I don't get it. She didn't want her caddie to read her putts. Now she just doesn't want her caddie? I am not looking foward to when my little girl becomes a teenager!
mr,
She's made about 18 million so far. The 10 million was only for initial contracts.
By the way on your timetable of 3 or 4 years for becoming a pga tour regular, even the sponsors wouldn't expect that.
She actually intends to start trying for q-school when she is about 20 or so.
If she is doing okay in pga events at that stage, and okay means either making 70% of cuts OR, making 40+% of cuts and getting some placings in the top 30 or 40, then that would be huge in terms of a story and in terms of continued endorsements.
Agreed, it would be, but I think there are some things working against her, specifically in terms of the PGA. There already has been some mainstream media backlash against the continued sponsor's exemptions, as has there been some grumbling from players. There has also been plenty of support, on Tour namely (Joe) Ogilvy (not the U.S. Open champ, the American who's friends with Warren Buffet). Of course this has all been discussed ad nauseum, but I think eventually the spigot may be turned off if she doesn't make one. In terms of Nike and Sony, they are paying her for the novelty of her talent at this point - a 16 year old trying to win on the LPGA Tour, trying to make a cut on the PGA Tour. That same novelty won't exist in 4 or 5 years.
I would also assume that most of the additional $8 million is from appearance fees.
Nobody will ever begrudge her the chance of trying to qualify for the PGA Tour, but there are already more and more voices, mainstream voices in the world of golf, not just idiots like me on GolfRewind, that are starting to say she should really be focusing on the LPGA at this time.
When you look at the LPGA, there is no novelty in an 18 year old winning multiple times. Paula Creamer has done that. I'm guessing the youngest to win a major on the LPGA is... 23, 24, something like that? Maybe younger? Point being, in order for her even to remain a novelty in terms of women's golf, much less men's, she has only a few years to start doing things that nobody else has done, because once she turns 18, people have already done it.
It all remains to be seen, but I think her getting endorsements such as the SONY/Nike deals and her getting large appearance fees will be less likely in her early 20's if she hasn't done something to transcend the sport in some way by that time. She's transcending it now because she's doing all of these things at 16, but she won't be 16 forever.
Gee you'd think that this was the 1st time anyone dumped a caddie. Picking apart the way it was done... who did the deed. Geez... does anyone know these details surrounding the sacking of anyone elses caddie ? Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill. I thought the guy should've been dumped for not trying to talk her out of the wedge from that very tight lie behind 18 on Sunday of The LPGA Championship.
The fact that the sacking was handled poorly isn't a reflection her, but on her father. Of course nobody expects a 16 year old to fire a grown man, but daddy could've stepped up to the plate. Send an agent to the gate when the guy's flying home and have a PR firm issue a release? C'mon, seriously... BJ should at least have the decency to call the guy, don't you think? That's just courtesy.
But why on earth should he get canned for her playing that wedge? That makes no sense, unless you were just speaking in jest.
I was thinking that if he had a contract there might be legal ramifications...my point was if you get fired, do you really feel better if it was done "right"?...what 16 year old male or female can sit down with a grown man and look and look him in the eye and tell him straight? I don't think that the situation was handled properly, all should have sat down together, but c'mon...a kid isn't allowed to operate a meat slicer in a deli or work overtime until they are 18, conducting a business meeting where you fire someone who is presumably close to you is a bit much to ask!
Of course, I was thinking pappy should have done it. I should have been more clear. A phone call is the least BJ could have done.
why was the other MW thread closed..... I seen nothing wrong in there at all except more rodney c garbage. This is a forum for opinions and as long as they don't break the rules they should be allowed forever.
why was the other MW thread closed..... I seen nothing wrong in there at all except more rodney c garbage. This is a forum for opinions and as long as they don't break the rules they should be allowed forever.
Rodney was being sarcastic in that thread, as was I in my response to him.
Agreed, it would be, but I think there are some things working against her, specifically in terms of the PGA. There already has been some mainstream media backlash against the continued sponsor's exemptions, as has there been some grumbling from players.
There has also been plenty of support, on Tour namely (Joe) Ogilvy (not the U.S. Open champ, the American who's friends with Warren Buffet).
I'm unsure as to how it will play out.
My own personal preference would be for her to take a break from the pga tour, with the exception of the Sony Open which is her home event.
She has her events against men on the Japanese, Korean and European Tours. That is enough for her to get used to mens courses.
I understand that she wants experience at the top level, but I think she has had a taste and should improve her game, then try again, and improve her game some more and try again.
I'm all for her playing on the pga tour, but I think it is counterproductive for her to play too many pga events too close together, because she will have little opportunity for growth as a player in between.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr3856a
I would also assume that most of the additional $8 million is from appearance fees.
She's made 700k plus in prize money. 1.5 from Casio. Not sure about SK Telecom, I think it was 700k.
So that's what another 6 millions in endorsements.
In any case maybe the 18 million figure was just plucked out of thin air by some journalist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr3856a
When you look at the LPGA, there is no novelty in an 18 year old winning multiple times. Paula Creamer has done that.
You are right there. Majors are the key, cause Creamer hasn't even been in contention on the back 9 in a major.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr3856a
I'm guessing the youngest to win a major on the LPGA is... 23, 24, something like that? Maybe younger?
I heard this one. I think it's 20 that was the youngest to win an lpga major.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr3856a
Point being, in order for her even to remain a novelty in terms of women's golf, much less men's, she has only a few years to start doing things that nobody else has done, because once she turns 18, people have already done it.
Agreed in terms of womens golf. People like Se Ri Pak had exceptional rookie years, including, I think, winning a major.
As regards men, maybe to challenge on the Asian Tour for a title. She was 17th or so after 2 rounds of SK Telecom, challenging for a title there would send the hype machine into overdrive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr3856a
It all remains to be seen, but I think her getting endorsements such as the SONY/Nike deals and her getting large appearance fees will be less likely in her early 20's if she hasn't done something to transcend the sport in some way by that time. She's transcending it now because she's doing all of these things at 16, but she won't be 16 forever.
All agreed, the older she gets, the more she needs to do, if she is to keep getting such high endorsements and appearance fees.
I heard this one. I think it's 20 that was the youngest to win an lpga major.
Agreed in terms of womens golf. People like Se Ri Pak had exceptional rookie years, including, I think, winning a major.
As regards men, maybe to challenge on the Asian Tour for a title. She was 17th or so after 2 rounds of SK Telecom, challenging for a title there would send the hype machine into overdrive.
All agreed, the older she gets, the more she needs to do, if she is to keep getting such high endorsements and appearance fees.
Yeah, I thought it was 20 for the LPGA Major. I mean, just for the sake of argument, say she doesn't win an LPGA title before her 19th birthday and doesn't win an LPGA major before her 21st? That's part of the reason I don't like the position her father has put her in, although I can understand all 18 million reasons why he did it.
It ain't my life, but I think he's put an awful lot of unnecessary pressure on a very young girl. Imagine her career being called a disappointment at the age of 21?
The ultimate indication of B.J. Wie's interest in his daughter's golf career was this, from Golf World, July 21, 2006:
"As a matter of fact, some of the criticisms of Michelle's playing on the PGA Tour are very logically thought out. However, they do not fully understand the capitalistic market mechanism. Did you see the large galleries following Michelle yesterday despite her first-round score of 77?"
Hey B.J., do you fully understand that being a parent doesn't include exploiting your child for money?
August 9th, 2006, 01:51 PM
That makes no sense, unless you were just speaking in jest.
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
