Rickie Fowler is a cautionary tale in overexposing a superstar

[Superbrit]

7 minutes ago, MUNIGRIT said:

IMO, Phil was better than Trevino or Seve. I'm a big Trevino fan too. Longevity and winning have a say IMO, plus he did it during the GOAT time.

Mickelson better than Trevino? oh no no no no got to disagree with that

 

Also Trevino had to deal with multiple top 10 players of all time, not just 1

 

Phil and Seve, career wise very close i must say

[Titleist 670]

I'm indifferent to Rickie, but he seems like a great guy and had a tremendous run as a top ranked golfer.

 

I'm not sure what his career goals are or were on Tour, but it's not like he was winning at an incredible clip, got endorsements, and suddenly fell off a cliff, so I'm not sure what the cautionary tale is.  If anything, he's probably earned so much and stayed near the top for so long, he might just not want to put in the same grind to maintain the level that he once had.

[melo]

On 12/21/2020 at 10:27 AM, MUNIGRIT said:

IMO, Phil was better than Trevino or Seve. I'm a big Trevino fan too. Longevity and winning have a say IMO, plus he did it during the GOAT time.

Maybe better than both, though to me not as good as Trevino, Seve, Faldo or Byron nelson...I think Phil is a top 15 guy that could have been top 10, knocking at top 5 with another 2 majors, one of them being a US Open. 

[bscinstnct]

On 12/21/2020 at 10:37 AM, Superbrit said:

Mickelson better than Trevino? oh no no no no got to disagree with that

 

Also Trevino had to deal with multiple top 10 players of all time, not just 1

 

Phil and Seve, career wise very close i must say

 

Phil has 44 PGA Tour wins (9th all time) and 5 Majors.

 

That puts his right there with Trevino or Faldo

 

None has a career Grand Slam. Phil and Trevino have 3 parts. Faldo has six majors but only 2 parts of the Grand Slam.

 

You just need to look at the names that Phil shares company with in the top-10 PGA Tour all time winner list to get perspective on his place in history.

 

 

Edited December 23, 2020 by bscinstnct

[dlygrisse]

On 12/19/2020 at 9:30 AM, ws6 said:

Brad Johnson - Super Bowl champion.  

Shawn McCheel major champion. Ben Curtis, Orville Moody, Jack Fleck, Todd Hamilton. Etc. Lots of guys with a major, that aren’t all time greats.  
 

Marino = Colin Montgomery 
 

I still like the Elway comp, Phil is a all time great player, but never the best of his era. tons of talent, lots of heartbreaks, loved by some, hated by others but in the end they were both legendary. 
 

 

[melo]

1 hour ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Phil has 44 PGA Tour wins (9th all time) and 5 Majors.

 

That puts his right there with Trevino or Faldo

 

None has a career Grand Slam. Phil and Trevino have 3 parts. Faldo has six majors but only 2 parts of the Grand Slam.

 

You just need to look at the names that Phil shares company with in the top-10 PGA Tour all time winner list to get perspective on his place in history.

 

 

Faldo had 41 career wins, but in his time foreign players didn't play here...that's why Gary player has 21 PGA wins and half of them are majors. Faldo was the best in the world for probably 2+ years. Won 6 majors, 41 total wins. Trevino has 3/4 of the grand slam twice and 30 career wins, but I tend to think he level of competition was better for the prime of his career than Phil's. He also won POTY in 1971 when he won 2 majors and 6 tour events, which is better than any year Phil ever had. They both have a players win, but Trevino has 5 or 6 Vardon trophies to Phil's zero. I think to me the biggest knock on Phil is that he was never the best. Not even for a year. Even David Duval, VJ, DJ have been the best for a year (also, not hard to imagine DJ winning two more majors and 15 tour events to have a resume exactly like Phil's)

[bscinstnct]

4 minutes ago, melo said:

Faldo had 41 career wins, but in his time foreign players didn't play here...that's why Gary player has 21 PGA wins and half of them are majors. Faldo was the best in the world for probably 2+ years. Won 6 majors, 41 total wins. Trevino has 3/4 of the grand slam twice and 30 career wins, but I tend to think he level of competition was better for the prime of his career than Phil's. He also won POTY in 1971 when he won 2 majors and 6 tour events, which is better than any year Phil ever had. They both have a players win, but Trevino has 5 or 6 Vardon trophies to Phil's zero. I think to me the biggest knock on Phil is that he was never the best. Not even for a year. Even David Duval, VJ, DJ have been the best for a year (also, not hard to imagine DJ winning two more majors and 15 tour events to have a resume exactly like Phil's)

 

All fair. Comparing across eras, even with solid stats, will have a level of subjectivity.

 

But, if being number #1 is a criteria, it’s likely that Faldo would never have been #1 in the Tiger era. Tiger would have destroyed Faldo. There’s no aspect of the game that Faldo was better than Tiger in and Tiger was far stronger in many.

 

I make this harsh comparison to underline who Phil was up against to attain #1.

 

Phil spent 270 weeks at #2. You could argue he would have had his time as #1, perhaps for a considerable amount of years, if he wasn’t playing against arguably the greatest player to ever tee it up. And for sure the most dominant player in any decade. 

[melo]

Just now, bscinstnct said:

 

All fair. Comparing across eras, even with solid stats, will have a level of subjectivity.

 

But, if being number #1 is a criteria, it’s likely that Faldo would never have been #1 in the Tiger era. Tiger would have destroyed Faldo. There’s no aspect of the game that Faldo was better than Tiger in and Tiger was far stronger in many.

 

I make this harsh comparison to underline who Phil was up against to attain #1.

 

Phil spent 270 weeks at #2. You could argue he would have had his time as #1, perhaps for a considerable amount of years, if he wasn’t playing against arguably the greatest player to ever tee it up. And for sure the most dominant player in any decade. 

I understand what you're saying...but even during the Tiger Era, there were moments...and Phil didn't fill them, instead Duval and VJ did...then later the young guys came around. It's a lot like the US open misses...Phil is just ALWAYS the bride's maid, even when Tiger wasn't the bride. Faldo was number one for two years during a time when Norman dominated the tour. In fact. We'd have Norman a lot higher up this list if he had finished off majors - he was number 1 like 8 different years....but Phil wasn't as good as Faldo or Norman when he was young, or Tiger and VJ during their prime, or anybody now (even Tiger again after back surgery). Don't get me wrong, Phil is an AMAZING talent, and he is somewhere in my top 15, just not quite the top 10. 

[Cincy_Ken]

10 hours ago, melo said:

I understand what you're saying...but even during the Tiger Era, there were moments...and Phil didn't fill them, instead Duval and VJ did...then later the young guys came around. It's a lot like the US open misses...Phil is just ALWAYS the bride's maid, even when Tiger wasn't the bride. Faldo was number one for two years during a time when Norman dominated the tour. In fact. We'd have Norman a lot higher up this list if he had finished off majors - he was number 1 like 8 different years....but Phil wasn't as good as Faldo or Norman when he was young, or Tiger and VJ during their prime, or anybody now (even Tiger again after back surgery). Don't get me wrong, Phil is an AMAZING talent, and he is somewhere in my top 15, just not quite the top 10. 

Phil's my alltime favorite golfer but I'd agree with your placement.  I just don't agree that it has anything to do with him not being #1.  He was clearly the #2 player of his generation; his up periods just didn't coincide with Tiger's down periods.  For me the reason Phil is not a top 10 golfer is he is the worst driver of top 20.  The one time he had the chance to ascend to #1 by winning his third straight major he hit it off the planet left.

 

I'm willing to argue that going straight off majors isn't the best measure but if I'm putting Phil over guys with more majors I just don't think I'd take him over guys who don't have the big fatal flaw.

[bscinstnct]

10 hours ago, melo said:

I understand what you're saying...but even during the Tiger Era, there were moments...and Phil didn't fill them, instead Duval and VJ did...then later the young guys came around. It's a lot like the US open misses...Phil is just ALWAYS the bride's maid, even when Tiger wasn't the bride. Faldo was number one for two years during a time when Norman dominated the tour. In fact. We'd have Norman a lot higher up this list if he had finished off majors - he was number 1 like 8 different years....but Phil wasn't as good as Faldo or Norman when he was young, or Tiger and VJ during their prime, or anybody now (even Tiger again after back surgery). Don't get me wrong, Phil is an AMAZING talent, and he is somewhere in my top 15, just not quite the top 10. 

 

If you’re bringing being #1 into the equation, I gotta push back again with

 

Faldo and Norman’s #1 ranking would look completely different, be a fraction of what they were

 

And possibly not even exist at all if TW played in their time.

 

Take Norman, the guys ego is huge, imagine TW kicking his butt week in and week out? And all the reporters asking him every week questions about....Tiger! 
 

Phil was #2 for 270 weeks. There is zero question he gets to #1 if TW isn’t his adversary.

 

Im not saying that makes him as good as Norman or Faldo or Trevino.
 

But, Phil is number 9 all time PGA Tour wins. Among The guys directly ahead of him are Hagan, Palmer, Hogan, and Jack and TW.

 

Thats very rare air ; )

[FakeClubPro]

On 12/21/2020 at 9:21 AM, bscinstnct said:

 

Phil be like

 

 

Who parked that car there?! 🤣

He kind of jumped on the trunk.   What an insane plane to park vehicles.

[dlygrisse]

The Phil/Faldo/Trevino comparison is an interesting one, I'd throw Seve in the mix as well.  Phil's game was probably more like Seve's although Seve's game fell off a cliff by the time he was in his 40's.  Seve was the king of Europe, one of the greatest Ryder Cuppers ever, the inspirational leader, while Faldo was more technical.  

 

4 really great players for different reasons, none of them GOAT status, all but Phil were the best in the world at one point in time.  As others have stated Phil had Tiger to overcome, Lee had a two year hot streak where he dethroned Jack, while Jack wasn't at his best.  

 

All these guys in their prime, at the peak of their game, I'd say Phil has the most firepower, the ability to go the lowest.  Faldo and Lee were grinders, classic ball strikers.  Seve was every bit as fun to watch as Phil, magical short game and recovery skills.  I have to give the Americans the edge on wins because the PGA is just deeper in every era. 

 

Greatest career, longevity and total resume I'd go.

1.  Phil

2.  Lee

3.  Faldo

4.  Seve

 

Subjectively, what they did for the game, impact around the globe, 

1.  Seve

2.  Lee

3.  Phil

4. Faldo

 

I'm sure most of you will disagree with me, because it is very close in my opinion.  You could make an argument for any of these guys being the best of this group.  

[Naptime]

To me Phil is like Bret Favre.  Fans say that both were passionate players.  Bret could be exciting on the field for his TDs or his interceptions.  Kinda like Phil, whose WTF blow ups are as well known as his wins.

[bscinstnct]

41 minutes ago, dlygrisse said:

The Phil/Faldo/Trevino comparison is an interesting one, I'd throw Seve in the mix as well.  Phil's game was probably more like Seve's although Seve's game fell off a cliff by the time he was in his 40's.  Seve was the king of Europe, one of the greatest Ryder Cuppers ever, the inspirational leader, while Faldo was more technical.  

 

4 really great players for different reasons, none of them GOAT status, all but Phil were the best in the world at one point in time.  As others have stated Phil had Tiger to overcome, Lee had a two year hot streak where he dethroned Jack, while Jack wasn't at his best.  

 

All these guys in their prime, at the peak of their game, I'd say Phil has the most firepower, the ability to go the lowest.  Faldo and Lee were grinders, classic ball strikers.  Seve was every bit as fun to watch as Phil, magical short game and recovery skills.  I have to give the Americans the edge on wins because the PGA is just deeper in every era. 

 

Greatest career, longevity and total resume I'd go.

1.  Phil

2.  Lee

3.  Faldo

4.  Seve

 

Subjectively, what they did for the game, impact around the globe, 

1.  Seve

2.  Lee

3.  Phil

4. Faldo

 

I'm sure most of you will disagree with me, because it is very close in my opinion.  You could make an argument for any of these guys being the best of this group.  

 

Im curious why Faldo never won a US Open. Or a PGA Championship.

 

Phil, well, we know the US Open is the major that least suits his game and...mentality. But he has 6 2/T2

 

I never watched Faldo but thought his game was all about fairways and excellent course management. So figured he would have won at least a US Open or PGA.

 

 

Phil could actually be likened to Sam Snead. Awesome golfer, as good as anybody talent wise, never won a US Open.

 

Seemingly for the same reasons as Phil...

 

Snead has 4 2/T2 in the US Open. Does this sound familiar?...

 

In the 1939 US Open, Snead needed to par the final hole to win, but instead he triple-bogeyed.

 

Hogan on Snead:

 

“If he could have played golf with my brain, he would be the only name in the record book.”

 

 

 

[Dr. Block]

It's funny how these threads always shift gears. It always makes for great reading, though, and as usual, you guys have delivered. Thank you. 

 

Phil's place among the very best is a challenging distinction. One incredible putt by Payne Stewart and one whiff of the driver are all that keeps him from being anointed. People say his game didn't fit the US Open, yet he put himself in position to win so many times. And not only the US Open, but in many other majors before he finally broke through. Love him or hate him, Phil is a fine thoroughbred. You could argue for Trevino and Faldo in many ways, but, in my opinion, neither had as high of a gear or as much talent as Phil. 

 

If Phil could have also played with Hogan's brain...the top of the list would go Nicklaus, Woods, Mickelson...

 

  

Edited December 23, 2020 by Dr. Block

[Body_Visions]

18 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

It's funny how these threads always shift gears. It always makes for great reading, though, and as usual, you guys have delivered. Thank you. 

 

Phil's place among the very best is a challenging distinction. One incredible putt by Payne Stewart and one whiff of the driver are all that keeps him from being anointed. People say his game didn't fit the US Open, yet he put himself in position to win so many times. And not only the US Open, but in many other majors before he finally broke through. Love him or hate him, Phil was/is a fine thoroughbred. You could argue for Trevino and Faldo in many ways, but, in my opinion, neither had as high of a gear or as much talent as Phil. 

 

  

 

 

Great point about Phil and the Open. That might be his greatest achievement.  

 

I made a thread a read a while back, Faldo vs. Phil, and the consensus seemed to be Faldo, which I agree with as well.

 

Out of the four mentioned above, I think Seve is the most gifted by far, and Phil is incredible in that department.  

 

Betting my own money, I would take Faldo or Trevino any time, and that would seem to be the best gauge in my eyes.

[Dr. Block]

18 minutes ago, Body_Visions said:

 

 

Great point about Phil and the Open. That might be his greatest achievement.  

 

I made a thread a read a while back, Faldo vs. Phil, and the consensus seemed to be Faldo, which I agree with as well.

 

Out of the four mentioned above, I think Seve is the most gifted by far, and Phil is incredible in that department.  

 

Betting my own money, I would take Faldo or Trevino any time, and that would seem to be the best gauge in my eyes.

I agree with you on Seve, though I think Phil is very, very close.

 

Just a fun hypothetical for you regarding betting your money: say we could take Faldo, Trevino, and Phil in their prime and put them in a stroke play challenge match for serious cash, would you still bet them over Phil? I would take Phil. Sometimes I think playing for the cash gets his game up more than anything else, including major championships.  

[dlygrisse]

1 hour ago, Body_Visions said:

 

 

Great point about Phil and the Open. That might be his greatest achievement.  

 

I made a thread a read a while back, Faldo vs. Phil, and the consensus seemed to be Faldo, which I agree with as well.

 

Out of the four mentioned above, I think Seve is the most gifted by far, and Phil is incredible in that department.  

 

Betting my own money, I would take Faldo or Trevino any time, and that would seem to be the best gauge in my eyes.

I think it totally depends on the course. At Augusta Faldo for sure, but if a low fade is a great shot to have on a lot of courses, and Trevino could just wear you out on certain tracks.  Phil's game didn't do well in the wind till later in his career, The other 3 were great in The Open early in their careers.  But if you are playing an American dessert course, Pebble, or even a typical American CC course I'd take Phil more often than not.  Seve had tons of talent for sure, Not sure if he really had more than Phil, but Seve only seemed to play well when he was inspired. Faldo was a technician, great iron player with a good short game, Lee was just a ball striking machine, great wedge player too.  

 

All 4 of these guys had great short games, if they had anything in common.  4 of the greatest wedge players ever, you;d have to throw Tiger in there as well, but there aren't too many guys who were better than these 4.  

[Body_Visions]

1 hour ago, Dr. Block said:

I agree with you on Seve, though I think Phil is very, very close.

 

Just a fun hypothetical for you regarding betting your money: say we could take Faldo, Trevino, and Phil in their prime and put them in a stroke play challenge match for serious cash, would you still bet them over Phil? I would take Phil. Sometimes I think playing for the cash gets his game up more than anything else, including major championships.  

 

Yes, I would still take Faldo and Trevino.  If we could somehow get them to bet their own money, I’ll take Trevino every time.

[melo]

2 hours ago, Body_Visions said:

 

Yes, I would still take Faldo and Trevino.  If we could somehow get them to bet their own money, I’ll take Trevino every time.

Interesting tidbit - Trevino has 5 Vardon trophies for lowest scoring average...Phil has ZERO, which I would have thought impossible, even with Tiger...but guess who else has NONE, Jack. 

 

Additional note, while I was delving into this I realized the vast majority of us underrate Billy Casper SEVERELY. 3 majors, 5 vardon trophies, 2 PGA runner-ups. 51 PGA wins in a career that overlapped 3-4 of the 15 best players ever. 

[MUNIGRIT]

I would bet although Phil never got to number 1 his ranking on the number scale was higher than Seve, Faldo and maybe Norman at some point. 

[Body_Visions]

3 hours ago, melo said:

Interesting tidbit - Trevino has 5 Vardon trophies for lowest scoring average...Phil has ZERO, which I would have thought impossible, even with Tiger...but guess who else has NONE, Jack. 

 

Additional note, while I was delving into this I realized the vast majority of us underrate Billy Casper SEVERELY. 3 majors, 5 vardon trophies, 2 PGA runner-ups. 51 PGA wins in a career that overlapped 3-4 of the 15 best players ever. 

 

 

Pretty sure, from memory that Jack missed a few because he didn’t play enough rounds to qualify.  

 

Awwsome fact about Trevino.

[Body_Visions]

3 hours ago, MUNIGRIT said:

I would bet although Phil never got to number 1 his ranking on the number scale was higher than Seve, Faldo and maybe Norman at some point. 

 

 

I guess that’s possible, but the ranking points have always changed, so I don’t think that’s a good gauge.  

 

Woosnam got there, and I don’t think he ever played in America full-time.   I would imagine that’s almost impossible now.  

[pma1048]

For anyone interested this interview he did last month with the Sub Par guys is a pretty good listen - he addresses or  hits on just about every issue discussed in this thread.  As a big fan of Rickie, I agree that his win total so far is disappointing and can't help but help but wonder if it might be in his best interest to dial back on some of the sponsor/off-course obligation stuff and think discussion of such is fair game...but for Eamon Lynch to describe him as a cautionary tale is clickbait b.s.  Rickie Fowler is a lot of things...a cautionary tale isn't one of them.

 

 

[freeze16172002]

On 12/22/2020 at 11:56 PM, bscinstnct said:

 

All fair. Comparing across eras, even with solid stats, will have a level of subjectivity.

 

But, if being number #1 is a criteria, it’s likely that Faldo would never have been #1 in the Tiger era. Tiger would have destroyed Faldo. There’s no aspect of the game that Faldo was better than Tiger in and Tiger was far stronger in many.

 

I make this harsh comparison to underline who Phil was up against to attain #1.

 

Phil spent 270 weeks at #2. You could argue he would have had his time as #1, perhaps for a considerable amount of years, if he wasn’t playing against arguably the greatest player to ever tee it up. And for sure the most dominant player in any decade. 

Phil's first 5 years on tour were Tiger free. Its not all Tiger he couldn't close out Payne Stewart in 99. And collapsed in 04 and 06 US Opens

Edited December 25, 2020 by freeze16172002

[Shilgy]

On 12/22/2020 at 8:20 PM, bscinstnct said:

 

Phil has 44 PGA Tour wins (9th all time) and 5 Majors.

 

That puts his right there with Trevino or Faldo

 

None has a career Grand Slam. Phil and Trevino have 3 parts. Faldo has six majors but only 2 parts of the Grand Slam.

 

You just need to look at the names that Phil shares company with in the top-10 PGA Tour all time winner list to get perspective on his place in history.

 

 

I’m with you on this one. How can anyone leave Phil out of their top 10. Tiger and Phil are the only two in this list born in the last 80 years. 80!!
Funny  how no one thinks Cy Young and his 500+ wins is the best pitcher ever but in golf they go strictly by volume without context.

[bscinstnct]

2 hours ago, freeze16172002 said:

Phil's first 5 years on tour were Tiger free. Its not all Tiger he couldn't close out Payne Stewart in 99. And collapsed in 04 and 06 US Opens

Phil didn’t become a fixture in the top 10 until late 1997

 

And he didn’t move into the top 5 until 2000

 

And, by then, well, we all know what TW was doing out there. 
 

So, with 270 weeks at number 2, all of them (not all consecutive but I imagine he strung many consecutive weeks if not years at number 2), it’s a given he’d have had some good stretches at number 1 without TW in the picture. 

 

 And as far as the US Open collapses, yes, well, if he won two US Opens, he’d be in the top 10 easily ; )

 

 

 

 

 

[freeze16172002]

11 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

Phil didn’t become a fixture in the top 10 until late 1997

 

And he didn’t move into the top 5 until 2000

 

And, by then, well, we all know what TW was doing out there. 
 

So, with 270 weeks at number 2, all of them (not all consecutive but I imagine he strung many consecutive weeks if not years at number 2), it’s a given he’d have had some good stretches at number 1 without TW in the picture. 

 

 And as far as the US Open collapses, yes, well, if he won two US Opens, he’d be in the top 10 easily ; )

 

 

 

 

 

took phil 6 years to become a fixture on tour is that a arguement for or against him? The 'if game" if I didnt quit little league I would be _________

Edited December 26, 2020 by freeze16172002

[freeze16172002]

12 hours ago, Shilgy said:

I’m with you on this one. How can anyone leave Phil out of their top 10. Tiger and Phil are the only two in this list born in the last 80 years. 80!!
Funny  how no one thinks Cy Young and his 500+ wins is the best pitcher ever but in golf they go strictly by volume without context.

what are the names on the list? .....I agree Phil is a top 10 all timer under age 80......show me a list that cy young isnt a top 10 all timer

Edited December 26, 2020 by freeze16172002

[grm24]

On 12/23/2020 at 6:05 PM, melo said:

Additional note, while I was delving into this I realized the vast majority of us underrate Billy Casper SEVERELY. 3 majors, 5 vardon trophies, 2 PGA runner-ups. 51 PGA wins in a career that overlapped 3-4 of the 15 best players ever. 

It's comical how much Billy Casper gets overlooked by golf people. Especially as you astutely noted who he accomplished the majority of his playing career against.  One of the greatest putters of all time. Still holds the record for most US Ryder Cup points won. Won a tour event in 16 consecutive seasons. Here is an interesting stat that shows how great he was. From Wikipedia.......

 

Between 1964 and 1970, Casper won 27 tournaments on the PGA Tour, two more than Nicklaus and six more than Palmer and Player combined, during that time period. 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Casper#Legacy