Fairway Feherty Tells All

Golf's best-loved broadcaster, David Feherty, has long been hailed as the funniest man in the sport. He'd be the first to tell you that's damning with faint praise.

Since retiring from the game in 1997 after a successful pro career that included five European Tour wins and a spot on Europe's 1991 Ryder Cup team, Feherty, 47, has made televised golf seem more like a frat party -- OK, a lively cocktail party -- since joining "CBS Sports" as an on-course commentator.

The author of four books, this Northern Ireland native also wields a sharp pencil as the longtime back-page columnist for Golf Magazine. TheStreet.com caught up with the links legend for some insight into the game today.

TheStreet.com: Does Phil Mickelson's recent Masters win -- his third major title and second in succession -- finally make him a legitimate threat to end Tiger Woods' dominance?

David Feherty: It's really up to Tiger. If you noticed the look on his face when he put the green jacket on Phil, it was, "Don't get used to this." The gap is still huge in the world rankings. I'd like to see a rivalry, but Tiger played like a rat at the Masters, and he was still in second place with two holes to play. Nobody else who was in the top 10 played badly that week, but he did.

Has Mickelson at least separated himself from the so-called Big Five to become the clear No. 2?

In terms of being a crowd draw, absolutely, although he's been that way for awhile. But in terms of separating himself from Ernie Els, Retief Goosen and Vijay Singh, I'm not sure.

When Tiger plays well, he wins. If he plays very well, he wins by 10. That's never happened before. When [Jack] Nicklaus played well, there were still several other people who could win.

What's Mickelson's appeal? Tiger gets criticized for canned answers, but Mickelson doesn't always come across as especially sincere or spontaneous.

I think it's that he's flawed. He has a beautiful crack -- that didn't come out well, let me rephrase -- there's an obvious flaw in Phil that people can relate to because, hell, they can screw up like that, too. That's the similarity with Tiger. The people who love to see Tiger win also love to see him lose, because it reminds them every now and then that he is actually human. He does so many superhuman things, that it's almost a relief, even to his fans, to see him not do so well.

Phil is more so -- he reminds us more often. Why is he hitting a driver out of the rough?! Dear God, Ethel, somebody dart him with a blowpipe! He makes the occasional lunatic decision that makes people identify with him.

Has pro golf done enough to keep medium-length hitters competitive? Should they? Hasn't length always been valuable?

Exactly -- it's always been valuable. Nicklaus blew people away in his prime -- he hit it 20 to 30 yards past people. That's what some guys are doing now, just in relation to more distance.

Golf courses are so much harder now than they were, [but] the difficulty of golf courses has kept up with technology. Shorter hitters have always whined. The Tour just played Harbour Town a couple of weeks ago; it's only 6,900 yards, but a fabulous test of golf. There is still room for a medium-length hitter out there. You can do other things well.

« Previous Page

1 2

Next Page »