Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelson and the end of an era

Red Shirt and Philly Mick are now in the golf history books in a new way.

At the Open at Royal Portrush, for the first time in 83 majors they were both entered into, they both missed the cut. That said, it wouldn't surprise me if it is not the only one in the next three years, even.

Phil's floundering and who knows where his arthritis is at. Tiger we know is a gimpy old man.

So, it also wouldn't surprise me one bit, despite the Woodsaholics and Tiger fellators, is if they're permanently capped at 15 majors and 5, respectively.

Ian O'Connor at ESPN fellated the hell out of Tiger Thursday, making a pun on Portrush being "no country for old men," which I easily refuted:

Oh, Ian, your attempt at metaphor-pun aside, Portrush was INDEED "a country for old men." Just not Red Shirt Tiger.
Darren Clarke, 50, even.
Ernie Els, 49, even.
Lee Westwood, 46, -3.
Henrik Stenson, 43, -1.
Just stop the Tiger Woods fellating, Ian.

— reallyDonaldTrump  🚩🌻 (@AFCC_Esq) July 19, 2019

Dave Shedloski, while not fellating Red Shirt as much as O'Connor, bad enough, claiming the weather is the only reason Tiger didn't do better in non-Augusta majors this year.

No, not really.

The real reasons are twofold.

One is that Eduardo Molinari and Brooks Koepka, both of whom know better, yakked away the 12th hole on Sunday at Augusta. The toooneyment was given to Tiger as much as  he won it, arguably.

Second, the reason Tiger did better at Augusta is that it's the first major of the year. Once the golf season gets rolling after that, the new schedule of a major a month simply will not accommodate Tiger if he's not playing at least a little bit in between, no matter the weather. (So, just as The Masters DID Tiger-proof Augusta National, if only to make it lefty-friendly, per Hank Haney, the PGA Tour and the FedEx pot of gold have Tiger-proofed the tour schedule, I guess.)

And, per Woods' comments about his 2018 schedule being too much, don't expect a lot of changes in 2020.

As I told O'Connor, the same to Shedloski. Tiger ain't winning anywhere else on majors, and he ain't winning three more, let alone four more times at Augusta National.

So put away this "he could still pass Jack" bullshit as the bullshit it is. Hell, contra Shedloski, I'm not sure Tiger passes Sam Snead's career wins record.

I almost wish Tiger Woods had won the PGA

Maybe it would have stopped ESPN from turd-polishing him.

Probably not. Even though Red Satan doesn't televise any of the majors, it still loves itself some stories clickbait.

Anyway?

Tiger is still not the GOAT. Jack Nicklaus is.

The top 10 that Jack faced throughout most of his career — and while lesser players can win majors, the cream usually rises to the top — was better than Tiger.

Vijay Singh, Phil Mickelson and Ernie Els from Tiger's peak might crack the 11-20 spots of Jack's peak, but not the top 10.

Arnold Palmer, Gary Player, Lee Trevino, Tom Watson and Seve Ballesteros were no doubts ahead of them. Peter Thompson and Ray Floyd arguably so. (Thompson didn't play the PGA tour, but five Opens, the last against an American-stacked field, is tough to overlook.) And, counting Jack himself, that gives me a top eight ahead of anything Tiger faced. Hale Irwin is arguably better. Julius Boros and Billy Casper are no worse than even and possibly better. Johnny Miller is even. That gives me 12. Throw out Seve, if you want, since his first major wasn't until 1979.

And, while they were largely post-Jack and pre-Tiger, Nick Faldo and Greg Norman are also better to probably better, than what Tiger faced.

Most those players wouldn't have been intimidated by Tiger the same way. Jack might have hit weights a bit and buffed the short game he admitted he neglected. Player would certainly have taken fitness tips from Tiger, and no way he's intimidated. Ditto on Ray Floyd. Certainly not on Lee and his own minority trying to crash big golf experiences.

I hate to sound like Dan Jenkins, so let's make sure I don't.

