OT: PGA Championship

[intlzncster]

Phil, Ernie, and Vijay have been playing professional golf for about 20 years. And the entire point of my argument is that today's talent will likely not win as many tournaments, because there's better competition.

Scoring average would be a better metric. It was interesting yesterday that Spieth broke Tiger's total score in the 4 majors over a single year, and Day broke the record for lowest score in a major. On the same day.

A good portion of that can be explained by better equipment, better training, nutrition, guys actually caring about their bodies and what have you. If you put a lot of those guys on that regimen, they'd be right there.

 

[mauconnfan]

Scoring average is not a great metric here since they played different courses. Tiger beat the average score of the field by 84 in his majors, Speith did it by 70.

Not many PGA's (majors) I can remember going back with greens so receptive let's be honest. It wasn't like just one guy was in double figures there were a ton. Does it say a lot about the depth, yeah some. But it also tells you the course was too soft for a major they were throwing darts for crying outloud, hardly anything bounced away from the pin like it does normally in majors. They were hitting 235 yard 4 irons and sticking it on a half island green. I know most of the courses they played in the "John Wooden" days didn't have greens like that.

 

[amory]

A good portion of that can be explained by better equipment, better training, nutrition, guys actually caring about their bodies and what have you. If you put a lot of those guys on that regimen, they'd be right there.

but they weren't! they weren't on that regimen!

lol i'm not gonna make much headway here but in short, I don't think the game "needs" Tiger at this point. It'd be nice to have him back in form, but either way the game is in great hands.

 

[intlzncster]

but they weren't! they weren't on that regimen!

lol i'm not gonna make much headway here but in short, I don't think the game "needs" Tiger at this point. It'd be nice to have him back in form, but either way the game is in great hands.

Hahaha I get you. I do think Tiger helped, but imo, it's more the natural evolution of the sport--and sports in general. You see it at every sport, at every level. But the key is, everybody was on equal footing (resources) in the time that they played.

I don't think the game needs Tiger per se, but it is way better off with him in the picture. He was like Mike Tyson in his prime. A killer. And ridiculously marketable.

 

[mauconnfan]

but they weren't! they weren't on that regimen!

lol i'm not gonna make much headway here but in short, I don't think the game "needs" Tiger at this point. It'd be nice to have him back in form, but either way the game is in great hands.

I agree with this for sure. While it looked like the game was going to miss Tiger and it did, it now has young kids who can really play and quite a few. It's in good hands and that is all thanks to Tiger. If you watched Jason Day he said Tiger was his hero and for that reason he's in great shape, stayed out of trouble and looked to golf for this to happen. He, Jordan, Rory, Rose, Rickey, DJ and a few others have it in a nice place. But we still need to see them do the things Tiger did before we think of these comparisons. I mean DJ for his length more than his ability to close majors, Ricky for his clothes more than winning. Still young and ways to go but to have them in the same light of even Sergio is not right. He didn't win big one's either but he won.

I think they will, most of them will win majors they're really good players.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Next April if the Sunday leaderboard at Augusta could easily look like this and no one would seem out of their element.

Spieth
Rory
Day
Rose
Watson
Scott
D Johnson
Fowler
Z Johnson

That's some compelling TV right there.

 

[mauconnfan]

Next April if the Sunday leaderboard at Augusta could easily look like this and no one would seem out of their element.

Spieth
Rory
Day
Rose
Watson
Scott
D Johnson
Fowler
Z Johnson

That's some compelling TV right there.

Throw in Koepka and Justin Thomas.

 

[Jerry1714]

Throw in Koepka and Justin Thomas.

Thomas is going to have to qualify for it first, might get in with making it to the Tour Championship this year though. I like his game, but it may be a little early for him.

Stenson should be on that list too. With 4 top 10s in the last 5 Masters you gotta include Kuch too.

 

[mauconnfan]

Thomas is going to have to qualify for it first, might get in with making it to the Tour Championship this year though. I like his game, but it may be a little early for him.

Stenson should be on that list too. With 4 top 10s in the last 5 Masters you gotta include Kuch too.

