Rory is interesting. He has done some really unlikable things but at the same time, he is just so damn likable when he talks. The way he handled that Master collapse was great as well. It's really easy for me to root for him.
***OFFICIAL OPEN CHAMPIONSHIP DISCUSSION***
- Thread starter erikbj
- Start date
Agree - maybe more "depth" today, but no Watsons, Palmers, or Trevinos like Jack had to beat to get his majors.
Id put Phil in that category. I would now put Rory in there and there are a lot of guys capable of playing well enough like a Sergio or Westwood. There just weren't the same amount of guys like that back then.
T[FONT="]h[/FONT]at is true now but w[FONT="]h[/FONT]en Woods was dominatin[FONT="]g[/FONT] in t[FONT="]h[/FONT]e 2000's [FONT="]h[/FONT]e didn't face t[FONT="]h[/FONT]e number of elite multiple major winnin[FONT="]g[/FONT] players t[FONT="]h[/FONT]at Jack did. If [FONT="]h[/FONT]e [FONT="][/FONT][FONT="]g[/FONT]ot a[FONT="]h[/FONT]ead by t[FONT="]h[/FONT]e end of Saturday, it was over.
I t[FONT="]h[/FONT]ink [FONT="]g[/FONT]olf is really balanced now, eac[FONT="]h[/FONT] major is completely up for [FONT="]g[/FONT][FONT="][/FONT]rabs. W[FONT="]h[/FONT]o knows w[FONT="]h[/FONT]o will win t[FONT="]h[/FONT]e P[FONT="]ga next mont[/FONT][FONT="]h[/FONT]
This will probably get spun into anti-Tiger but his beginning was also in a "down" era.
The current big names were entering the down side and he got in the heads of Ernie and Monty.
I agree that the depth is better making for better events (at times) but the major-winning depth remains nearly the same.
If a guy with the talent of Sergio is major-less then what are the real hopes for most of these guys?
The current big names were entering the down side and he got in the heads of Ernie and Monty.
I agree that the depth is better making for better events (at times) but the major-winning depth remains nearly the same.
If a guy with the talent of Sergio is major-less then what are the real hopes for most of these guys?
Els, Singh, Faldo, Michelson, McIlroy, Harrington, Furyk. Hell, McIlroy could end up being a top 5 all time player by the time he is done. There's a couple other guys playing right now who could end up winning 3 or more majors with Oosthuizen, Watson, Spieth, Kaymer, McDowell, Schwartzel......
I'm not sure I see how this really supports your point. The fact that a guy as good as Sergio still hasn't won a major says an awful lot about the guys who HAVE been winning majors.
Comparing jack to tiger is like babe Ruth vs Miguel Cabrera.......different eras make it impossible.
Guys in the past didn't work out, guys today take drugs and work out. Yes tiger has been questioned a number of times about PED use.
Jack was the best of his generation, tiger was the best during his window. Now we will see if Rory or speith can do something the next 15 yrs
Guys in the past didn't work out, guys today take drugs and work out. Yes tiger has been questioned a number of times about PED use.
Jack was the best of his generation, tiger was the best during his window. Now we will see if Rory or speith can do something the next 15 yrs
One of these does not belong, at least yet.
If Graham Dalaet doesn't miss a one foot putt Speith has zero wins, let alone majors.
Spending 76K with ARod's "doctor" will lead to speculation (dispite his personal disdain for Tiger, Hank Haney defends him BTW).
Even if Haney knew he was doping, there is no way he could say anything or he would be black balled from coaching.
I agree, to an extent.
Hank didn't see him do it and is looking at it from the "he's already strong and a work-out freak" perspective.
That puts it back at square-one.
