Best of the Masters

I suspect Phil isn't the husband some are portraying him to be because "the look on his face?"

Really?

 

"Isn't" ? No. More "Hasn't been."

Call it women's intuition. Call it being around pro athletes for awhile. Call it a guess based on percentages.

If I were a betting woman in Vegas (irony intended), I'd put my money on the marriage not being picture perfect all these years.

My point is simply that I wouldn't make the statement that Rick Reilly made in his column today. "Phil has stayed true to his wife." I mean, how does he know? Just don't go there, one way or the other.

But, by all accounts, Phil seems really devoted now. And maybe that's all that's important.

Amy must have been going through hell this past year. From the little I know about breast cancer treatment, if she's still in bed all day 11 months after diagnosis......... This hasn't been an easy fix treatment.

God be with her and all who are going through this.

 

Of course, it depends on what you had the night before, I suppose.

Anyhoo, Mickelson has always been portrayed as man, Woods as machine. Now, it's Mickelson as Superman, Woods as human

 

Stevie.

 

Nobody's and no.

When I read Reilly's statement and Mo Dowd's as well (a few months ago), I was immediately reminded of some of the statements baseball writers have made about PEDs. "At least A-Rod is clean," etc.

 

Reilly has been friends with the Mickelsons for years, so it doesn't surprise me that he went so far as to make that statement. (He's the journalist, after all, who went so far as to write that Phil wore a green jacket to bed with her in 2004 after he won his first major, so obviously they like and trust him.) I don't known that I believe it's true that they have the perfect marriage, but who really does? I think they have a normal marriage, filled with good times and rough patches, and I don't think "intuition" and "rumors" that people have had over the years about Mickelson (without a shred of proof) have ever risen to the level beyond that. People don't want the Mickelsons' marriage to be a good one because it would be so delicious if it wasn't, if he really did turn out to be a fake.

I agree that it's naive to believe their marriage is the complete opposite of the Woods' marriage. But I think a lot of the desire to have Mickelson be a fake is just that -- desire to unmask a fraud because it's too nauseating for some people if it's real.

As much as Reilly and others want Phil to be Father and Husband of the Year, some people seem to really, really want him to be revealed as Phony Mickelson.

I suspect the reality of it is they might have a pretty normal marriage, not so much idyllic as full of ups and downs and ultimately a commitment to one another.

 

Well, again, my intuition would only be a guide not to make statements about Phil's fidelity in the absolute one way or the other.

Sometimes you have to go with your gut, and my gut would tell me-- just don't touch it.

There's more than enough amazing material here to write about!

 

We never learn. How many times are we going to create these one-dimensional trite 'storylines'....before wailing in outraged disappointment when the story doesn't play out as we demanded?

Two facts: Phil won, and his wife has cancer. Is it necessary to vet their marriage before deciding whether the story is good enough?

 

There's a long way between "picture perfect" and where Tiger is. I'd bet Phil is closer to picture perfect than he is to banging escorts and porn stars.

Bianchi had a good column about how this is the same old Tiger.

 

Right on, 21. Take it for what it is. Phil's appeal has always been as an Everyman, not a Superman. It's not hard to understand why fans continue to root for him. They seem themselves in him as they wish they could be.