Poor Fed, still can't get his due in the American media [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Poor Fed, still can't get his due in the American media

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 03:53 AM
If anyone subscribes to the NYTimes online, they usually post a picture of the winner on the front page. Maybe they did so earlier today, but there is no pix of Fed now. It is 9/11 after all, so they have a pix of a couple embracing in remembrance at Ground Zero.

Further down the page however, is the headline for the US Open: At 35, Agassi Gives All but Falls to Younger Star Right below the summary is a secondary link with the headline, Roberts: Here's Hoping Agassi Plays On

You go to the Sports Page and, who has 2 pix to 0? Agassi of course, waving to the crowd. You go to the Tennis page, and there's Roger!...shaking hands with Agassi whose facing prominantly in the photo, you see the back of Fed's head.

DickE said earlier today that maybe both Agassi and Fed will be on Letterman tomorrow.

PaulieM
09-12-2005, 03:56 AM
they had a little blurb in the top corner earlier :shrug:

megadeth
09-12-2005, 03:59 AM
well, fed doesn't need to win the american press. US doesn't dominate tennis anymore anyway. so why push to win them over when the rest of the world is in awe with him?

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:01 AM
they had a little blurb in the top corner earlier :shrug:
A blurb with Fed only in a picture?

Fergie
09-12-2005, 04:02 AM
Who cares american press :ras:

PaulieM
09-12-2005, 04:03 AM
A blurb with Fed only in a picture?
yup a little picture, the score and a link. that's all he got on most websites, espn, si etc.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:03 AM
well, fed doesn't need to win the american press. US doesn't dominate tennis anymore anyway. so why push to win them over when the rest of the world is in awe with him?
Well, even Fed has said you know you've made it when you come to NYC and win the USO.

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:05 AM
yup a little picture, the score and a link. that's all he got on most websites, espn, si etc.
That's sad, because when Sharapova won last year at Wimby, she took up the whole front half of the newspaper, she was the hurricane of last summer.

Even Kim got a nice photo and wrap up.

alelysafina
09-12-2005, 04:09 AM
If anyone subscribes to the NYTimes online, they usually post a picture of the winner on the front page. Maybe they did so earlier today, but there is no pix of Fed now. It is 9/11 after all, so they have a pix of a couple embracing in remembrance at Ground Zero.

Further down the page however, is the headline for the US Open: At 35, Agassi Gives All but Falls to Younger Star Right below the summary is a secondary link with the headline, Roberts: Here's Hoping Agassi Plays On

You go to the Sports Page and, who has 2 pix to 0? Agassi of course, waving to the crowd. You go to the Tennis page, and there's Roger!...shaking hands with Agassi whose facing prominantly in the photo, you see the back of Fed's head.

DickE said earlier today that maybe both Agassi and Fed will be on Letterman tomorrow.

That's jacked up!!!! I am ashamed, I am ashamed...

Dirk
09-12-2005, 04:09 AM
They don't sign Ninja's checks so fuck em. :)

PamV
09-12-2005, 04:10 AM
If anyone subscribes to the NYTimes online, they usually post a picture of the winner on the front page. Maybe they did so earlier today, but there is no pix of Fed now. It is 9/11 after all, so they have a pix of a couple embracing in remembrance at Ground Zero.

Further down the page however, is the headline for the US Open: At 35, Agassi Gives All but Falls to Younger Star Right below the summary is a secondary link with the headline, Roberts: Here's Hoping Agassi Plays On



Well if they refer to Federer solely as a Younger Star and don't even mention his name you know something is wrong with the NYTimes. Agassi playing at 35 is not bigger news than Federer winning back to back Wimby/USOpen two years in a row. That hasn't been done in the Open Era. I wonder if they ever mentioned it in 2004 when he won 3 majors?

Corey Feldman
09-12-2005, 04:11 AM
im sure Federer wont care..
its water of a Roddick's back

PaulieM
09-12-2005, 04:13 AM
That's sad, because when Sharapova won last year at Wimby, she took up the whole front half of the newspaper, she was the hurricane of last summer.

