|
Replies: 24
| visibility 396
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2011
|
|
|
|
 |
Hall of Famer [9089]
TigerPulse: 100%
43
|
Agreed, except for GOAT
Aug 15, 2017, 1:37 PM
|
|
Just Jack!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gridiron Giant [16038]
TigerPulse: 98%
50
Posts: 18682
Joined: 2009
|
What's crazy is that the Masters this year was incredible.
Aug 15, 2017, 1:39 PM
|
|
The best Masters since Phil's 1st win imo.
The PGA and British were awesome as well. Stunning the ratings were that low. At one point, there were like 7 guys tied for the lead on Sunday at the PGA including Justin Thomas, one of the hottest American names on tour.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2011
|
These numbers do not reflect golf fans
Aug 15, 2017, 1:40 PM
|
|
Tiger brought in the casual observers who knew nothing about golf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17382]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 15370
Joined: 1999
|
Partially agree
Aug 15, 2017, 1:59 PM
|
|
Although I am not much of a player anymore, I come from very much a golfing family. My Dad has played in the US Am, my brother played at Clemson and professionally, and I grew up playing junior tournaments and was on 4 state champ teams in high school. From probably 1975 to 2000, I watched the PGA every Saturday and Sunday.
There are just no compelling players for me, anymore. Tiger was one, and particularly so when taking into account his rivalry with Phil. Parity has reached the PGA, which in itself is good, but it has resulted in boring action and no name winners. Just look at the major champions over the past 5 years. Zzzzzz...
I went from watching every round, to watching majors only (every second of coverage), to basically watching only the Masters and US Open, only on the weekend, and sometimes not even then (if, for instance, DJ is leading).
I like Tiger, and his absence has contributed to my alienation from the PGA, but is not the sole factor by far.
I am sure that there are plenty of fans who enjoy seeing a bunch of no-names take turns winning majors, but not me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2011
|
Great points.***
Aug 15, 2017, 2:28 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11880]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: Partially agree
Aug 15, 2017, 3:38 PM
[ in reply to Partially agree ] |
|
Bingo ...... you just described me.
Jack, incidentally, knew instinctively that when Tiger was winning all of his majors at a younger age, it was his later years that would seal his legacy as the GOAT, particularly in majors. It has worked out that way, much due to Tiger's physical condition, but I would contend also from his mental approach and his incentive to continue to play at a high level. Of course, Jack was thinking at the time, that his priorities would be different because of his family.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [6813]
TigerPulse: 96%
41
Posts: 13500
Joined: 2015
|
Re: Partially agree
Aug 16, 2017, 2:12 PM
[ in reply to Partially agree ] |
|
Yes because Garcia and Speith are such no names. Koepka and Thomas will probably win more majors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letterman [294]
TigerPulse: 89%
14
|
Re: What's crazy is that the Masters this year was incredible.
Aug 15, 2017, 1:44 PM
[ in reply to What's crazy is that the Masters this year was incredible. ] |
|
I think that golf can be regional too. It's hard to meet someone around the south that doesn't know where the Masters is played. I've lived in the midwest and CA, both places could care less about golf. Didn't know main names, or where courses/tournaments were.
And dating over the years, it's hard to get non-golfers interested, also hard to keep someone's attention that long. And the last unifying theme, people who don't play golf, don't understand how amazing the pros are, and how hard it is to do what they do consistently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [38595]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 33261
Joined: 2011
|
Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA.
Aug 15, 2017, 1:40 PM
|
|
I love playing , but for all that I enjoy about participating in the game of golf I cannot watch 4 minutes of it on television .
It's not a game made for TV , in my opinion .
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [8088]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
|
Or was he the worst thing that ever happened to golf?
Aug 15, 2017, 1:44 PM
|
|
Was his stardom so great that it has cast a huge shadow on golf that it cannot recover from? What if there never was a Tiger? Would golf have slowly progressed into something better than we have today? Would Rashan Gary be playing for Clemson? Would countless champagne bottles remained unopened?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2011
|
The players today wouldn't be enjoying the giant purses
Aug 15, 2017, 2:28 PM
|
|
without Tiger Woods.
Golf is just resorting back to the mean. It attracts a small niche group who happen to be a fantastic niche because of their buying power.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17046]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 16942
Joined: 2004
|
Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA.
Aug 15, 2017, 2:30 PM
|
|
But GREAT ratings for TMZ.
I think he is a total bum. He played good golf back in the day but now a has been. He is golf's Bill Clinton.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [38595]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 33261
Joined: 2011
|
Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA.
Aug 15, 2017, 2:40 PM
|
|
Clinton was a scratch golfer ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2011
|
Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA.
Aug 15, 2017, 2:59 PM
|
|
Clinton was a scratcher.
Tiger was the worlds best golfer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11880]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA.
Aug 15, 2017, 3:40 PM
[ in reply to Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA. ] |
|
Clinton was never close to a scratch golfer ..... basically a cheater on the golf course as well as ....oh you know!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Warrior [4992]
TigerPulse: 100%
37
|
Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA.
Aug 15, 2017, 2:38 PM
|
|
Tiger brought a revolution to the game of golf, one that ultimately hastened his decline, due to increased competition. It also fundamentally changed golf, by introducing the elite athlete, that can level the playing field with the pure natural golfer. Tiger had both, and we will eventually see another rise to the top, but the time on top will be short because the margin for error is so small. Until another great comes along and changes the game the PGA will struggle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Tiger [38595]
TigerPulse: 100%
56
Posts: 33261
Joined: 2011
|
Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA.
Aug 15, 2017, 2:39 PM
|
|
Speith ? Rory ? That Coot Johnson ?
These guys aren't greats yet ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [81266]
TigerPulse: 100%
62
Posts: 37556
Joined: 2003
|
I'll say they are truly great when they play with the
Aug 16, 2017, 1:14 PM
|
|
consistency of a Nicklaus or a Woods. The guys on your list might win one week, and miss two cuts in a row the next two tournaments. The truly great find a way to turn those 77's into 71's, and make it to the weekend consistently, especially in Majors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2011
|
The Masters had to literally change their course and
Aug 15, 2017, 3:00 PM
[ in reply to Re: No Tiger. No bueno for the PGA. ] |
|
Tiger proof it. Few athletes in history change the actual game like that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Conqueror [11880]
TigerPulse: 100%
46
|
Re: The Masters had to literally change their course and
Aug 15, 2017, 3:56 PM
|
|
Tiger .... I accidentally TD'ed you ...love your posts and would never do that intentionally! Dangit!
You read a lot about the Augusta National "Tiger proofing" the course, but the truth is that they have been doing that ever since it was built in the early 1930's. Not many years after it was built Perry Maxwell re-designed all of the green complexes. Over the next 30 years bunkers were added and removed, tees re-built, greens re-built or changed (#8 green for example), etc., etc. In the 70's, way before Tiger, tees were moved back (#13 as far back as possible to the Augusta CC property line), bunkers adjusted, green surfaces re-contoured, tress planted, etc. Clifford Roberts never made changes just to penalize or accommodate a single player. He did what he thought was best for the golf course and certainly part of it was protecting par.
In later years, it appeared that they were trying to make the course more difficult for Tiger (by more lengthening), but if they did that just for him, they were playing into his hands because it was making it that much more difficult for the shorter hitters. The truth is that all these younger players were bombing it. The second cut "rough" was a slight concession, but it really hasn't had much effect. I had dinner with Fannie Sunneson this past Master's week (Faldo's caddie for both wins) and her insight into the changes was quite interesting. The caddies pick up the minutest little changes and other factors that make the course easier or harder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [14233]
TigerPulse: 100%
49
Posts: 13983
Joined: 2011
|
Re: The Masters had to literally change their course and
Aug 15, 2017, 4:49 PM
|
|
Thanks! Learned something new.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paw Master [17382]
TigerPulse: 100%
51
Posts: 15370
Joined: 1999
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [86]
TigerPulse: 97%
9
|
What if Jack would have taken a boat load
Aug 15, 2017, 5:33 PM
|
|
Of PEDs like Tiger. Would Jack have been considered the GOAT?
|
|
|
|
|
|
National Champion [7742]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 10578
Joined: 2007
|
Agreed, I was at the PGA last sunday and when Thomas had a
Aug 15, 2017, 5:40 PM
|
|
two shot lead i knew it was probably over. If there was a two shot lead and Tiger was still on the course it was always in question. There's no killer mentalities anymore. No gamers. We all knew if tiger was on the leader board at all on the final day it was his tourney to lose, even if he was down 5 strokes to start the day. Now you know, if someone has a 3 shot lead there isn't much turnover going to happen. These guys are all very bland. The only drama is when DJ chokes out and loses a tourney.
It was fun to go to hear the roars but there wasn't much to that tournament as a whole. No one really went out there and won it.. it was more of people fading back into the pack. You don't have those charging players like Jack, or Tiger, or even a Norman/Faldo type. ITs just average.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 24
| visibility 396
|
|
|
50
