Tiger Woods hits out a bunker on the 18th hole during the final round of his Masters' win last weekend. Andrew Redington/Getty Images

Just forget it.

Forget Tiger Woods righting the leaking U.S.S. Major and sending the media into a long-lost frenzy. Forget the publicized and overblown skirmish between pugnacious Phil Mickelson and virile Vijay Singh. Forget the Chip Heard Round the World on 16. Forget the seven-straight birdies by Woods on Sunday morning, Chris DiMarco's feisty play and the Augusta officials' refusal to air the Sunday morning round.

However, do not forget the increase in people watching Sunday's final Masters round versus the previous year's ratings or the reason why.

The 2004 Masters had every reason to garner boffo ratings. It had Mickelson -- the present-day Arnold Palmer and the "people's choice" -- striving to exorcise the ghost of lost majors past from his golf ledger, scorching the back-nine with a monumental 31 and giving viewers a storybook ending. It had Ernie Els performing his own surgical prowess on the final nine then pacing the practice green waiting for the sudden-death playoff between the two golf giants.

That scenario still didn't provide enough juice to lure viewers because Woods finished in a tie for 22nd and had already taken his jet -- and the ratings -- down the runway when Mick's winning putt found the jar.

You can bet Tour officials and network suits won't forget.

This year, ratings rose dramatically and while those ratings offered instant gratification, the ensuing hangover could leave the Tour staggering no matter the amount of Tylenol. In fact, network execs are discounting the ratings bonanza because the main subject doesn't play enough events to satisfy television's appetite or justify another immense contract.

Last week's Masters validates the fact that avid golfers and casual fans alike can't (and won't) see the players for the Woods. The mere fact that ratings increased some 41 percent over last year's event throws a wrecking ball at the carefully constructed Tour. Need I remind you we're comparing Woods' victory ratings with Mickelson and Els -- not Mike Weir and Len Mattiace. This surely makes officials in Ponte Vedra Beach squirm and fidget. If Mickelson and Els (two of the Big Four) can't draw viewers, you have to presume the Tour has Woods at the top and the others are his B-list supporting cast and highly paid catnip.

With Woods planning to play no more than half the Tour events, what does Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem do? As mentioned in an earlier article, the Commissioner is facing his negotiation Waterloo. If viewers only care about Woods, the networks have to feel confident a lesser dollar contract is theirs for the taking.

Tour officials are in denial if they think their sport is not dependant on Woods' results. The fans have delivered a landslide vote. They must clone Woods, resurrect John Daly's inconsistent game or be condemned to less money. Sobering, no?