golfortennis

Fred Couples is in. As is I believe Lanny Wadkins. So yes they are in. Should they be in is a different question, but frankly 4 majors is pretty rarified air..

You're referring to the late 90s dead puck era. The early 90s were still good hockey. Plenty of fights, but they were rarely staged. Lemieux was in his prime, Gretzky was still at the top of the game(although not his game), and shots from nearer the blueline had enough of a chance of beating the goalie that it was exciting to see them be taken. The North Stars used the "stand 4 men at the blueline and dare guys to go through us" to reach the finals in 91, but nobody really caught on until the Panthers in 96 clutched and grabbed their way to the finals. (The Devils played a trapping game, but they did have talent and could play a bit of real hockey.) Once the Panthers made it through, teams simply took the approach that the refs won't call all the penalties so get your money's worth. It's better today in terms of flow(guys who can't skate (coughDerianHatchercough) don't stay in the league very long. Although I still think goalie equipment needs to shrink. Goalies claim the thigh rise offers protection. But the only thing it protects are GAAs.

I think it's the NBC Olympics mentality. Men will watch sports regardless. This is the stuff that draws the women. OR so goes the thinking. But TV people have been known to lack awareness outside of their own bubble, so....

Not me but one of my buddies lost in a playoff for the senior club championship. Not a story until he talks about how he saw the guy commit an infraction(think he fluffed the lie) somewhere on the back nine, but didn't call it because he didn't want to be known as "that guy." Considering the guy more than likely did multiple times, my buddy likely wins if he called him on it. Never did win it(sorry,hasn't won it, but he doesn't have the game for newer players in the division any more).

You're not wrong, but there's been more than a couple of setups like this where it turned out to be closer to a scam than an actual good offering. But based on the thread someone linked earlier, sounds like it is moving along.

I figured you did. Was more of a general question as opposed to directly at you. Darn forums....

Captains do have some part to play in success, but more importantly, isn't it a bit early to say "their guys aren't better than the current crop of Americans" as it pertains to the RC? They've split the last four, and it brings to mind the old adage when the baseball team loses, "the other guys are paid to be out there as well." Completely agreed on your money sentence. For whatever reason, there isn't the same benefit to sponsoring an ET event as there is a PGA tour event. Still think it's tax related, but have never been able to confirm.

But that athlete has overcome severe trauma in her life. When she was 6 her dog, was hit by a car, but she found the strength to overcome it. When she was 9, the next dog had cancer. While most people would crumble having been through two(TWO!!!) traumas such as those, she persevered. And then, just as she was on the cusp of qualifying for the Olympics, on the start line she discovered that her great aunt twice removed who she once visited in South America came down with a bad cough, which combined with the fact she also learned that her ski wax was 1% grippier than her competitors, almost ruined her entire dream, but she summoned the courage of the 9 year old from deep within, and with the help of a raft of doping disqualifications, turned her 9th place finish into an Olympic berth. These truly are the stories that need to be celebrated.

Ferg you're going to need a new schtick. This one is getting old...

But they didn't have a lot of that stuff in Montgomerie's day. WGC's didn't show up till 1998. Montgomerie made his bones on the ET events. Today it is as you describe, but not back then.

I had seen that recently. What I couldn't make out is whether there are some real issues or whether it was just one rogue guy who got his knickers in a knot. Both sides claim the one that fits their argument, so wondered if there are some neutrals who know more about it.

Attacking any criticism? Gotcha. Anyone can say anything on the internet, but I doubt I even notice your post if you make similar points but without the word hate. I'm attacking the misuse of language. I'm really interested to learn more. Please begin with answering two questions I have : 1)Which university do you have your psychology Ph.D. in, and 2)Are you a CEO?

I'm no psychotherapist or anything of the sort, but couldn't one make the argument that your use of the word "hate" to describe anything that isn't praise suggests an issue of your own? Just saying the old adage of pointing a finger seems to apply here, and it's become very sad that anything short of complete praise is "hate". Snowflake generation perhaps?

As much as I have criticized Roberts in the past, Comcast's handling of GC the last few years is much worse. Not to mention, Roberts did redeem himself in my eyes a little bit when he did the narration for the Club Pro Guy video.

Just be glad he was able to attend the filming of that commercial. How would you feel if you went to the event where Feherty had to apologize for his absence. "He could not be here as he is attending the birth of his future wife."