Tour is ever inching towards MLB circa '98

[golfortennis]

1 hour ago, deadsolid...shank said:

One of my biggest complaints about coaches is when they pigeonhole players into position by size. My high school had a team (20 years after me) that was incredibly talented (it included a guy who won on the PGA Tour a couple years ago ((now it’s still a golf related post😀)j, number one ranked team in the state. But....tow particular players on this team. One was a 5’10” kid, really good athlete, strong, QB of the football team. Played guard. Could not throw it in the ocean if he was standing on the beach. Played the perimeter jacking up 3’s.  2nd player, 6’4”, real skinny kid, not overly athletic or strong. One of the best shooting kids I’ve seen, won the 3pt contest in the local all star game. Could flat out stroke it. Almost always played on the block🙄. Drove me crazy. 
 

Big guys CAN play the perimeter, little guys can play on the block (depending on defense of course). Too many coaches don’t recognize and utilize each players particular skill set. 

 

I have a cousin who was the best player on his hockey team.  I'm biased, but I thought he had great vision as a center, and could really drive some offence.  But because he was one of the bigger kids, and a coach wanted "size on the blueline," he got put on defense.  As I noted in another post, coaches looking to build resumes rather than develop players.  I don't think he was necessarily a can't miss NHL center, but given he did get invited to the scouting camp for the OHL having played defense, I always felt a bit bad he never got to see how good he might be at his best position.

 

Your last sentence reminds me of the sac bunt.  Analytics have shown that except in a very few situations, it's better to swing away.  But a manager is also thinking about the fact he won't get criticized for sac bunting if it doesn't work out, but he will if they swing away and it doesn't work out.  At least a few years ago that was the case, might have changed now with the additional knowledge.   

 

[sethdavidsdad]

Until he really starts dominating I don’t see it being an issue. The headline this week was Bryson dominates Bay Hill. Such fake news. He won by one shot. Westwood is late 40’s and Bryson still had to make a putt to win. Sure he cut off a huge amount on the par 5 but he still only made birdie. Now if he starts consistently making double eagles on par 5 and eagles on par 4s then lets talk. Just my opinion of course. Now if every player can gain 20-30 more yards on top of what they already have we may have a problem.

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, milesgiles said:

 

up until recently, Britain was one of the only countries where primary school children still played 11 a side soccer routinely. Other countries reckoned it was more important to give kids more time on the ball to develop skills, so played 4 or 5 a side on smaller pitches. When those other countries started stuffing us at soccer, we realised we might nit have quite the right approach..

 

point being, put those kids in an 11 a side game, if theyve only played 5 a side, yes theyd lose. But in the long run their skill set will be stronger and by the time any professional clubs might want to sign them, they can start learning the full game with the basic skills in place.

 

Yes the vast majority wont get anywhere near a trial with a professional club, but you also dont lose talent out of the game at the same rate.

 

Put it like this, if your kid has realistic pro ambitions, wouldnt you want them on the most efficient path possible? Being the best at 15, at golf, soccer, basketball or anything else isnt very important 

I see the point.  But if that were my goal , I’d have him in a sport specific boarding school , or a full time at home coach 1 on 1. I think we should leave them alone snd let them be kids , an learn naturally as I did.  The cream will always rise , unless you run the cream out of the game with boring play and 1 win seasons for their first 10 years.  

[milesgiles]

1 hour ago, golfortennis said:

 

I have a cousin who was the best player on his hockey team.  I'm biased, but I thought he had great vision as a center, and could really drive some offence.  But because he was one of the bigger kids, and a coach wanted "size on the blueline," he got put on defense.  As I noted in another post, coaches looking to build resumes rather than develop players.  I don't think he was necessarily a can't miss NHL center, but given he did get invited to the scouting camp for the OHL having played defense, I always felt a bit bad he never got to see how good he might be at his best position.

 

Your last sentence reminds me of the sac bunt.  Analytics have shown that except in a very few situations, it's better to swing away.  But a manager is also thinking about the fact he won't get criticized for sac bunting if it doesn't work out, but he will if they swing away and it doesn't work out.  At least a few years ago that was the case, might have changed now with the additional knowledge.   