Dan's fetishizing of Ben Hogan to the point of trying to count things like the North/South as a major is ridiculous.

Plus, Hogan, setting aside his car accident and miracle comeback, played in a relatively barren era for golf. Sam Snead had a long career, playing at a winning level throughout the 1950s, but Byron Nelson had retired, and until Arnie and Gary at the end of the decade, when Cary Middlecoff and a young Boros are your next in line, it's not good depth. Given that the PGA banned Bobby Locke, using a face-saving excuse to cover for jealousy, that only adds to the egg on the collective golf face of the 1950s in the US.

#Masters2018 thoughts and semi-predictions

No, Red Shirt won't cover his apparel with a 5th green jacket. (Mono P/Flickr)

First off, straight out of the chute? I'd like Rory to win. Would be great for him to get that career Grand Slam and to put his 2011 collapse out of mind. Would also be great for a game of golf where casual fans either have to eventually let go of Tiger Woods Red Shirt or else stop being even casual fans. If Rory gets his slam (and assuming Philly Mick doesn't get "revenge" at this year's US Open at Shinnecock or wins any US Open) you then have the "rivalry" of Jordan Speith needing the PGA for his slam. And other young guns like Thomas and Koepka to at least add a second Slam win to their games.

That said, bearing in mind what Hank Haney and several others have said about how it's a lefties course today? (There's over 390K hits for that on Google; one piece even notes lefties have a specific advantage at the nerve-rattling 12th. Many people, including triple winner Nick Faldo, say that modern equipment makes a cut easier to hit than a draw. In that same piece, Phil agrees that 12, especially, is better for lefties.) Phil has won again, but I don't think he has the length to contend there. Bubba Watson, on the other hand, has gotten hot and straight himself recently. He might be my No. 1 as far as likelihood, Justin Rose 2, Rory 3, Jason Day 4 .... 

Tiger ... 10th? 15th? He's got the length, and earlier this year has been OK with the putter. But, driving accuracy sucks. Driving is indeed for dough at Augusta National. But, what if accuracy offsets that? Or a small putting sample size goes awry? Or that Augusta's walking length, with hills ... well, if not injures a back, at least tires it a bit? Phil? 15th?

Out of the full field, I don't see too, too many other serious contenders. Speith appears too far away yet from being a contender, even though this course seems to like him. Rain is in the forecast for Saturday, along with winds approaching 20mph, though removed for today. But it did rain fairly hard Wednesday morning. That and a cool start Sunday could hurt a short player like him. OTOH, Zach Johnson won in 2007 when Sunday was almost frigid. And, don't forget that Rory's had a good record on majors with rainy tracks.

It's a small field, once you remove older champs like Olazabel, Langer, Singh, Immelman, Lyle and Woosnam who won't make the cut. Faldo, interestingly, is firmly retired. Maybe in a few years, he'll be added to Nicklaus and Player as an honorary starter.

Hideki Matsuyama, Jon Rahm and Thomas Pieters are the few others that jump out at me for this year. Henrik Stenson and Paul Casey as sleeper picks do nothing for me.

And speaking of lefties, will Li Yuxin take top amateur honors?

Surgery: End of the line for #TigerWoods?

USA Today photo via ESPN

I just saw this on Golf Channel: Woods has had surgery for a pinched nerve.

He will definitely miss the Masters. I assume he'll be early enough in his rehab that while he may appear at the US Open, he won't be worth much there. And, per in-house injury analyst (really?) Stephania Bell in ESPN's piece, average rehab time is 4.5 months, so scratch the US Open for sure, and possibly the Open, maybe even the PGA for this year.

Vegas is leaning to Rory McIlroy as the new betting favorite. Pundits are giving Adam Scott and Jason Day (sorry, but his bum thumb scares me off) some love.

Let's look at the future, though.

Earlier this year, I said I expected him to move to No. 15 on majors wins, because both the Open and PGA tracks favored him. But now, all bets are off, are they not? Certainly, until we see the actual rehab process at work.

