We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Is Nicklaus relevant anymore?

He’s not relevant to me. I’m more of a casual golf watcher and fan. From that perspective, the current players (some of them) are much more relevant to me than Nicholas.
 
Very. Just like Tiger will always be relevant to the game and any other all time great will always be relevant to their respective sports. Is he relevant to today's fields? No, but he'll always be relevant to the sport.
 
CBaker said:
Very. Just like Tiger will always be relevant to the game and any other all time great will always be relevant to their respective sports. Is he relevant to today's fields? No, but he'll always be relevant to the sport.
Click to expand...
not sure GIF by Night At The Museum
 
Only in the conversations when it comes to the Majors & Tiger Woods. Maybe if there is a new golf course under construction with his name behind it
 
He is, and always will be, relevant in the history of the game from his playing days. I do agree that his views on the modern game are irrelevant though.
 
His contribution to the game as a player, designer and via tournaments and charities make him a person who whose accomplishments will always make him relative to the history of the golf
 
He's relevant but not the most relevant. Obviously the USGA is listening to him or people like him so he's going to impact all of us with this stupid ball rollback. That seems pretty damn relevant to me.
 
To me no. Not that he doesn't have influence or and effect on some aspects, I just don't see them as relevant to today's game. Too much other stuff going on with him and his name now.
 
Jman said:
And when something like a question such as this is POSED to people, they’re going to engage, if it was never posed, they wouldn’t. On your stance you could also say then if no one was talking about him as there was no thread, he isn’t relevant.
Click to expand...

if you pose the same question about Ryan Palmer to people, it gets zero traction, people don't engage. there are plenty of threads that go nowhere.
the fact that Nicklaus was the choice and the post is getting engagement points to at least some degree of relevance.

JB said:
I could start a thread on OJ Simpson and get tons of views, it doesnt mean he is relevant to the current NFL game.
Click to expand...

that moves things back to the question @Jeff Spicoli asked about how "relevant" is being defined.
a strict definition is simply being related to the discussion, i think most everyone would agree he's related to golf generally.
but a more colloquial definition usually includes that they matter. let's look at the narrower version of "he currently matters."

OJ doesn't matter to the current NFL game because he isn't influencing anything in the NFL, his voice or actions don't matter.

i do think Nicklaus continues to matter in golf, as he appears to view himself as a guardian of the game. his views (agree with them or not) get airtime and he's undeniably influential with key decision-makers. this whole ball rollback issue didn't just get invented by the USGA and R&A a few months ago, Nicklaus has been pushing on it for years. it's easy to dismiss his comments as "old man shaking fist at cloud" stuff, but his private and public pressure on the ball rollback issue alone suggests he continues to matter and influence modern golf.
 
Yes, He is one of the greatest players ever. He is a HOFer and that is where his status lies.
One of the Grand Masters still around.
 
jpgolf said:
I’m not particularly a Nicklaus fan. I think a lot of negativity about him lies in his personality. Seems like “golf” adored Palmer for his personality... and was enamored with Bobby Jones for his. Golf was in awe of Ben Hogan because of his tenacious personality. But Nicklaus just tends to rub people the wrong way. He may be a nice man, a good parent, and a loving husband... but, golf fans just don’t gravitate towards him like they do other “legends.”
Click to expand...
Ever watch the 86 Masters?
 
Is the Pope Catholic?
Jack is the GOAT, of course he is relevant, I don’t always agree with him, but it doesn’t affect his relevance to the game.
 
I would guess he wants to be relevant but really isn't. Certainly not in the way Bobby Jones was when he was alive. He will always be a major part of the game's history.
 
razaar said:
I would guess he wants to be relevant but really isn't. Certainly not in the way Bobby Jones was when he was alive. He will always be a major part of the game's history.
Click to expand...
Not going along with Jones compared to Nicklaus. Counting the amateurs is just not the same and he wasn't facing the best. The best were treated like step children and I would think the legacy of Hagan exceeds that of Jones let alone Nicklaus.
 
Relevant as he is teaching golf course design, most recently JT and Panther National. I am learning more about the design of courses during non-play season, so relevant topic of mind.

I always enjoy his indepth at Memorial and Masters speaking ops. I would say relevant, game changing now - probably not.
 
I think so, he was one of the first long ballers and the battles he had with Arnie helped the game back then in a similar way Tiger did. He’s still in tune with the governing bodies and is involved in design work so he knows both sides of the coin. Is he respected? I don’t think so
 
The GOAT (Jack) or any GOAT of any sport should be relevant.
 
JB said:
Bill Russell is in the NBA and literally nobody talks about him as one of the greats anymore.
Nor do they discuss him as relevant.
Click to expand...
Yeah but Bill wasn't the NBA GOAT.
 
Deets said:
The GOAT (Jack) or any GOAT of any sport should be relevant.
Click to expand...

Not only is this one of those highly subjective topics that can be debated endlessly when you’re talking about GOATs of any sport.. , but the meaning of relevant is also open to such wide interpretation.. accomplishments after playing vs while playing.. for eg..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Hes a legend so he is relevant to an extent as some people value his opinion.

HE IS NOT AS RELEVANT as he would like to be, thats for sure. To me he is less and less relevant every year that goes by.

also, to be fair to him, id say the same for Arnie if he were still around. Although, it seemed later in life Arnie didnt try so hard and thus is farrrrrrrrrr more endeared
 
If he decided he’s had enough, and stepped back from golf entirely (no appearances, interviews, course designs etc..). What would be the net result to the game? I think that could be a good answer to the question. My guess would be very little.
 
I fully appreciate all the greats from years past that accomplished mighty feats in the arena of sports, but let me ask you this… and the answer is a resounded answer to the question presented.

Do you currently play and or watch golf on TV because of Jack? I don’t and I fully expect your answer to be the same, where as many play or watch golf because of Tiger.

For that alone my answer is a clear No that Jack is not relevant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top