Roger Federer becomes the first man to win 15 Grand Slam titles. Virtually every commentator talking about it dubs him “the greatest men’s tennis player of all time.” The match that puts him over the top ends with a 16-14 tiebreak in the fifth set of Wimbledon, the sport’s crowning glory. And days later, Sports Illustrated puts a black and white photo of two baseball players who haven’t played in over 15 years on the cover. Sure, at the top is a lousy headline, “Roger Stands Alone,” but the man just pulled off one of the greatest accomplishments in the sport (if not the greatest accomplishment): How do you not put him on the cover? I know they want to promote their “timeless” ‘Where Are They Now’ series, but not putting Federer on the cover was a questionable decision at best.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
probably a good thing….the SI curse…if he were on the cover, he’d probably lose in the first round of the Open.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
That does seem ridiculous, but SI has never really given super coverage to tennis anyway. But still…he should have at least garnered a little corner picture or somethin.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
They had Nadal on the cover after last year’s Wimbledon. They had Roger on a month ago after he won the French. I like tennis and I like Federer, but I’m no nut about it. But still, even with having him on a month ago, they really missed the mark by not having him on again. IMHO.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Agreed Cyd
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 2:44 pm
This issue is planned well in advance for the summer and the Where Are They Now has been tradition. I have no issue with no putting a pic of Federer on the front since he graced their cover a month prior.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 3:15 pm
Come on, he broke the most important record in his sport. I don’t care if he’s been on the cover for the last twelve issues, when you break THE record you put him on the cover. And the last time he was on the cover he did something great too. Serious snub.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 3:29 pm
Agreed Jim. Besides it’s not like it’s Ripken’s consecutive games record or anything, Rafa will pass him in majors in 6-8 years and Federer wouldn’t have these last two if Rafa wasn’t out anyways.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 4:41 pm
a) He’s not American
b) He’s ugly (at least to me)
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
He is on the cover in a headline stripped across the top. His picture is not, but it’s not like SI ignored him.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
I’m not sure sure Nadal is going to pass him. Especially if he can win a couple more. He is 23 and he will have to contend with Federer for a couple more years, plus guys like Djokovic (22) and Murray (22), plus any teenage up-and-comers, will really give him a run for his peak years. If Federer stays at 15, Nadal has a shot; But if Federer can get to 17 or 18, which is very doable for him, I think that puts it out of Nadal’s reach.
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Cyd, when did you become Bud Collins? Wasn’t it a year ago on this website or a podcast that said you didn’t know anything about tennis and couldn’t care less about it?
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 8:56 pm
The curse of the cover of SI has happened so many times I believe it. I’m not really superstitous, but that one bad ju-ju I can’t resist. I was actually HOPING that Fed would not make the cover.
That said, I love Rafa almost as much. And would not be displeased if he or Andy Roddick won the US Open. Not after I the performance from a guy who I thought was finished, pulled out of his guts last weekend. What a great thing if he can win after coming so close! Rafa wins, he completes his career Gland Slam.
Roger wins, it is not just 6 straight but likely enough points to stay at #1 long enough to pass Connors and Lendl and approach the all-time holder, Pete Sampras. (Fed 238 weeks, Pete 286). Especially with Rafa not likely to want to turn his knees to jello with coming close to all the hardcourt tournaments and points he won in 2008.
on Jul 11th, 2009 at 12:22 am
No serious sports magazine should omit Roger Federer from its cover.
It’s not just that Federer broke the world record of Grand Slam tennis majors, it is that he did it in half the time it took Pete Sampras. To put this in context, while Federer won his 15 tennis majors, Tiger Woods won only 6 golf majors. While Federer reached a ridiculous 21 Grand Slam semifinals in a row, Tiger’s best streak in his career was five majors in a row with fourth place or better finishes. As well, Federer won on all four surfaces, while Sampras never came close to winning on clay. Federer is also a tennis grand master who is universally considered the most talented and complete player in tennis history as well as the Michelangelo of beautiful tennis. Furthermore, professional tennis players voted to give him their sportsmanship award for fair play for a record 5 years in a row!
These multiple dimensions of success are the reasons many tennis greats have proclaimed Federer as the Greatest Tennis Player of All Time.