Given Phil's back problems last week, at Golf Digest, John Strege recently asked if we're at the end of an era. Could be yes, indeed.

So, Rory? While America and Mrs. Robinson may not be waiting for you, the PGA of America sure as hell is, as are other golf organizations. (An ESPN fan poll says that 15 percent of previously potential TV viewers will skip the Masters because Tiger isn't there.) Ditto on TV networks hoping for some star power, I'm sure.

And it's funny that on April 3, Rory said this thing himself, that golf needs a dominant player. He didn't talk about his "lost" 2013 or a couple of "lost" chances to win earlier this year being part of the problem.

For Woods, it's the first Masters miss since his initial appearance 20 years ago. Here's what happened, at Augusta and elsewhere, in 1994.

As for Tiger's future beyond this year? Lee Trevino won one of his six majors after undergoing more serious back fusion surgery after being struck by lighting. However, overall, he was never the same player after then. (I guesstimate he would have won at least seven majors without that happening.)

And, per Sports on Earth, there's two other questions. First, there's the issue of whether Tiger's workout regimen may have focused on bulking up to the detriment of flexibility. Second, as golf fans all know, Woods moved to Hank Haney to overhaul his swing to reduce stress on his left knee. With the back problems, will current swing coach Sean Foley have to do further work?

And, Woodsaholics? You may need to work on getting a life.

Is #TigerWoods a wuss?

Despite his interest in military-style training, and his one-legged ironman to win the 2008 U.S. Open, he's withdrawn from a number of tournaments recently.

So, Golf Digest compared his WD rate to a number of contemporaries. 

No surprise that he's not as tough as a Vijay Singh. But, he's also less tough than Freddy Couples, renowned for his own struggles with back problems.

So, TW is either a wuss, or getting more fragile by the minute. Neither one is good for his quest to catch or pass Jack Nicklaus' 18 major titles.

I blogged last month that I thought TW had a good chance at getting at least No. 15 this year. Let me rethink that. Sorry, Woodsaholics.

Why is Tiger Woods still stuck on 14?

That's actually one of four interrelated questions.

The second is, when will he get off his winless schneid at golf majors?

The third is, will he catch or pass Jack Nicklaus' 18?

The fourth is, why can't Tiger win coming from behind?

And, the fifth is, when will Tigerholics, not just among fans, but golf writers like Jay Coffin with drivel like this, face reality?

That last one first: Not for some time.

Coffin said the reason Tiger can't win a major when he's not in the lead after 54 holes is because being behind at that point shows he's not playing great in general. That' AFTER he said that Ernie Els and Phil Mickelson, with 4 and 5 majors respectively, have both won twice coming from behind.

As long as the "holics" are going to engage in special pleading, they're not worth much more than the back of the hand from better-rounded golf fans.

In turn, Coffin's answer relates to question no. 4.

Real answer?

It's a mix of Woods' self-pressure at majors causing him to tighten up, the loss of his aura of invincibility since Y.E. Yang took him down in the final round of the 2009 PGA, and continuing struggles at times with the putter. (I'm setting aside issues with the driver since, at many Open courses, at least, and some U.S. Open ones, you can stuff the driver in the bag.)

Until he really proves he can win a major period, we should simply expect him not to, and for the reasons above.

So, until he learns how to stop "pressing" on the weekend, and making the psychological changes to make that happen, we shouldn't expect such changes.

It's interesting that, whether there's much in the way of results or not, a lot of top golfers work with sports psychologists, but Tiger doesn't.

I'm not saying he needs one. I am saying he probably needs to have and demonstrate the openness to consider having one. Until he does, he's not closer to a solution.

Will he catch or pass Jack? I give him one in three odds of catching, and one in four of passing. Certainly before he addresses question no 4.

I've answered no. 1, in part, with no. 4. I think the loss of intimidation is part of it. I'm also with Hank Haney, that Tiger-proofing the Masters seems to have worked. U.S. Opens still seem iffy given Tiger's current putting.

That leaves British Opens, but only when greens don't change, and PGAs.