Stenson good call although he may just be a bit too streaky we'll see. But when on he has a powerful game. A kid like who showed up on the scene from Euro ball is Willet. Think he will be a player to watch as well as the big Austrian Weisberger (?) and another relatively unknown in a kid Grillo who has a lot of game

 

[Jerry1714]

Stenson good call although he may just be a bit too streaky we'll see. But when on he has a powerful game. A kid like who showed up on the scene from Euro ball is Willet. Think he will be a player to watch as well as the big Austrian Weisberger (?) and another relatively unknown in a kid Grillo who has a lot of game

Way Branden Grace has played this year in the spotlight and at 27 years old he is a name to watch as well

 

[UConn4ever]

Stenson good call although he may just be a bit too streaky we'll see. But when on he has a powerful game. A kid like who showed up on the scene from Euro ball is Willet. Think he will be a player to watch as well as the big Austrian Weisberger (?) and another relatively unknown in a kid Grillo who has a lot of game

Stenson is world class when his putter is working if it's off he's a middle of the pack player.

 

[tykurez]

Way Branden Grace has played this year in the spotlight and at 27 years old he is a name to watch as well

Boy did he seem like an unstoppable train yesterday ... just couldn't keep up that ridiculous pace.

 

[JSM1970]

Kaymer, who has the best complete game. He should win more than he has/does.

Throw in Koepka and Justin Thomas.

 

[jleves]

I'm surprised by the downgrading of Tiger in this thread. The guy has won 14 majors and 79 PGA Tour events. I don't care what era he played in, those are massive numbers and he still has a chance to win some more, although it is kind of shocking to think he hasn't won a major in 7 years. Any player who gets the career grand slam is considered legendary and a hall of famer. Tiger has done that three times over. He had plenty of elite competition in his prime even if it wasn't as deep. The other top 5 players at any point in his run were great players. Maybe we go a little deeper now, but the elite players of that time were amazing - some are still threats to win majors.

What would have been interesting would be Jack and Tiger being in their prime at the same time. I would give the edge to Tiger in the matchup. I'm sure that will catch some heat, but in his prime, Tiger was killing the field which was better than the field in Jack's prime.

Unless the game changes and fewer great athletes decide to play golf, Jack's and Tiger's numbers won't be touched.

If only he didn't come to the conclusion that having lots of sex was an addiction but pretty natural to most of the guys I know....

 

[Chin Diesel]

Throw in Koepka and Justin Thomas.

And several others.

Kaymer
Oosthuizen
Matsuyama
Bradley
Simpson
Jimmy Walker
Neil Reed
Snedeker
JB Holmes
Schwartzel
Sergio



My arbitrary dividing line was that no one watching would have any doubt if the player's game was big enough to match the moment. The second group you may have doubts.

**Except Kaymer. I'll put him in the top group. Two majors and a Player's Championship. He won't let the moment be bigger than him.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I'm surprised by the downgrading of Tiger in this thread. The guy has won 14 majors and 79 PGA Tour events. I don't care what era he played in, those are massive numbers and he still has a chance to win some more, although it is kind of shocking to think he hasn't won a major in 7 years. Any player who gets the career grand slam is considered legendary and a hall of famer. Tiger has done that three times over. He had plenty of elite competition in his prime even if it wasn't as deep. The other top 5 players at any point in his run were great players. Maybe we go a little deeper now, but the elite players of that time were amazing - some are still threats to win majors.

What would have been interesting would be Jack and Tiger being in their prime at the same time. I would give the edge to Tiger in the matchup. I'm sure that will catch some heat, but in his prime, Tiger was killing the field which was better than the field in Jack's prime.

Unless the game changes and fewer great athletes decide to play golf, Jack's and Tiger's numbers won't be touched.

If only he didn't come to the conclusion that having lots of sex was an addiction but pretty natural to most of the guys I know....

Tiger may catch lightning in a bottle and win another but he has 20+ players every major who are much better than him right now or any time soon. Moreso than his swing mechanics it's his physical ailments that will keep him from reaching Jack. These guys are hitting 330+ off the tee effortlessly.

And you highlight a big difference. During Tiger's prime there were only 5-10 players whose game was comparable if Tiger was on that week.

