Are these guys Hall of Famers

[golfandfishing]

6 hours ago, mosesgolf said:

Imo 2 majors is a prerequisite for HOF. 

No Fred Couples.  He was Mr Popular but not HOF material. 

Somebody better tell Chi Chi Rodriguez to come get his stuff. 

[golfandfishing]

1 hour ago, anth said:

He’s not a shoe in I guess, but I’m surprised that a guy who has a Major, a Players, 2 x WGC Matchplays and 51 weeks at Number 1 is somehow considered so far behind Furyk and Sergio.

Decent chance that if he does get in he will have laryngitis and WD from the ceremony anyway. His display would have to be placed next to the first aid station. 

[Big GG]

The HOF in any sport means absolutely nothing. Peer respect and respect for the sport you play is far greater.

[Shilgy]

8 hours ago, dalehead said:

The World Golf Hall of Fame got off to an auspicious start. Here is the list of the first inductees in 1974.

 

Walter Hagen
Ben Hogan
Bobby Jones
Byron Nelson
Jack Nicklaus
Francis Ouimet
Arnold Palmer
Gary Player
Gene Sarazen
Sam Snead
Harry Vardon

 

IMHO standards have slipped considerably since then. Fred Couples? DLIII? They belong in that company? And I’m not just picking on them, there are other members with records similar to theirs.The current standard of 15 total wins on the major world tours, including The Japan, Sunshine, Asian, and Australian tours, plus 2 wins in the majors or Players should be the minimum for consideration, not an automatic entry. Any if no one gets the required 65% of the votes there are no inductees that year.

 

As for Jason Day, Furyk, and Sergio, compare them to the original inductees and tell me what you think.

The original covered the first 70 years or so of golf. Seems like you should have the best class first. Like the first baseball class was Ruth, Cobb, Honus Wagner, Crristy Mathewson and Walter Johnson.. 

 

And how did Ouimet get in??😏 One major and nothing else? Geez…

[Shilgy]

8 hours ago, Ghostwedge said:

The shine has been off a lot of things lately.....Gladys Knight and the Pips are in the Rock n Roll HOF and Grand Funk Railroad isn't ? WTH is that all about ?

Political correctness I guess.  Nothing is special now, everyone gets a trophy.

I like Day , Furyk, etc. but in with Jack, Arnie , Hogan and Snead ? Uh no.

No one would be saying they would be the equals of Jack Arnie Ben and Sam.  But if you’re just comparing to those four which of them needs to leave to make room for Tiger? 

[Holy Moses]

18 hours ago, ChillyDipper said:

If Fred Couples is then yes, I think they all are.

I thought the criteria to get into the HOF was strengthened after Couples got in 

[dalehead]

9 hours ago, grm24 said:

Couples didn't get in under the current rules. He was voted in under different circumstances which has already been pointed out in this thread. Couples actually has 15 PGA Tour wins with 1 major and 2 Players. Under the current rules the Players counts the same as a  major. Only 2 ET wins (Masters win doesn't count on each tour). And FWIW I've never said Couples is a HOFer. I've just pointed out why he is in the HOF. Huge difference. FTR Couples being voted in was a huge reason why the HOF voting rules were changed.

 

What do you think about a player being in the HOF with only 11 PGA Tour wins but has 3 majors and 1 ET win? Or a player with only 10 PGA Tour wins with 3 majors and 4 wins in Japan? How about 14 wins and 1 major?

 

Players in question are Payne Stewart, Larry Nelson, Ken Venturi. Venturi was inducted to the HOF the same year as Couples.

Venturi got in for his broadcasting career more than his playing record. Payne Stewart because his life and career were cut short in his prime. Larry Nelson belongs in a group of players like Ben Crenshaw, DL III, Sandy Lyle, Ian Woosnam. Good careers and worthy of HOF consideration but no more than that. And the list is longer.Tom Kite, Chi Chi Rodriguez, Bob Charles, Neil Coles. I could go on. The point is at what point does it cease being the Hall of Fame and become the Hall of the Very Good, or the Hall of the Popular?

[Ghostwedge]

2 hours ago, Shilgy said:

No one would be saying they would be the equals of Jack Arnie Ben and Sam.  But if you’re just comparing to those four which of them needs to leave to make room for Tiger? 

