep experience.  If there’s one thing to be concerned about with Colorado besides the Duchene injury, it’s youth.

Prediction: Avalanche in six.

 St. Louis Blues vs. Chicago Blackhawks

Truthfully, this series shouldn’t even happen.  The Blues lost their final six games of the season and the Hawks have been 5-6 in the last 11 games.  These slides have coincided with a serious injury problem for both teams, meaning one of the best squads all year will be eliminated after the first round.  Three weeks ago, this was my Western Conference Finals matchup, if that gives any context.

St. Louis wins if:  They are healthy and they score.  What was once one of the top offensive groups has been decimated by injuries to David Backes, T.J. Oshie, Patrik Berglund, Vladimiar Sobotka, and Vladimir Tarasenko.  Coach Hitchcock claims all his injured guys are close to being right, but time will tell.  The bigger concern is scoring for the Blues.  Despite having one of the best defensive groups in the playoffs, the Blues scored nine goals in their last nine games.  When going against the second-ranked offense in Chicago, that isn’t a great recipe.

Chicago wins if:  Jonathan Toews and Patrick Kane return.  This same roster won the Cup last season, so having all hands on deck will be important given how much hockey they’ve seen in the last year or so.  Kane has been out for weeks, but the team continues to tell the media that he will return.  Which will make the Hawks tough to handle, especially when we consider the inclusion of Marian Hossa and Andrew Shaw on this team.  The depth is tough to overcome.

X-factor:  Ryan Miller.  For the first time in three years, the Blues have a goalie who can equalize a playoff series.  Miller has also reached deep in the playoffs twice in his career, so don’t discount him based only on his somewhat pedestrian regular season numbers with St. Louis, much of which comes from the recent slide.

Prediction:  Tough to tell with injuries, but I like Chicago in seven.

 San Jose Sharks vs. LA Kings

This will be the one to watch.  The Sharks and Kings played an immensely tough seven game series last year, and a six game series the previous season.  The Kings are one team the West powers did not want to face, but one note is that in the season series between these teams is the home squad went 4-1-0.  That might be big for the Sharks if Game 7 becomes a reality yet again.

LA wins if:  They can overcome another year of offensive woes.  They scored the 25^th most goals this year, well below the Sharks, who ranked fifth in the same category.  At the same time, the Kings have given up the fewest goals of any team in the league.  As such, Jonathan Quick and the stifling defense must continue their strong campaign to keep San Jose out of the net.

San Jose wins if:  Antti Niemi beats Jonathan Quick.  I fully expect the Kings to grind out some victories while relying on Quick to keep the Sharks at bay.  It’s tough acting like Niemi is a bad goalie (he’s won a Cup and was at the top in wins this season), but he definitely is not the strength of this team.  Given that scoring more than three goals will be tough on Quick, Niemi needs to be great to win.

X-factor:  Besides the two goalies, Justin Williams of the Kings deserves mention here.  He scored twice in Game 7 last year against the Sharks, and also scored in 2006 to give the Cup to Carolina.  He isn’t going to be the name you hear coming into the series, but there’s no doubt Williams has a knack for scoring big goals.

Prediction:  I hemmed and hawed here, but the Sharks are the better team.  I’m thinking the Kings’ magical run ends this year.  Sharks in six.

 

The Masters

This is the year.  The year I can finally write a bit of a column about The Masters, knowing full well the five or so hits this article gets will be by people who will read it all.  I’ve been through the field, and here’s what you will need to expect at The Masters.

1.      Open Season.  A few years ago, Trevor Immelman won The Masters after seemingly coming in from the local McDonald’s.  Very few knew who he was, and even fewer likely can tell you what he’s doing now (like every Masters champ, he’s allowed into the field for the rest of his life).  I could see a similar type of winner this year.  Only Patrick Reed has won twice thus far this year, and a guy won a tournament a few weeks ago while shooting a 76 in the final round.  Especially with Tiger gone, look for a strange candidate this weekend to emerge.

2.      Experience Matters Most.  Notwithstanding the paragraph above, the biggest key at The Masters is experience.  The hole locations don’t change year to year, and the course in general really doesn’t change (minus the uprooting of the Eisenhower Tree this year, which is a controversial decision undoubtedly) so if you’ve done well here before, the course just catches your eye.  Phil Mickelson has finished in the top five nine times since 2001, and Tiger (despite all his troubles) has finished in the top six eight out of the past nine years.  Augusta favors its own.