 

[jleves]

Tiger may catch lightning in a bottle and win another but he has 20+ players every major who are much better than him right now or any time soon. Moreso than his swing mechanics it's his physical ailments that will keep him from reaching Jack. These guys are hitting 330+ off the tee effortlessly.

And you highlight a big difference. During Tiger's prime there were only 5-10 players whose game was comparable if Tiger was on that week.

Totally agree that Tiger will have to improve his game a lot to win another or two. I think he may be able to do it, but he's never getting to Jack's numbers with the current field. Even so, 14 or 15 or 16 majors is still huge. None of these young phenoms will get to double digits just because of the fields. Maybe Spieth or Rory sniff double figures, but I think it's unlikely.

 

[mauconnfan]

And several others.

Kaymer
Oosthuizen
Matsuyama
Bradley
Simpson
Jimmy Walker
Neil Reed
Snedeker
JB Holmes
Schwartzel
Sergio



My arbitrary dividing line was that no one watching would have any doubt if the player's game was big enough to match the moment. The second group you may have doubts.

**Except Kaymer. I'll put him in the top group. Two majors and a Player's Championship. He won't let the moment be bigger than him.

Problem is there's not many closers even though they are talented. They all had their years, streaks like Keegan and Webb - neither can do anything but make cuts now hardly even being in contention on weekend. Good money? yes but not really elite at all as well as most of the rest. Kaymer has the game but has also fell off when the time comes to close the last couple of years, but he has wins to show his potential and his success. Always have been good players on tour but to be named with other "winners" you need to have more than one or 2 good years in which you were always in contention. Not really a lot of those.

And Neil Reed? I mean Bobby Knight beat the hell out of him and he's now a pro golfer?

 

[Excalibur]

Tiger may catch lightning in a bottle and win another but he has 20+ players every major who are much better than him right now or any time soon. Moreso than his swing mechanics it's his physical ailments that will keep him from reaching Jack. These guys are hitting 330+ off the tee effortlessly.

And you highlight a big difference. During Tiger's prime there were only 5-10 players whose game was comparable if Tiger was on that week.

While this is true, many of the current generation are where there are at least in part because of Tiger Woods. The rest of the field was weak by comparison because they were playing a different game than he was. Now the new guys have caught up. The fact that Tiger was the first to do it doesn't make it any less remarkable.

The tour today looks a lot like it did in the mid 1970's, when guys like Miller, Weiskopf, Watson, Floyd, Irwin and others emerged after Jack revolutionized the game in the 1960's. The only difference was that Jack could still compete.

 

[storrsroars]

I don't miss Tiger at all and won't going forward. I like the potential of Speith/Day/DJ/Louie/Rory for compelling majors going forward.

What I'll miss in the future is the cigar chomping Euro team in the Ryder Cup. Had a chance to follow Clarke, Jimenez, Westwood and others around during a practice round at Brookline in 99. Fun group of guys.

Nine of my predicted top 10 made the cut and four made the top 10, so not too bad.

 

[Leebo]

I'm nearly as much of a Tiger fan as a UConn fan. Basketball and golf are my two favorite sports.

I'm not worried about Tiger. I'm not worried about UConn.

 

[mauconnfan]

The game does not need Tiger no doubt about that. But if you want to see a dramatic surge in ratings, watch it if he becomes Tiger again. It's fine where it is, but it would be unbelievable if he makes it back and that's a no doubter.

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

Golf has become more unwatchable IMO. A LOT less intriguing without a dominant force like Tiger.
WOOHOO Jason Day won the PGA championship! Now back to another white stiff winning the next major. And a different one the next major.
Imagine if tennis didn't have dominant forces like Djokovic, Nadal and Federer- even less people would care. Or if the NBA didn't have Lebron, Kobe and Durant.
It doesn't matter if you hate Tiger. I don't like Tiger. But he makes the sport interesting. And it would be even more interesting if he was competing at a high level again.

 

[Excalibur]

3-4 dominant players beats one dominant player, regardless of their names. That's where we are heading.

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

3-4 dominant players beats one dominant player, regardless of their names. That's where we are heading.

Ok, name the next 3-4 dominant players in golf.