New topic
PrintableNDRU said: JustErin said: I'm not saying you're making it up. I'm just saying that I do not believe that these clauses really exist - other than something along the lines of "the image we wish to present" which can be interpreted in a million ways...whatever suits the company he represents. If people didn't get all in a tissy over something that really is ONLY between his wife and him those companies probably wouldn't even have blinked and the ones that are actually keeping it real aren't. Companies do not give a shit about the morals of the people they use to sell their products, just like most people don't give a shit about it when it comes to how they personally live. Companies care only about the mighty $$$$. they don't care about their morals, they care about the image of their morals ONLY if the buying public gets all bent out of shape over a particular situation...even if it's temporary...which I sure this will be. | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Vendetta1 said: Like Andrew said: that he would represent a certain image. I am really not making this up.
i believe as least two of his sponsors dropped him for violations. Yeah it's dumb but it is also dumb to sign the shit in the first place. I'm not saying you're making it up. I'm just saying that I do not believe that these clauses really exist - other than something along the lines of "the image we wish to present" which can be interpreted in a million ways...whatever suits the company he represents. If people didn't get all in a tissy over something that really is ONLY between his wife and him those companies probably wouldn't even have blinked and the ones that are actually keeping it real aren't. Companies do not give a shit about the morals of the people they use to sell their products, just like most people don't give a shit about it when it comes to how they personally live. Companies care only about the mighty $$$$. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RodeoSchro said: JustErin said: They didn't pick him to endorse their product because he was a good husband, they picked him because he is a good golfer. The fact that some people, or some companies think that some dude who simply plays a sport well MUST be kept to some higher moral standard that most people themselves can't seem attain is lame. He doesn't sell products because of his so called moral standing - you're really kidding yourself if you think he does. As I said, lame. You are incorrect, ma'am. He is still as good a golfer as he was last month, but now we know he's a pussy and an asshole. And based on that, most of the companies that hired him have dropped him. They didn't drop him because his golf game went south, did they? Yes, Tiger Woods is indeed lame. Come on now, you're just being naive. Those companies didn't drop him out of some moral concern. They dropped him because they were concerned about the effect his affair would have on their brand. It was a monetary decision. Nothing more, nothing less. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NDRU said: JustErin said: But it's one thing to protect an athlete from getting hurt and another to make a clause about being a good husband and daddy. Please, as was said already as soon as he starts playing again and wins, all the moral outrage will be forgotten by the big guns and he will be their little darling again. yes, but there is also a big difference between being a great player and being the face of a product I agree, though, tiger will win, say he's sorry, act like a good boy, and he'll be forgiven by most Yeah, and will most likely blame his unfaithfulness on "sex addiction," which is a  excuse. That is not a legitimate reason to me, I don't care what anybody says."You put water into a cup, it becomes the cup...Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend." - Bruce Lee
"Water can nourish me, but water can also carry me. Water has magic laws." - JCVD | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vendetta1 said: JustErin said: I'm not saying you're making it up. I'm just saying that I do not believe that these clauses really exist - other than something along the lines of "the image we wish to present" which can be interpreted in a million ways...whatever suits the company he represents. If people didn't get all in a tissy over something that really is ONLY between his wife and him those companies probably wouldn't even have blinked and the ones that are actually keeping it real aren't. Companies do not give a shit about the morals of the people they use to sell their products, just like most people don't give a shit about it when it comes to how they personally live. Companies care only about the mighty $$$$. And this is what I have been saying this whole time. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Vendetta1 said: Yeah I'm not a saint and don't care about who's fucking who. But, uptight America does with their hypocritical asses and it can affect sales of a product so from a business sense, they are protecting themselves. it's dumb but that's the way we do things here.
And this is what I have been saying this whole time. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violator said: RodeoSchro said: You are incorrect, ma'am. He is still as good a golfer as he was last month, but now we know he's a pussy and an asshole. And based on that, most of the companies that hired him have dropped him. They didn't drop him because his golf game went south, did they? Yes, Tiger Woods is indeed lame. Come on now, you're just being naive. Those companies didn't drop him out of some moral concern. They dropped him because they were concerned about the effect his affair would have on their brand. It was a monetary decision. Nothing more, nothing less. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: NDRU said: I don't think anyone's face sells me Wheaties, personally. But if you had a product, would you put the best _____ who happened to be a self-acknowledged racist on your cereal box, or would you pick the second best who at least appeared to be a nice family guy? It's not a choice of best golfer vs. nice guy, it's a choice between best golfer/bad guy vs. another awesome athlete/good guy. [Edited 2/17/10 17:43pm] Of course I would pick the nice guy, but I also wouldn't expect the nice dude to live up to some higher standard that most of us can't even uphold. It's one thing to pick a nice guy, it's another to expect the dude to be a fucking saint. There is a lot of room for some acceptable sinning between being a saint & what Tiger did.
