Tiger Woods' News Conference on Monday...Let the Madness Begin!
When Tiger Woods enters the room in Augusta to start his press conference at 2PM Eastern Standard Time, on Monday, April 5, 2010, The Masters will never again be the same. "The Return of Tiger Woods" will begin, and the media circus that will shortly follow will be something we have ever seen before.
What should we expect during this press conference?
Will Tiger open himself up, and answer every question that's asked?
Will Tiger discuss the specifics of his automobile accident on the early morning after Thanksgiving Day 2009?
Will Tiger answer any questions regarding the state of his marriage?
Will Tiger address the recently purported story that he paid one of his bimbos $10M in hush money?
Never in a million years (no pun intended).
So I have to ask—why should anyone watch this press conference? Hasn't this story received enough coverage?
I want to see Tiger on the golf course. I don't care about his marital problems. I don't care how many women were involved in his extramarital affairs. I do care about how he will make golf more interesting again.
Here's a potential question for the aforementioned press conference: Does he have a legitimate shot at winning The Masters? Can someone who hasn't played competitively in four to five months have any shot at all, even Tiger Woods?
I don't have any doubts that not only can he compete, but win, and convincingly.
That will be the determining factor if Tiger's rehabilitation had any affect on him. Tiger's nerves of steel and legendary ability to focus will be scrutinized during this tournament like never before. Even with a very controlled gallery, Woods surely will hear some negative comments from fans, but he must be expecting it and prepared to deal with it.
Let's just fast-forward to Thursday, April 8, 2010. Let me know Tiger's tee time, and that's when I'll tune in. Unless he comes clean and tells all during Monday's presser, I could care less anymore about this soap opera.
Tiger by three strokes—remember that you read it here first.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?