Reilly on Tiger

I know so many of us like to wax about what Reilly used to be and is no longer (Lupica, too; though it's more of a was-he-ever-great kind of thing). That said, I almost never read Reilly any more. I just don't spend much time at ESPN.com, and when there it's usually to check games in progress and stats rather than stories. That's what Grantland's for, right?

So, reading Reilly's Open column on Tiger is sort of akin to reading him for the first time again (at least I'm not holding recent examples of his phoning it in against him, if they exist, because I haven't read them).

Really, it's a long-winded way of saying this:
This is an excellent, excellent column.
Thoughtful, funny, insightful, reasoned, nuanced.
Wonder what others think.

http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/page/usopenreilly130617/tiger-major-problem

 

Two immediate reactions:

1) Really overwrought in spots.

I mean, really? It's easy to fixate on the personal issues to come up with a flashy column. Tiger had major injuries that badly derailed his game. The biggest "cautionary tale" is that athletes hold up better in their 20s than their 30s, but that doesn't make for riveting copy.

2) I'm not calling Reilly a racist. I promise. Don't know shit about him and don't read him very often. But this stuff drives me nuts:

By all accounts Tiger has worked his ass off since he was a toddler. He has (or certainly had) an obsessive work ethic. Why does every black guy have to be "gifted" while every white guy is hard working? I half expected him to call Mickelson "scrappy."

 

He's probably teeing up the same thing for LeBron if the Heat lose again.


I was expecting a Rory McIlroy rip job. That guy wins two majors, is declared the next God's Gift to Golf, dumps his agent, goes global and his career implodes.

 

Are columns like this going to be written every 6-8 months?

Tiger is far from done, still elite, and he's still going to break Jack's record.

 

Oh do I wish we were in the same room to make that bet.

It has been five years since he won a major, and you think he has a career birth coming that will bring him five more?

 

You mean the guy who has 4 wins in 9 events this year and is ranked No. 1?

Gonna be a helluva rebirth.

 

Yeah. That guy.

Still has never won a major when he wasn't leading after three rounds.

And you think that at age 37, he is going to find enough youth to put together the equivalent of another Hall of Fame career, with a total of major championship victories that by itself would put him in the all-time top 20. Mmmm hmmm.

 

The best comparison to Tiger? Mike Tyson...

No, I'm not comparing Tyson going to jail for rape to Tiger fucking a laundry list of Waffle House waitresses, strippers and porn stars, but it would be someone who just dominated their sport early on, had personal issues and was never the same afterwards.

Both should have been the best their sports had ever seen, but they couldn't quite get there, but people remain fascinated with them years after they were past their prime, and in Tyson's case, basically a decade after he retired.

 

Better piece by CPierce here: http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9394910/the-decline-tiger-woods-us-open/

 

I think you're reading way too much into this.

 

Yes, I do.

Jack won the Masters at 46. Watson almost won the British a few years back at what, 59?

Tiger despite his injuries is in much better shape than those 2. He's 37, still in his prime, will be in his prime for 10 years unless all the knee joints and shoulders and elbows start breaking down at warp speed, and I just don't see that happening.

You don't think he has something to prove? He'll win 7 or 8 more majors before he's 50.

I'll buy you a round of golf in your town if he doesn't win 2 majors by the time he's 40.