We've launched the new forums! Read more here

ST Jude Classic [Spoilers]

back then payne stewart played top flites and strata's... lolz
 
JB said:
That is because there were only a dozen guys with a certain skill set. In today's game there are 200 with that skill set. We know, everything was better back in the day, you walked up hill in the snow to school, yada yada yada.

Would you call Ed Sneed a household name? Apparently other "mediocre" guys from back in the day could collapse as well. 79 Masters is one of the worst choke jobs ever.
Click to expand...

Maybe.

But in my opinion, the big difference between today's Tour and yesterday's Tour is the fact that it's a lot easier to make a million dollars today because much of what a player earns isn't from prize money but from endorsement deals, meet and geets, clinics, pro-ams, TV spots and magazine ads; most of which was unheard of way back when. Consequently, if a player has enough talent to gain a Tour Card, it's real easy to get "fat and happy" without ever having to come close to a winner's check and as such, the desire to push one's self hard enough to win is greatly diminished.

Many of "yesterday's" pro's came from an era (or were very close to players who did) when many tournaments only paid money to those who finished in the top twenty; the rest were offered a handshake and that was it. Combine that with the fact that there were precious few opportunities to make "outside money" beyond tournament checks and you had an environment in which a player had to "win to eat" and sometimes that was quite literally the case.

"Back in the day" many pro's toured the country in caravans of Airstream trailers and the camaraderie that developed from that also served to incite a healthy level of competition and "bragging rights". Today, many pro's time-share Lear Jets and most are so busy with off-course interests that winning has almost become an afterthought.

It's a different world and I think that the toughness that was bred back in an era when a pro's income was more directly related to his talent and his hunger to win was more finely tuned, has been softened by all of the "perks" available today to even the most lower echelon players and that hunger to win has been replaced by a hunger to sign deals instead. Sure, the talent level today may be more evenly spread out than it was years ago, but with the myriad opportunities to "feather one's nest" that exist today, I think the toughness I grew up admiring has disappeared or at least been eroded to a point where it's a once in a while thing.

That's one of the primary reasons why I admire Tiger so much. He doesn't need the money yet he keeps pushing because he has an "old school" approach to competition and he regards second place as being just "first loser" and I like that. Jack was the same way; he once said that "...there's first place and then there's everyone else...". Today, it seems as if that philosophy has been replaced by "Top twenty guarantees a millionaire's lifestyle" and it does and I think that's sad.


But that's me.


-JP
 
You may want to check out endorsement deals a little closer JP. The top players (top 12) from the 70s and 80s earned far more in endorsements (and still do for the most part) than they ever earned in winnings. The same can be said for the rest of the field really. Sure prize money has gone up as have endorsement contracts, but taht is no different than any other sport, let alone any other job in the world. It is easier to earn a million dollars now than it was in the 70s. That is part of life.

Do you think Jack Nicklaus or Arnold Palmer are who they are today financially because of their prize money they won? That is absolutely ridiculous! You talk about admiring Tiger, I guess you would have to admire Phil as well for the same reason right? Or is it more about favorites than your actual debate. Surely he has more money than he ever needs, yet he keeps working hard and winning.

Today technology is available for every player to make the game a level playing field where as 30-40 years ago, only the top 10 had hand mades and fitted to spec irons.
 
I do agree with this 100%, but the nathan green thing with the world cup kinda tells us that he makes too much money. And he isnt even an elite player. Maybe he just lacks passion for golf? Or has an extreme passion for soccer. But he practically said "Im paid enough to ignore the largest tournament in the US".
JB said:
You may want to check out endorsement deals a little closer JP. The top players (top 12) from the 70s and 80s earned far more in endorsements (and still do for the most part) than they ever earned in winnings. The same can be said for the rest of the field really. Sure prize money has gone up as have endorsement contracts, but taht is no different than any other sport, let alone any other job in the world. It is easier to earn a million dollars now than it was in the 70s. That is part of life.

Do you think Jack Nicklaus or Arnold Palmer are who they are today financially because of their prize money they won? That is absolutely ridiculous! You talk about admiring Tiger, I guess you would have to admire Phil as well for the same reason right? Or is it more about favorites than your actual debate. Surely he has more money than he ever needs, yet he keeps working hard and winning.

Today technology is available for every player to make the game a level playing field where as 30-40 years ago, only the top 10 had hand mades and fitted to spec irons.
Click to expand...
 
Thainer21 said:
I do agree with this 100%, but the nathan green thing with the world cup kinda tells us that he makes too much money. And he isnt even an elite player. Maybe he just lacks passion for golf? Or has an extreme passion for soccer. But he practically said "Im paid enough to ignore the largest tournament in the US".
Click to expand...

There have been lazy golfers in every generation.
 
Hacker Charlie said:
IDK What was in Tom Kite's bag at Pebble Beach in 1992, but I know his bag was a Ram staff bag! Ram now seems to be the bottom dollar Sports Authority brand.
Click to expand...

is it me or is tom kite not the scariest looking dude ive ever seen
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top