Even Kim got a nice photo and wrap up.
i'd really like to see roger on the cover of si sometime. sharapova made it after wimby last year. i wonder what roger would have to do to finally make it. :(

alelysafina
09-12-2005, 04:16 AM
i'd really like to see roger on the cover of si sometime. sharapova made it after wimby last year. i wonder what roger would have to do to finally make it. :(

Sharapova :aplot:

Becarina
09-12-2005, 04:17 AM
they just showed some highlights and part of an interview on Espn

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:22 AM
i'd really like to see roger on the cover of si sometime. sharapova made it after wimby last year. i wonder what roger would have to do to finally make it. :(
Only if someone like Wertheim pushes for it. Someone said that JMac was recently on Letterman, who used to follow tennis but doesn't much anymore. JMac mentioned how good this new guy, Federer, was and Letterman gave him a blank look.

I think that's the (still) basic American reaction to 21st Century tennis.

Maybe we can swap Andy for Feds in the Lexus commercials. Now, those would be funny.

LoveFifteen
09-12-2005, 04:52 AM
1. The NY Times is not the entire American media.

2. At Sports Illustrated.com, the main picture of the US Open is Roger celebrating his victory. The main headline on Yahoo.com is "Federer wins US Open". On CNN.com right now, the picture is Federer with the caption "Federer Captures Second Straight US Open". On the dreaded Foxnews.com, the picture is of Federer kissing the trophy with the caption "Federer Wins Open". The headlines at ABC.com is "Federer Wins 2nd Straight U.S. Open Title". On TheWashingtonPost.com, the newspaper has the GALL to mention Agassi's name with the headline "Federer Beats Agassi at Open"!

joycomesmorning
09-12-2005, 10:18 AM
Quite obviously, he has some difficulty with media appreicaton in Canada as well:

_________________
Mon, September 12, 2005

Federer's dominance sinks game to new lows
By ERIC FRANCIS, CALGARY SUN




CALGARY -- Roger Federer may very well end up being the greatest tennis player of all time, but his dominance threatens to sink the game to new lows.

It's no secret the last time tennis was exciting Andre Agassi had hair, which made it fitting that for the first time in well over a decade, the men's U.S. Open final offered up delicious intrigue yesterday, thanks to what could be Agassi's final Open appearance.

However, with millions of casual sports fans sitting down to watch what they hoped would be a magical finish to Agassi's career, Federer proved once again he's essentially invincible.

Despite early excitement, it ended the same way all his matches do.

Without a worthy rival, Federer's brilliance will be lost as more and more people ignore a sport that died when wooden rackets and colourful players gave way to a power game devoid of rallies.


The pending departure of Andre Agassi - the last of the game's great personalities - is going to make tennis matters a whole lot worse.

Shabazza
09-12-2005, 11:08 AM
Without a worthy rival, Federer's brilliance will be lost as more and more people ignore a sport that died when wooden rackets and colourful players gave way to a power game devoid of rallies.

The pending departure of Andre Agassi - the last of the game's great personalities - is going to make tennis matters a whole lot worse.


he's lost in history!! :rolleyes:

MariaV
09-12-2005, 11:10 AM
:rolleyes: When Agassi had hair tennis wasn't exciting for me at all. And the LAST the of the game's great personalities - :rolleyes: But that's only me of course.
I won't even get into the 'devoid of rallies' thing.

Neely
09-12-2005, 11:19 AM
Damn, poor Roger. How bad that is ;)

nobama
09-12-2005, 11:23 AM
Well having the mens USO final on the same day as the start of the NFL season doesn't help either. All the sports press cares about the next day is football anyway. What's making headlines though is Agassi's comment that Roger's the best he's ever played against. Of course he said this about Pete too, but still one hell of a compliment from the old guy.

thrust
09-12-2005, 11:54 AM
What are we supposed to do, lick his feet? Everyone states that Roger is the greatest player today, but Agassi is an American tennis legend who had achieved an incredible feat in reaching the USO final at 35. Roger was lucky yesterday that Andre was that old. Four or five years younger I really think Andre would have won yesterday. Don^t fret, I am sure Roger is on the front pages of all the Swiss newspapers as well as other European publications.

thrust
09-12-2005, 12:01 PM
Pete, at his best, would have beaten Roger in three yesterday. Pete had a superior serve than Andre ever did, as well as a vastly superior net game. Pete would have won his service games much easier than Andre did yesterday, which would have enabled Pete to dominate on the ground as well as at the net.

