Nadal To Leave IMG Agency!

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by cc0509

I always though Safin was a big nothing. Never saw what all the fuss was about and never found him remotely attractive. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Agreed. Safin always looked dirty and infested with std's. He does nothing for me at all.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by Clarky21

Agreed. Safin always looked dirty and infested with std's. He does nothing for me at all.

LOL, he probably is! I agree.

[veroniquem]

Safin was very good looking (like Haas) and he had presence. Of course all of this is very subjective, so arguable.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

Safin was very good looking (like Haas) and he had presence. Of course all of this is very subjective, so arguable.

Safin is not attractive to me; Haas is a different story. He is very good-looking, movie star good-looking imo.

[veroniquem]

Originally Posted by cc0509

I don't agree with you. For me Federer has tons of charisma and even did when he was in his goofy long-haired stage. I was an Agassi fan and agree he had a lot of charisma but Federer is right up there with him in my book. I agree that Nadal has charisma too but in a different way to Federer. Federer is elegant, Nadal has a boyish charm.

And Djoko is a born entertainer, so they all have something in the end...

[smoledman]

Safin is a tennis gigolo - that doesn't make him charismatic. To me Fed's ability to have these interviews during slams(AO, USO) where he comes off like a regular pro is amazing.

[GoodVibrations]

I won't argue back and forth about Safin and Fed but I think the bottom line is that it's hard to claim that Federer is THAT much more naturally charismatic as a person than Djokovic or whoever else. If you put them both in room without knowing who they were, I don't think most people would think that Federer is far and away more charismatic. Fed is popular with the casual fan because of his winning ways (most of all) and the image that's become associated with his brand. It's not because he's so amazingly movie star charismatic. The "problem" is that Djokovic doesn't have an obvious image or brand beyond being a jokester and that sort of stopped years ago. I'm sure that's why he/his people signed with IMG, to help him with that.

[smoledman]

Originally Posted by GoodVibrations

I won't argue back and forth about Safin and Fed but I think the bottom line is that it's hard to claim that Federer is THAT much more naturally charismatic as a person than Djokovic or whoever else. If you put them both in room without knowing who they were, I don't think most people would think that Federer is far and away more charismatic. Fed is popular with the casual fan because of his winning ways (most of all) and the image that's become associated with his brand. It's not because he's so amazingly movie star charismatic. The "problem" is that Djokovic doesn't have an obvious image or brand beyond being a jokester and that sort of stopped years ago. I'm sure that's why he/his people signed with IMG, to help him with that.

There is more to being charismatic then making impressions of other players. Federer just oozes charisma when he does pressers and interviews.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

And Djoko is a born entertainer, so they all have something in the end...

Yes, I think Djokovic has a good personality but I don't find him charismatic in the same way a Federer or Nadal is.

[GoodVibrations]

Originally Posted by cc0509

Yes, I think Djokovic has a good personality but I don't find him charismatic in the same way a Federer or Nadal is.

I think we need to define what everyone means by "charismatic." I agree that Nadal and Federer have a certain charisma inherent in their particular personal brand for sure.

smoledman, seriously, most casual fans aren't watching a bunch of Federer interviews. They like him because, again, he wins a lot and they find his overall image appealing. Not because he's Mr. Charismatic in interviews. He is a "classy competitor" and everything surrounding him screams this. I guess could include his demeanor in interviews but it goes way beyond that to marketing and PR of the "RF" brand in the media -- just think of his endorsements. Novak doesn't have a similar niche.

[smoledman]

the biggest thing Fed has going for him is his excellent game. The variety of shots he brings to the game is something leaves fans breathless. That is the most important part.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by GoodVibrations

I think we need to define what everyone means by "charismatic." I agree that Nadal and Federer have a certain charisma inherent in their particular personal brand for sure.

smoledman, seriously, most casual fans aren't watching a bunch of Federer interviews. They like him because, again, he wins a lot and they find his overall image appealing. Not because he's Mr. Charismatic in interviews. He is a "classy competitor" and everything surrounding him screams this. I guess could include his demeanor in interviews but it goes way beyond that to marketing and PR of the "RF" brand in the media -- just think of his endorsements. Novak doesn't have a similar niche.