The list obviously includes the original inductees, I just threw those four out there as best known. Why would any leave for Tiger ? Not the biggest TW fan but he is a shoo-in first ballot and should be 100% on all ballots. 

Sometimes common sense should enter the picture.

[tatertot]

14 hours ago, grm24 said:

https://www.worldgolfhalloffame.org/criteria/

 

Male Competitor
A player must have a cumulative total of 15 or more official victories on any of the original members of the International Federation of PGA Tours (PGA TOUR, European Tour, Japan Golf Tour, Sunshine Tour, Asian Tour and PGA of Australasia) OR at least two victories among the following events: The Masters, THE PLAYERS Championship, the U.S. Open, The Open Championship and the PGA Championship.

 

A player must be at least 45 years old during the year of a given Induction Ceremony (example: A player be at least 45 years old in 2021 in order to qualify for the Class of 2021), or be at least three years removed from being an active participant (as determined by the Tour) on any of the original members of the International Federation of PGA Tours.          

I was pretty close ...

[cdnglf]

5 hours ago, anth said:

He’s not a shoe in I guess, but I’m surprised that a guy who has a Major, a Players, 2 x WGC Matchplays and 51 weeks at Number 1 is somehow considered so far behind Furyk and Sergio.

He had an incredible run, but only 12 wins total (PGA or Euro) so far.

[3whacker]

Popularity does not equal FAME.....there isn't a sports HOF that has one scratching your head wondering why someone is in the HOF or why someone else is not in the HOF....and now with social media the posturing by the fans as to what constitutes a member reaches a whole different level...inclusion into any hall is going to be subjective, once you make statistical landmarks for inclusion you actually eliminate those that deserved to be in all along

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, Ghostwedge said:

The list obviously includes the original inductees, I just threw those four out there as best known. Why would any leave for Tiger ? Not the biggest TW fan but he is a shoo-in first ballot and should be 100% on all ballots. 

Sometimes common sense should enter the picture.

Ah, but the post I replied to was saying the guys under discussion in this thread are not nearly the equals of those four so they don’t belong.  Statistically Arnie does not belong in that four with Tiger replacing him.  

  A Hall of Fame tells the story of that particular endeavor. It’s not the Hall of the Elite.  A post a few above claimed DL3 should not be in. If you achieve lifetime membership with 20+ wins it should be automatic. Only 30 players in the history of the tour have more wins and 17 of that 30 were born over a century ago.

 

Sheesh.

[golfandfishing]

1 hour ago, Shilgy said:

Ah, but the post I replied to was saying the guys under discussion in this thread are not nearly the equals of those four so they don’t belong.  Statistically Arnie does not belong in that four with Tiger replacing him.  

  A Hall of Fame tells the story of that particular endeavor. It’s not the Hall of the Elite.  A post a few above claimed DL3 should not be in. If you achieve lifetime membership with 20+ wins it should be automatic. Only 30 players in the history of the tour have more wins and 17 of that 30 were born over a century ago.

 

Sheesh.

That’s a good benchmark. Someone also suggested Crenshaw shouldn’t be in - 19 wins w 2 majors including an all time classic at the 1995 Masters and the sexiest putting stroke around. I’d watch Crenshaw order lunch before I so much as turn my head to watch DJ mindlessly bash a driver. 

[Shilgy]

4 minutes ago, golfandfishing said:

That’s a good benchmark. Someone also suggested Crenshaw shouldn’t be in - 19 wins w 2 majors including an all time classic at the 1995 Masters and the sexiest putting stroke around. I’d watch Crenshaw order lunch before I so much as turn my head to watch DJ mindlessly bash a driver. 

Not sure any pro that stays at #1 “mindlessly bashes driver” but I agree with you on Gentle Ben. 
 

Let’s face it….this is one of those arguments that will come up every year. We all have varying definitions of what constitutes hall worthy.  

[Bad9]

On 5/14/2021 at 6:06 PM, bscinstnct said:

 

Exactly, if you use him as a threshold then Days record is just as good and JF and SG are better. 
 

They really need a separate, “inner” HoF where, except BJones and some UK guys, the standard is 5 majors. 

 

 

Agree. Couples and Love III lowered the threshold so much it really doesn't mean anything anymore. Its better than the NHL though.