Doris Loeffel
09-12-2005, 12:34 PM
Well thrust you keep forgetting one thing - today you'll find hardly anything of Roger in the newspaper (online yes but not on paper) - as the match didn't finish before 1 am this morning - not quite the ideal time to make big headlines out of it to be printed on the front page in big letters. Even though you could expect a win from Feds.

So I think it's a shame that even such a great and entertaining match like the final where even an american was included didn't get better headlines for Roger...
but what can you do that's the way it is.

nobama
09-12-2005, 12:42 PM
Pete, at his best, would have beaten Roger in three yesterday. Pete had a superior serve than Andre ever did, as well as a vastly superior net game. Pete would have won his service games much easier than Andre did yesterday, which would have enabled Pete to dominate on the ground as well as at the net.
Whatever... :rolleyes:

nobama
09-12-2005, 12:51 PM
What are we supposed to do, lick his feet? Everyone states that Roger is the greatest player today, but Agassi is an American tennis legend who had achieved an incredible feat in reaching the USO final at 35. Roger was lucky yesterday that Andre was that old. Four or five years younger I really think Andre would have won yesterday. Don^t fret, I am sure Roger is on the front pages of all the Swiss newspapers as well as other European publications.Sorry, but what happened in the third set yesterday was not "luck". Andre was still playing at a high level in that set - enough to take it to a tb. So to say that Roger got lucky because he played 35 yr old Andre is pure bs. The first three sets were probably some of the best tennis Andre ever played.

Andre said yesterday that Roger was the best he'd ever played against....that with Pete he knew there was a place he could get to where he might have a chance, but there is no such place with Roger. Now the "Fedtards" on MTF didn't pay him to say that. He's just calling it as he sees it.

RogerRocks
09-12-2005, 12:54 PM
I don't want roger to be omnipresent all over the media. I want him to remain the way he is now, not the roddick-like sell out whorish behaviour :ras:

RogerRocks
09-12-2005, 12:56 PM
please roger, don't ever do mojo ads :tape:

Action Jackson
09-12-2005, 12:58 PM
I don't want roger to be omnipresent all over the media. I want him to remain the way he is now, not the roddick-like sell out whorish behaviour :ras:

I wouldn't worry about that.

Castafiore
09-12-2005, 01:10 PM
Sheesh...you guys are tough on Roddick these days:
don't be too hard on Roddick for his mojo ads. It's not like Roger avoids that sort of attention all together: wasn't Roger in Vogue magazine with an elaborate photoshoot and doesn't he have his own brand of perfume?

About the media:
from what I've seen, they don't have enough superlatives to describe Roger at the moment so most of the sports press are giving him plenty of very positive attention. Articles like the one joyscomesmorning has copied here are just too stupid.

Edit: video of the last game from Sporza.be:
(just click on "laatste game" under video)
http://www.vrtnieuws.net/sport_master/tennis/us_open/050911_F_Federer_Agassi/index.html?video_1

Mrs. B
09-12-2005, 01:10 PM
they wanted a fairy tale story of Old Ball American AA taking the title before retiring but Roger spoiled it for them.

Roger, you gets none! :lol:

liptea
09-12-2005, 01:15 PM
. i wonder what roger would have to do to finally make it. :(

a sex tape./

blosson
09-12-2005, 01:18 PM
a sex tape./

:haha:

onewoman74
09-12-2005, 01:36 PM
a sex tape./

sounds good to me...a threesome w/ Mirka and Angelina...u couldn't get his name out of the news...lol!!!

liptea
09-12-2005, 01:37 PM
sounds good to me...a threesome w/ Mirka and Angelina...u couldn't get his name out of the news...lol!!!
Roger Federer, Paris Hilton of the athletic world.