Since I don't expect Tiger to win this year at Oak Hill, Tigerholics will have to wait until Royal Liverpool for the possibility of No. 15.

#Tiger Woods, #Masters cheater

Don't agree w/NY Post politics, but love its headers!

Update, May 1: As I predicted, it was NOT Joe Fan, but a golf pro, who originally phoned in about Tiger Woods bad drop at the 15th hole of Round 2 at the Masters. It was a golf pro, still unidentified. More here, in which Augusta National looks more goofy. Again. And, possibly deeper into playing favorites.

Tiger Woods didn't get an "unlucky break" by how his ball bounced after hitting the flagstick on the 15th green in Friday's second round.

Instead, he got a lucky break by not being disqualified for cheating on where he took his drop after his ball bounced in the water.

Per Dan Wetzel's column (and Dan, for someone who could take on the "mighty" Bowl Championship System, you're an awful suck-up to Tiger and the Masters) Woods acknowledged deliberately improving his lie by not taking a drop allowed by golf rule standards. (Update: Wetzel has doubled down on the Tiger suck-up hypocrisy in a second column.)

And, per ESPN, the rule is pretty damned clear.

Therefore, a two-shot penalty, instead of disqualification, is clearly "Tiger favoratism."

The man knows the rules of golf. He deliberately broke this one.

Beyond that, another ESPN column reminds us that "intentionality" isn't even an issue. Theoretically, not even with the new 33-7 overlay rule. It's a basic rule, that Tiger should know. He blew it. The "Tiger rules" folks at Augusta should have disqualified him. If not, he should have DQ-ed himself.

Update, May 1. Given what we now know, per the top link, IMO, maybe 33-7 should NOT have applied. And, if we need a DQ, Fred Ridley should DQ himself from running the Masters rules committee or having any part of it. And worse, the USGA and the R&A are now "getting the back" of Ridley and Augusta National. A sport that has a lot of self-proclaimed ethics has got a bunch of issues with that now.

And, if a Chinese youth can get a bogus stroke penalty for delay, and if 45 years ago, Roberto de Vicenzo can get penalized for his playing partner's mistake at Augusta, then a cheater can get disqualified. Or a semi-cheater. Or somebody for whom ignorance is not an excuse and shouldn't be.

This isn't about Tiger's mistresses, etc. This is inside the gallery ropes. Let's see how many Tiger homers continue to defend him.

The fact that Tiger is taking to Twitter to defend himself shows he knows th score. And, in Wetzel's column, Ernie Els' shrug of the shoulders with his comment indicating "Yeah, it's Tiger," shows he knows it's another score.

And, it's not just Tiger. Any "ordinary" tournament, a favor like this would attract less scrutiny.

But, because the Masters puts itself on a pedestal, it's invited second-guessing.

I mean, for years, NBA writers talked about the "Jordan Rules" in basketball. We've now got evidence of similar.

I mean, this was phoned in yesterday, or emailed in, or whatever, by a fan. Masters officials claimed video evidence yesterday was inconclusive, but they reverse themselves today? On what grounds, other than Tiger's words? And, since those words indicate deliberation, then why no DQ?

And, if Bob Costas, yesterday, on Dan Patrick's radio show, could chide CBS and The Masters for not talking about racism and other issues? Bob, let's hear you now.

Update, 5:15 p.m. Saturday: Well, Nick Faldo had no problem weighing in from the CBS side. He just talked about "old rules" and "new rules" of golf, and said that, per his own thought and discussion with fellow pros of his age, that, under the "old rules," a golfer in Tiger's position would have DQ-ed himself.

Let's have somebody interview Jack Nicklaus on this!

And, as of April 25, he's now weighed in. He says he thinks the penalty was appropriate. OK, but then, his logic goes fuzzy. He says that if Tiger had DQ-ed himself, THAT would have been a statement by Tiger that he was above the rules.

Meanwhile, Masters rules officials screwed up on how they handled this. Tiger should immediately have been met by them, or as soon as they heard, with full review of video, instead of what actually happened.