Federer was the world’s best sportsman (links below) as he was the record four-time winner of the prestigious Laureus World Sportsman of the Year Award, beating sports greats such as Michael Phelps, Tiger Woods, Lance Armstrong, Michael Schumacher, etc. The Laureus World Sports Academy (over 40 great sports legends, e.g., Jack Nicklaus, Michael Johnson, Mark Spitz, Edwin Moses, Dan Marino) votes by secret ballot to select award winners.
http://tinyurl.com/nzz96n
http://tinyurl.com/35e66s
http://tinyurl.com/2gxn4e
The way Federer beat Rafa Nadal in straight sets on Madrid clay showed that Roger had finally overcome the impact of his Mononucleosis illness and back injury that affected his serve, movement, fitness and confidence over the past 18 months. That’s the way Federer was playing and beatig Nadal in late 2007 just before he got ill (see link). The way Federer played Soderling in the French Open final, he had a good shot at beating Nadal on clay there and he would have beaten Nadal at Wimbledon. Even in his 46 weeks as World No. 1, Nadal did not have the record of accomplishment that Federer had in his first 46 weeks as World No. 1. Nadal’s tennis career is not sustainable given his physical style.
http://tinyurl.com/2rufxt
on Jul 11th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
Sports Illustrated hasn’t been a true, reliable sports magazine in a long, long time. It’s too given over to politically in vogue notions — notwithstanding their factual lunacy — such a “climate change” or “global warming.” What a joke! I read it in the dentist’s office for comic relief. When I want real sports skinny, SI doesn’t even occur to me.
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 7:19 am
I cancelled my SI subscription last year after they put Nadal and Federer on the cover after their Wimbledon final, with Rafa shown face-on and Roger from the back. This, after Fed had been number 1 for the longest stretch in tennis history, had already won 5 Wimbledons in a row, had previously won 24 title matches in a row, was then the 4-time defending US Open champion (number 5 in a row would come 2 months later), and had displayed what is generally said to be the most sublime tennis ever during the past five years, never to be shown on the vaunted SI cover until after a stinging defeat.
When Roger was finally given a cover after Roland Garros last month, I didn’t evengo out to buy it. I can go to cnnsi.com anytime, and the magazine coverage is superfluous and dated anyway. I was concerned about the Cover Curse, but now that Roger has won Wimbledon again it is clear that SI has even lost its relevance as a curse.
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 7:21 am
Bottom line is this…SI has to sell magazines. The “Where Are They Now” issue is one of their biggest sellers of the year and, as it’s been pointed out, has been planned for a long time. And while Federer’s accomplishment is great, he’s not enough of a personality to lure people to buy the issue at the newstands. They have a fiduciary responsibility to their employees and shareholders to sell magazines and tennis in general just doesn’t do it. Also, he was just on the cover last month after winning the French and his Wimbledon win was acknowledged with the headine on the top of the cover with a nice article inside. Much ado about nothing.
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 11:58 am
GrebBtm, I have no idea where you got that impression, but tennis and golf would fall after only football and basketball on my “favorite sports” list. I watch lots of tennis - and while my back problems have mostly kept me away from the court for the last five or six years, I’ve played a lot too. So I have no idea what I said that would have led you to that conclusion.
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
I have been watching sports for over 35 years and can tell you even though Tennis is not my favorite sport there has never and I repeat never been an athlete as amazing as this guy Roger Federer…….I do not care if you are talking about Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Wayne Gretzky, Jack Nickalas, Muhammad Ali, Michael Shumakker, Pele, Lance Armstrong, or whoever else you want to mention……….I have watched all these athletes in their primes and through their domination, but none of them hold a candle to what this guy Roger Federer has done for the past 6-7 years…….He is truly the Greatest Sportsman I have ever had the privolege to watch and he does it in a sport where they play months a year……..When he broke the majors record by Pete Sampras I was really looking forward to seeing him on the cover of SI Magazine and for them not to put himon the cover is a disgrace to sports and people who enjoy sports stories in general……..I have never in my 35 years of enjoying sports have heard of a more ludicrious descision……Shame on you SI and get your shit together……….And like I said tennis is not my favorite sport to watch, but baseball is…………
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 6:45 pm
Hey DruggyBear,
Wishful thinking on your part, predicting Nadal to have the most majors eight years from now when he can’t even make it to the most important tournament in the world today.