1sun
09-12-2005, 02:13 PM
Pete, at his best, would have beaten Roger in three yesterday. Pete had a superior serve than Andre ever did, as well as a vastly superior net game. Pete would have won his service games much easier than Andre did yesterday, which would have enabled Pete to dominate on the ground as well as at the net.
roger at his best would slap pete around the court so hard and so fast that pete would run off and retire

tennischick
09-12-2005, 02:25 PM
Rogi's face appears at the ATP official website but the caption is "Agassi can't derail the Fed Express". i think that the combination of Agassi and Federer is appropriate to the occasion. Federer appears to have accepted that which is why he made so many comments about Agassi in the closing ceremony. if he wanted to get any kind of applause from the crowd, all he had to do was tell them how great Agassi was. :lol:

i posted a few days ago that i think that it galls Federer when the crowd openly supports his opponent. this was the ultimate test of that. and having to continue to share the limelight with his opponentAgassi may be irksome but it is the smart thing to do if Fed wants to get any attention at all in the US. ;)

Puschkin
09-12-2005, 02:35 PM
I am rather sure that Roger prefers to have lifted the trophy to being pictured on page 1.

wcr
09-12-2005, 02:39 PM
Pete, at his best, would have beaten Roger in three yesterday. Pete had a superior serve than Andre ever did, as well as a vastly superior net game. Pete would have won his service games much easier than Andre did yesterday, which would have enabled Pete to dominate on the ground as well as at the net.


You seem pretty sure of that. It's playing the "what if" game where you get to pick and choose the things you want to believe about an outcome to convince yourself of the likely results.

In the years to come all anyone will have to look at regarding the Federer v. Sampras challenge will be the one match they played. Perhaps when folks look at this match they will see the 10 year difference in age and that neither player was at his best. Maybe they'll even know that Sampras was the defending champion and heavy favorite. Nevertheless, results are what matter. And they are called facts. Everything else is nothing more than "what if."

http://www.atptennis.com/en/players/headtohead/head2head.asp?player1=Federer%2C+Roger&player2=sampras

wcr
09-12-2005, 02:41 PM
Roger spends a great deal of time with the media. He's the best ambassador for the sport. He will surely take note of the NY TIMES faux pas. I hope he also takes note that the NY TIMES isn't what it used to be and the last thing anyone expects when they open it is any kind of fair and balanced reporting.

Subscription officially cancelled!

joycomesmorning
09-12-2005, 03:39 PM
Roger spends a great deal of time with the media. He's the best ambassador for the sport. He will surely take note of the NY TIMES faux pas. I hope he also takes note that the NY TIMES isn't what it used to be and the last thing anyone expects when they open it is any kind of fair and balanced reporting.

Subscription officially cancelled!
OOOHH!! I bet those NY Times execs are shaking in their boots...If ALL of tennis diehard fans cancelled their Times, who would even notice? And if we marginalize that to only Federer diehards....well, let's put it this way...there were about 24,000 fans who watched last night's final...and only about 100 of them WERE NOT on their feet before, during and after the match screaming ANDRE . . .

Actually, the Clarey piece and most especially the Selena Roberts piece that were featured in this morning's NY Times were EXCELLENT!!!! EXCELLENT!! You really should read before you rant....

jcm

R.Federer
09-12-2005, 03:43 PM
I think this also has been the case for softspoken sports giants from Europa, borg comes to mind. lendl also. becker was very outgoing, no surprise he got lot of coverage.
Anyway, it is a shame they dont give more time to Roge.

(Also, on usopen.org page, they show picture of Roge and Andre, with caption "The Champions"). its alright, they want to give credit to andre, but they are wrong to focus on andre

But also, keeping media away is good for long term non-tennis distraction to stay away. Some day when he sits with his 15 GS trophy haul, they will regret

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:00 PM
1. The NY Times is not the entire American media.

2. At Sports Illustrated.com, the main picture of the US Open is Roger celebrating his victory. The main headline on Yahoo.com is "Federer wins US Open". On CNN.com right now, the picture is Federer with the caption "Federer Captures Second Straight US Open". On the dreaded Foxnews.com, the picture is of Federer kissing the trophy with the caption "Federer Wins Open". The headlines at ABC.com is "Federer Wins 2nd Straight U.S. Open Title". On TheWashingtonPost.com, the newspaper has the GALL to mention Agassi's name with the headline "Federer Beats Agassi at Open"!
I appreciated the counterargument, however you listed all of the sports websites, not the US's No. 1 paper. Also, NY Times has a major influence and when something very well done or controversial gets into the tennis section, it's noticed by others (just ask Wertheim or the Aussie press who did an article about Selena Roberts' diss of Hewitt).

