Who needs Tiger Woods? U.S. would not have won Ryder Cup with Woods on team

I’m not saying Tiger Woods isn’t the greatest player on earth, so there’s no need for you Tiger fans out there to treat me like I’m dirt or Lee Westwood.

But, Woods isn’t a team player, at least in the Ryder Cup sense. He has never made any bones about the fact he is less than wildly enthusiastic about playing for his country.

That attitude, intentional or not, trickles down to the rest of the team. Woods is a leader by default anywhere he goes, and his influence, particularly with younger players, is enormous.

That may be why the winning U.S. team this weekend had such a strong showing by its rookies: they hadn’t had the opportunity yet to be poisoned by Woods’ lackadaisical attitude.

It’s hard to imagine a more gung-ho American team than this year’s version. If you could harvest the energy from fist-pumps, we’d have solved the national energy crisis this past weekend.

Also, I’ve got serious doubts about Phil Mickelson. Why does the best non-Tiger player in the world have such a lousy Ryder Cup record? Once or twice maybe, you could see. But, Mickelson consistently fails to deliver in the Ryder Cup. Maybe he, too, is so immersed in his own superstardom he is unable to relate to the team concept.