Welcome to Teeing Off, where Devil Ball editor Jay Busbee and head writer Shane Bacon take a day’s topic and smack it all over the course. Suggest a future topic by writing jay.busbee@yahoo.com, or hit us on Twitter at @jaybusbee and @shanebacon. Today: new reports continue to show how negatively the public views Tiger Woods. Our question: does that really matter?

Busbee: So there’s a report out this week that Tiger’s Q scores–the statistical measure of his popularity–continue to remain in the range of Michael Vick and Ben Roethlisberger, both of whom were either accused or convicted of far worse "transgressions" than Woods ever committed. Fully 50 percent of all respondents to the survey had a negative impression of Woods. Big softball here for you, Mr. Bacon: what’s it going to take for Tiger to get a more favorable Q rating?

Bacon: WIN GOLF TOURNAMENTS!!!! Seriously though, Tiger has to be Tiger soon, or his stock will continue to fall. Think of Tiger as Blockbuster. A company with a strong hold on the movie renting business years ago, technology (and in this analogy, youth and international players) turned the once strong company into an afterthought in our ways of watching entertainment. Now, Blockbuster is selling whatever they can in their stores to try and turn a profit, just like Tiger is doing whatever he can to his swing to be successful. If Tiger can win again, and win a big tournament (I think one is in Augusta in the next month or so), it’ll change all of this. Kobe Bryant won a championship, and his image turned. Ben Roethlisberger made a Super Bowl, and people rooted for him again. When Tiger is in contention at the Masters again, life will seem normal, and people will get behind him once more.

Busbee: Were you surprised by the amount of negative perception of Tiger? It’s still 50 percent. That seems pretty high. Maybe we’re a moral nation. Or, since winning will change that figure in a heartbeat, maybe not.

Bacon: I’d have to say I am still amazed that people haven’t let up on the guy yet, but I bash the guy on a daily basis, so I guess I’m part of that problem. It seems we love our stars until they screw up, hate them, and then love them again when they turn it around. Tiger is an example of the first two, and we’re still waiting for the third to ring true. Here is a question for you: how fast will the sponsors start running back to Camp Tiger when he wins a major? At Usain Bolt speed, or just Carl Lewis speed?

Busbee: At sportswriters-claiming-Tiger’s-back-when-he-shoots-one-decent-round speed. I do have to give the Woods camp credit for holding out for the top-shelf sponsors; you know there are phone-card and cash-for-gold companies who’ve been appealing to Tiger to come shill for them. (Though Tiger hawking phone cards would’ve been fun to see.) Look, you and I both know the simple truth is that no matter how much people bray about how much they hate Tiger, and they will, the silent majority will come right back to watch him once he gets back in contention. And it all begins this week at Bay Hill.

All right, your turn. Still got a negative perception of Tiger? What’s going to change your mind, if anything? Go!

Read More Golf News from:

The FedEx Cup has taken plenty of grief from fans and sportswriters alike for its perceived contrivances and attempts to compete with the majors for golf preeminence. By now, your take on the FedEx Cup is probably set in stone, so further tweaks aren’t going to make you like it much more or less. But the latest PGA Tour plan might make a few Tour pros take some more interest in the FedEx Cup.

As the AP reports in detail, he Tour is in the process of considering several changes to its season-ending format. One that will surely draw plenty of attention is a plan to make those players who don’t reach the FedEx Cup playoffs compete for their cards against top Nationwide players. The top 125 players in points reach the playoffs; everybody else suddenly ends up on the bubble.

Under the proposed change, those players who don’t reach the top 125 would compete in a three-tournament series against an as-yet-undetermined number of Nationwide pros. Those who didn’t survive the three-tournament series could still get into PGA events through various exemptions.

In a way, it’s brilliant, a total meritocracy. It’s the equivalent of the English Premier League’s relegation, where underperforming teams get bounced to lower leagues and minor-league powerhouses get promoted. It’s not done often in pro sports because, well, pro teams only want to have to compete so much. (The Pittsburgh Pirates and Los Angeles Clippers, say, don’t want to have demotion hanging over their heads.)

The other side of the issue, of course, is that it adds even more complexity to an already ridiculously complex process. It will be up to the Tour to explain, in probably player-by-player detail, what’s necessary for each competitor to remain on Tour or move upward.

