OT: PGA Championship

[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.

 

[Jerry1714]

Tiger in the lead heading into the weekend, be interesting to see the TV rating this gets if he still there on Sunday.

 

[Jerry1714]

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

Not really hard to figure out.

Rory, Jordan and Day have won 5 of the last 6 majors and if Rory was healthy for the Open its probably 6 of 6.

Add in the runner ups, and basically at least 2 of 3 being in the top 10 of all those majors, and the 8 or 9 non major wins the 3 have combined for over that stretch we have 3 clear guys dominating the sport right now.

 

[mauconnfan]

Tiger in the lead heading into the weekend, be interesting to see the TV rating this gets if he still there on Sunday.

Don't worry even if he wins the naysayers will site the less than stellar field and rightfully so to a point. Should be fun because quite honestly if he really has the feeling back, his reaction should be a positive one. I mean c'mon we all know how bad he would like to get into the FedEx and making it there with that kind of pressure would be a confidence builder for him. Interesting for sure.

 

[TasteofUConn]

WOOHOO Jason Day won the PGA championship! Now back to another white stiff winning the next major.

"White stiff?" What? Is that necessary? You really think Tiger's success was because he was half asian, half black? And not because he was a tremendous, revolutionary talent? Tiger was successful notwithstanding his race, not because of it. What is your issue? Golf too white for you? Tough t1tties for you.

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

"White stiff?" What? Is that necessary? You really think Tiger's success was because he was half asian, half black? And not because he was a tremendous, revolutionary talent? Tiger was successful notwithstanding his race, not because of it. What is your issue? Golf too white for you? Tough t1tties for you.

1. You just put several words in my mouth-when did I ever make such a stupid statement like "Tiger's success was because he was half asian, half black'? That is asinine. Tiger was dominant, unique, had personality (either good or bad), and a pioneer-mostly because of his race and background. That's what made it fun to watch. Please don't make up stuff that I never said.
2. Sorry if my lack of political correctness offends you. By white stiff, I meant a guy who lacks personality, edge, character. And yes, it just so happens that an overwhelming majority of the tour is caucasian. I have no problem (especially considering I'm white). But it's not about race mostly, it's about uniqueness. For example, Rickie Fowler is a unique golfer, especially with his outfits, (but unfortunately he's not dominant enough to fit this conversation). Bubba is also unique-unorthodox swing, self-taught. (I think Fowler is claimed to be self-taught also).

Golf is not "too white", because that is subjective and breeds racism. It lacks character, people coming from different paths with unique playstyles and methods that are extremely competitive. Not to say golfers aren't competitive (it's probably one of the most mentally demanding sports), it just lacks observable fire that exists in most other sports at the highest level. This could also just be because you don't physically compete against another person.. But JMHO

 

[mauconnfan]

1. You just put several words in my mouth-when did I ever make such a stupid statement like "Tiger's success was because he was half asian, half black'? That is asinine. Tiger was dominant, unique, had personality (either good or bad), and a pioneer-mostly because of his race and background. That's what made it fun to watch. Please don't make up stuff that I never said.
2. Sorry if my lack of political correctness offends you. By white stiff, I meant a guy who lacks personality, edge, character. And yes, it just so happens that an overwhelming majority of the tour is caucasian. I have no problem (especially considering I'm white). But it's not about race mostly, it's about uniqueness. For example, Rickie Fowler is a unique golfer, especially with his outfits, (but unfortunately he's not dominant enough to fit this conversation). Bubba is also unique-unorthodox swing, self-taught. (I think Fowler is claimed to be self-taught also).

Golf is not "too white", because that is subjective and breeds racism. It lacks character, people coming from different paths with unique playstyles and methods that are extremely competitive. Not to say golfers aren't competitive (it's probably one of the most mentally demanding sports), it just lacks observable fire that exists in most other sports at the highest level. This could also just be because you don't physically compete against another person.. But JMHO

Not sure how Jason Day and his story lacks personality, character and an edge? Have to agree many of the bigger names are "stiffs" in so many ways with little to attach to but Day isn't one of them.