 

 

doesnt your cousin missing out prove my point?

 

wouldnt you rather his coach had worried less about winning and more about developing prospects?

[milesgiles]

39 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I see the point.  But if that were my goal , I’d have him in a sport specific boarding school , or a full time at home coach 1 on 1. I think we should leave them alone snd let them be kids , an learn naturally as I did.  The cream will always rise , unless you run the cream out of the game with boring play and 1 win seasons for their first 10 years.  

 

I dont follow soccer that closely, but my impression is that there is vastly more home grown talent in the British Premier League than there was 30 years ago. Back then, when the big money came into the game, it was all about importing the biggest foreign stars possible

[One Putter]

Everyone talks about Brysons driving and ignores the fact that he made like 200 ft of putts on Sunday. That's kind of what makes the whole thing work. Guy was a world class player who won everything as a junior golfer and won the NCAA champs in college. His distance is not why he's good.

 

Yall act like anyone who can learn to hit it 350 is automatically gonna be a PGA Tour pro. That isn't how this works and it never has been how this works. There have always been and will always be long hitters. Get. Over. It.

Edited March 10, 2021 by One Putter

[2bGood]

On 3/8/2021 at 2:19 PM, milesgiles said:

Ive already seen a member here make the same accusation of Bryson and I advised him to withdraw it.. which he didnt.

 

Its absolute rubbish on every level, but that wont stop this being a 20 page thread 

 

On 3/8/2021 at 2:52 PM, dlygrisse said:

My guess is he is doing all sorts of things to enhance his performance, including supplements.  With all the attention he is getting I would be highly surprised if he was taking anything on the banned substance list.  I'm not sure what is on the list the PGA tour uses, but Bryson is working his butt off, and if anything he is taking is allowing his body to recover faster it seems to be working.  

 

I just don't see PGA tour players being called before a special committee in congress and being subpoenaed to testify.   It will certainly inspire more people to go this route, golfers will end up training more like baseball players than traditional golfers, but ya still gotta have a short game.  

 

On 3/8/2021 at 5:08 PM, phizzy30 said:

I know some of you guys believe that no one on tour uses PEDs.  All I will say is that it's extremely naive to think so and leave it at that.  Not speculation on my part, but I work in the sports industry and have pro athletes as clients. 

 

Not being specific to Bryson, but I would find extremely hard to believe that there are not multiple players on the PGA Tour that have used PED's. The reason is they work. 

[golfortennis]

40 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

doesnt your cousin missing out prove my point?

 

wouldnt you rather his coach had worried less about winning and more about developing prospects?

 

Oh, I'm not saying that isn't what coaches *should* be doing.  I'm just saying that isn't how it works in reality.

[golfortennis]

40 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

I dont follow soccer that closely, but my impression is that there is vastly more home grown talent in the British Premier League than there was 30 years ago. Back then, when the big money came into the game, it was all about importing the biggest foreign stars possible

 

Well one of the things that caused that was the FA tried to impose a certain quota of homegrown players, and it was struck down as violation of EU rules.  The floodgates opened after that.   Not sure if that goes back 30 years, but I think that had a huge impact.  

[golfortennis]

24 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

 

 

 

Not being specific to Bryson, but I would find extremely hard to believe that there are not multiple players on the PGA Tour that have used PED's. The reason is they work. 

 

It's highly unlikely more than a few high-level athletes aren't using one form or another.  Whether it's actual performance, or recovery/injury prevention(demands on athletes are ridiculous in a lot of ways), they are there.

 

There was a great piece on TSN about some hockey players and Toradol. If you can watch that, see what players will do to stay on the ice/floor/field, and can still convince you guys won't do anything they can, then I don't know what to say.  

[gvogel]

2 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

up until recently, Britain was one of the only countries where primary school children still played 11 a side soccer routinely. Other countries reckoned it was more important to give kids more time on the ball to develop skills, so played 4 or 5 a side on smaller pitches. When those other countries started stuffing us at soccer, we realised we might nit have quite the right approach..

 

point being, put those kids in an 11 a side game, if theyve only played 5 a side, yes theyd lose. But in the long run their skill set will be stronger and by the time any professional clubs might want to sign them, they can start learning the full game with the basic skills in place.

 

Yes the vast majority wont get anywhere near a trial with a professional club, but you also dont lose talent out of the game at the same rate.

 

Put it like this, if your kid has realistic pro ambitions, wouldnt you want them on the most efficient path possible? Being the best at 15, at golf, soccer, basketball or anything else isnt very important 

Earl Woods would have disagreed.  His approach worked out pretty good.

[milesgiles]

26 minutes ago, golfortennis said:

 

Well one of the things that caused that was the FA tried to impose a certain quota of homegrown players, and it was struck down as violation of EU rules.  The floodgates opened after that.   Not sure if that goes back 30 years, but I think that had a huge impact.  

 

the floodgates opened because the newly founded Premier League got a huge Sky Tv deal and the clubs spent the money on the best players possible.. who werent British.

 

[milesgiles]

33 minutes ago, golfortennis said:

 

Oh, I'm not saying that isn't what coaches *should* be doing.  I'm just saying that isn't how it works in reality.

 

which is why I specifically commented on what good coaches 'should' do 

 

 

[milesgiles]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

I see the point.  But if that were my goal , I’d have him in a sport specific boarding school , or a full time at home coach 1 on 1. 

 

thats financially way beyond 99% of parents in the uk or really anywhere outside the USA..  we have nothing like the resources devoted to amateur sport that you do 

[milesgiles]

53 minutes ago, 2bGood said:

 

 

 

Not being specific to Bryson, but I would find extremely hard to believe that there are not multiple players on the PGA Tour that have used PED's. The reason is they work. 

 

As I said, I think some may do, but its outrageous to accuse specific athletes with no evidence whatsoever. Cant believe this thread is still going

[milesgiles]

22 minutes ago, gvogel said:

Earl Woods would have disagreed.  His approach worked out pretty good.

 

Actually I dont think he would.. he wanted Tiger to be the best at 25, not 15.. it just so happened that he was, but it wasnt the goal.

[golfortennis]

4 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

Actually I dont think he would.. he wanted Tiger to be the best at 25, not 15.. it just so happened that he was, but it wasnt the goal.

 

I'm not sure about that.  Golf is a little different in that you have to somewhat keep performing, but take Laurie Canter as one example.  One reason he took up golf, after being a junior tennis player is that if you're not the best by certain ages, you lose opportunities.  It's quite similar in many sports.  Kids grow at different rates, and a number of times the physical difference rules.  You have kids who were smaller early on not get picked, and choose another sport or activity.  I know plenty of people I went to high school with who were much smaller than me in grade school, but grew a lot and got bigger than me.  But did they lose out on development because they were passed over?  

 

It may be pure coincidence, but Malcolm Gladwell had an interesting point about how many major junior hockey players(16-20, a large feeder for the NHL) were born in the first half of the year.  It was a much bigger weighting than you would expect, and his theory, which I don't think is complete BS, was that they are just bigger at tryout time at 8/9/10, so they get the opportunities.

 

It's also why I'm torn on the growth of all these travel teams in youth sports.  ON the one hand, it feeds into the "everyone gets a trophy" mentality(in NA, it is viewed as a badge of honor for a kid to be on a "travel" team), but at the same time, if, as above, it gets kids opportunities to play until they catch up size-wise..... 

[cwilk]

Why do people care if a player uses PED’s. If a player has a soft tissue injury, why would taking HGH or a secretagogue be a bad thing if it’s use is to help speed up the recovery time? There is more to their use than hitting the long ball. 

