Is the era of Tiger Woods dominance now officially over? You’ll find many golf fans who say that Tiger is finished — in the comments section of this blog, for instance — but until now I’ve never read a major sportswriter who is willing to pronounce his career as terminally ill. Joe Posnanski is a Senior Writer at Sports Illustrated, and with the Kansas City Star was twice named the best sports columnist in America by The Associated Press Sports Editors. And although he phrases it carefully, Posnanski is basically writing Tiger off. From his personal blog:
I don’t think there is almost anyone out there who is writing off Tiger Woods. And frankly … there’s good reason to write him off. This may sound cruel but I actually mean it as the opposite of cruel: More people SHOULD be writing off Tiger Woods.
First, he will turn 35 at the end of the year. There has been talk that this means Woods will still be in his golfing prime for the next few years, but history tells a different story. Since 1970, the average age of major championship winners is 32, and things tumble off for golfers after age 35. Fewer than a quarter of the major championship winners have been 36 or older.
More to the point, Woods has been dominant for a dozen years — which is a long time to dominate in golf. The greatest golfers have had a fairly short window of time when they dominate, and when that window closes they stop winning major championships.
Posnanski goes on to say that Tom Watson won his majors from 1975-83; Bobby Jones from 1923-1930; Sam Snead from 1946-1954, etc. Two notable exceptions are Gary Player (1959-78) and Jack Nicklaus (1962-1986); Nicklaus winning his last major at age 46.
Is Tiger like Nicklaus or Player? Maybe. But we don’t know. And I don’t know why we would just ASSUME that he is like Nicklaus or Player. Tom Watson seems a better comparison to me. Before Woods, the last guy to utterly dominate the PGA Tour was Watson. He was PGA Tour player of the Year six out of eight years from 1977-84. He won seven majors and a total of 35 events in those years — his high might not be quite as high as Woods, but it’s plenty high.
Posnanski writes that one of the indications that Tiger is showing signs of age is his putting is going south. He used two putters at the British Open and missed a lot of putts. He missed a lot of putts at the U.S. Open. With the pros, its usually the short game that’s the first to go.
It’s more than just putting. There have been his often-discussed swing issues. He has had numerous and major injuries. And, sure, he has also been dragged through a very public media flogging. All of it figures to take its toll.
Tiger Woods is not a story. Tiger Woods is not a movie, and he’s not a fairy tale. Tiger Woods is not even the young man who played golf at a higher level than any man in the history of the sport. No. Tiger Woods is a balding 34-year-old man fighting his swing, his putter, his confidence, his past and his history.
***
Writing off Tiger [JoePosnanski.com]
-
- Tiger 75 - Jul 20, 2010 at 1:21 PM
-
Tiger’s decline didn’t just start. His big mistake was made when he fired Butch Harmon. He still dominated after he let Butch go, but he wasn’t the same golfer after that…he became beatable. Now with his personal troubles and the after affects of the several injuries, he’s just an average PGA player (maybe above average), but definitely not the once dominating player we all once knew.
-
- ron - Jul 20, 2010 at 2:38 PM
-
1st, rick is not a major columnist.2nd, who cares what rick thinks.3rd.why do you keep writing and speculating on tiger. if he wins or never wins again who cares. he has 14 majors, and 75 wins.enough said. nobody wins forever, but few have that many wins.
-
- Bill - Jul 20, 2010 at 2:59 PM
-
Tiger Woods is no Jack Nicklaus. Nicklaus is the best of all time.
Tiger deserves to be considered “one” of the greatest of all time. But, he’s not the greatest.
Everybody thinks the current player is the greatest of all time. Many never got to actually play his entire career. I did. And Jack is the best.
Jack has won 18 majors. Jack has 19 seconds in majors. Jack has 6 thirds in majors. That’s 43 times Jack won, placed, or showed in majors. If you look at the finishes like that, Woods doesn’t even make it to the first tee. Jack faced many more Sunday finishers than Tiger ever has.
Tiger has been fortunate to be in the right place at the right time. I can’t blame him for that. That’s a lucky stroke that any golfer would take. But the Sunday finshers have not been there consistently in the Woods era. Period.
In my opinion, after watching both of their careers, Jack Nicklaus is still the greatest golfer of all time! It’s in the hole!
-
- Rick Chandler - Jul 20, 2010 at 4:20 PM
-
Dude. The major columnist to whom I was referring is SI’s Joe Posnanski. I think I made that fairly clear. Sorry for calling you dude, but that’s a pretty swing and a miss on your part. You’ve gotta protect with two strikes.
-
- Mike in the Long Grass - Jul 21, 2010 at 10:54 AM
-
It’s a well-reasoned article, but it doesn’t even mention one key point: Some pro golfers quietly believe that Tiger’s swing is falling apart, that Haney left him really messed up.
Tiger hitting it straight for four days is the exception, not the rule, these days.
