baddog

Yep, Jack playing on one leg couldn't have whipped his competition. He had to be 100% every week. You're learning. Thanks!! Isn't it funny how much some people take from a post? Just what fits their agenda. Wow, I forgot. Your opinion is the only one that counts. Anything straying from that line of thought is a ''spin''. Why do you think that we believe our opinion is the only one that counts??? I think your opinion counts. I respect your opinion but I disagree with it. Is that ok? Cool. I respect every opinion on here. I just don't want my view referred to as a spin. It makes it seem that mine doesn't matter or that I don't know what I am talking about. I have watched golf all my life, and I even like Tiger. Maybe I just don't want to see the idols of my day surpassed. That's difficult for anyone, I suspect. I still hold my position on the competitive edge.

Yep, Jack playing on one leg couldn't have whipped his competition. He had to be 100% every week. You're learning. Thanks!! Isn't it funny how much some people take from a post? Just what fits their agenda. Wow, I forgot. Your opinion is the only one that counts. Anything straying from that line of thought is a ''spin''.

UNC is hitting a high % and Michigan St. is turning the ball over and shooting air balls.....a formula for an arse whipping which is what we have so far.

UNC 38-18. I'm not sure what it is that Michigan St. is playing....it sure ain't basketball.

Wow Wow, a thread addressed to me. I feel special. I think all of us can ''chew'' on this post I quoted by NDN. He states his mind without sarcasm or attitude. I agree with most of what he said, except that I still think Jack is better. Only time will tell how Tiger's competition plays out. Right now, I think it is lagging behind Jack's. However, I like what you said NDN. It makes sense.

Watching Stroud play today.....nice up and down from the bunker. Looks like he has a PING hat on with the ''I'' scratched out.

I was pretty sure you would try to spin it your way. You choose to interpret it the wrong way. What it means is Besides the top 5 guys in the 70's no one else won because they simply were not as good as todays players. It just is not even close. That is fine. It is your opinion and I respect that. However, it is simple another senior just not wanting to admit that a young black man has taken over the game of golf and that this generation is far and above generations of the past. You will see the light soon! Dude, there were more than 5 guys!!....which has always been my point. Look at the lists, and that's just the majors, then get back to me. Thanks for the respect, then you shoot me down. Which is it? I have never mentioned race. Must be your spin.

Good stuff.

Gee spinks, as bright a guy as you seem to be, I think you have proven my point even further. You said this... ''It basically means that whereas in Nicklaus’ era the top few players in the world won a significant number of PGA Tour events, in Tiger Woods' era there is far more parity which can be statistically seen in the lower percentage of events won by the top five golfers in the world.'' I have to counter with not so much parity, as the top five aren't as good, and Tiger is taking more titles because of it. This argument is like whether the glass is half full or empty. You brought up some good stats, now look at the list of past major winners and you will see a repetition of names alright.....more than the few you mentioned for sure though.....and that's just the majors. Really, you left out so many name it ain't even funny. Please look at the list of past winners. My opinions can only play out as the years go by. Lots of you have said you liked Jack and have changed your minds. It is simply that I haven't. It still does not make me wrong.

You sure weren't the ''go to'' guy in this discussion. I thought you would have seen that coming nostradamus.

BS again. You need to have watched Ray Floyd before making a remark like that. It's just not true. Floyd was the toughest to catch, even Jack said that. Give Raymond a lead, and he didn't choke. Taking Michael Jordan from a team sport and playing him against individuals does not really fit this scenario. Playing the Jordan led Bulls against the 50s-60s Celtics would be interesting though. Cartwright against Russell would be no contest. Russell wins that one easily. Remember, Jordan was a great player in his own right before he won any championships, but he didn't win one until Scottie Pippen stepped up. Ahhh, team sports. Ali was the best. Whether Louis could have beaten him, I would be willing to listen to someone who saw him fight. Louis' records still stand today. That's a tough one. I get sick of the younger generation thinking that sports happened while they were alive. That's a dream world. None of the past champions could match today's athletes. If that's not the biggest bunch of malarkey, I don't know what is. O'hair could have won that tournement had he not choked on Saturday with bogey finishes and followed that on Sunday with too many bogeys. This kid has won twice in four years with no majors. Not really much competition for Tiger, yet he had a huge lead and blew it. If you want to give Tiger credit for that then go ahead, but some people fold under the simple pressure of winning. Ray Floyd did not. Tiger, Garcia, Els, Singh, all could have won playing in Jack's day. However, Jack squeezing out 18 major wins while playing in such a group is what impresses me. These are my opinions, of which no one can produce any 'facts' to discredit them. Just because someone disagrees with me, does not make them right.

Oh please oh great seer, show me any 'facts' you have produced. Your comment was well deserving of my short answer because that's what it was.

BS

Of course I have, and I came to the conclusion that the quality of players is not what it was back then. It's like watching the NE Patriots play the Detroit Lions every week. Are you going to tell me that NE just makes it look easy, or that Detroit sucks? If you don't agree with what I say, then don't, but please don't tell me who I can compare.

Hey Lazeek. Nope, not sick at all, just still living in the past with the guys I grew up with. Nothing wrong with that. ;D

Whatever, I think you need to look at the lists of past winners of the PGA, British Open, US Open, and Masters and please show me where the dropoff in talent is. Tiger would smoke those guys? I think not.

Besides Phat Mac, I am the only one on this thread who is not a moderator. Do all you guys know each other or something? Just curious. Tiger is the best today, but he needs better competition IMO.

I see your point and like all the golfers of old BUT none of them had to stare down Tiger on a Sunday. Sorry, I think just the opposite. That kid today could have won had he not choked. Please don't tell me that's what Tiger does to people. All the old greats made final day charges of their own, and some won, and some leaders choked, but not like I see today. These are just my opinions and today's contest merely reinforces it.

I will repeat my stance. Tiger Woods is the best player in golf today. However, if you spotted Raymond Floyd a 5 shot lead going into the final day, 4 birdies would not be enough. Not only would Raymond have played bogey-free golf, he would have birdied a couple more just to make sure you didn't have a chance. We just don't have that type of players today.......and again, I like Tiger.

Tiger will make that putt.

Players today can't hold a lead and force anyone to play catch up. They choke balls into the water when all they have to do is play center of the green. Tiger's job is made more easy....IMO.

You give yourself way too much credit. You don't get to me at all. I just don't get you. Your opinions are not facts. It's just the way you interpret them. Have a good day, buddy.

Methinks kool-aid is better than the stuff you been drinking. Just what is it that crawled up inside of you and died?

Again, you have no point. It is MOOT. No one is scared of anyone. If they were afraid, they wouldn't don the uniform.

Actually, LaMarque smacked us around twice in one year when they won the title ('03 I think). Once in pre-district and in the playoffs. However, we played them tougher that year than anyone, except for maybe Texas City. The past two seasons we have played both Lamarque and Brenham. Apparently we do not run from powerhouses, so your point is moot. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out either. Is your team playing the same teams as 5 years ago. Then you must be scared.