3.      Cream at the Top.  Since 1986, the tournament has been won by a player in the World Top 10 seventeen times, more than any other major all year.

4.      Win the Weekend.  The first two rounds really don’t matter much for the casual observer.  Only one person in the last 29 years has won while holding the first round lead.  Only two in the last 14 have won when leading going into the weekend.  Contrast that with the stat that of the past 23 champs, 19 have come from Sunday’s final pairing.  Clearly it behooves one to be in the mix, but Saturday is the all-important day for any potential winner.

5.      Don’t Bet on Europe.  Jose Maria Olazabal was the last Masters champ from Europe, back in 1999.  Suffice it to say, we are a long way from the dominance of Nick Faldo and Bernhard Langer.

Now, here are some players for everyone to keep an eye on:

Phil: I was worried about Phil even making it to Augusta, but a T12 in Houston last weekend means Phil looks to be clicking on all cylinders.  Right now, I’d absolutely put him in the group of guys who can win this thing.  He seems to be back and has won thrice already at Augusta.

Matt Kuchar:  Notable for many reasons, not the least of which being his immensely flat swing.  For a guy of Kuchar’s stature to bring his backswing so far down his back still looks hokey to me, but he’s been able to put it to good use.  Winner of The Players in the past, with six top tens this year, and coming off a playoff loss last week where he led the field in greens-in-regulation, Kuchar is peaking right now.  Also, he’s the guy who might need this the most, as Kuchar has long been a major favorite without any real showing to meet expectations. 

Rory McIlroy:  He’s finished in the top 25 each time he’s taken the course this year, so there’s plenty of reason to like Rory.  He came close at The Honda Classic this year too, losing in a playoff on a very difficult course.  He has it all, just wondering if he can take it to the cabin at the end.

Henrik Stenson:  My ambivalence towards blogging last year somehow left me to not mention just how impressive this Swede was to close out last year.  He won the FedEx Cup and was the most consistent player coming down the stretch.  Now at Number 3 in the world, he seems to be fitting the bill.  But, Stenson is not only a Euro but he’s also never finished in the top 15 here.  It will be interesting to see how he does.

Adam Scott:  Unless you’re Tiger or Jack, repeating in back-to-back Masters can be immensely tough (Nick Faldo did do it also).  I like Scott coming into Augusta this year.  Minus a terrible collapse at Bay Hill, he’s been playing as well as he could to start the season.  Like Rory, he also hasn’t finished lower than 25 this season.  To cap it all, he’s the only guy to make the cut in the last 8 majors.

Justin Rose: Last year’s U.S. Open champ, Rose has a great fundamental swing.  I’m also fairly bullish on him, though it definitely isn’t because of his play this year.  He missed the cut at Bay Hill and looked a little overwhelmed when the Tour went to Doral.  But, I like Rose’s mindset now that he’s a major winner.

Lee Westwood and Luke Donald:  England has plenty of reps these days, and these two are perhaps the most enigmatic.  Donald was the guy for a while, holding the top world ranking but never breaking through when needed.  Westwood, on the other hand, is the model of overachievement, particularly at Augusta.  He’s finished in the top 15 the last four Masters, which no one else has done.  These guys will be fun to keep an eye on, only because they can likely hear the window latching shut.

Jordan Spieth, Patrick Reed, Harris English:  These three guys are all very young, and one of them (Reed) is particularly irritating.  This same guy wears read and black on Sunday because he wants to be like Tiger, but let’s just say the sleek red shirt doesn’t look as good on him as it does on the jacked Eldrick Woods.  Jordan Spieth also is a crowd favorite, who still can’t legally drink.  I think English is the guy of these three.  He has six top tens this year, is fourth in scoring average, and is first in greens in regulation.  I’m betting he finishes top five this year in is first Masters.

Dustin Johnson:  Literally no one can overpower a golf course like DJ.  He makes a birdie or better on 57.5 percent of all Par 5s this year, which is tops on Tour.  He also boasts three top 5s this year.  That said, this mammoth comes with a volatile streak…he shot an 80 on Thursday last week and withdrew from the Houston after one round.  He’s a guy you could see either missing the cut or winning by five.

Sergio Garcia:  At this stage, the best European player coming into Augusta is the Spaniard.  I truthfully hope he wins so that he will have to host next year’s dinner, at which he might consider some different culinary options than what he’s offered in the past.  He has not missed a cut all year, and his lowest finish is nineteenth, in Abu Dhabi.  Not to mention the lowest scoring average on Tour.  He finished in the top ten here last year, so I wouldn’t count him out.