A certain something that one has inherently which makes one globally likeable. One either has it or one does not. Federer and Nadal have it, Djokovic does not have it, nor does Murray at least not on the same level.

[GoodVibrations]

Originally Posted by cc0509

A certain something that one has inherently which makes one globally likeable. One either has it or one does not. Federer and Nadal have it, Djokovic does not have it, nor does Murray at least not on the same level.

You're looking at the situation from the standpoint of Nadal and Federer being already established superstars though, so of course it's easy to say that they have that "certain something" that makes one globally likeable. I think it's totally possible that Djokovic just doesn't have it, but we'll see. I think a lot of what seems "inherent" in Nadal and Federer is actually the result of great marketing and PR, but we're all looking at it from the point of hindsight, so it doesn't seem that way. We'll see in a few years re: Djoko I suppose.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by GoodVibrations

You're looking at the situation from the standpoint of Nadal and Federer being already established superstars though, so of course it's easy to say that they have that "certain something" that makes one globally likeable. I think it's totally possible that Djokovic just doesn't have it, but we'll see. I think a lot of what seems "inherent" in Nadal and Federer is actually the result of great marketing and PR, but we're all looking at it from the point of hindsight, so it doesn't seem that way. We'll see in a few years re: Djoko I suppose.

No, I don't think I am being blinded by Federer's and Nadal's success. Djokovic has already won 5 slams, surely that is enough for me to see if he has that charisma and I don't think he has it. I don't think he will ever be as popular as Federer and Nadal. Just as Sampras with his 14 slams was never as popular as Agassi with his 8.

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by cc0509

No, I don't think I am being blinded by Federer's and Nadal's success. Djokovic has already won 5 slams, surely that is enough for me to see if he has that charisma and I don't think he has it. I don't think he will ever be as popular as Federer and Nadal. Just as Sampras with his 14 slams was never as popular as Agassi with his 8.

True. And he is far from new to tennis, so if he were going to blow up into a superstar like Fed he would have by now. He's been on the tour for years.

[Rjtennis]

Nadal isn't a big draw as a personality. He is rather shy and speaks broken English. He is a marketing draw because he is a beast on the court. Nole has way more personality and charm and is the #1 player in the world. A good agent can make him a big star. The biggest strike against him is that he is from a small country.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by Clarky21

True. And he is far from new to tennis, so if he were going to blow up into a superstar like Fed he would have by now. He's been on the tour for years.

Yep, but the *********s are blind. With charisma it is there or it is not and it is very rare for a player to have blinding popularity and charisma. If you look at tennis from the 70's on, the only true superstars are Borg, Agassi, Federer and Nadal amongst the greats and past slam winners.

[Mike Sams]

Originally Posted by smoledman

There is more to being charismatic then making impressions of other players. Federer just oozes charisma when he does pressers and interviews.

You wouldn't give Federer the time of day if he was a #100 ranked player.

[cc0509]

Originally Posted by Mike Sams

You wouldn't give Federer the time of day if he was a #100 ranked player.

But the point is Djokovic already has five slams and has been on tour for a while, yet he does not have anywhere near the popularity that Federer and Nadal do. Why? It is not only because Federer and Nadal have more slams, Djokovic is not in their league in the charisma department. He will never be the global superstar they are. Look at Sampras and Agassi as the perfect example.

[Mike Sams]

Originally Posted by cc0509

But the point is Djokovic already has five slams and has been on tour for a while, yet he does not have anywhere near the popularity that Federer and Nadal do. Why? It is not only because Federer and Nadal have more slams, Djokovic is not in their league in the charisma department. He will never be the global superstar they are. Look at Sampras and Agassi as the perfect example.

That's because Djokovic wanted to be liked. He wanted attention which is why he did those stupid impersonations and got himself this reputation of being a joker. He should've kept it no nonsense, straight business-like from the beginning and let his tennis do the talking.