Meanwhile, if not in a major, golfers have voluntarily withdrawn from other tournaments in similar situations, as John Feinstein notes. So, it's not rule 33-7, designed for TV viewers phoning in more iffy rules violations, that's at issue with "new rules" vs "old rules." Because this wasn't a call made by a viewer of Woods' drop, but of Woods' statement after his round. Maybe Sir Nick was referencing that, but the reality is this is Tiger rule vs. rules for others.

And, per Golf Channel, it sounds like Masters officials are either kind of clueless, or were taking the lead in perpetuating Tiger rules. Maybe the unnamed caller threatened to go more public. And, had a name big enough that, if he did so, this would have been a hand grenade exploding.

That said, whether Tiger actually DID gain an advantage or not, I can't believe that he doesn't know that rule better. I'd like to also have his current caddy, Joe LaCava, talk (fat chance). I'd also like to hear his outspoken long-term former caddie, Stevie Williams, weigh in on if he, as Tiger's caddie in the past, knew the rules that clearly, and what he would have said to Tiger if he saw him trying to do something like that.

And, I got my wish for Adam Scott to win. Now, Stevie, even if nobody sticks a mic in your face, speak out anyway.

And, speaking once more of Williams, don't forget it was his read, based on his experience, of the putt Scott faced at No. 10 in the playoff that let Adam win.

Almost to a man, even the ones who think Tiger should have gotten a DQ, or else withdrawn, still think it wasn't deliberate, in the sense of trying to get a deliberate edge.

WTF? That's not what the unnamed caller thought, I think.

I'm not sure, overall, who has more egg on the face, Tiger or Augusta National. It's awfully damned close between a golfer thinking he's privileged and an alleged "major championship" that got busted in preferential treatment as well as second-rate management.

Meanwhile, you Tiger fellators who call people like me Tiger haters? Look in the mirror; your slobbering over him leads to disdainful reactions like this.

Steve Williams on #TW at #Masters: Tiger should have DQed

Adam Scott and Steve Williams. Getty Images via ESPN

Hah! What I've been waiting for, and said so since Sunday evening, when Adam Scott won the Masters with his dramatic playoff putt.

Scott's looper, who helped him with the dramatic putt, Steve Williams, was on Tiger Woods' bag for all but the first of his 14 majors, as golf fans know.

Well, he's now spoken about Woods' infamous, ultimately penalized, drop on the 15th hole on Friday.

Williams says he doesn't think Woods was trying to get a competitive advantage, but that he should have been disqualified, not just penalized two shots.

"From what I can gather, he took an illegal drop, signed a scorecard and left the course," Williams told the television station. "Under most circumstances that would result in disqualification. ... If the rules of golf are upheld, I believe he should have been disqualified."

Sounds pretty simple, doesn't it?

Williams also says he doesn't like viewers phoning in about Player X knocking a leaf off a tree or whatever.

I agree. And, so do officials, and the PGA, who ameliorated that, at least, with Rule 33-7. However, that rule didn't apply to this situation.

Don't agree w/NY Post politics, but love its headers!

Rather, Tiger tattled on himself after the round, in the presser. That's why I agree with Williams that Tiger wasn't trying to gain an advantage. Nonetheless, it was clearly illegal. And, yes, he should have been DQ-ed.

But, what if there were a second phone call? Not a Joe Fan. Say, either a former player, or another currently active one. I'm betting the former. Somebody with a certain amount of game himself. Somebody appalled that nothing was being done when Woods admitted he had broke a rule.

Maybe it was Jack Nicklaus! I'm 3/4 joking, but 1/4 serious.

Or ... calling from another golf network ... Johnny Miller! That one is only 50 percent joking.

In that original post, I said somebody should interview Jack. I wasn't joking then, and I'm even less joking now.

Let's have him weigh in on viewer call-ins in general, and this issue in particular. Or let's have Sir Nick Faldo expand on the comments he made on the issue.

Or, if it was Miller, damn, let's have him say something during NBC's next golf broadcast of a tournament that has Woods in it.

