Speaking of guys everyone loves to hate.
Hopefully Rickie wins again before 2016.
Hopefully Rickie wins again before 2016.
-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
CJ _24 Get to the Point Thread
- Thread starter DeadMan
- Start date
I've never understood the hate for Rickie Fowler. Then again, I think winning is the most overrated thing in sports, especially in golf.
-YTC
-YTC
Really? I think the complete opposite, winning is the most important thing in golf. I don't care how many backdoor top 10s or top 5s you had. Who cares?
Yes, really.
Especially in a sport like golf. You are playing against the course. You are attempting to shoot your best number possible. You have no control whatsoever as it relates to what others are shooting. You can't defend them, block their shots, or steal their balls. If you shoot an exceptional score at a difficult course against the best players in the world, why does it matter if someone else caught fire that week and put together a superhuman effort?
Rickie Fowler continually puts together exceptional scores at difficult courses against the best fields in the world. So what if he hasn't won at the Puerto Rico Open or some other garbage tournament?
http://nolayingup.com/2015/03/18/why-rickie-fowler-doesnt-win-more/
-YTC
Especially in a sport like golf. You are playing against the course. You are attempting to shoot your best number possible. You have no control whatsoever as it relates to what others are shooting. You can't defend them, block their shots, or steal their balls. If you shoot an exceptional score at a difficult course against the best players in the world, why does it matter if someone else caught fire that week and put together a superhuman effort?
Rickie Fowler continually puts together exceptional scores at difficult courses against the best fields in the world. So what if he hasn't won at the Puerto Rico Open or some other garbage tournament?
http://nolayingup.com/2015/03/18/why-rickie-fowler-doesnt-win-more/
-YTC
Well, besides the fact that most people have competitive fires to win and be better than your competitors...hes prolly just fine with making 7-8 figures per year playing a game and banging smokin hot babes. If I were in his shoes, the only thing that would bother me about my life is that I hadn't won something. Everyone wants to win...whether you can play defense or not. You want to be the best. Golf, basketball, baseball, racing...doesn't matter. If you're in your prime with the best equipment you've got and you're not playing to win...then Ive got nothing for ya
Do you really think Tiger and his play didn't have an effect on others during his prime? Or Jack? It's not about blocking shots or playing defense, it is a mental game. If you think you can't effect others you are doing it wrong. I don't care that someone posts a low score. Someone else did better. Do we care that team A beat team B 110 to 109? Well they put up 109, what can you do. You can play better and win the game. This is competition, its not some shitty Tuesday league with your buddies.
You argument about super human effort is also bogus.
You argument about super human effort is also bogus.
Well, of course you want to win. Nobody is arguing that.
Would you rather have the career of Rickie Fowler or Chris Kirk?
-YTC
Would you rather have the career of Rickie Fowler or Chris Kirk?
-YTC
then you concede that winning is important?
Can you explain to me why Tiger never won a major when he was trailing after 54 holes if his mental game was so dominant? Who wilted under the PRESSHA of the great Tiger Woods?
And your team analogy is pointless. Of course we care that Team A beat Team B. However, what does that final score say about any of the individual players in that game?
-YTC
Of course it holds some level of importance. We are debating how high that level of importance is.
And again, whose career would you rather have: Rickie Fowler or Chris Kirk?
-YTC
I mean, I hate to cape up on this one, but cot dang are you'll wrong on this one.
What golfers under 30 are you taking before Rickie Fowler right now? With what has been accomplished to this point in their career? McIlroy, Spieth and ?????
-YTC
What golfers under 30 are you taking before Rickie Fowler right now? With what has been accomplished to this point in their career? McIlroy, Spieth and ?????
-YTC
For the mid pack golfers, on the grand scheme, winning isn't that important except to them so they can say they won on the tour. To the legit, major championship winning type golfers...winning is everything.
Whats your point there though? So the only golfers you would take before Fowler under 30......are the ones who have won? lol
What does the fact that a player shot well at a course but lost say? It says the same thing, they weren't fucking good enough. Just like team b wasn't good enough.
I'm not even going to argue that Tiger and Jack weren't mentally dominant. Don't be stupid. It shows more mental fortitude to have the lead and not give it up when everyone is coming after you then to come from behind. You have something to lose and more pressure, when you are behind you have nothing to lose. Just ask Adam Scott and Normal about that. I don't know why Tiger sucks coming from behind. You would think he would be good at it with all his Perkins experience. I don't know how many times he has come from behind in his other 70 odd wins.