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 6:46 pm
Kennedy I agree with you 100%………..I have never seen anything ilke Federer and I have been watching for 40 years+……..He is ahead of Ali, Jordan, Woods, and the rest!
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
oh please, how is Roger the ‘GOAT’ when he gets his butt kicked by Rafa every time then cries like a baby afterwards? Does Phil own Tiger? Did Barkley own Jordan? Did Frazier own Ali? What ‘GOAT’ gets owned by his rival? NONE! Do you honestly think Roger would have reached 15 if Rafa was healthy?
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 8:36 pm
Druggybear
how gullible Nadal fans are to even think he deserved to win 6 titles. He won 3 FO only because Keurten retired, he won the next one when Roger was ill, the same happened in Wimbledon too Roger was ill and rafa still needed darkness to use the moonballs to win.
Finally forget about the Australian open. he wouldn’t have defeated a true Federer. What was there was a Fed without match practice. Fed even looked like going out to journeymen like Berdych.
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 8:38 pm
there is no doubt that Roger would have had 15 if Nadal had been healthy……..The only reason he does not have 20 is because he was the one that was sick and Nadal and the other guys took advantage of that………..DruggyBear your name says it all………try not to embarrase yourself on this post anymore…….
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 9:47 pm
make all the excuses you want but the head-to-head record speaks for itself:
Nadal 13
Federer 7
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federer%E2%80%93Nadal_rivalry
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 10:31 pm
I agree 100% with the author completely. I mean, the people in the picture are from decades ago, so most of the fans then will probably be at least 40-50 year old men in the present. Hint: SI appeals to a younger generation, so choosing whether to putt Fed or the black and white picture on the cover must be reaaaaaaaaly hard to decide
on Jul 12th, 2009 at 10:58 pm
As far as SI’s decision goes, don’t discount the fact that Federer doesn’t have an ounce of Rafa’s sex appeal. I doubt SI would have sold many more copies with ol ‘bitter beer face’ Roger on the cover.
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 10:26 am
SI’s decision to overlook Roger Federer’s greatness on the most anticipated achievement in tennis in decades was a serious misstep. But then again it should come as no surprise since SI never every really seemed serious about tennis to begin with. Sure he’s not flashy between the points, and is more of a gentleman’s man, than a testosterone swollen jock, but I think there is a lot to be said about an ordinary looking man, doing extraordinary things. I think we have become so enamored with standout personalities that we overlook the “every men” of this world; where celebratory antics between points and brilliant, eyebrow raising one liners in press conferences, eclipse the resume of players. The importance and difficulty of the achievement however, overshadowed the publicity of the moment and ideally that is what should happen.
On the issue of Nadal, is it a logical perception that his physical dominance of the sport is coming to an end? I would say yes. Why? because of the Lleyton Hewitt Effect. Hewitt back in the early turn of the century did pretty much the same thing Nadal has been doing (though Nadal does it exponentially better) but this type of physical exertion over a protracted period of time will only shorten the life of you career. Has it been any wonder that Nadal usually has little left by the time the US Open comes around? Seems like Nadal has two choices: Develop a more powerful kill shot: a bigger serve, a flatter forehand etc to finish off points faster or continue playing his labor intensive game and top out at 9 or 10 slams
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Are you all stupid, blind, or what? Federer was on the cover when he won the French Open a few weeks ago. Chill, fanboys.
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Thanks deluge…that’s only been mentioned about 5 or 6 times in the posts so far.
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
John McEnroe: Seven major titles=Seven Sports Illustrated covers.
Roger Federer: Fifteen major titles= One Sports Illustrated cover.
What’s wrong with this picture? Could someone please explain?
on Jul 14th, 2009 at 8:20 pm
I can’t say I’m very surprised. Tennis has been marginalized to nothing in America for 25 years. However, Mr. Federer should praised for his accomplishment. Tennis IS the most grueling mano-a-mano sport today, esp. when winning a Grand Slam, let alone 15. I believe we are in a golden era of tennis. If you haven’t enjoyed the last 3 or 4 years in men’s tennis, you are not a REAL fan of sports. I was rooting for Feds even though Roddick was his counterpart. What a classy ambassador to tennis. Nice guys can and do finish first!