203 replies to this topic

[tbowles411]

Johnny, on 06 March 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

Rory does not get to be in this conversation until he wins 6-7 majors.
End of story

Let me know when that happens

This I ABSOLUTELY agree with.  He's at the beginning, full of promise and has all of his hair.  Let's let him get to two and beyond and see.  But when he approaches double digits, get back to me.  We've seen this show before.

[irlgolf56]

MB GOLF, on 06 March 2012 - 01:27 PM, said:

^^^

Hey, I agree, but the point of this post is for the minions who argue "Tiger's Back!", "Rory's the Man!", etc, etc.  

Point is simple:

Each had "budding careers" 40 events into their respective PGA TOUR careers.  Those stats are measurable.  Each have "career numbers" that do offer trends on the PGA TOUR.  

All are fantastic, but to argue who's "the man" is nuts.  

Give me someone with better career numbers 40 events in as a professional.

"Rory's the man!" sounds like a very Tiger-esque phrase.

No, no, Rory fans are far more sophisticated.

"Rory is a mighty fine young man with a great deal of potential!" is not as "cool", but more accurate.

[irlgolf56]

Just for the information of the general reader, I am as devout a Rory fan as they come,  but putting him in an 18 major conversation is frankly quite ridiculous.

I do however think he could start edging his way into this type of conversation, if only for double digits.

He is only 22, he has a good 20 years left, he doesn't have to have a Tiger 2000-like year to get there, but he will need to be incredibly consistent.

[Vindog]

This thread is definitely living down to its potential

[whcwhc]

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Why don't you compare the 3 of them at 22 years old and get back to us

Nice try, but
Jace turn pro @ 21.
Tiger turn pro @ 21.
Rory turn pro @ 18.

[MileHighClub]

whcwhc, on 06 March 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Why don't you compare the 3 of them at 22 years old and get back to us

Nice try, but
Jace turn pro @ 21.
Tiger turn pro @ 21.
Rory turn pro @ 18.

I see.  So all of the pro tournaments that Jack and Tiger played in as amateurs and all of the division 1 college tournaments that they played in don't count?  Seems like you are trying to give those two a big head start.

[rblmp32]

Great stats.  Amazing to see Tiger's numbers, as compared to Jack (and Rory for that matter) and naturally just goes to show just how amazingly consistent Tiger was/is.

[irlgolf56]

whcwhc, on 06 March 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Why don't you compare the 3 of them at 22 years old and get back to us

Nice try, but
Jace turn pro @ 21.
Tiger turn pro @ 21.
Rory turn pro @ 18.

I don't necessarily agree with the argument, but a pro at 18 is there for a reason, and is not going to get going immediately. The kid still should have been in school at that age!  

I've said it before, but I subscribe to the theory that he spent his formative years learning the trade,  learning how to get into contention and learning how to win after he got there, and that his real career is only just starting.

[kellygreen]

MileHighClub, on 06 March 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

By the age of 22, Jack, Tiger, and Rory each had one Major victory.  History may end up showing they were evenly matched.  Wait and see.

The only problem is that Rory turned pro at age 18, and therefore is entering his fifth season as a professional.

Whereas Tiger was playing college and amateur golf, and going to classes until age 21.  So at age 22, he had only finished his first season as a pro.

[kellygreen]

MileHighClub, on 06 March 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

whcwhc, on 06 March 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Why don't you compare the 3 of them at 22 years old and get back to us

Nice try, but
Jace turn pro @ 21.
Tiger turn pro @ 21.
Rory turn pro @ 18.

I see.  So all of the pro tournaments that Jack and Tiger played in as amateurs and all of the division 1 college tournaments that they played in don't count?  Seems like you are trying to give those two a big head start.

Are YOU arguing that NCAA tournaments and USGA amateur events are the same as playing a full-time USPGA Tour or European Tour schedule?

Edited by kellygreen, 06 March 2012 - 01:46 PM.

[whcwhc]

MileHighClub, on 06 March 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

I see.  So all of the pro tournaments that Jack and Tiger played in as amateurs and all of the division 1 college tournaments that they played in don't count?  Seems like you are trying to give those two a big head start.

Please WIKI or Google a bit and you will see that Rory had just as impressive "AMATEUR" career as JACK and Tiger. Not giving anyone a head start, but it certainly does not make sense comparing them @ 22 just because Rory is 22.

[svccmember]

Here is a fact.

In Sports,  someone better always comes along.

Enjoy the Players now on tour whose idol is Tiger Woods, and they get to play him. Tiger never got to play Jack in a competitive PGA event.

[deasy55]

whcwhc, on 06 March 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Why don't you compare the 3 of them at 22 years old and get back to us

Nice try, but
Jace turn pro @ 21.
Tiger turn pro @ 21.
Rory turn pro @ 18.

Tiger turned pro at 20.

But that's not the point. Tiger/Jack did their apprenticeship on the college/amateur circuit. Rory did his on the pro circuit. They decided to mature their golf games differently.

People saying that Rory has been a pro 4 years, therefore we should compare his career to what Tiger/Jack had done after 4 years is laughable. Fact of the matter is, at the 2019 Masters, McIlroy will have been a pro for almost 12 years and playing in his 11th Masters as a pro (barring any injury or unforeseen tragedy), but he'll still be in his 20s and have half his career to go. There's over 50 majors for Rory to play in until he gets near Tiger's current age, 76 majors until he reaches Lefty's current age, and that's a scary thought.

[deasy55]

whcwhc, on 06 March 2012 - 01:48 PM, said:

Please WIKI or Google a bit and you will see that Rory had just as impressive "AMATEUR" career as JACK and Tiger. Not giving anyone a head start, but it certainly does not make sense comparing them @ 22 just because Rory is 22.

Well, we can't exactly compare them at 30, can we?

[MileHighClub]

irlgolf56, on 06 March 2012 - 01:42 PM, said:

whcwhc, on 06 March 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Why don't you compare the 3 of them at 22 years old and get back to us

Nice try, but
Jace turn pro @ 21.
Tiger turn pro @ 21.
Rory turn pro @ 18.

I don't necessarily agree with the argument, but a pro at 18 is there for a reason, and is not going to get going immediately. The kid still should have been in school at that age!  

I've said it before, but I subscribe to the theory that he spent his formative years learning the trade,  learning how to get into contention and learning how to win after he got there, and that his real career is only just starting.

This^^^

If you have kids then you know that they change a lot between the ages of 18 and 21.  So Rory spent these formative years learning his trade playing in pro tournaments and the other two did it playing as amateurs in pro events and in top flight college events.  Few male golfers can win a PGA tour event as an 18 or 19 year old.  Look at photos of Tiger while in college and you will see a skinny twig.  They grow stronger and get much better at golf during this time.  It isn't fair to Rory to compare him at 18 or 19 years old to Jack and Tiger at 22 or 23 years old, unless you have a huge bias and don't want to accept that Rory is quite possibly as good at 22 as Jack and Tiger were.

[JaxBeachNole]

coolmonk, on 06 March 2012 - 01:06 PM, said:

This thread is like comparing LeBron/Kobe/MJ. In the end, the only numbers that matter are 0, 5, and 6 rings. LeBron is a solid player as is Rory...both are developing and in their prime but both need more championship wins to be considered better than their predecessors. Kobe is like Tiger, both a little past their prime but still capable of dominating on any given day, and until they win that next ring or major...MJ and Jack will always be remembered as the most iconic figures in their respective sports (okay I lied..Tiger will probably go down as the most iconic golfer in history). Regardless, the point is Rory is no Tiger...and Tiger is no Jack. We can only compare them at the end of their careers and even then you can't say one was better than the other because they all competed in different eras.

Quote

Avatars

• PG-13 avatars
• please. Nothing offensive to women or inappropriate for children.

I like that this post has an ad for Nike Basketball shoes

"Tiger is no Jack" is correct he is better

[kellygreen]

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 01:55 PM, said:

whcwhc, on 06 March 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

deasy55, on 06 March 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Why don't you compare the 3 of them at 22 years old and get back to us

Nice try, but
Jace turn pro @ 21.
Tiger turn pro @ 21.
Rory turn pro @ 18.

Tiger turned pro at 20.

But that's not the point. Tiger/Jack did their apprenticeship on the college/amateur circuit. Rory did his on the pro circuit. They decided to mature their golf games differently.

People saying that Rory has been a pro 4 years, therefore we should compare his career to what Tiger/Jack had done after 4 years is laughable. Fact of the matter is, at the 2019 Masters, McIlroy will have been a pro for almost 12 years and playing in his 11th Masters as a pro (barring any injury or unforeseen tragedy), but he'll still be in his 20s and have half his career to go. There's over 50 majors for Rory to play in until he gets near Tiger's current age, 76 majors until he reaches Lefty's current age, and that's a scary thought.

No, it is NOT laughable.

Because Rory had several years to get used to competing as a professional...getting familiar with the courses that he would play each year, and the superior standard of play on the professional tours.     It is common for European players to turn pro as teenagers, simply because there is not the collegiate athletic system over there that we have here.   But that does NOT negate the fact that Rory is entering his fifth year---with all the experience that entails----simply because he started younger.

Tiger fell out of the classroom as a student at Stanford....playing college kids and 40 year-old bank executives at USGA events...and won the THIRD event he teed it up as a professional.  Won the first major he competed in as a professional by 12 shots.

What is laughable is insisting that the two men were at the same stage in their professional carreers at age 22, simply because they were the same age.  

The bottom line is that Rory had the benefit of a MUCH hotter crucible to turn him into the player he has become at age 22, than Tiger did playing college.   Rory is a fifth-year professional.  Regardless of what chronologic age he is.

[Vindog]

tbowles411, on 06 March 2012 - 01:29 PM, said:

Johnny, on 06 March 2012 - 01:26 PM, said:

Rory does not get to be in this conversation until he wins 6-7 majors.
End of story

Let me know when that happens

This I ABSOLUTELY agree with.  He's at the beginning, full of promise and has all of his hair.  Let's let him get to two and beyond and see.  But when he approaches double digits, get back to me.  We've seen this show before.

I agree that it's early to make the comparisons.

But if I may dare...It's pretty dumb to say "let's not even talk about it until he gets X majors".  Neither Jack nor Tiger had 6 majors at 22.  People were making the Tiger - Jack comparison pretty early in Tiger's career...if we remember.

[Vindog]

JaxBeachNole, on 06 March 2012 - 02:05 PM, said:

I like that this post has an ad for Nike Basketball shoes

"Tiger is no Jack" is correct he is better

That's your opinion and perhaps a biased one at that, I'm not sure.

Last I knew 18 was more than 14

[bscinstnct]

Who knows what the future brings.

But, Rory is in a very elite class to win a major at so young an age.

And he did show that he can destroy a top field at a major, very Tiger-esque.

[MileHighClub]

bscinstnct, on 06 March 2012 - 02:10 PM, said:

Who knows what the future brings.

But, Rory is in a very elite class to win a major at so young an age.

And he did show that he can destroy a top field at a major, very Tiger-esque.

Finally, a voice of reason.  Short and to the point.  Good post.

[JaxBeachNole]

Vindog, on 06 March 2012 - 12:55 PM, said:

JaxBeachNole, on 06 March 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

Tiger Woods is the greatest golfer of all time, Rory is going to be great (his swing is absolutely beautiful) and I would expect him to win multiple majors. I think the number one ranking will be his for a very long time.

jury is still out on that one.  He could be when it's all said and done, but right now it's a contested issue.

I disagree, Tiger 2000 to 2001 is the greatest any player has ever played period. He owned all four scoring records for the majors at the time, 3 coming in a row while winning the Masters in 2001 to complete the Tiger Slam.

[irlgolf56]

kellygreen, on 06 March 2012 - 02:07 PM, said:

No, it is NOT laughable.

Because Rory had several years to get used to competing as a professional...getting familiar with the courses that he would play each year, and the superior standard of play on the professional tours. It is common for European players to turn pro as teenagers, simply because there is not the collegiate athletic system over there that we have here.   But that does NOT negate the fact that Rory is entering his fifth year---with all the experience that entails----simply because he started younger.

Tiger fell out of the classroom as a student at Stanford....playing college kids and 40 year-old bank executives at USGA events...and won the THIRD event he teed it up as a professional.  Won the first major he competed in as a professional by 12 shots.

What is laughable is insisting that the two men were at the same stage in their professional carreers at age 22, simply because they were the same age.  

The bottom line is that Rory had the benefit of a MUCH hotter crucible to turn him into the player he has become at age 22, than Tiger did playing college.   Rory is a fifth-year professional.  Regardless of what chronologic age he is.

So then we shall wait to compare them like we should have done in the first place?

[Vindog]

JaxBeachNole, on 06 March 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

I disagree, Tiger 2000 to 2001 is the greatest any player has ever played period. He owned all four scoring records for the majors at the time, 3 coming in a row while winning the Masters in 2001 to complete the Tiger Slam.

again, that's your opinion.

18 is still more than 14.  So there's that

[kellygreen]

IIRC, Sergio Garcia won his first professional tournament at age 19....in his SIXTH start as a professional.   He had his famous duel with Tiger down the stretch at the 1999 PGA Championship only a few months later.

The issue isn't physical maturity...the issue is EXPERIENCE.   Older players have simply had longer to learn the subtleties of the game...and how to win at the highest level...than someone who is younger.

Rory has had several years of learning this at the professional level....and I'm not going to let you simply discount simply because comparing his career to Tiger's at the same age (though at vastly different stages in their professional careers) puts Rory's accomplishments in a more favorable light.  

Rory is likely to go on to be a HOF player before his careers over.  But the bottom line is that it has simply taken him longer to get his legs under him as a professional than Tiger...and the fact that he turned professional as a teenager is no excuse.   Especially when Garcia won TWICE on the European Tour as a 19 year old.

[johnnypro]

Can everyone just take a deep breath, take a step back and contemplate how immensely difficult it is to win 14 majors, let alone 18.
McIlroy's career is in its infancy and to speculate on whether he can or will break Tiger's or Nicklaus" record is preposterous at this point.
All it take is one mis-step to derail a career: one serious injury; one DUI; one liaison with the wrong woman; one too many sniffs of coke. Who knows? Can anyone say none of these will ever happen to McIlrpy? Never say never.

[Finbarr Saunders]

Jack was and still is the greatest golfer to ever play the game

[kellygreen]

irlgolf56, on 06 March 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

kellygreen, on 06 March 2012 - 02:07 PM, said:

No, it is NOT laughable.

Because Rory had several years to get used to competing as a professional...getting familiar with the courses that he would play each year, and the superior standard of play on the professional tours.     It is common for European players to turn pro as teenagers, simply because there is not the collegiate athletic system over there that we have here.   But that does NOT negate the fact that Rory is entering his fifth year---with all the experience that entails----simply because he started younger.

Tiger fell out of the classroom as a student at Stanford....playing college kids and 40 year-old bank executives at USGA events...and won the THIRD event he teed it up as a professional.  Won the first major he competed in as a professional by 12 shots.

What is laughable is insisting that the two men were at the same stage in their professional carreers at age 22, simply because they were the same age.  

The bottom line is that Rory had the benefit of a MUCH hotter crucible to turn him into the player he has become at age 22, than Tiger did playing college.   Rory is a fifth-year professional.  Regardless of what chronologic age he is.

So then we shall wait to compare them like we should have done in the first place?

That would be MY recommendation...but it seems some people want it all...and want it NOW.

Though I do think it is a reasonable comparison to see what Rory does--now that he's become World No. 1---in comparison to what Tiger did when he first become No. 1.

[irlgolf56]

kellygreen, on 06 March 2012 - 02:16 PM, said:

IIRC, Sergio Garcia won his first professional tournament at age 19....in his SIXTH start as a professional.   He had his famous duel with Tiger down the stretch at the 1999 PGA Championship only a few months later.

The issue isn't physical maturity...the issue is EXPERIENCE.   Older players have simply had longer to learn the subtleties of the game...and how to win at the highest level...than someone who is younger.

Rory has had several years of learning this at the professional level....and I'm not going to let you simply discount simply because comparing his career to Tiger's at the same age (though at vastly different stages in their professional careers) puts Rory's accomplishments in a more favorable light.  

Rory is likely to go on to be a HOF player before his careers over.  But the bottom line is that it has simply taken him longer to get his legs under him as a professional than Tiger...and the fact that he turned professional as a teenager is no excuse.   Especially when Garcia won TWICE on the European Tour as a 19 year old.

Tom Lewis won in the 3rd start of his career, he is going to be better than Rory?

If Rory is succesful from now, who cares how he started? It took him longer to get started, but when he gets started, who is to say what his limtation is?

Yes it is harder to start on tour as a teenager than as a 21 year old, of course it is.

[MileHighClub]

kellygreen, on 06 March 2012 - 02:07 PM, said:

No, it is NOT laughable.

Because Rory had several years to get used to competing as a professional...getting familiar with the courses that he would play each year, and the superior standard of play on the professional tours.     It is common for European players to turn pro as teenagers, simply because there is not the collegiate athletic system over there that we have here.   But that does NOT negate the fact that Rory is entering his fifth year---with all the experience that entails----simply because he started younger.

Tiger fell out of the classroom as a student at Stanford....playing college kids and 40 year-old bank executives at USGA events...and won the THIRD event he teed it up as a professional.  Won the first major he competed in as a professional by 12 shots.

What is laughable is insisting that the two men were at the same stage in their professional carreers at age 22, simply because they were the same age.  

The bottom line is that Rory had the benefit of a MUCH hotter crucible to turn him into the player he has become at age 22, than Tiger did playing college.   Rory is a fifth-year professional.  Regardless of what chronologic age he is.

These are the arguments (excuses, perhaps?) of someone who KNOWS that Rory is capable of eclipsing his beloved hero.  Relax, friend.  The jury won't be in on this for many many years.