I'm not even going to argue that Tiger and Jack weren't mentally dominant. Don't be stupid. It shows more mental fortitude to have the lead and not give it up when everyone is coming after you then to come from behind. You have something to lose and more pressure, when you are behind you have nothing to lose. Just ask Adam Scott and Normal about that. I don't know why Tiger sucks coming from behind. You would think he would be good at it with all his Perkins experience. I don't know how many times he has come from behind in his other 70 odd wins.
PSUEagle
Well-Known Member
Stuart Appleby, anyone?
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
I'd say that's a minority, though. I think that most pro athletes are crazy people, because the amount of work you have to put in to get to be a pro athlete is insane.
Why has no one answered my question? Whose career would you rather have right now: Chris Kirk or Rickie Fowler?
-YTC
-YTC
Cool. So the best golfers in the world would rather have the career of Michael Campbell or Shaun Micheel over Rickie Fowler?
The point is that for everyone who calls Fowler "overrated" they have no basis for it at all. Whatever flaws you want to point out about Fowler apply to everyone else in his age bracket, except that Fowler has been MUCH better on the biggest stages. Better than Reed, Day, Koepka, or anyone else you want to throw out there.
Nobody is questioning Tiger or Jack's mental dominance. That wasn't the point. My point is that you told me that Tiger could effect other people's game mentally. My counter point is that you have no example of that being true in a final round of a major. As to your point about having "something to lose and more pressure," would you rather be in the lead after 54 holes, or trailing? Which one is a more difficult position to win from?
Okay, Ricky Bobby.
I'm not a professional atholete, and neither are you. I have no idea what the "entire point of sports" would be for anyone.
My point about winning being overrated is in the context of historically and presently judging athletes. An athlete can be "great," "elite," "underrated" "insert whatever hot-take word" without winning. It certainly applies in team sports, slightly less so in sports where it is you vs conditions (golf, bowling, darts, judged sports, etc...). Now, in true one-on-one competition, I can see a higher emphasis placed on winning, and deservedly so. For example, tennis, MMA/combat sports, etc... Sports where you have a direct impact on the performance of your competition.
-YTC
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
I'm not entirely sure what we're talking about anymore. In golf, we have some decent heuristics for measuring how good golfers are, independent of wins. Rickie, until last year, was in the 20-40 range of golfers in the world/PGA Tour. I'm not really sure where this idea came that he wasn't performing to his talent. Hell, look at his statistics. He's not excellent at anything - just above average at everything. He's around 40 for strokes gained tee to green the last 2 years. From that, you could easily say he's out performed his talent.
Y'all are all cray anyway. The only people I've seen call him overrated are his peers in that stupid SI poll that came out before the tournament. They are just jealous of him because he gets a lot of attention and prior to this past weekend, hadn't won shit. He was like Anna Kournikova. Do you know how much those other females in tennis hated her? Oh lawd, you could smell the estrogen boiling. So then he goes out and wins the richest tournament. Now they really hate him.
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
It's a dumb question. Fowler's career earnings are $7M higher than Kirk's. Of course I'd take Fowler.
If you ask me who is a better golfer - that is a tougher question. Kirk's total strokes gained last year was better than Fowler's, believe it or not.
goblue96
Disney and Curling Expert
But, but...I thought winning was the entire point of sports?
Chris Kirk has won more than Rickie Fowler, yet you are saying that Fowler has had the better career. Help me understand.
-YTC
cot damn whitey got up in arms about a couple mediocre golfers. You know shit has hit the fan when Chris Kirk has been brought up as a comparison.
Yes, anyone would take Fowler. Hes 4 years younger, has made 7 million dollars more money, has a better looking side piece and has won a more prestigious tournament. Not sure the point you're trying to make with comparing him to Kirk and what not though. Its stupid.
Yes, anyone would take Fowler. Hes 4 years younger, has made 7 million dollars more money, has a better looking side piece and has won a more prestigious tournament. Not sure the point you're trying to make with comparing him to Kirk and what not though. Its stupid.
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
A win in the fall series and in a tournament against the British are like half wins at best. Not all wins are created equal. Before last week, I might have taken Kirk on the basis of wins, but not now.
Again, I'm not sure Fowler is a better golfer than Kirk.
And to add to that, your earlier statement of "I'd take Patrick Reed over Rickie Fowler every day of the week" is problematic. Fowler has earned nearly $10 million more than Reed. Even last year, which was the best year of Reed's career by just about every measure, saw him fall short of Fowler's earnings...and that was with Reed playing 2 more tournaments than Rickie!
-YTC
-YTC
Chris Kirk has won more golf tournaments than Rickie Fowler. Yet, everyone would take the career of Rickie Fowler.
How does this make any sense when winning is the most important thing? Could it be that perhaps you and Deadmong are overvaluing winning? HMMMMMMMM
-YTC
Oh, so it's only some wins that are overrated. Am I understanding that correctly?
-YTC
Don't blame you a bit for waving the white flag. It takes a big man to admit when he has nothing else left to use in an argument.
-YTC
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
Got damn you don't even remember what you asked. You said who would you take over Fowler that's under 30? I took that to mean, who are the better golfers than Fowler under 30. Better career is a completely different thing. Especially when we're talking about golfers under 30 who haven't been on the tour for very long.
I remember exactly what I asked:
"What golfers under 30 are you taking before Rickie Fowler right now? With what has been accomplished to this point in their career? McIlroy, Spieth and ?????"
At this point in their careers, Reed has 2 more PGA wins, and has earned nearly $10 million less. I'm not asking you to project anything. As of right now, at this point in their careers, whose are you taking?
-YTC
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
By the way, whitey, Matt Every would be a much better person to compare to before this week.
I think the problem is that the golf media is fucking dumb. They hype up Fowler as the next great player, for whatever reason. But he simply wasn't that good before last year. Wins shouldn't be the only measure of how good a golfer is, but the other measures showed that Rickie was merely above average before then. Media anointed him as the next great thing, so they had to backtrack after he didn't progress.
Wins aren't the only thing, but they are important. Who is the better golfer - the guy who finishes 1st in strokes gained over the year but doesn't win, or the guy who finishes 10th in strokes gained but wins 5 times? Answer me that one.
I think the problem is that the golf media is fucking dumb. They hype up Fowler as the next great player, for whatever reason. But he simply wasn't that good before last year. Wins shouldn't be the only measure of how good a golfer is, but the other measures showed that Rickie was merely above average before then. Media anointed him as the next great thing, so they had to backtrack after he didn't progress.
Wins aren't the only thing, but they are important. Who is the better golfer - the guy who finishes 1st in strokes gained over the year but doesn't win, or the guy who finishes 10th in strokes gained but wins 5 times? Answer me that one.
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
Who am I taking for what? That question is meaningless. I told you exactly what I thought the question was (who is the better golfer). The better career? What the fuck does that even mean? Folwer has earned $10 million more than Reed, but he's been on tour for 3 fewer years.
There are at least 5 golfers under 30 who are flat out better than Rickie. I could probably name an additional 5 that are pretty close to Rickie as well. Rickie has probably earned more money than all of them but Rory. So what the fuck are you asking me?
this response is exactly what i was expecting. Its good to weed out the folks that you can have a conversation with and those you can't.
1. Agree on the Matt Every, but I was using Kirk because someone in my office was having the same discussion with me and was on the wrong side too. He kept bringing up Kirk because he had "three times as many wins as Rickie" before this week.
2. The media's hype of a player shouldn't have a bearing on intelligent people being capable of discussing their accomplishments. Before last year, Rickie didn't have a ton to hang his hat on. However the last 18 months of his career have been outstanding.
3. I'd have to see other statistics (money won, etc), and need to know which tournaments garnered those 5 wins. Also, I'd like to know how each player performed on the biggest stages against the best players in the world. If you have a real life comparison, I'd be happy to answer.
-YTC
It means based on their accomplishments to this point. That isn't a difficult question to figure out.
What golfers under 30 have accomplished more than Rickie Fowler has? Does that simplify the question for you?
I have absolutely no clue what the future holds, and neither do you. I'm strictly speaking about what has been accomplished up to May 12, 2015. Which, by the way, are the only results we have to analyze. I can't analyze what's going to happen at the 2017 PGA Championship.
Once those other golfers (Koepka, Reed, Matsuyama, etc...) have accomplished more, then I'll gladly place them ahead of Fowler in my own (admittedly meaningless) rankings.
-YTC
You sound like you are repressing something. May I direct you to another thread to get those feelings out?
This should help.
-YTC
DeadMan
aka spiker or DeadMong
I don't have an actual comparison for #3. I don't think the best player in strokes gained would ever not win a tournament.
Okay, accomplished more than Rickie, other than Rory and Spieth:
Reed (more wins in a shorter period of time, plus won a WGC which is probably equal to the Players) and Koepka (same amount of wins, but getting from Europe onto the PGA Tour is much more impressive than getting in via the old Q-School like Rickie did), Jason Day (more wins, one WGC, better showings in majors) for sure. I think that's it. 5 golfers under 30 better than Rickie sounds right to me.