Started By
Message

re: Why do people just assume Tiger is the Goat?

Posted on 6/17/25 at 1:14 pm to
Posted by Jdash13
Gonzales
Member since Jan 2023
813 posts
Posted on 6/17/25 at 1:14 pm to
Cause by every metric but majors he’s dwarfs everyone, go look at all time strokes gained, best scoring averages etc.
Posted by nugget
Abrego Garcia Fan
Member since Dec 2009
15652 posts
Posted on 6/19/25 at 4:35 am to
quote:

and Jack was playing with shite gear, The game was changed for Tiger's generation with the 420cc driver.


Gear doesn’t matter, they were playing with the same as their peers, dumbass

quote:

and there's no doubt Jack had better competition.


This is wrong and plain stupid as well. Way more people have access to golf now making the fields much deeper. When 60% of the US Open field has the ability to win compared to when it was just 20% back in Jacks day, means it’s much tougher to win now. And, it will be much more diluted in another 20 years.

The only people that think Jacks better is because of nostalgic reasons.
Posted by bdavids09
Member since Jun 2017
1325 posts
Posted on 6/19/25 at 10:55 am to
Yeah people forget how good Phil Mickelson was in his prime. If Phil’s prime wasn’t same time as tigers then he would probably be one of the best of all time.
Posted by MWP
Kingwood, TX via Monroe, LA
Member since Jul 2013
10953 posts
Posted on 6/19/25 at 11:34 am to
quote:

Anybody that watched Tiger in his prime knows that the only reason he didn’t eclipse Jack is due to his body breaking down.


Lets be honest. Tiger did that to himself with his Navy SEAL fetish phase. Dude was making jumps, running around Orlando with a weighted pack, and training with the West Coast Team guys. One of the main reasons him and Hank split was over this behavior.
Posted by iwyLSUiwy
I'm your huckleberry
Member since Apr 2008
40471 posts
Posted on 6/19/25 at 11:37 am to
quote:

This is like the Earnhardt, Sr./David Pearson discussion. 1A and 1B.

Personally, I view Eldrick as tGOAT but you will get no argument from me saying it's Jack.


Yea it's really not that hard. It's easy to make an argument for both really. I personally give the edge to Jack because of the majors and even the 2nd place finishes in majors but have no problem with someone who thinks Tiger is the goat. They both are deserving of the title.
Posted by Tyga Woods
South Central Jupiter Island, FL
Member since Sep 2016
41239 posts
Posted on 6/19/25 at 11:49 am to
quote:

Lets be honest. Tiger did that to himself with his Navy SEAL fetish phase. Dude was making jumps, running around Orlando with a weighted pack, and training with the West Coast Team guys.


I'm not saying that some of the injuries weren't his fault. I just think it's reasonable to believe that if he stayed healthy like Mickelson or Rory, he likely would've had 18+ majors. I don't think that's much of a stretch.
Posted by Doug_H
Baton Rouge, LA
Member since Sep 2013
2643 posts
Posted on 6/19/25 at 12:53 pm to
quote:

Jack has three more majors and played against arguably better competition


This is mathematically false. Wayyy more golfers today, both professional and high level amateurs that don't make the cut today that possibly could have in the older days based on scores, meaning a far higher % of facing better competition

The gear/technology argument is ridiculous because it is inconsequential as both players would have same access to the current equipment of their time playing against competition using the same said equipment.

I would say Tiger because of his dominant run, which I value slightly higher than longevity=/=more wins. But I have no gripe with people's opinion of Jack being the GOAT either.
Posted by BuckeyeGoon
Member since Jan 2025
857 posts
Posted on 6/20/25 at 7:47 am to
I believe golf is one of the sports where every year the players are getting better than the past generations. And its not just related to equipment. Everything about the game/golf swing is being optimized and improved constantly and more players are able to take advantage from a young age. You take any random player who's currently in the top 25 and put them in the year 1990, they would absolutely dominate and win multiple majors per year.
This post was edited on 6/20/25 at 7:48 am
Posted by Allyn McKeen
Key West, FL
Member since Jun 2012
4636 posts
Posted on 6/21/25 at 7:32 am to
Both were the best of their era. Jack was special. He was the Bryson of his time. No serious golfers hit the ball as far as Jack. He was also deadly on distance control. He would play 18 holes and hit 18 shots pin high.

A lot of people focus on Tiger's power, but his short game was better than all of his peers, and it wasn't close. Phil was stupid good. Tiger was better.

Equipment did change the game a lot. Iron and wedge technology has made the rough less punishing. That changed the game from fairways being the premium to distance being the premium. 50 years ago you couldn't hold the ball on a firm green from the rough. Now you can.