Another possible change, and one that would have a dramatic effect on the romance of Q School, is the elimination of the possibility of going straight from Q School to the PGA Tour. The change would, in the PGA Tour’s estimation, better prepare young pros for the rigors of the Tour. But, as the AP notes, players such as J.B. Holmes and Dustin Johnson jumped straight from college to the Tour via Q School. Still, anything that raises the overall level of the game is worth consideration.

PGA Tour considers change of season-ending format [AP/Yahoo! Sports]

Read More Golf News from:

Watch More Videos from:

at

Watch More Videos from:

at

Watch More Videos from:

at

Watch More Videos from:

at

Watch More Videos from:

at

For sake of argument, let’s say that the Accenture Match Play is one of the top six biggest golf tournaments of the year. Sure, it isn’t a major, but it is the type of event that brings the best in the world together and forces them to play hard against each other for six straight days in hopes that you’re the last man standing, literally, in the match play format.

So is their recent announcement to head back to Marana, Ariz. a good thing? I believe so. The golf course, albeit gimmicky at times, seems to be a perfect fit for the type of format they play. It brings the desert into play on a lot of holes, which means that you actually get a glimpse of the best in the world trying to pitch out sideways like a group of hackers would do while vacationing at Troon North, and it has some fun holes that make the golf exciting.

So far since the tournament has been hosted at Dove Mountain three extremely respectable champions have walked away with the trophy, with Geoff Ogilvy, Ian Poulter and Luke Donald being the big winners in Marana.

Also, it seems like a different style golf course is perfect for the different style of play. I went down to Dove Mountain this year, and thought the course was tough but fair. It plays long, but has some holes you can make anything from eagle to double-bogey on, with this thought highlighted by the 15th hole.

It also seems that the 18th is a finishing hole that produced tons of drama, none more than the match between Bubba Watson and J.B. Holmes this year.

For a golf tournament that sets itself apart, I think Dove Mountain is a good fit for now. Sure, the crowds are pretty sparse, and the course has some holes you wish could be altered, but unless we’re talking Pine Valley and Cypress Point, what course doesn’t? 

Read More Golf News from:

The whole "check out our trick shot!" phenomenon is perilously close to jumping the shark — or, more to the point, throwing the shark into the hoop from the far end of the court. Anyway, we run ‘em every so often if there’s something new, and this one, straight from Down Under, qualifies as that: throwing a ball into the hole from more than 100 yards out:

Those "How Ridiculous" lads sure are happy. But why’s it so much darker when they hit the shot from when they recorded the intro?

Read More Golf News from:

So here’s a little oddity brought to us by Waggle Room: Tiger Woods was in a college-level Economics textbook, but he’s not anymore. Here’s the story: N. Gregory Mankiw, a professor at Harvard, used Woods as an example in his textbook "Principles of Economics," like so:

In case you can’t read that text, this is basically one of those "opportunity cost" questions, in which you must decide whether it’s a good idea for Tiger to mow his own lawn or pay somebody $20 to do it while he goes out and makes Nike commercials.  Surely you don’t need to go to Harvard to figure that one out, though if Tiger can get away with paying $20 to have someone mow this mammoth monstrosity, more power to him.

Anyway, Mankiw decided, rightly enough, that Woods’ personal travails might distract from the question itself, according to the Harvard Crimson. Mankiw substituted in New England Patriots QB Tom Brady, making this THE BEST TEXTBOOK QUESTION EVAAHHHH!!!! NO ONE DENIES THIS!!!

Still, we think the professor is acting a little too hastily here. Instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, just change the bathwater. Or the baby. Whatever, just make up a different question. You know, one like this:

Should Tiger Woods Chase Grenades? A Devil Ball Exam:

It is 2009. Tiger Woods is worth a billion dollars and is married with two children. However, he is also often tempted by women of less than sterling character. Explain, using the concepts of opportunity cost and comparative advantage, how in the world Woods could think it’s a good idea to torpedo one of the greatest sports legacies in history by chasing women who wear nametags and/or nothing at all.

You have one hour. Please keep your eyes on your own paper. And … begin.

Read More Golf News from: