Nick Faldo Versus Johnny Miller

If you watch professional golf on TV, you've had a lot of opportunities to hear Nick Faldo and Johnny Miller do color commentary. Both were top players in their day and both are extremely knowledgeable about the game, swing mechanics and their fellow pros. Having said that, I much prefer Nick Faldo and would have liked to have seen him work the U.S. Open.

Johnny Miller comes across as angry and exudes an air of superiority. I can just hear him telling someone that back in his day the holes all played uphill, the balls were lopsided and the wind always blew in your face. If a player doesn't hit the best shot possible, Miller intimates that the guy choked, while Faldo has a much more compassionate take. Nick comes across respecting that golf never has never been a game of perfection and never will be. He's Mr. Affable to Johnny's Mr. Caustic. I suspect there's a chip on someone's shoulder in there somewhere.

Nick Is Right On Golf Broadcasting

I like a good deal of The Golf Channel's coverage of pro tournaments, but there are a few places they could definitely improve. Like the blue imaginary putting line. The first time I saw it, it was interesting. By the third time it was a nuisance. If you have to keep this doodad, then at least lose it before the player actually putts. Listen to Nick Faldo. Behind his politeness he's trying to help you improve your broadcasts.

Gary McCord sounds like a nice guy. I'm sure he'd be great to live next to - funny and lot's of interesting golf stories. But when he's running the show, I feel like I'm tuned into the 'Gary McCord Hour', playing between Oprah and Ellen. Sometimes the commentators should let the play speak for itself.

And then there's the music that has become mandatory when showing the 'on screen' scoreboard. I thought we were done with Muzak about 15 years ago. Now it seems to be on a vicious comeback. It's at the mall, in the airport, at the bookstore and recently on TV anytime there's a 'data' shot. I've got enough lunacy running around my head without having more piped in.

That's not to say that I'm not thankful for The Golf Channel and all the tournament coverage they provide. In most cases I wish they had the rights to more Saturdays and Sundays. Now, with the networks, we're lucky to get 3 hours of coverage. Take away the commercials and talking heads, that doesn't leave much time to watch real play.

ESPN Masters Coverage is Abominable

Today is probably the worst golf tournament coverage I have ever seen and because it's the Masters it's that much more painful. It's not the problem of the ESPN commentators, it's the producer. When you cover a golf tournament you are expected to broadcast the play, not shots of the trees, the bridge, magnolias, and so many walks down memory lane that I thought I was watching the history channel for awhile.

The trend in the last couple of years is to focus too much on only a very few golfers at the top. If a player is a few shots back you're lucky if you see then hit two shots. I do believe the average viewer is like me. I want to see Justin Leonard and Vijay Singh and Padraig Harrington and the rest of the best golfers in the world whether they're on or not. I want to see as much as I can of the best golfers in the world on one of the best courses in one of the top four tournaments of the year. Not only is ESPN sticking to the leaders on the course and Tiger, but the producer has fallen in love with everything that has nothing to do with the live action.

It's getting to the point where you have to be online to actually know what's going on. If a top player like Retief Goosen isn't doing so well, why? Has he lost control of his driver, did he hit it in the water, did he take a double bogey somewhere? Why can't the networks let the camera show us the action and let it speak for itself. Why not get as much real footage on our screens as possible. I love Gary Player and I think it's great that Zach Johnson won last year. But don't take away from this year's actual play to take us back into the history books over and over. That's better handled later, or earlier, but not during the heat of play. By chopping up the coverage the viewer gets no sense of the overall unfolding of the competition.

The powers that be at Augusta have gone to extremes to have the Masters run and be covered the way they want. Maybe it's time for them to look at the Thursday/Friday contract with ESPN and let a network who will really cover the action take over next year.

The Golf Channel, Cialis and Slazenger

An advertiser is an advertiser and most every popular media business needs them, who else is going to pay the bills. So don't blame the Golf Channel for the pain that the current Cialis and Slazenger ads cause. I've got nothing against either product, it's just certain characteristics of the ads - not the product mind you - that's making it more painful to sit through the ads with each passing day.

The production quality of the Cialis ad is fine, it's just that it NEVER CHANGES. If you've got enough advertising funds to buy up that much airtime, then spend a few more bucks on some different versions. I've had to watch that kitchen faucet erupt more than once too often. It's getting so you can't watch any sporting event without being bombarded by erectile dysfunction products. I guess that says something about where the male viewing public is at, so maybe we are buying enough pills to warrant the ads. But please, too much repetition can kill a good thing.

Take a page out of the Aflac book. Even if you've seen a lot of their ads, you look sort of look forward to them because they are funny and there are enough versions to keep from driving you stark raving mad. Lilly, please do us a favor and come up with a few more versions of the ad or you're going to give golf a bad name.

Then there is Slazenger's 'Raw Distance' ad. Who do they think buy the most golf balls? If it's 14 year old boys who play video games then they've probably hit a home run with their ad that you'd swear was for the World Wrestling Entertainment. If it's anybody else, then why would video of raw meat and blood in a blender and a guy who spends too much time in the weight room and not on the practice range make anyone want to purchase a golf ball. My advice, team up with Lilly and get a twofer deal with the advertising agency producing the Aflac and Geico ads. Your golf ball may be terrific, but who can get past your commercial.

‘ESPN on ABC’ British Open Coverage

I don’t care how many media names are linked together, the ‘ESPN on ABC’ coverage of the British Open was poor. I’ve already talked about too many commercials so I won’t belabor that point. I’ve already talked about not telling the story, not selling the excitement, so I won’t go there, but what about showing a few shots from more than the top two tournament leaders and Tiger. For example, Mike Weir started Sunday just off the lead, but I don’t think there was more than one shot of him during all of Saturday. And where was Romero? Until his back nine on Sunday I didn’t even know he existed. Most golf fans are interested in more than just the two low scorers. I know it’s hard to keep a storyline going on 8 or 10 golfers at a time, but isn’t that what top coverage is supposed to provide. It’s not rocket science, if you had fewer commercials you could show more golf. Of course we all know that golf, like most things in life, is about the bottom line. Whoever is willing to pay the most earns the right to provide the coverage, regardless of whether they can do it best. Imagine building skyscrapers or bridges based only on the low bid.

However, what irked me the most was the interview with Jean Van de Velde. First, most everything on TV these days is focused on human failure. Producers have decided that no one in their right mind wants to hear about success. Golf coverage, in general, seems to be a bunch of commentators just waiting for the next golfer to choke. Success is under-played while failure is played up and repeated until you’re ready to swear off pop culture altogether.

But I digress. How dare the interviewer try to browbeat the seriously ill Jean Van de Velde into some kind of complete emotional breakdown. Talk about poor decision making, the producer of that piece ought to be enshrined in a prominent place in the hall of shame. Monsieur Van de Velde very clearly and graciously described his feelings then and now. This, however, wasn’t enough for the producers. I felt they wouldn’t be satisfied until the guy committed seppuku on screen. Adding further to the aggravation, they had to show footage of his collapse at least 5 different times on Sunday. ESPN or ABC or whoever you are, we get the picture, we know the story but this is now and that was then. Show us the live coverage, build the drama, explain the game, use the Swing Cam (or whatever it’s called), keep the commercials down and let us enjoy the terrific competition. You might also want to teach your commentators that what they don’t say is as important as what they do say. Great jazz artists discover this as they mature. The idea that ‘dead air’ is such a terrible thing has really made coverage almost unbearable at times. If it wasn’t one of the majors I would have turned it off!

One more thing for the commentators – you don’t have to pretend you know which way every putt is going to break. It doesn’t really add anything and we can all see the results and judge for ourselves. If we didn’t have to worry about line and speed, every putt would go in. We get it – don’t browbeat us! Telling us that there’s a big ridge across the green or that a put has about a dramatic break is a help because it helps paint the picture. Telling us your guess that a putt is going to break an inch left or right adds nothing.

Golf Needs A New Kind Of Publication

I read a lot of golf magazines. Or, more correctly, I peruse a lot of golf magazines. It’s part of my job to be up on the latest in golf, so I go to the local bookstore and leaf through seven or eight different ones each month to get the latest and greatest news on golf.

I never really considered the whole lot of these publications until just recently. I was content to look through them and come away with a strange sense of emptiness, but never really question why. Maybe I’m a little thick, but it finally dawned on me. They are all marketing publications. They’re not thoughtful, unbiased journals about the wonderful game/sport of golf. They’re extensions of the golf courses, equipment makers, destination resorts, travel agencies, and teaching pros to sell us the sport.

Think about it. When’s the last time you read anything critical of the sport in a golf magazine or a thoughtful article on the state of the game. Who’s writing about slow play, the fact that amateurs never get better, how all the ‘cure your slice’ articles never reduce the number of slicers, how there’s no club that can keep you from hitting it fat, the high price of destination golf courses, or the lack of creative course architecture. They can’t. If they did, who would pay for the magazine, certainly not the current advertisers who all have a stake in keeping us all in dreamland. Think about it, there must be at least three pages of unabashed advertising for every one page of an article.

Can the sport of golf evolve sensibly and protect its wonderful heritage without thoughtful discourse on what’s right and wrong with the current game. Take the issue that many private courses around the country, with a few exceptions, are losing membership at an alarming rate. This is more than a single facility problem, it’s endemic to golf in this country in the 21st century.

Like most naysayers, I can point out problems, but I don’t have much to offer in the way of a solution. Maybe we need someone with deep pockets and a religious commitment to the game to fund such a noble undertaking. Could it pay for itself in a year or so once golfers realized how refreshing it would be to read about golf without being sold every step of the way? Maybe it could attract advertisers who want to market to golfers, but don’t have a vested interest in the sport. Look at the TV advertisers to find some likely candidates.

Honesty has to be as good for golf as it is for everything else. For every advertising dollar that honest reporting might drive away, there is another dollar lurking in the shadows just waiting to associate itself with the wonderful sport of golf.

CBS, Fed Ex, Faldo and Finchem

I love Jack Nicklaus and it was great to see K.J. Choi win the Memorial in sterling fashion - fabulous bunker play and putting on the last holes. Congratulations Mr. Choi - well done and well deserved!

Why then, did the whole thing leave a bad taste in my mouth? As I've written in this blog before, this year's CBS coverage of golf is troubling. It's not just CBS of course, but a combination of Tim Finchem, the FedEx Cup and Nick Faldo as color commentator. Here's how I see it.

The FedEx Cup has an insane amount of money at stake for the players. From a player's perspective this is where the big dollars are. That's not to say that winning a million dollar first place check isn't good pay, but you'd have to win 10 of those to earn what you can get for first place in the FedEx Cup. I think there's a limit to how much sports figures can make before the fans get turned off by excess. The game is in danger of losing some of it's appeal when so many players can earn millions in any given year and not even win. It takes away from the integrity of a sport where you got paid only if you earned it - no million dollar salaries for bench warmers.

I believe there is even a darker side to this. Most golf fans watch the sport on TV. It's the medium that creates our view of professional golf and determines if we enjoy watching it or turn on Major League Baseball instead. Many golf fans have never seen a professional tournament. Most baseball fans have been to at least a game or two and it's that live experience that colors our view of it on TV. When your watching at home it's easy to smell the hot dogs and feel the peanut shells under your feet.

Golf relies much more on the TV broadcast to set the scene and feed our imagination. How can CBS do this if they have to devote more time to advertising than to actual coverage of the competition? They're in a hole before coverage even begins. Add to this that with so many commercials they can never provide more than a few uninterrupted minutes of golf. The result is no flow, no sense for the viewer of what's happening on the course. It's just a few random shots and putts interspersed among a lot of commercials. This same approach killed the winter Olympics where you need to see a slalom heat or a ski jumping round from beginning to end to get emotionally involved. Even baseball has protected the sanctity of the half inning.

Golf has to be sold to us as drama, and it's the networks job to do this. Pro golfers are not a flashy bunch in the first place and today's young players seem to have all worked hard to take emotion out of their game. Maybe this makes them play better, but it certainly makes for a less exciting viewing experience for us. They keep to themselves with their emotions tucked neatly into their golf bags.

If there's any hope for this recipe for disaster to succeed, it falls to the commentators. They have to somehow create drama where it's all but invisible, help us forget the constant interruptions and keep us on the edge of our seats. They only seem able to do this when Tiger is in contention because of the larger than life drama that follows this era's greatest player everywhere he goes. Otherwise it's a bit ho hum, or maybe a lot ho hum. While Nick Faldo is knowledgeable and makes insightful comments they never come together enough to describe the drama that's unfolding. The great English golf commentator Peter Alliss makes few comments, but it works when the BBC pretty much lets the cameras role without commercials. Johnny Miller is much better than Nick in this department, even when he comes across as a bit superior to everyone out on the course. Don't downplay that he's helped immensely because NBC doesn't break up the coverage like CBS.

In the end, the whole ball of wax falls on the Commissioner's shoulders. After all, he dreamt this thing up, created the format, determined the purse and then negotiated the deal. While the FedEx Cup may be a terrific idea, it's execution ultimately dooms golf fans and the long term outlook for the sport. Did someone forget that you're not supposed to kill the golden goose?

Yeah NBC - Boo CBS!

What a difference a network can apparently make in coverage of a PGA tournament. If you read this column, you know that I took offense at the high proportion of commercials to actual tournament play two Sundays ago at the Wachovia Championship. The television coverage was provided by CBS. On the other hand, this past Sunday’s coverage at The Players was excellent thanks to NBC. I hardly noticed the commercials interspersed among long stretches of PGA players actually hitting balls. What a relief!

Mr. Finchem, if you’ve got any pull with CBS please urge them to follow in NBC’s footsteps. I sure hope that NBC is doing this year’s US Open TV broadcast. I, for one, was ready to forgo TV if the CBS style coverage was all I could look forward to on Saturday and Sunday. And by the way, Wachovia, you must have some pull in this situation. Please get CBS to clean up their act or you’ll end up having a dead golden goose on your hands.

I have to take exception to Johnny Miller’s phrase ‘Winged Foot special’ in referring to what Phil Mickelson might hit on the last hole. It’s an attention grabbing line, but a bit of a cheap shot. Today’s news coverage has made every wart a headline that will never go away. Most of yesteryear’s great players made their share of bad shots and poor decisions, but thankfully we can hardly remember them because they weren’t front and center ad infinitum. It seems to me that Greg Norman was a pretty decent golfer in his heyday, but all I can seem to recall is how he choked repeatedly at Augusta thanks to the media’s pension for human failure. It’s a shame because it speaks volumes about what society really values today.

Sean O’Hair, congratulations on playing terrific golf, all the more impressive because you’re just getting started. I have my own opinions on how you played the 17th, but what’s more important is how you handled yourself when asked to explain what happened. You’re a class act and it’s hard to imagine you won’t turn out to be very successful on tour. One bit of advice, speed up your play.