It's better than having Tiger-fellating writers like Dan Wetzel continue to give him a pass.

Per ESPN, the rule is pretty damned clear. Meanwhile, if not in a major, golfers have voluntarily withdrawn from other tournaments in similar situations, as John Feinstein notes.

Meanwhile, this all shows the value of a good caddie. Other caddies wouldn't have had the same degree of skill in helping Scott line up his putt. Williams might have helped Tiger avoid a bad drop on Friday. He still might not have won, but he would have been closer, at the start of Sunday's round.

More on #TigerWoods - #SteveWilliams split

Guess we won't be seeing this any more.

Yesterday, I blogged the basics of Tiger Woods firing long-time caddie Steve Williams, who was on the bag for all but one of his 14 majors titles.

Fired him, not released him to look for other golfers while Tiger continues to rehab. That this was a stunner is clear from Williams' comments, even though he knew about it a couple of weeks ago (see further below):

"Needless to say this came as a shock," Williams said. "Given the circumstances of the past 18 months working through Tiger's scandal, a new coach and with it a major swing change and Tiger battling through injuries, I am very disappointed to end our very successful partnership at this time."

WTF? As in "fired," not let him go to work for other golfers as Tiger's rehab time lengthens.

There's been about nobody more loyal, at least on the surface, to Tiger the last 2 years. Is he trying to hit new personal lows?

That said, ESPN (above) trimmed some parts of the AP story, which says Williams knew about this two weeks ago.

Williams told The Associated Press that he met with Woods in a board room at Aronimink after the final round of the AT&T National and told him they would no longer work together. Williams said he chose to keep quiet out of respect to Scott, not wanting the Australian to face queries from the British media at Royal St. George’s.

That's class. Real class on Williams' part and "class" with snark on Woods' part.

Williams reveals more on class vs. "class":

In a telephone interview, Williams said he was not upset by being fired and said he was proud to have been fired only twice in his 33 years as a caddie—by Woods and Norman.

“But I’m disappointed in the timing of it,” he said. “To be as loyal as someone can be, and with what one had to go through over the last 18 months . . . “

Move on, Stevie. Oh, and don't be such a cameraman thug for Adam Scott. Lighten up. (I think you will.)

Williams is commenting yet more today.

"I've stuck by him through and through," Williams told 3 News. "Now he decides things aren't going well for him, and I'm down the road, so the timing's very disappointing."

He suggested that Woods would need to work hard to rebuild their friendship.

"First of all, the person has to gain your respect, and that's something that I feel Tiger has to work hard on," he added, while confirming he will choose his words carefully when he comes to tell his side of golf's most famous modern partnership.

But wait, that's not all.

Robert Lusetich has more on Williams' loyalty after the Escalade escapade, even though it was unrewarded.

At first glance, he can come off as Luca Brasi to Woods’ Don Corleone — a one–dimensional brutish enforcer — but in reality Williams, while unapologetically loyal, is a far more nuanced man. ...

While researching “Unplayable,” my 2010 book on Woods, I asked someone close to him for one word to describe what he was really like.

Complicated, came the answer.

Just how complicated is now obvious for all to see, because there was no rational reason for Woods to end the most successful golfer–caddie team in history.

Finally, Lusetich has the best answer for the "why" question I've seen yet:

But end it he did, out of nothing more substantial than hubris.

Neither Woods nor Williams is publicly talking about what prompted the split.

Woods’ statement that “it’s time for a change” is as laughably generic as the old standard, “irreconcilable differences,” offered up in Hollywood divorces.

Though it’s true that they’ve grown somewhat apart over the past 18 months — Woods relies almost entirely these days on his manager, Mark Steinberg — those close to the situation say that Williams was fired simply because he’d filled in as a caddie for Adam Scott.

Last month, Williams had flown from New Zealand to his summer home in Oregon believing he’d be joining Woods at Congressional Country Club.

But a day after he arrived came the news that the injuries to Woods’ left leg were going to keep him out of the US Open.

