baddog

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.

Fill in for smitty....How else does one team tell another team that they are going to play someone different in pre-district? Like I said before, no other team is still playing the same pre-district schedule as 5 years ago. Therefore, no one is ducking anyone. Times change and teams play other teams. You still haven't answered my question.

that's not the question ....the question is why did Brook and Nederland stop playing....after the last time they played Nueman told Stump he didn't want to schedule Brook the next year,that's when Stump went out and found other teams to play... Nope, but it was inferred that that was the reason. Tell me, how else is it done? smitty, what HS team do you follow?

It's actually called 'field turf'. It's been voted best in the NFL by the players. Check this out... [Hidden Content]

I guess if a team can keep a coach long enough, he can develop an MO. You are dead wrong on this one as usual. Lots of other teams want to schedule the LMs and Brenhams, but it's up to Neumann to play them all just to keep you pacified. Who are the powerhouses that Ozen has been accustomed to scheduling? Inquiring minds want to know. Been brushing up on your Latin lately? :

It takes a real caring individual to poke fun at one of the few sports a paraplegic can play. You get my vote for He-man of the year. Good job.

Is there another team on here who can say that they are playing the same pre-district teams they played 5 years ago? If not, then I guess you are afraid of those teams too.

He needs to be introduced to Meadowlark Lemon's half-court hook, which he could make 9 out of 10 times. ;D

Larry Bird....the consummate player