[bladehunter]

26 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

thats financially way beyond 99% of parents in the uk or really anywhere outside the USA..  we have nothing like the resources devoted to amateur sport that you do 

Hmm.  Well for what it’s worth. I wish we didn’t either.  
 

full time “ travel ball “ teams have ruined youth sports in my opinion.  As has YouTube , in the respects of showing kids the celebrity kids teams .  You have good youth players not wanting to pursue a sport after they witness the 0.1 % 13 year old dunk in competition etc.  I’ve literally heard kids say “ I can’t do that .... no use in trying.  “.     Now I’m not delusional.  Most kids never sniff college much less pro play.  But - I think the dream is a very healthy one to have and remain intact.   Seems like in the last 10 years that bubble has burst.  
 

but the real problem with the monetized sports setup we have is that it really is all about the clicky coaches and parents.  It’s not based on talent at all.     This started as I was a high school kid in the 90s with AAU basketball.   You’d have someone’s dad be the coach.  Then have the coaches son as a guaranteed starter.   And his close buds as well.   I was recruited by several of these teams.  Chose the one that would supply a ride to and from games and practice.   And found out quickly that they only wanted me as a sub to give their guys a breather.  You see. They play it as you’re saying.  To develop  their kids for school teams. Not necessarily to win.   This puts the poorer unconnected kids at a huge disadvantage, and discourages the more talented kids who try to tag along but don’t see playing time.  As a side note.  The AAU practices were what fueled my “ competition is war “ mentality.  I hated those teams that much.  But loved the game and wanted to play.  
 

i guess what I’m saying is that $ rules the day.  Not talent.  You have to be extraordinary to overcome that.  The  school teams are the only way around the $.  And sometimes even that doesn’t work.  I never started on an AAU team. And I played on 7.  But.  I was a kid who first dunked a ball in 7th grade , and started every game of the middle school , then jv , and then varsity seasons. This is with the same group of kids on both accounts.  That’s the bias that the industry has.  My parents were absent.  And I had no political clout.  
 

 

so be careful what you wish for.  The system we have isn’t a good thing.  Local teams can’t field enough players to survive because the  well off kids all take their $ and play travel ball where they control the teams etc. 

Edited March 10, 2021 by bladehunter

[cwilk]

@milesgiles why is HGH to repair an injury any different than any other prescription that would expedite the healing process?

[PuttCurseRepeat]

On 3/8/2021 at 7:08 PM, phizzy30 said:

I know some of you guys believe that no one on tour uses PEDs.  All I will say is that it's extremely naive to think so and leave it at that.  Not speculation on my part, but I work in the sports industry and have pro athletes as clients. 

 

Wow! This post was almost informative AND courageous. Congratulations.

[BombinJim]

30 minutes ago, cwilk said:

Why do people care if a player uses PED’s. If a player has a soft tissue injury, why would taking HGH or a secretagogue be a bad thing if it’s use is to help speed up the recovery time?

You artificially reduce recovery times and raise ones abilities beyond which they could obtain naturally. One could postulate the state of the professional game would evolve to the “using or losing” era of professional cycling, where if you aren’t using, you’re losing (e.g. Lance Armstrong). kids who look up to pro athletes could be swayed into following the footsteps of their PED using idols. Long term health studies of using PEDs are scarcely published/conducted. Athletic feats become tainted and the viewer becomes jaded and disinterested because everyday people/most of the world does not use PED’s. So there’s a short list of reasons, pick your favorite.

[golfortennis]

37 minutes ago, cwilk said:

Why do people care if a player uses PED’s. If a player has a soft tissue injury, why would taking HGH or a secretagogue be a bad thing if it’s use is to help speed up the recovery time? There is more to their use than hitting the long ball. 

 

I think part of it is the idea that once you go down that road, how much of what you are watching is a guy's natural talent, vs a science experiment?  At some point, it loses the luster that drew people in in the first place.  Why waste hours on a weekend watching this when I could just read a science report that would tell me how things would go?

 

In the past, the stuff that would be used could be fatal, so I could understand the argument that you could not enable a system that required someone else to risk their health in order to keep up with someone who chose to do so.  With all the advances today, I'm not sure how much of that is still true.  But there is also the fact, right or wrong, those are the rules being played under, and if you ignore those, then what?

 

The one I have always had a problem with is the whole "guys in the past never did this."  Well, Willie Mays openly talks about greenies in the 60s.  And given how back in the day an arm injury was the end of a career, but now medicine has them back on the field, weightlifting and other training information...where is the line as to what is ok to use and what is not ok to use?

[bladehunter]

18 minutes ago, cwilk said:

@milesgiles why is HGH to repair an injury any different than any other prescription that would expedite the healing process?

Because it can be abused and there’s then no recourse.  Guys would fake injuries just to get a scrip so they can then juice.  

[bladehunter]

The better question is.  Why do you want to watch an unnatural event ? 

[golfortennis]

3 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Because it can be abused and there’s then no recourse.  Guys would fake injuries just to get a scrip so they can then juice.  

 

It's abused now.  Cycling teams have TUE's for asthma medications that normally indicate a mortal danger if the asthma is untreated.  Yet amazingly, with this one medication they can go from their deathbed to being world class cyclists.

 

And the number of backdated TUE's in tennis is unreal.

 

Part of the reason I was disappointed Vijay Singh couldn't get discovery in his case.  Have to believe the tour has a lot of stuff there they would not want seeing the light of day.

[bladehunter]

5 minutes ago, golfortennis said:

 

It's abused now.  Cycling teams have TUE's for asthma medications that normally indicate a mortal danger if the asthma is untreated.  Yet amazingly, with this one medication they can go from their deathbed to being world class cyclists.

 

And the number of backdated TUE's in tennis is unreal.

 

Part of the reason I was disappointed Vijay Singh couldn't get discovery in his case.  Have to believe the tour has a lot of stuff there they would not want seeing the light of day.

Oh for sure.  100 %

[milesgiles]

48 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Hmm.  Well for what it’s worth. I wish we didn’t either.  
 

full time “ travel ball “ teams have ruined youth sports in my opinion.  As has YouTube , in the respects of showing kids the celebrity kids teams .  You have good youth players not wanting to pursue a sport after they witness the 0.1 % 13 year old dunk in competition etc.  I’ve literally heard kids say “ I can’t do that .... no use in trying.  “.     Now I’m not delusional.  Most kids never sniff college much less pro play.  But - I think the dream is a very healthy one to have and remain intact.   Seems like in the last 10 years that bubble has burst.  
 

but the real problem with the monetized sports setup we have is that it really is all about the clicky coaches and parents.  It’s not based on talent at all.     This started as I was a high school kid in the 90s with AAU basketball.   You’d have someone’s dad be the coach.  Then have the coaches son as a guaranteed starter.   And his close buds as well.   I was recruited by several of these teams.  Chose the one that would supply a ride to and from games and practice.   And found out quickly that they only wanted me as a sub to give their guys a breather.  You see. They play it as you’re saying.  To develop  their kids for school teams. Not necessarily to win.   This puts the poorer unconnected kids at a huge disadvantage, and discourages the more talented kids who try to tag along but don’t see playing time.  As a side note.  The AAU practices were what fueled my “ competition is war “ mentality.  I hated those teams that much.  But loved the game and wanted to play.  
 

i guess what I’m saying is that $ rules the day.  Not talent.  You have to be extraordinary to overcome that.  The  school teams are the only way around the $.  And sometimes even that doesn’t work.  I never started on an AAU team. And I played on 7.  But.  I was a kid who first dunked a ball in 7th grade , and started every game of the middle school , then jv , and then varsity seasons. This is with the same group of kids on both accounts.  That’s the bias that the industry has.  My parents were absent.  And I had no political clout.  
 

 

so be careful what you wish for.  The system we have isn’t a good thing.  Local teams can’t field enough players to survive because the  well off kids all take their $ and play travel ball where they control the teams etc. 

 

the only point i was making was about 'good' coaching, which clearly does not include nepotism😇

[milesgiles]

35 minutes ago, PuttCurseRepeat said:

 

Wow! This post was almost informative AND courageous. Congratulations.

 

dont worry he was quite happy to accuse Bryson in another thread 

[milesgiles]

37 minutes ago, cwilk said:

@milesgiles why is HGH to repair an injury any different than any other prescription that would expedite the healing process?

 

because every athlete would claim a soft tissue injury?