With Woods sidelined, and seeing that he was already in the US, it seemed innocuous enough to Williams to answer an SOS from his old friend, (Adam) Scott, who’d just parted ways with longtime caddie Tony Navarro and needed someone to step in while he looked for a permanent replacement.

But it wasn’t innocuous to Woods, who wasn’t happy to be sharing his caddie with another player.

Hubris, or jealousy? Sounds like that is the bottom line.

Williams is clearly, to use his word, “disappointed,” but he shouldn’t be.

He should’ve known there was every chance that this day would come because Woods is a control freak and Williams won’t be controlled.

One big takeaway? The Tiger Woods of the past 18 months, post-Escalade, is just as much a fake, a persona, as pre-crash Tiger.

Those of us who aren't Woodsaholics probably had some suspicion of that already but, like Williams, were giving Tiger the benefit of the doubt. That said, I'm interested in how many Woodsaholics will give up the addiction now.

That said, there's other takeaways, namely one big one.

Tiger's done for the year. He's not going to pick up a new looper on the fly and be competitive in the PGA Championship or even at Firestone. And, he'll finish outside the top 125 on the FedEx chase anyway. So, he's done for the year, as far as results, even if he plays.

And, speaking of that? Lusetich continues:

Scott gladly has hired Williams but the word is Woods wants to play at the Bridgestone Invitational in the first week of August but doesn’t yet have a caddie.

The two loopers he most respects, Billy Foster and Joe LaCava, he may not be able to get.

The happy–go–lucky Englishman Foster isn’t likely to leave Lee Westwood and doesn’t want to relocate to the United States. LaCava’s just left his longtime employer, Fred Couples, to start with Dustin Johnson, a player with tremendous upside.

And, a Tiger who could still do nothing more than putt two weeks ago wants to play at Firestone anyway? He'll get smoked. I actually hope he does play, and does worse than a year ago.

And, I hope Adam Scott wins a major, soon, with Williams on his bag.

Yahoo's Devil Ball Golf has another takeaway:

The loss of Williams could be hugely damaging on the course as well as in the court of public opinion. Williams is 13 years older than Woods, and while he didn't give off a "father figure" vibe, he certainly had it in him to guide Woods in certain directions -- on the course, at least -- while keeping more intrusive elements like the media and the galleries at bay. Whoever takes on the job of caddying Woods, and there are no serious candidates as yet, will have to be part psychologist, part bouncer, an enforcer with Zen calm.

Yeah, Williams was a photographer bruiser. And Tiger benefited from it. Let's see what his next caddy does.

Elsewhere, Rick Reilly has advice for Tiger that he'll likely never follow.

At the same time, he offers a further window yet onto Woods:

New Normal #5: Spread it around a little.

Look, everybody knows you're the cheapest guy on tour. Some people are sure your wallet is sewn shut. I know a car valet in L.A. that you've stiffed so many times, he feels like he's full of embalming fluid. The last time he saw you, he stood in front of the car door, making small talk until you made with a fiver.

A person like that ain't changing that much that easily.

Finally, could Tiger have won all 13 majors for which Williams looped using any caddy? Contra Michael Collins at ESPN, I doubt it.

I very much doubt he would have won the 2008 U.S. Open without Williams, off the top of my head. Ditto on some of his other close victories. Let's not forget that only four of his 10 majors wins since 2000 were by more than 2 shots.

In fact, in this ESPN story, Tiger admits that Williams' one club call, alone, was key to getting him into a playoff with Rocco Mediate.

Here's Hank Haney pointing out Williams as part of Tiger's success:

"He was just a great caddie, especially under pressure. Everyone is nervous when the tournament is on the line. The players are nervous, the caddies are nervous. I never sensed that Steve Williams had any choke in him at all. Do you know how many tournaments he won [as a caddie]? It was over 100 [144 total]. How many with Raymond Floyd? With Greg Norman? He's not just getting lucky all the time.''

I would be fairly surprised if Tiger wins another major; I'd be hugely surprised if he passes Nicklaus.