Look, part of endorsing products is about your image. It's show biz, not sports. Tiger's image was seriously tarnished. Like Mike Tyson, nobody denies he was a great boxer, but he just looks like a fucking nutjob after biting a man's ear off! Nobody is going to say Mike Tyson loves our product! And I can't say I wouldn't fuck a bunch of chicks or bite a man who punched me either, but it's obvious that advertising is not expecting to be showing humans acting human, it's about showing ridiculously unrealistic role models My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vendetta1 said: JustErin said: And this is what I have been saying this whole time.
I'm all stuffed up and running a fever myself, and I'm probably cranky too....I should probably just log off and get some sleep. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NDRU said: JustErin said: Of course I would pick the nice guy, but I also wouldn't expect the nice dude to live up to some higher standard that most of us can't even uphold. It's one thing to pick a nice guy, it's another to expect the dude to be a fucking saint. There is a lot of room for some acceptable sinning between being a saint & what Tiger did.
Look, part of endorsing products is about your image. It's show biz, not sports. Tiger's image was seriously tarnished. Like Mike Tyson, nobody denies he was a great boxer, but he just looks like a fucking nutjob after biting a man's ear off! Nobody is going to say Mike Tyson loves our product! And I can't say I wouldn't fuck a bunch of chicks or bite a man who punched me either, but it's obvious that advertising is not expecting to be showing humans acting human, it's about showing ridiculously unrealistic role models Again, that's what I've been saying this whole time. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: Vendetta1 said: i'm exhausted and once i read what you said I saw I had just posted what you've been saying.
I'm all stuffed up and running a fever myself, and I'm probably cranky too....I should probably just log off and get some sleep. no, I'm telling you you're wrong!!   My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: NDRU said: There is a lot of room for some acceptable sinning between being a saint & what Tiger did.
Look, part of endorsing products is about your image. It's show biz, not sports. Tiger's image was seriously tarnished. Like Mike Tyson, nobody denies he was a great boxer, but he just looks like a fucking nutjob after biting a man's ear off! Nobody is going to say Mike Tyson loves our product! And I can't say I wouldn't fuck a bunch of chicks or bite a man who punched me either, but it's obvious that advertising is not expecting to be showing humans acting human, it's about showing ridiculously unrealistic role models Again, that's what I've been saying this whole time. right and I think it's stupid, because I don't care what razor they use, but it's the way it is and to get the big $ you have to act like you're a saint My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
NDRU said: JustErin said:
I'm all stuffed up and running a fever myself, and I'm probably cranky too....I should probably just log off and get some sleep. no, I'm telling you you're wrong!! You can continue to tell me I'm wrong even when I'm gone! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: NDRU said: no, I'm telling you you're wrong!! You can continue to tell me I'm wrong even when I'm gone! I'll be muttering it as I try to sleep My Legacy
http://prince.org/msg/8/192731 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: NDRU said:
There is a lot of room for some acceptable sinning between being a saint & what Tiger did.
Look, part of endorsing products is about your image. It's show biz, not sports. Tiger's image was seriously tarnished. Like Mike Tyson, nobody denies he was a great boxer, but he just looks like a fucking nutjob after biting a man's ear off! Nobody is going to say Mike Tyson loves our product! And I can't say I wouldn't fuck a bunch of chicks or bite a man who punched me either, but it's obvious that advertising is not expecting to be showing humans acting human, it's about showing ridiculously unrealistic role models Again, that's what I've been saying this whole time. Frankly, this whole role model bullshit is what gets me. The best ad I ever saw from a sports celebrity was Charles Barkley's Nike ad from the 1990's where he proclaimed "I am not a role model. Parents should be role models." And the other thing that bugs me is the fact that our American mainstream media would rather report non-stop on Tiger Woods' infidelities instead of reporting real news. This is classic example of trying to have it both ways by saying that cheating is bad yet giving an open forum for all of these hoes to talk in detail about their sexual flings. Half of the issues we have in the USA wouldn't even be an issue if people were allowed to be honest about their sexuality instead of shrouding sex in some mysterious abstraction or putting it on a pedestal just for the purpose of pleasing right wing Christian groups and angry feminists. Can't we all just acknowledge that we love sex, we love pussy (or dick), and we want to make each other cum like a raging volcano and enjoy the blissful moment after climax? Then we can focus on more important stuff that's relevant to our lives.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
728huey said: JustErin said: You could so get it. NDRU said:
Again, that's what I've been saying this whole time. Frankly, this whole role model bullshit is what gets me. The best ad I ever saw from a sports celebrity was Charles Barkley's Nike ad from the 1990's where he proclaimed "I am not a role model. Parents should be role models." And the other thing that bugs me is the fact that our American mainstream media would rather report non-stop on Tiger Woods' infidelities instead of reporting real news. This is classic example of trying to have it both ways by saying that cheating is bad yet giving an open forum for all of these hoes to talk in detail about their sexual flings. Half of the issues we have in the USA wouldn't even be an issue if people were allowed to be honest about their sexuality instead of shrouding sex in some mysterious abstraction or putting it on a pedestal just for the purpose of pleasing right wing Christian groups and angry feminists. Can't we all just acknowledge that we love sex, we love pussy (or dick), and we want to make each other cum like a raging volcano and enjoy the blissful moment after climax? Then we can focus on more important stuff that's relevant to our lives.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I know a whole lot of men who don't have Woods notoriety nor his wealth and their pics could easily be used for the definition of a 360° ho'. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: RodeoSchro said: You are incorrect, ma'am. He is still as good a golfer as he was last month, but now we know he's a pussy and an asshole. And based on that, most of the companies that hired him have dropped him. They didn't drop him because his golf game went south, did they? Yes, Tiger Woods is indeed lame. The dude is lame for sure, but even more lame are the finger waggers that are holding this dude to a higher standard simply because he golfs well. That's what is so fucked up about North American culture. Practice what I preach not as I do. It's a culture of fuck it, it doesn't matter unless I'm caught....but until then, I'm gonna just point my finger at everyone else. You are missing my point. He is NOT held to a higher standard because he's a great golfer. He's held to that standard because HE created it as part of his advertising persona. But on a personal level, I couldn't care less if he's a great golfer or a hack. He is an adulterer, and that makes him a piece of crap in my book. And if you think I'm being hypocritical, then you're just off base. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
hi im the tiger n im richer than any of u bozos .. ya i nut like a madman so what its all a ploy to drum up a twisted sense of sympathy for me so i can get richer off it. watch me hit this hole in one ha ha oh im sick im sick can i get a gazzillion dollrs n go to a 5 star for rehab n get served lobster. Gee hows my ferarri i havnt slept in it for awhile .. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Fauxie said: GOAT.