Also, when you read that Agassi lost to a "younger star", what does that mean? The reporter may have just likely meant Nadal or Gasquet. Feds now has 2 less Slams than Old Balls.

selesfan
09-12-2005, 04:24 PM
That's sad, because when Sharapova won last year at Wimby, she took up the whole front half of the newspaper, she was the hurricane of last summer.

Even Kim got a nice photo and wrap up.


Thats because the Americans treat Andre like a God, Pete Sampras was always jealous of all the press Andre got while he was the better player. The American women on the other hand don't get much press here except for Jennifer.

wcr
09-12-2005, 04:24 PM
OOOHH!! I bet those NY Times execs are shaking in their boots...If ALL of tennis diehard fans cancelled their Times, who would even notice? And if we marginalize that to only Federer diehards....well, let's put it this way...there were about 24,000 fans who watched last night's final...and only about 100 of them WERE NOT on their feet before, during and after the match screaming ANDRE . . .

Actually, the Clarey piece and most especially the Selena Roberts piece that were featured in this morning's NY Times were EXCELLENT!!!! EXCELLENT!! You really should read before you rant....

jcm

Cancelling my subscription was a joke for crying out loud. Do you need smiley faces to figure that out?

Castafiore
09-12-2005, 04:30 PM
The American women on the other hand don't get much press here except for Jennifer.
and the Williams sisters

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:32 PM
Thats because the Americans treat Andre like a God, Pete Sampras was always jealous of all the press Andre got while he was the better player. .
Which is why he has to back up his record with those RBS commercials :lol:

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 04:53 PM
Bill Barclay of Reuters did a nice piece on Fed's win, however the headline is "Federer Wrecks Agassi's Dream." (BTW, reporters don't come up with the headlines. It's the job of copy editors).

selesfan
09-12-2005, 05:10 PM
and the Williams sisters

They don't get as much press here in Philly, maybe the NY times covers them more. Jen is America's darling, looks like Sharapova is taking over for her ;)

MisterQ
09-12-2005, 05:17 PM
Honestly, it makes sense that Agassi is prominent in the headlines. Federer was expected to make the final and win the whole thing. Agassi's presence was a surprise, and full of sentimental value for many people.

I bought the Times today and they were full of praise for Federer. There is a massive picture, half-a-page length, of Federer jumping up like a bunny at the end, and then a tiny picture of Agassi and Fed standing next to each other. The headline is "Agassi slows time, if not Federer." There is a graphic called "The Dominator on Display" showing Roger's amazing stats for the tournament. On the inside page, there is once again a picture of each player, and Federer's is larger and more flattering. What is there to complain about?

Castafiore
09-12-2005, 05:28 PM
I bought the Times today and they were full of praise for Federer. There is a massive picture, half-a-page length, of Federer jumping up like a bunny at the end, and then a tiny picture of Agassi and Fed standing next to each other. The headline is "Agassi slows time, if not Federer." There is a graphic called "The Dominator on Display" showing Roger's amazing stats for the tournament. On the inside page, there is once again a picture of each player, and Federer's is larger and more flattering. What is there to complain about?
Thanks, MisterQ.

Another storm in a glass of water in MTF.

MariaV
09-12-2005, 05:34 PM
Honestly, it makes sense that Agassi is prominent in the headlines. Federer was expected to make the final and win the whole thing. Agassi's presence was a surprise, and full of sentimental value for many people.

I bought the Times today and they were full of praise for Federer. There is a massive picture, half-a-page length, of Federer jumping up like a bunny at the end, and then a tiny picture of Agassi and Fed standing next to each other. The headline is "Agassi slows time, if not Federer." There is a graphic called "The Dominator on Display" showing Roger's amazing stats for the tournament. On the inside page, there is once again a picture of each player, and Federer's is larger and more flattering. What is there to complain about?
Mr Q! :hatoff:

RogiFan88
09-12-2005, 05:40 PM
it's their loss... ;)

thrust
09-12-2005, 05:56 PM
No top player at 35 plays as good tennis as he did between 25-30. I am talking about great professional players. Agassi may honestly think Federer is harder for him to beat than Sampras, but he is being delusional. When he was playing Pete, in their prime, Adre was a much better player than he is now-at least in 4 or 5 setter.

thrust
09-12-2005, 06:06 PM
1sum- Get real!! If Roger could not blow a tired 35 year old Agassi off the court, there is NO way he could handle an in form Pete, like you claim. Surely you woud agree that Pete was a better player than Andre, in their primes? If not, you are as delusional as Anere is now. Anere is still a great player, has had a great carrer and a great 2005 USO. However, I think he would be wise to retire. Losing to Roger the way he did yesterday, at his age, is something he should be proud of.

PaulieM
09-12-2005, 06:31 PM
Roger Federer, Paris Hilton of the athletic world.
omg your sex tape comment made me laugh so hard. roger shows the world his inner skank...

LoveFifteen
09-12-2005, 07:29 PM
I appreciated the counterargument, however you listed all of the sports websites, not the US's No. 1 paper.

To be honest, I don't know what America's #1 paper is. Is the NY Times really the most-read paper in America? I thought America's #1 paper was USA Today, which by the way, had a picture of Roger kissing the trophy on the front page with the caption "Federer beats Agassi in US Open Final". (No picture of Andre on the front page).

Federer will never be a media darling in the States because of his personality. Europeans with personalities like Becker & Nadal are much more popular in the States. It's a two-way street. Personalities that are beloved by Americans might not be loved by Europeans. Oh hell, who am I kidding? It doesn't matter what personality an American player has, s/he's going to be hated by Europeans no matter what. :p

Clara Bow
09-12-2005, 07:44 PM
It doesn't matter what personality an American player has, s/he's going to be hated by Europeans no matter what.

I know you are kidding but please...please let's not start the "everyone hates Americans" thing.

Roddick seems to be quite popular in the UK. I was there during Wimbledon 2004 and the papers were quite keen on Andy. And Agassi is very popular in Europe.

LoveFifteen
09-12-2005, 07:53 PM
I know you are kidding but please...please let's not start the "everyone hates Americans" thing.

Roddick seems to be quite popular in the UK. I was there during Wimbledon 2004 and the papers were quite keen on Andy. And Agassi is very popular in Europe.

I was just being silly. I have read many articles on Federer, and all of them spoke glowlingly of him. I think Americans can't really fall in love with Federer because he's so "perfect" and "god-like". Americans are crazy about underdogs and "comeback kids". Sampras was never that popular either. Lance Armstrong is insanely popular because he overcame cancer. If Lance didn't have cancer, hardly anyone would care about him. It's just how things are in America.

If Federer is dethroned by someone, gets injured, has some tragedy, etc. and then comes back in full glory, expect him to become wildly popular in the US. I mean, Monica Seles was resented by a large portion of the American tennis world before she was stabbed, and now she's a beloved icon of tennis.

Corey Feldman
09-12-2005, 08:13 PM
i think roger could care less about how any fans think of him... Yanks or not

he's too busy WINNING

RogiFan88
09-12-2005, 08:29 PM
so it's not worth paying "Canadian" prices for the NYT or USA Today? ;)

tennischick
09-12-2005, 10:09 PM
i think roger could care less about how any fans think of him... Yanks or not

he's too busy WINNING
Rogi cares very much about fan response, which is why he brings it up so often in his interviews. but in this situation i think he wisely accepts that he has to share the stage with the much-beloved Agassi. smart guy our Rogi. :worship:

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 10:23 PM
Honestly, it makes sense that Agassi is prominent in the headlines. Federer was expected to make the final and win the whole thing. Agassi's presence was a surprise, and full of sentimental value for many people.

I bought the Times today and they were full of praise for Federer. There is a massive picture, half-a-page length, of Federer jumping up like a bunny at the end, and then a tiny picture of Agassi and Fed standing next to each other. The headline is "Agassi slows time, if not Federer." There is a graphic called "The Dominator on Display" showing Roger's amazing stats for the tournament. On the inside page, there is once again a picture of each player, and Federer's is larger and more flattering. What is there to complain about?
Well, that's great if he was given rightful praise in the paper. Was that on page 1? I can't be bothered to buy the Times, why when I can get it for free on the web?

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 10:28 PM
LoveFifteen: BTW, I meant NY Times is #1 in terms of esteem. USA Today, that last I heard, was No. 1 (although it's not read in NYC, outside of airports).

Tennis Fool
09-12-2005, 10:30 PM
Rogi cares very much about fan response, which is why he brings it up so often in his interviews. but in this situation i think he wisely accepts that he has to share the stage with the much-beloved Agassi. smart guy our Rogi. :worship:
I think Agassi will be back. That's why it annoys me. He'll pull another rabbit out of his hat.

But better Agassi than Sampras (can you imagine)?

liptea
09-12-2005, 11:55 PM
I appreciated the counterargument, however you listed all of the sports websites, not the US's No. 1 paper. Also, NY Times has a major influence and when something very well done or controversial gets into the tennis section, it's noticed by others.




So...you mean people are going to read the article and find out that Roger Federer is amazing, tune in to watch him play, like the sport and keep watching to see who the guy that beat America's beloved Andre? Doesn't sound too bad to me.

You're getting caught up in the semantics.

tangerine_dream
09-13-2005, 12:02 AM
Good to see TF back in action causing mass hysteria with his misleading threads again.

I have a print copy NYT in front of me and there's a nice color photo of Roger and Andre on the front page and an even bigger photo of Roger celebrating his win on the Sports front pages. He is the headline sports news story. And he'll be on David Letterman again tonight. So whether or not a picture of him shows up on a newspaper's website is hardly indicative that he's being ignored, imo.

btw, for anyone who hasn't seen it yet, Johnette Howard, who is part of the US media, wrote a terrific editorial about how Roger deserves more respect. Go here (http://www.newsday.com/sports/columnists/ny-sphow314405175aug31,0,7446021,print.column?coll=ny-sports-columnists) to read it.

LoveFifteen
09-13-2005, 12:11 AM
I have a print copy NYT in front of me and there's a nice color photo of Roger and Andre on the front page and an even bigger photo of Roger celebrating his win on the Sports front pages. He is the headline sports news story. And he'll be on David Letterman again tonight.

At this point, the paranoid anti-Americans will claim that if Americans truly respected Federer, he would be on Jay Leno! :lol:

Just kidding.

tangerine_dream
09-13-2005, 12:21 AM
At this point, the paranoid anti-Americans will claim that if Americans truly respected Federer, he would be on Jay Leno! :lol:

But all the *real* tennis fans watch Conan O'Brien. ;) :p

R.Federer
09-13-2005, 12:47 AM
Roge is not especially excluded for this, I dont think leyton had a Jay Leno appearance (not sure about Letterman either) when he was number 1 two years. There were other number 1's, also marcelo and carlos. All the non-Americans will not get the same exposure in US, it is natural.
I dont believe Roge should believe he got special bad treatment here

Tennis Fool
09-13-2005, 04:02 AM
Good to see TF back in action causing mass hysteria with his misleading threads again.

I have a print copy NYT in front of me and there's a nice color photo of Roger and Andre on the front page and an even bigger photo of Roger celebrating his win on the Sports front pages. He is the headline sports news story. And he'll be on David Letterman again tonight. So whether or not a picture of him shows up on a newspaper's website is hardly indicative that he's being ignored, imo.

btw, for anyone who hasn't seen it yet, Johnette Howard, who is part of the US media, wrote a terrific editorial about how Roger deserves more respect. Go here (http://www.newsday.com/sports/columnists/ny-sphow314405175aug31,0,7446021,print.column?coll=ny-sports-columnists) to read it.

Well, I'm HAPPY he made Page 1 of the newspaper. I'm not going to buy that expensive rag when I can get it free on the web. Usually the paper imitates what the web does, like when they put SHARAPOVA on the website front page as they did the paper the next day.

Glad you posted the link by J Howard as that means you believe others feel that he is not getting proper treatment for someone on the same track as Sampras.

BTW, when was Feds on Letterman before :scratch:

Scotso
09-13-2005, 04:04 AM
Why should he? If you're not an American, you need a big personality to make it here. That is not Federer.

TenHound
09-13-2005, 07:28 AM
For Roger to make SI Cover would be very simple - he'd have to make as much $$ for IMG & Am. Corps. as Shrieknova does.

Pea
09-13-2005, 10:02 AM
Of course not. Americans are only fascinated by assholes.