Fred Couples:  Is he 54?  Yes, but his finishes in The Masters the last four years:  6, T15, T12, and T13.  Nobody has the kind of feel for Augusta as Freddy.  His win here in 1992 was an eon ago, but I expect him to be on the first page for most of the week.

Ok, those are some guys I will have my eye on.  Time to give some predictions:

Surprise Missed Cut:  Bubba Watson.  Yeah, everyone should love him, but he tied for 50^th last year.  He only has three top 10s in majors over his career, so I’m betting he doesn’t do well this week despite his win two years ago.  

This year’s Miguel Angel Jimenez:  MAJ is a golfer who hits the top of major leaderboards every couple of years, which starts everyone wondering if he can do it that year.  He inevitably can’t close it up down the stretch.  My guy here is Victor Dubuisson.  A Frenchman, Dubuisson is immensely creative around the greens, which vaulted him into the Match Play Championship final just a few weeks ago.  You don’t know him, but I’m betting he shows up for a round or two.  Or Gonzalo Fernandez-Castano, who finished T20 last year.

My Winner:  Picking a winner for any golf event is tough, but I’m gonna pick Scott to repeat.  He’s played the best at all the Big Boy events recently and has been on a tear coming in.  Plus, there’s nothing like repeating at Augusta, and since his form is there, it makes sense to bet on his experience as well.

Family Matters

Over the past few weeks, there have been two incidents of misguided buffoonery that center on what, for some reason, is something of a controversial topic in sports: family.  It seems really strange to me, as many of these leagues and their players raise tons of money to help kids of various conditions and socioeconomic statuses, or for family-formed organizations, like MADD.  And yet, some in the sports world continue to believe that being a professional athlete means you can’t be present for the birth of a child.

Most recently, Troy Westwood, a Winnipeg radio reporter who you will likely never hear of again, took Winnipeg Jets captain Andrew Ladd to task for missing a game to be with his wife after their second child was born.  At the time, the Jets were on the very fringes of the playoff hunt, six points out of the last Wild Card playoff spot, with very little going their way.  The Jets lost that night, 2-1, to the Dallas Stars, another team fighting to make the postseason.  Said Westwood: “this is pro freakin’ sports, your team needs you, get to the game.”

On Wednesday of this week, Boomer Esiason similarly commented about Daniel Murphy, the Mets second baseman who left the team to be with his wife after their child was born.  Dr. Boomer added opined a suggestion: “Quite frankly, I would have said C-section before the season started.”

These comments encapsulate what is one of the worst aspects of widespread pro sports: that of hero worship by its followers, which becomes bastardized into a misguided thought that athletes are not ordinary humans with some ordinary cares.  While I have long believed athletes must be cognizant of the image they project to fans (particularly when it comes to public conduct), that conviction does not mean athletes are not people with jobs.  That their job gets televised does not change the fact that Andrew Ladd and Daniel Murphy have a job.  Sure, it’s a job that’s very unique and doesn’t require desk-surfing, but professional athletics is, first and foremost, a job.

As such, it’s worthwhile to consider the rights of almost any other American who has a job.  One right, which I’m certain is in both Mr. Westwood’s and Mr. Esiason’s contract, is that of maternity or paternity leave.  The factory worker, the postman, the team’s GM, the janitor, and the corporate CEO all are legally entitled to that right.  Whether they take it or not is their business, but to think a pro athlete can’t avail himself of a legal right is ridiculous.  It becomes particularly absurd when we consider that there are 162 games in the Mets season.  If we were talking NLCS Game 7, the calculus certainly changes, but the right still exists.

And, frankly, it should.  Folks can take the Mike Florio approach who referred to “nine month family expansion activities.” In reality, the birth of a child means much more than that.  I can certainly tell you that the mother of said child, after labor, would not see it as just an “activity.”  She’d likely call for more morphine, which I’m told is how my mother handled the aftermath of one of the two births she experienced.  There are few, if any, greater expressions of love than bringing a new life into the world.  That someone would criticize a father for not wanting to meet is child after supporting his wife through pregnancy and labor is, frankly, heartless.

I should add, the argument given does not stand up to much scrutiny.  Sure it is “pro freakin sports,” but if a player can’t skip one game for a birth, what are they supposed to do about a death?  Does being an athlete preclude them from taking a day off to grieve and support loved ones?  If it doesn’t (and no, it doesn’t) then we should rightfully treat comments by Westwood and Esiason with scorn.  In effect, they are saying a major family event like a birth is not important enough to skip one game in a career.  Not only does that attitude completely submarine the very real importance of each new birth, but we should then rightly ask if any family event is that important.  If addition to the family isn’t, then subtraction certainly isn’t.

