Tiger Woods and Foley

[JB]

Question, can we as fans honestly call him 'potentially' the greatest player of all time. At this moment I don't think he can carry that title. Based on recent events I can't see him handling the pressure cooker that is Sunday at a major. Without 5 more he will be the second best to ever play, right?
Let's get a win against 144 them another and then a major and revisit this thread.

I think it is a fair statement. Its arguable, because of Jack's record, but his winning percentage and overall depth of field are certainly there.

 

[CharlieMoy]

So if he keeps playing events and his winning percentage dwindles, does it take anything away from that argument?

I think it is a fair statement. Its arguable, because of Jack's record, but his winning percentage and overall depth of field are certainly there.

 

[thepete]

So if he keeps playing events and his winning percentage dwindles, does it take anything away from that argument?

In immediate memory perhaps but 15 years down the road...nah.

 

[Chunkylover77]

I have no doubt that Tiger was the best golfer I've ever seen. Didn't get to see Jack in his prime but I can't imagine he was as dominant a force as Tiger was for that extended period of time.

 

[CharlieMoy]

I have no doubt that Tiger was the best golfer I've ever seen. Didn't get to see Jack in his prime but I can't imagine he was as dominant a force as Tiger was for that extended period of time.

I cant imagine that either. I mean he played in so many events afaik.

 

[Tmex]

Question, can we as fans honestly call him 'potentially' the greatest player of all time. At this moment I don't think he can carry that title. Based on recent events I can't see him handling the pressure cooker that is Sunday at a major. Without 5 more he will be the second best to ever play, right?
Let's get a win against 144 them another and then a major and revisit this thread.

This is going to completely come off as someone who clearly didnt watch the older generation as much (although I did grow up watching couples, norman etc) but I don't see how he isnt. I'm bias towards what I've seen but imo (which again is generational) I think i'd still give him the edge. if Major victories were all that mattered, some players would be a lot lower on the list than others.

 

[Tadashi70]

Based on a 15 year stretch there is no argument. But based on 10 years Griffey was the greatest as well. Now he is a hall o famer. If TW breaks JN record of majors I think he deserves the title greatest 'Player' that ever played the game. But if he doesn't he will trajectly only be remembered for 15 yrs and a horrible thanksgiving weekend

 

[JB]

Based on a 15 year stretch there is no argument. But based on 10 years Griffey was the greatest as well. Now he is a hall o famer. If TW breaks JN record of majors I think he deserves the title greatest 'Player' that ever played the game. But if he doesn't he will trajectly only be remembered for 15 yrs and a horrible thanksgiving weekend

This is true, however one must also remember that while the Thanksgiving weekend was the "coming out party", its not as if he made a single mistake. If one chooses to remember for those actions, I dont believe its the "coming out party" that is in their thoughts, but what they consider a myriad of things.

I agree with your thoughts on the 15 years and like baseball, golf is very much a statistic sport. However if he sprinkles in 2 wins a year and a couple of more majors (my expectations), I think he is considered the GOAT.

 

[Tadashi70]

This is going to completely come off as someone who clearly didnt watch the older generation as much (although I did grow up watching couples, norman etc) but I don't see how he isnt. I'm bias towards what I've seen but imo (which again is generational) I think i'd still give him the edge. if Major victories were all that mattered, some players would be a lot lower on the list than others.

I really didn't start watching and following golf until '86 so I saw the same guys you saw. Based on a set number of years no one has ever done it better. But I think this title should be taken up if he starts done a winning path or he was just great for a period.
I do think the bench mark is majors. And I do agree there are guys in the HOF that have way less but an impressive career. When TW hangs it up and has surpassed the bench mark, Jack...IMO he will be the greatest. But if he doesn't I cant see that holding water.

 

[Tadashi70]

This is true, however one must also remember that while the Thanksgiving weekend was the "coming out party", its not as if he made a single mistake. If one chooses to remember for those actions, I dont believe its the "coming out party" that is in their thoughts, but what they consider a myriad of things.

I agree with your thoughts on the 15 years and like baseball, golf is very much a statistic sport. However if he sprinkles in 2 wins a year and a couple of more majors (my expectations), I think he is considered the GOAT.

This I agree with 100%. I am just bringing to light that he will have to finish strong to hold the GOAT.

 

[JB]

I think the benchmark is partly majors, and I know I am in the minority at this point. We discuss majors as being the greatest, however leading up to that point of being the greatest of all time, only majors are discussed sporadically. This is easier to explain via talking, but let me give you an example.

John Daly
Fred Couples

Would anybody in their right mind consider John Daly a better career golfer than Fred Couples? Yet he has twice as many majors.

 

[berty1027]

I think it is a fair statement. Its arguable, because of Jack's record, but his winning percentage and overall depth of field are certainly there.

I have to agree with JB here. It is absolutely debateable who is the greatest of all time, and I think the biggest factor in my mind is the record in the Majors which currently gives the edge to Jack - but the overall depth of fields during Tigers career, in my opinion, has been far better than during Jacks career. You could debate this all day, but I can honestly call him "potentially" the greatest of all time. At the very least he is in the conversation.

 

[Kmac]

I think the benchmark is partly majors, and I know I am in the minority at this point. We discuss majors as being the greatest, however leading up to that point of being the greatest of all time, only majors are discussed sporadically. This is easier to explain via talking, but let me give you an example.

John Daly
Fred Couples

Would anybody in their right mind consider John Daly a better career golfer than Fred Couples? Yet he has twice as many majors.

That right there is mind bottling and almost shocking.

 

[berty1027]

I think the benchmark is partly majors, and I know I am in the minority at this point. We discuss majors as being the greatest, however leading up to that point of being the greatest of all time, only majors are discussed sporadically. This is easier to explain via talking, but let me give you an example.

John Daly
Fred Couples

Would anybody in their right mind consider John Daly a better career golfer than Fred Couples? Yet he has twice as many majors.

Clearly JD is twice the golfer than Freddie will ever be!

jk. haha.

 

[the_paulo]

Difficult to compare golfers over the generations by any factor other than majors. For instance, the money list wasn't there, so can't compare wins on that. The OWGR weren't there, so can't compare time at the top.

 

[Hanks]

He's also twice the size too

Clearly JD is twice the golfer than Freddie will ever be!

jk. haha.

 

[Tmex]

I really didn't start watching and following golf until '86 so I saw the same guys you saw. Based on a set number of years no one has ever done it better. But I think this title should be taken up if he starts done a winning path or he was just great for a period.
I do think the bench mark is majors. And I do agree there are guys in the HOF that have way less but an impressive career. When TW hangs it up and has surpassed the bench mark, Jack...IMO he will be the greatest. But if he doesn't I cant see that holding water.

I don't know man. I think all sports stars lose their dominance as time goes. If we were to say, you know the Jordan that retired from the wizards (the one who missed wide open dunks) wasn't as strong as he was during that long run he had... I'm gonna use that to say he isn't the GOAT...I don't know. Even then its a generational arguement because I didn't watch the era before he, magic, bird, robinson, wennington.. etc

 

[TC]

It's one thing to get upset with the dude, but to "enjoy" seeing him lose on Sunday? C'mon you're not a real fan. It's like me saying I'm a Lebron fan, but enjoyed watching him choke in the Finals.

You're completely reaching. Just b/c I enjoy seeing Phil step up and take a tournament by the throat and win it doesn't mean I love seeing Tiger fail. I'm a realist dude. I'm not a person who sits around hoping for Tiger to "come through for me". I call it like I see it. Clearly, you love Tiger and not Phil. I prefer Phil over Tiger but I don't dislike him. He can't close on Sunday's anymore. It's kind of ironic that an entire line of clubs is named Victory Red b/c that's what we saw from him on Sundays. Not anymore. That's my point. And that was the point of my post that you dug up to try to engage in some sort of smear tactic.

 

[Canes]

That's exactly what it's like, you can't control who people do and do not like or how they root for them.
Is he a fan like you of TW, no but that does mean he's not a 'real' fan.
I'm not getting on your case but define 'real' fan for me.

It's all good Freddie. Real fan = someone who doesn't relish in their team's misery.




- Tappin' that ice cold keg!!!

 

[Kmac]

It's all good Freddie. Real fan = someone who doesn't relish in their team's misery.




- Tappin' that ice cold keg!!!

You can stop the BS now because my BS meter is pinned.

 

[blugold]

So. Sean Foley. He uses a lot of technology to analyze the swing. That's pretty sweet.

 

[JB]

It's all good Freddie. Real fan = someone who doesn't relish in their team's misery.




- Tappin' that ice cold keg!!!

Golf fans are allowed to be objective though. Its okay to support the good and still not be okay with the bad.

 

[TC]

It's all good Freddie. Real fan = someone who doesn't relish in their team's misery.




- Tappin' that ice cold keg!!!

hahaha, you're such a sore loser. Seriously. So I can't be a fan of Tiger's b/c I enjoyed watching someone step up, take the spot light from him, and win a tournament? B/c that's precisely what Phil did. He played awesome golf. I enjoyed watching him make shots and drain clutch putts. I figured as a fan or golf you would enjoy that? But alas, you were hoping for a Mickelson melt down, so how do we differ?

 

[Hawk]

I really have no opinion on this. I like TC's point about biomechanics, because my instructor does the same thing in the hopes that his students can avoid injury. He's not a stacker though.

 

[#Cookie]

hahaha, you're such a sore loser. Seriously. So I can't be a fan of Tiger's b/c I enjoyed watching someone step up, take the spot light from him, and win a tournament? B/c that's precisely what Phil did. He played awesome golf. I enjoyed watching him make shots and drain clutch putts. I figured as a fan or golf you would enjoy that? But alas, you were hoping for a Mickelson melt down, so how do we differ?

Not really sure if it matters but canes' initial post with your quote was from Abu Dhabi when TW lost to Robert Rock....nothing to do with Phil initially.