So in the last Major, Brooks Koepka takes another win with an amazing round to finish 16 under. The story though, was Tiger shooting a 64 and keeping the pressure up until the very end, along with Adam Scott.
The announcers even said what a shame it is that another Major for Koepka will be overshadowed by Woods' being in contention. I don't blame Tiger. He's just doing his thing. He says all the right things in his interviews. He's humble and simply talks about his rounds. It's the media I've always had a problem with. Follow him. Absolutely. Give him extra coverage for sure. He's by far, the biggest star in the game. Just don't do it to the detriment of other, currently more successful, golfers.
There are some great, young players on tour. I've been a Spieth fan since he broke in. Tough year so far. Justin Thomas is quickly becoming one of my favorites. Yeah, I know he's a Bammer. Whatever. But if you hear an interview with him, it's hard not to like this guy. I just think the PGA needs to have coverage of their events geared as much towards all these young guns and the future of golf, as it does on Tiger. Hell, I hope Woods starts winning some tournaments and creating some rivalries. Great for golf.
Oh, and if you love golf, The Ryder Cup is fast approaching.
I like playing golf. Never much on watching it. Will watch some occasionally just to see who's winning, realize that I don't know most of them -- where are Ernie Els, Greg Norman, Seve Ballesteros, Chi Chi, Gary Player, Tom Watson and the real golfers? -- see who's winning and go do something else.
I'll admit that I checked the leaderboard a few times today simply because I didn't want to see Woods win and have to listen to months and months of the HE'S BACK bellowing from every direction. I watch Woods in exactly the same way I watch an Alabama game. Only occasionally and only to see him lose.
Last chance at a major this season. What's more likely, that he'll be better a year from now when he's 43 and got a little more rust in the tank or will his game continue to edge back toward the middle/bottom? He was a good golfer, one of the best. Part of the issue I have with him is that his heyday came in the middle of a golfing valley. Would he have won the same if he'd had to compete against the better golfers of today?
When Tiger won his first Masters, Tom Kite (48 years old) was second, Watson (also 48) was fourth. The list of players who finished second in his 14 majors isn't exactly a who's who of the game. Els (twice), Bob May, David Duval, Retief Goosen, Phil, Chris DiMarco (twice), Colin, Shaun Michael (guess he wasn't wrestling that week), Woody Austin and Rocco Mediate.
At some point over the next few years he'll probably win another tournament. Maybe not a major, but something. You could say the same about pretty much every golfer who finished in the top 20.
Think about this for a minute. Tom Watson was 33 when he won his last major. Sam Snead 41. Gary Player 42. Hogan 40. Seve 31. Byron Nelson 33. Walter Hagen 32.
Since 1968 (50 years) only four men have won a major at age 43 or over. FOUR. Only 8% of all majors in history have been won by a man over the age of 40.
When he was good, he was as good as anybody. But he hasn't been "that guy" in over a decade.
From what I've heard, he played as well as he's played in a long time today. Does that mean it's a trend and he's going to be "back?" Maybe, but the odds are against it. Let's cover it as if he is, regardless.
185 Replies
30900 Views