BEING POLITICALLY (IN)CORRECT

Am I insensitive by saying that Woods should have been "Player of the Year" instead of Padraig Harrington? Am I being politically incorrect? This coming from someone who has defended Jack Nicklaus as the best golfer ever, (now, I am not so sure).

Am I insensitive to think that in their December 6-13 issue, Golfweek should have published a photo of Stacy Lewis or Harrison Frazar on the front cover instead of one of Michelle Wie? Or how about the pictures inside concerning the LPGA Q-School results? Here is what I base my insensitivity and political incorrectness on:

Concerning Tiger Woods vs Padraig Harrington in 2008: Winning Percentage: Tiger played in seven (7) tournaments and won 5 (U.S. Open, Buick, Match Play, Bay Hill, Dubai) of them, finished 2nd (Masters) and 5th (World Championships) in the other two. Padraig played in fifteen (15) events; won two (yes, majors), missed the cut three times and in the ones that he made the cut in, he finished as low as 55th. Tiger's average finish was "1.7"th, Padraig's average finish (in the ones he made the cut) was "15.5"th. Padraig's average finish in his best 7 tournaments was "4.4"th. Against Each Other: Tiger finished 1st (U.S. Open), 1st (Match Play) and 2nd (Masters) in the tournaments that they both competed in. Padraig finished 36th, 17th and 5th in the same events. In other words, Padraig lost to Tiger all three times they competed against each other. Stats: Putts per GIR (Tiger-1.735/Padraig-1.742); Par Breakers (T-1st/P-8th); Scoring (T-67.65/P-69.28); GIR (T-80%/P-51.7); the only meaningful stat that Padraig won over Tiger was putts per round: 28.04 vs 28.65, but you must take in consideration the difference in GIR, thus, in this stat, Padraig had many opportunities to lower the stat by chipping close on the greens he missed. Money: Padraig $4.3M; Tiger $6.9M. Can someone explain the "rule" or logic that they used to come up with this?

In Padraig's favor: he played and made the cut in all 4 majors, and won two. That Tiger did not participate, is nothing that Padraig could control, so he beat everyone else, and played wonderful golf down the stretch in his two wins. "Tiger Like". It's been said that the Tour was trying to be "politically correct" by saying, "Tiger has won many and probably will win more, let's allow someone else to have it this year. It would look bad if Tiger wins all awards" But, even Tiger voted for Padraig, so, in this case, if it is good for Tiger, even if I do not understand it, it is good for me. Congratulations Padraig!

Now, are they planning to give Tiger the Ben Hogan Award next year for "Best Come Back After Injury"?

Now, concerning Michelle Wie, Stacy Lewis and Harrison Frazar. I like reading magazines and usually, most are pretty fair in their reporting. Usually, I don't mind when the front cover might not be the one of the best week's player. However, Golfweek, in their December 6-13 issue, which reported the best players coming up in 2009 via Q-Schools in both tours, chose Michelle Wie for their front cover instead of Harrison Frazar and Stacey Lewis. Here are the facts: Michelle finished 7th in Q-School and Stacey finished 1st, 6 shots ahead of her. Harrison Frazar finished 8 shots ahead of 2nd place and shot a record low 59 in the fourth round (the event is played over six rounds). Granted, he has played 300 PGA Tour events, and has never won, but he earned his way there and to my knowledge, never had an invitation for his looks. In more ways than one, he just won his first!

Even more unfair, the inside headline for the LPGA Q-School reads: "I really earned it" referring to Michelle Wie, who despite only winning one tournament (2004) as an amateur, has been invited to many LPGA and PGA events, even in 2008, ahead of Stacy Lewis. There is a full page photo of Michelle alone and a 1/6th page (at best) of Stacy and caddy! Here are some facts: before turning professional, Stacy won several events, including the 2007 LPGA stop in Arkansas and the 2007 NCAA Championship, she also had a 5-0 record in the Curtis Cup, part of the reasons that she became the top ranked woman amateur until she turned pro. I encourage you to read her courageous story by clicking the link in "Alex's Favorites". You will realize that you are not just looking at another pretty face on the LPGA, but that you are looking at a role model of the highest quality, a young woman who overcame many obstacles, including the doubt that she could ever play golf again,let alone compete at this level. A remarkable story. On the other hand, truly, what has Michelle done? Get $10M from Nike and hit a few 300 yard drives? Michelle is good, but Stacy outdid her and deserves much, much better.

Give credit to where credit is deserved. Give Tiger "Player of the Year"; give Stacy her due and a great front cover picture (if she was a man, she would had already won the "Ben Hogan Award"). At least they did publish a full page photo of Harrison in the inside. I want to end by recognizing that Michelle Wie has tremendous potential and could end up beating Stacy or being ranked higher in the future, but now is now, and I'd like to see a full page photo of her. Harrison will have to work hard to come on top on the PGA Tour, but he had his week. Padraig Harrington had a year that everyone else, except Tiger, would have liked to have. Given the facts above, I don't understand the logic of some people! Sorry. I don't get it!