I just want to see him back playing again. As of today, he's not the GOAT (Greatest Of All Time). He's behind Nicklaus for sure, and in my mind, Bobby Jones, too. Maybe one day he'll be the GOAT but for now, he's just a goat. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RodeoSchro said: JustErin said: The dude is lame for sure, but even more lame are the finger waggers that are holding this dude to a higher standard simply because he golfs well. That's what is so fucked up about North American culture. Practice what I preach not as I do. It's a culture of fuck it, it doesn't matter unless I'm caught....but until then, I'm gonna just point my finger at everyone else. You are missing my point. He is NOT held to a higher standard because he's a great golfer. He's held to that standard because HE created it as part of his advertising persona. But on a personal level, I couldn't care less if he's a great golfer or a hack. He is an adulterer, and that makes him a piece of crap in my book. And if you think I'm being hypocritical, then you're just off base. I'm not missing your point, I'm just not agreeing with it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
violator said: RodeoSchro said: You are incorrect, ma'am. He is still as good a golfer as he was last month, but now we know he's a pussy and an asshole. And based on that, most of the companies that hired him have dropped him. They didn't drop him because his golf game went south, did they? Yes, Tiger Woods is indeed lame. Come on now, you're just being naive. Those companies didn't drop him out of some moral concern. They dropped him because they were concerned about the effect his affair would have on their brand. It was a monetary decision. Nothing more, nothing less. They absolutely dropped him over a moral concern. That's EXACTLY what an affair is - a moral concern. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RodeoSchro said: Fauxie said: GOAT.
I just want to see him back playing again. As of today, he's not the GOAT (Greatest Of All Time). He's behind Nicklaus for sure, and in my mind, Bobby Jones, too. Maybe one day he'll be the GOAT but for now, he's just a goat. Yup, a goat...a scapegoat. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: RodeoSchro said: You are missing my point. He is NOT held to a higher standard because he's a great golfer. He's held to that standard because HE created it as part of his advertising persona. But on a personal level, I couldn't care less if he's a great golfer or a hack. He is an adulterer, and that makes him a piece of crap in my book. And if you think I'm being hypocritical, then you're just off base. I'm not missing your point, I'm just not agreeing with it. OK. Hope you feel better. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
JustErin said: RodeoSchro said: As of today, he's not the GOAT (Greatest Of All Time). He's behind Nicklaus for sure, and in my mind, Bobby Jones, too. Maybe one day he'll be the GOAT but for now, he's just a goat. Yup, a goat...a scapegoat. LMAO, a scapegoat - for who? Well, at least you haven't blamed his wife in this, like some misguided people have done. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RodeoSchro said: JustErin said: I'm not missing your point, I'm just not agreeing with it. OK. Hope you feel better. Thanks. I really should be resting. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
hi im tigers wife and i had nooo clue whatsoever about anything,ever .. really .. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Vendetta1 said: thejason said: I just hope he comes out and owns the shit without fucking excuses... Exactly. I am Tiger Woods and I am a ho. and tell everyone to fuck off To make a thief, make an owner; to create crime, create laws. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RodeoSchro said: violator said: Come on now, you're just being naive. Those companies didn't drop him out of some moral concern. They dropped him because they were concerned about the effect his affair would have on their brand. It was a monetary decision. Nothing more, nothing less. They absolutely dropped him over a moral concern. That's EXACTLY what an affair is - a moral concern. A moral concern is what his wife had when she found out. A financial concern is what his sponsors had when they found out. You're confusing the two. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Cuddles said: Vendetta1 said: Exactly. I am Tiger Woods and I am a ho.
and tell everyone to fuck off | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |