- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Last 7 major winners were 1st time major champions- good or bad for the game?
Posted on 6/19/17 at 7:54 am
Posted on 6/19/17 at 7:54 am
Got into a discussion yesterday with a friend about if the fact that the last 7 major winners were 1st time major champions is good for the game or bad. I say its great for the game but he made the point that the game needs a rivalry and as of right now there really isn't one. I see his point but there's so many good players on tour now that I don't know if we'll ever see rivalries like we did in the 70's and 80's and 90's. What do you think?
7
Posted on 6/19/17 at 8:22 am to roguetiger15
Except for Danny Willett, Most of those were "brand name" guys... Day, DJ, Stenson, Garcia, and Koepka looks like he's got potential to be a star, so I think it was a good batch. For golf to resonate with the non-golfing, casual sports fan, I think it's typically better to have a couple of dominant players winning majors.
You definitely don't want too many Danny Willet, Trevor Immelmann, Ben Curtis types fluking wins in your biggest events.
You definitely don't want too many Danny Willet, Trevor Immelmann, Ben Curtis types fluking wins in your biggest events.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 8:33 am to roguetiger15
Good for the competition. The former greats (including Tiger) never faced the depth of talent that is out there right now. A lot of that was created because of Tiger, but it is what it is.
Bad for the casual fan or local golf course looking to draw more interest in the game. Overall tho, interest starts with the youths getting involved. I've never seen golf as fluent as it is on the high school and college levels so while we're seeing a dip right now, I think that curve will increase.
Bad for the casual fan or local golf course looking to draw more interest in the game. Overall tho, interest starts with the youths getting involved. I've never seen golf as fluent as it is on the high school and college levels so while we're seeing a dip right now, I think that curve will increase.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 8:50 am to dpd901
quote:
Except for Danny Willett, Most of those were "brand name" guys... Day, DJ, Stenson, Garcia, and Koepka looks like he's got potential to be a star, so I think it was a good batch. For golf to resonate with the non-golfing, casual sports fan, I think it's typically better to have a couple of dominant players winning majors.
You definitely don't want too many Danny Willet, Trevor Immelmann, Ben Curtis types fluking wins in your biggest events.
This. In general, it's a bad thing. You don't need a 2-man rivalry per se, but having it stay around the top 5 or 10 guys in the world that the casual sports fan has heard of is good for the game.
First timers and flash in the pans are not good for the game at all, but many of these particular first timers in the past couple seasons were not unheard of guys.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 10:42 am to dpd901
quote:
Except for Danny Willett, Most of those were "brand name" guys... Day, DJ, Stenson, Garcia, and Koepka
This...
I think Day, DJ, and Stenson are likely to win another...
Garcia and Koepka might win another...
Willett and Walker not likely...
Posted on 6/19/17 at 11:27 am to roguetiger15
I don't think the first time major winners hurt the game. Instead, I think it is the lack of personalities that are hurting. Right now, Mickelson, Speith and Fowler are arguably the fan favorites and they are some of the more outspoken golfers. The TV fan needs someone to identify with and they have a difficult time with the new breed of pros that have played the junior golf circuit and have been coached not to put themselves out there with the press or the fans. It seems like many of these guys are interchangeable as they don't reveal their personalities and they just seem like golfing machines. That is probably great for their game, but in kind of sucks from a fan's point of view.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 1:23 pm to roguetiger15
quote:neither good nor bad
Last 7 major winners were 1st time major champions- good or bad for the game?
quote:golf has become too big for a handful of guys to dominate like we saw in the earlier years...what Tiger did in the year 2000s was unprecedented and we will never see dominance like that again, there's too many really talented players for just a few to rise so far above that it becomes a true rivalry
Got into a discussion yesterday with a friend about if the fact that the last 7 major winners were 1st time major champions is good for the game or bad. I say its great for the game but he made the point that the game needs a rivalry and as of right now there really isn't one. I see his point but there's so many good players on tour now that I don't know if we'll ever see rivalries like we did in the 70's and 80's and 90's. What do you think?
just my thoughts
This post was edited on 6/19/17 at 1:24 pm
Posted on 6/19/17 at 1:49 pm to roguetiger15
get ready for the winners to be even more diluted. AJGA and other junior tours are loaded with very strong golf talent - deeper fields from 13 to 18 at any time probably.
But here is the problem - these kids are machines - as well as they play, they are on the opposite side of the pendulum for personality.
We need a new Jack, Arnie, Tiger, Phil, Seve, Chi Chi, type personality to get going on the tour.
it is gong to fall on Jordan, Fowler, JT, Kaughman type guys to breath personality into the PGA Tour.
The Tour does a great job with their weekly Inside The PGA Tour Show - it really shows the human side of golfers....and you can make a slight connection to their world....but no one outside a few golf diehards watches that
But here is the problem - these kids are machines - as well as they play, they are on the opposite side of the pendulum for personality.
We need a new Jack, Arnie, Tiger, Phil, Seve, Chi Chi, type personality to get going on the tour.
it is gong to fall on Jordan, Fowler, JT, Kaughman type guys to breath personality into the PGA Tour.
The Tour does a great job with their weekly Inside The PGA Tour Show - it really shows the human side of golfers....and you can make a slight connection to their world....but no one outside a few golf diehards watches that
Posted on 6/19/17 at 3:01 pm to KillTheGophers
It is also a lot tougher to be a "personality" these days when someone is always ready to question every move or every word on social media.
Posted on 6/19/17 at 3:54 pm to DivotBreath
More casual viewers when tiger or phil is at or near top leaderboard saturday morning. Golfers are hsppy with one hit wonders and youthful winners.
Posted on 6/20/17 at 12:26 am to roguetiger15
great for the game
Posted on 6/20/17 at 12:42 am to roguetiger15
I don't think a new winner is bad. But it is bad when you don't have a top guy like Ricky, rory, or phil battling it out in the final two groups.
Guys like Finau and HV3 would be great to go along with Ricky, but theyre not consistent enough yet
Guys like Finau and HV3 would be great to go along with Ricky, but theyre not consistent enough yet
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News