I should note that Esiason makes a little more sense than Westwood.  Each game in the NFL does mean more than it does in hockey, so I can understand his perspective being a little different.  Still, I’m not entirely sure how pleased his wife would be if he “said C-section.”  (Also, who can blame Murphy from taking a break from the putrid Mets!?).  Either way, the comments of Esiason and Westwood are an awful manifestation of extreme jock-sniffing, which results in criticizing players who rightly value what’s important in life: family.

Backing Into Obscurity?

There will be figures we, no matter what, will never like.  For instance, I have to think hard when I notice this one girl behind the Chipotle line.  She barely gives me enough food to feed my gerbil, much less my 6’5” frame.  But, the alternative is Noodles & Company, so I grit my teeth and bare it.  Some sports figures also seem to underwhelm us, and yet we have to respect them, if only because they manage to patch up the ugly in their sport.  I mean, who can actually claim to like Nick Saban.

For me, that person has always been Tiger Woods.  With each new major victory, I groaned.  His amped up mentality, which so many others loved, always struck me as arrogance.  I am one of the few avid golf spectators who has, in the past, stayed away from Tiger.  I can count multiple majors where I stopped watching once he hit the fourth round with the lead.  Until a small little Asian guy beat him on the best hybrid shot you will ever see, Tiger was unbeatable.  (For those curious, his win at Pebble Beach deserves to go down as the most impressive major victory ever…he was the only guy under par, and won by 15 strokes).  Once his scandal started, everyone began cooling on Woods, but before too long he was back in the mix, winning tournaments and tantalizing fans everywhere.

And he still will, but I think it’s time to consider nailing the coffin shut on Tiger’s rise.  His apex has come and gone.  And, much as I hate to say it, it’s saddening.

Just to explain, a back injury is one of those things that golfers can’t ever really shake.  The best epitome of back problems over the years, Fred Couples, had difficulty after losing his back for much of the 1994 season, just one year after ascending to the World Number One Ranking and winning the Masters.  He still feels the effects.  That said, Tiger has more general athleticism and conditioning than Freddie had, and he’s made so much money he won’t rush himself back.  But, and I think this is true, his chances of tying Jack Nicklaus’ major wins record are now almost zilch.  I believe Tiger will win one more at least…he’s only 38, and when he does win it will be a lot like Jack’s 1985 Masters.  A blast from the past, a weekend where past memories flood viewers, and a time when golf looks surreally appealing to almost anyone.

And that’s the worst consequence of Tiger’s injury news today.  He will miss The Masters for the first time in his career, a tournament that fits his game best.  But, all of a sudden, golf is in trouble.  Yes, we all love Phil Mickelson, if only for his U.S. Open futility.  Adam Scott looks good in pictures.  Rory McIlroy has the most beautiful swing you can imagine.  But none of these would-be challengers can bring the attention to golf that Tiger garners. 

Yeah, I dislike that fact.  It kills me that those whose only association with golf is a Robin Williams skit can likely only mention Tiger Woods when asked who’s playing golf today.  He draws the most galleries at events by far, and last year the Masters experienced a 7.2 rating for the 90 minutes centered around Tiger finishing his third round (compared to a 6.3 overall for the third round in general). 

Tiger is the tide that has raised all golf boats.  It is not surprising that the Golf Channel finally found existence against the backdrop of Woods’ deep successes.  Tiger drove Nike to an amazingly strong 8 percent market share for golf balls, when Nike had before then been nothing but a niche manufacturer.  Ratings for the 2009 PGA Championship final round, which concluded in a second place finish by Tiger, were 150 percent above the previous year’s numbers.

In the end, golf may be just fine.  It remains a big recreational activity for many, and that certainly can’t be discounted.  But to act as if anyone playing now has a similar effect on golf, compared to Tiger, is ludicrous.  Even Phil, everyone’s favorite village idiot, doesn’t draw the same kind of media attention that Tiger does.  Did you know Phil might miss The Masters because of injury as well?  Oh yeah, the dude has a strained oblique muscle.  The different treatments are stunning in how unequal they are.

I will wait to find the next heir apparent, and hopefully golf will continue.  But any golf fan, regardless of whether they like Tiger Woods, should hope this injury doesn’t have a lasting impact on his career.  If it does, golf may have its forty days in the wilderness.