If Jack played in Tiger's era he would have focused on distance and been successful. If Tiger had played in Jack's era, he would have focused on being deadly accurate off of the tee and would have been successful.

Who was better? Take a pick. You aren't wrong either way.
Posted by TT9
Global warming
Member since Sep 2008
90151 posts
Posted on 6/21/25 at 4:57 pm to
Jack is a much better person, I'm glad a low life like Tiger never passed him.

All i got.
Posted by dpd901
South Louisiana
Member since Apr 2011
7836 posts
Posted on 6/21/25 at 9:48 pm to
quote:

Anybody that watched Tiger in his prime knows that the only reason he didn’t eclipse Jack is due to his body breaking down.


If we’re going with the Coulda/Woulda/Shoulda Metric, then its Hogan and it’s not particularly close
Posted by BigNastyTiger417
Member since Nov 2021
5032 posts
Posted on 6/23/25 at 10:36 am to
Wrong.
Posted by Bigdawgb
Member since Oct 2023
3212 posts
Posted on 6/23/25 at 12:39 pm to
quote:

If we’re going with the Coulda/Woulda/Shoulda Metric, then its Hogan and it’s not particularly close


Hot take but I think Scottie Scheffler is close to what a prime Ben Hogan would look like in the modern era.

Medicore putting but the best player tee to green by a mile
This post was edited on 6/23/25 at 12:40 pm
Posted by makersmark1
earth
Member since Oct 2011
20099 posts
Posted on 6/23/25 at 6:59 pm to
quote:

I believe golf is one of the sports where every year the players are getting better than the past generations.


In days of yore, pros made more money hustling on Monday and Tuesday than the purses paid on the weekend.

A big shift occurred with TV and Arnold Palmer. Nicklaus was part of that growth, but there were a limited number of guys playing tournament golf for a living outside of the PGA tour.

When Tiger Woods came into the game, the money changed dramatically. This allowed worldwide tours to provide an opportunity to make a good living to many players. Now PGA Tour, DP World, and even Korn Ferry golfers make a nice living.

Guys in the 1970s and 1980s won in a season what a couple of T12s would get them today.

The professionalization of youth golf also exploded under the presence of Tiger. He made golf COOL.

I’m not a Tiger fan boy, but he made the biggest difference in purses. Every golfer who tied for tenth since 1997 has benefitted immensely.
Posted by QB
Louisiana
Member since Sep 2013
7536 posts
Posted on 6/23/25 at 7:58 pm to
Very simply put, if Jack played with Tiger's ball, and Tiger played with Jack's ball, the divide would be substantially more than it presently is in majors won. BTW, Tiger played with a ball for about two years that nobody else had 2000-2002. It was a Nike ball with the Titleist Pro V1, which Titleist didn't have at the time. It was an extreme difference and was part of Tiger's dominance. Jack gets my vote for GOAT because of several reason similar to the ball situation.
Posted by T1gerNate
Member since Feb 2020
1887 posts
Posted on 6/29/25 at 9:47 am to
Jack is tGOAT. Tiger went on an unbelievable tear and he was probably the best competitor of all time before the accident but you have to take into account the full career’s body of work for the GOAT discussion. Jack > Tiger and frankly it’s not that close.
Posted by LilWezyAna
BR
Member since Feb 2016
3185 posts
Posted on 7/15/25 at 11:12 am to
quote:

Jack also never lost a ball

Is this some sort of joke or are there people out there that actually believe this?
Posted by reauxl tigers
Tiger Woods Fan
Member since Aug 2014
9659 posts
Posted on 7/15/25 at 11:40 am to
quote:

Gonna save myself some typing and just link you to a decent article on the subject


And to save some scrolling:
quote:

So where do we stand? Is Tiger Woods or Jack Nicklaus the greatest ever? Well, because we don’t have sufficient comparable stats, they’re inconclusive. It depends what you see as the most important qualification for greatness. If it’s purely down to The Majors, Jack wins. If it’s down to individual, overall performance, Tiger wins. If you consider the technical data we do have – probably it’s Tiger, but in terms of team events, Jack has the edge
Posted by redfish99
B.R.
Member since Aug 2007
18639 posts
Posted on 7/15/25 at 12:24 pm to
Tiger has always been on the pills. Jack was a natural wonder who excelled on the biggest stages against numerous other Hall of Famers. Tigers era was against soft arse silver spoons .
Posted by blueboxer1119
Baton Rouge
Member since May 2013
9545 posts
Posted on 7/15/25 at 2:11 pm to
Because if they played each other in their prime, Tiger would kick the shite out of fat cigarette smoking Jack.

Anyone that knows anything about golf acknowledges this. Only hacks think otherwise.

*ask any PGA pro who is the best that has ever played.
This post was edited on 7/15/25 at 2:12 pm
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 4Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram