| |
Main
Date: 14 Mar 2007 17:19:47
From: multi
Subject: Phil defends Tiger
|
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/golf/2070AP_GLF_Tigers_Tournament.html
"All of the conflicting events cannot support themselves financially,
and all of the excess revenue from the tour goes to support those
tournaments, and most of that money is driven by Tiger," Mickelson
said. "So if you're looking at 450 spots that Tiger is creating, and
if he wants to take 20 away because he wants to have a prestigious
event, I think we should not, as players, be narrow-minded."
|
|
| |
Date: 19 Mar 2007 10:08:06
From: Mister Hand
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On 18, 8:29 am, High_Colo...@webtv.net (Miss Anne Thrope) wrote:
>
> I laughed so friggin hard when I read that douche nozzle's quote, that I
> popped a blood vessel in my eye.
Yay!
|
| |
Date: 18 Mar 2007 19:56:40
From: Tighthead
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On 16, 5:46 pm, "BigPurdueFan" <bigpu...@aol.com > wrote:
> On 16, 11:25 am, "Tighthead" <tighth...@lawyer.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 16, 3:59 am, David <dgold1...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
> > > On 15 2007 13:30:06 -0700, "Tighthead" <tighth...@lawyer.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > >On 14, 11:47 pm, "annika1980" <annika1...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > >> On 15, 1:02 am, "Manco" <manco_doll...@net2blah.com> wrote:
>
> > > >> > That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
>
> > > >> No, Vijay is still officially Tiger's Bitch.
> > > >> Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
>
> > > >I'd say the 2004 Masters suggests that Phil is no longer in that
> > > >role.
>
> > > I would say that until Mickelson beats Woods on a Sunday in the
> > > final group that the status quo has not changed. In 2004, Woods was
> > > never a threat, finishing tied for 22nd.
>
> > > David
>
> > So Mickelson has to beat Woods in the final group on a Sunday to stop
> > being Ernie's bitch? 31 on the back nine at a Sunday at Augusta
> > doesn't count I guess.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Not in this respect, no. It only took away the GPTNWAM tag.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I would say that going on a birdie binge to take away Ernie's best
shot a great jacket means that Phil is not Ernie's bitch. Apparently,
I am alone in this opinion and likely crazy.
|
| |
Date: 18 Mar 2007 08:29:36
From: Miss Anne Thrope
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
"I think we should not, as players, be narrow-minded."
Yep, it looks just as silly when I write it, as it does when I say it
out loud.
I laughed so friggin hard when I read that douche nozzle's quote, that I
popped a blood vessel in my eye.
|
| |
Date: 16 Mar 2007 17:46:48
From: BigPurdueFan
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On 16, 11:25 am, "Tighthead" <tighth...@lawyer.com > wrote:
> On 16, 3:59 am, David <dgold1...@yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 15 2007 13:30:06 -0700, "Tighthead" <tighth...@lawyer.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >On 14, 11:47 pm, "annika1980" <annika1...@aol.com> wrote:
> > >> On 15, 1:02 am, "Manco" <manco_doll...@net2blah.com> wrote:
>
> > >> > That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
>
> > >> No, Vijay is still officially Tiger's Bitch.
> > >> Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
>
> > >I'd say the 2004 Masters suggests that Phil is no longer in that
> > >role.
>
> > I would say that until Mickelson beats Woods on a Sunday in the
> > final group that the status quo has not changed. In 2004, Woods was
> > never a threat, finishing tied for 22nd.
>
> > David
>
> So Mickelson has to beat Woods in the final group on a Sunday to stop
> being Ernie's bitch? 31 on the back nine at a Sunday at Augusta
> doesn't count I guess.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Not in this respect, no. It only took away the GPTNWAM tag.
|
| |
Date: 16 Mar 2007 08:25:00
From: Tighthead
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On 16, 3:59 am, David <dgold1...@yahoo.de > wrote:
> On 15 2007 13:30:06 -0700, "Tighthead" <tighth...@lawyer.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On 14, 11:47 pm, "annika1980" <annika1...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On 15, 1:02 am, "Manco" <manco_doll...@net2blah.com> wrote:
>
> >> > That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
>
> >> No, Vijay is still officially Tiger's Bitch.
> >> Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
>
> >I'd say the 2004 Masters suggests that Phil is no longer in that
> >role.
>
> I would say that until Mickelson beats Woods on a Sunday in the
> final group that the status quo has not changed. In 2004, Woods was
> never a threat, finishing tied for 22nd.
>
> David
So Mickelson has to beat Woods in the final group on a Sunday to stop
being Ernie's bitch? 31 on the back nine at a Sunday at Augusta
doesn't count I guess.
|
| |
Date: 15 Mar 2007 13:30:06
From: Tighthead
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On 14, 11:47 pm, "annika1980" <annika1...@aol.com > wrote:
> On 15, 1:02 am, "Manco" <manco_doll...@net2blah.com> wrote:
>
> > That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
>
> No, Vijay is still officially Tiger's Bitch.
> Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
I'd say the 2004 Masters suggests that Phil is no longer in that
role.
|
| | |
Date: 16 Mar 2007 11:59:41
From: David
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On 15 2007 13:30:06 -0700, "Tighthead" <tighthead@lawyer.com >
wrote:
>On 14, 11:47 pm, "annika1980" <annika1...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On 15, 1:02 am, "Manco" <manco_doll...@net2blah.com> wrote:
>>
>> > That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
>>
>> No, Vijay is still officially Tiger's Bitch.
>> Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
>
>I'd say the 2004 Masters suggests that Phil is no longer in that
>role.
I would say that until Mickelson beats Woods on a Sunday in the
final group that the status quo has not changed. In 2004, Woods was
never a threat, finishing tied for 22nd.
David
|
| | | |
Date: 16 Mar 2007 08:11:34
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On Fri, 16 2007 11:59:41 +0100, David <dgold1958@yahoo.de > wrote:
>>> Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
>>
>>I'd say the 2004 Masters suggests that Phil is no longer in that
>>role.
>
> I would say that until Mickelson beats Woods on a Sunday in the
>final group that the status quo has not changed. In 2004, Woods was
>never a threat, finishing tied for 22nd.
Woods does not effect the above role.
|
| |
Date: 14 Mar 2007 23:47:52
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
On 15, 1:02 am, "Manco" <manco_doll...@net2blah.com > wrote:
> That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
No, Vijay is still officially Tiger's Bitch.
Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
|
| | |
Date: 15 Mar 2007 09:51:37
From: the Moderator
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1173941272.834618.155100@e65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> On 15, 1:02 am, "Manco" <manco_doll...@net2blah.com> wrote:
>
> > That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
>
> No, Vijay is still officially Tiger's Bitch.
> Phil is still Ernie's Bitch.
They are all Tiger's bitches.
|
| |
Date: 15 Mar 2007 05:02:05
From: Manco
Subject: Re: Phil defends Tiger
|
multi wrote:
> http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/golf/2070AP_GLF_Tigers_Tournament.html
> "All of the conflicting events cannot support themselves financially,
> and all of the excess revenue from the tour goes to support those
> tournaments, and most of that money is driven by Tiger," Mickelson
> said. "So if you're looking at 450 spots that Tiger is creating, and
> if he wants to take 20 away because he wants to have a prestigious
> event, I think we should not, as players, be narrow-minded."
That's it! Phil is officially Tiger's bitch.
|
|
