Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Which alum did the better job promoting their University? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M35WJIIdhS4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 No one ever accused Jack of being charismatic. Jack did his promoting on the golf course, by becoming the greatest golfer to ever live. Obviously Tiger is on his way to taking that away from him, but until then, Jack is the best who ever lived. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclones Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 No one ever accused Jack of being charismatic. Jack did his promoting on the golf course, by becoming the greatest golfer to ever live. Obviously Tiger is on his way to taking that away from him, but until then, Jack is the best who ever lived. Boy, what a great debate that is. Golf is one of those sports in which equipment has made such a major difference that its difficult to say across generations. One argument could be that since all players have benefitted from the equipment improvements that you can throw that argument out. But who knows how good Jack would be if he started playing in 1996 when Tiger turned pro. Those would be some battles. The Bear butthole wouldn't tighten up on the back nine on Sunday like those of Mickelson, Els, and others that Tiger has left in his wake. Tiger stays 2nd on the list until he wins major #19. Another interesting note is that to go along with Jack's 18 major wins were 14 2nds and 8 third places. That's some damn good golf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted January 14, 2008 Author Share Posted January 14, 2008 Jack will always be the Babe Ruth of Golf. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted January 14, 2008 Share Posted January 14, 2008 Boy, what a great debate that is. Golf is one of those sports in which equipment has made such a major difference that its difficult to say across generations. One argument could be that since all players have benefitted from the equipment improvements that you can throw that argument out. But who knows how good Jack would be if he started playing in 1996 when Tiger turned pro. Those would be some battles. The Bear butthole wouldn't tighten up on the back nine on Sunday like those of Mickelson, Els, and others that Tiger has left in his wake. Tiger stays 2nd on the list until he wins major #19. Another interesting note is that to go along with Jack's 18 major wins were 14 2nds and 8 third places. That's some damn good golf. A fine debate indeed. However, claiming that Jack wouldn't fold on the back nine like Tiger's contemporaries is only an argument to support why Jack is better than those guys, not Tiger. Don't get me wrong, I'm not implying for a second that there's any reason at all to mention any of those guys in the debate. In terms of equipment, like you said, everyone benefits from that, so I can't see why that matters. Nobody is pointing to Tiger's scores as reasons for why he may be better than Jack. I think time will tell, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 I don't think they fold. I saw a stat, that it was either the 2001 or 2002 Masters, Phil Mickelsons 2nd place score to Tiger, would have won every other Masters tournament. The most amazing thing about Jack wasn't the 18 majors, it was how many times he finished 2nd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.