heard a rumor from the only "connected" guy i know in relation to the pga tour. he said he hear wind that when phil mickelson changed over to callaway all of sudden a while back that the reason was callaway offered to cover his enormous debt in vegas. we all know phil is a gambler with his money and his game. anybody else hear this from a reputable source?
I think there was word of a "tell all" article regarding this that was supposed to be come out but never surfaced. Phil switched to Callaway right before the Ryder Cup a couple of years ago and all there have been since then are "rumors."
Until we see anything concrete, I would take it as just that.
Just prior to the 2004 Ryder Cup, Mickelson was dropped from his long standing contract with Titleist/Acushnet Golf when he took heat for a voicemail message he left for a Callaway Golf executive. In it, he praised their driver and golf ball and thanked them for their help in getting some equipment for his brother. This memo was played to all of their salesmen and eventually found its way back to Titleist. He was then let out of his multi-year deal with Titleist 16 months early and signed on with Callaway golf, his equipment sponsor to this day. He endured a great deal of ridicule and scrutiny from the press and fellow Ryder Cup members for his equipment change so close to the crucial Ryder Cup matches. He faltered horribly at the 2004 Ryder Cup going 1-3-0, but refused to blame the sudden change in equipment or his practice methods on his performance. (Mickelson, Callaway Sign Endorsement Deal article)
Actually that is not a rumor but rather a published story from just before the Open Championship last summer.
Both the Washington Post and the Daily Telegraph (London) reported that Callaway picked up Phil's gambling debt - just as they did for John Daly.
The latter was for $1.7MM, not sure what the amount was for Lefty.
Do you happen to have a link to either of those articles?
Quote:
Originally Posted by notohp2002
Not true, Daly the golfer is a gambler....but not our Phil is he?
I've heard Phil likes to gamble. I hear a lot of stories about how he likes to make "small" wagers amongst other players. Like others, I've heard rumors about Phil's debts in Vegas but I haven't seen any substantial proof that would make me believe it were anything more than a rumor.
Do you happen to have a link to either of those articles?
I could only find the the abstract for the Washington Post piece - the substance of which was Callaway paid off Phil's gambling debt - but when I clicked through to read it I got message "this article is no longer available".
The Daily Telegraph article is a piece about Phil which contains one paragraph whereby they reference the WP article, i.e., 'an article in the WP revealed Callaway....'.
I don't believe that entirely. Titleist wouldn't drop him just for leaving a nice VM to Callaway. There had to be other problems. If Tiger left a message to a Mizuno executive (for getting clubs for his wife, maybe?), do you think Nike would can him??
I don't believe that entirely. Titleist wouldn't drop him just for leaving a nice VM to Callaway. There had to be other problems. If Tiger left a message to a Mizuno executive (for getting clubs for his wife, maybe?), do you think Nike would can him??
In the end, it probably has to do with money. Callaway probably has more to spend on Tour player sponsorships than Titleist does. Didn't Ernie Els just leave Titleist for Callaway?
In the end, it probably has to do with money. Callaway probably has more to spend on Tour player sponsorships than Titleist does. Didn't Ernie Els just leave Titleist for Callaway?
Ok, that article makes sense. It mentions that he asked for more money.
When this "rumor" broke, Sports Illustrated was going to do a big article about the situation.
Ford Motors said if they went through with the article, they would never advertise in thier magazine again.
I got this from a very reliable source.
When this "rumor" broke, Sports Illustrated was going to do a big article about the situation.
Ford Motors said if they went through with the article, they would never advertise in thier magazine again.
I got this from a very reliable source.
gotta love the politics. i like phil i was just curious. its really non of anyones business anyway just wanted to see if what i heard was true.
April 12th, 2007, 01:22 AM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