[golfandfishing]

1 hour ago, Bad9 said:

Agree. Couples and Love III lowered the threshold so much it really doesn't mean anything anymore. Its better than the NHL though.

Love has 21 wins, a PGA and 2 Players. How high was the bar before him?

[Shilgy]

11 minutes ago, golfandfishing said:

Love has 21 wins, a PGA and 2 Players. How high was the bar before him?

Exactly, I don’t get the Love comments at all. 
 

They have had the Haal of Fame for 47 years with multiple players in most years. And yet just 30 players all time have more wins.

 

How in the world is that not worthy? 

[dalehead]

4 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Exactly, I don’t get the Love comments at all. 
 

They have had the Haal of Fame for 47 years with multiple players in most years. And yet just 30 players all time have more wins.

 

How in the world is that not worthy? 

Nice career. A shoo in for the Hall of the Very Good. But an all time great? No. I think the HOF should be for those who have had an outstanding career, not just a very good career. I also can’t get very excited about inductees who meet the 2 majors requirement with a PGA and a Players. Maybe the requirement should be 2 majors, at least one of which must be a Masters, US Open, or Open Championship.

Look at at it this way

Jack Nicklaus

Lee Trevino

Phil Mickelson

Sam Snead

Nick Faldo

Davis Love III

Which one doesn’t belong?

[cdnglf]

59 minutes ago, dalehead said:

Nice career. A shoo in for the Hall of the Very Good. But an all time great? No. I think the HOF should be for those who have had an outstanding career, not just a very good career. I also can’t get very excited about inductees who meet the 2 majors requirement with a PGA and a Players. Maybe the requirement should be 2 majors, at least one of which must be a Masters, US Open, or Open Championship.

Look at at it this way

Jack Nicklaus

Lee Trevino

Phil Mickelson

Sam Snead

Nick Faldo

Davis Love III

Which one doesn’t belong?

 

Seems like the Hall you want is very different from the one that exists. Kite, Couples, Stewart, Strange, Larry Nelson, Wadkins, Monty, OMeara are all in.

 

 

Edited May 16, 2021 by cdnglf

[iBanesto]

The HoF should not have to induct people every year.

 

Maybe every 5 years would be better.

 

Sometime you feel they are clutching at straws to add people.

 

I support the ET, but I don't believe Montgomerie is HoF material.

[grm24]

6 minutes ago, iBanesto said:

The HoF should not have to induct people every year.

They don't. It's every two years with a maximum of four people inducted. Next induction is set for March 2022. Tiger is being inducted.

 

https://www.worldgolfhalloffame.org/inductions/2022/

 

 

[grm24]

40 minutes ago, cdnglf said:

 

Seems like the Hall you want is very different from the one that exists. Kite, Couples, Stewart, Strange, Larry Nelson, Wadkins, Monty, OMeara are all in.

Don't forget Hale Irwin. 19 wins. Ben Crenshaw 19 wins. No way did DL3 being elected lower the bar for entry when players with a lesser resume were already inducted.

 

If people actually took the time to see who was already in the WGHOF they might be surprised. For instance Ray Floyd has 1 more win that DL3 on the PGA Tour. Has 4 majors and 1 Players Championship. DL3 has 1 major and 2 Players championships. Nobody questions Floyd as a HOFer. Right? Yet their careers are very similar. Especially since the WGHOF has Player Championship wins as the same as winning a major. 

Edited May 16, 2021 by grm24

[Loose_Ferrule]

3 hours ago, grm24 said:

Don't forget Hale Irwin. 19 wins. Ben Crenshaw 19 wins. No way did DL3 being elected lower the bar for entry when players with a lesser resume were already inducted.

 

If people actually took the time to see who was already in the WGHOF they might be surprised. For instance Ray Floyd has 1 more win that DL3 on the PGA Tour. Has 4 majors and 1 Players Championship. DL3 has 1 major and 2 Players championships. Nobody questions Floyd as a HOFer. Right? Yet their careers are very similar. Especially since the WGHOF has Player Championship wins as the same as winning a major. 

With all due respect their careers are not close. 

 

Floyd has 63 Professional wins including 4 majors and 4 Senior Tour Majors and 1 Players Championship

 

Davis has 37 Professional wins including 1 Major and 2 Player Championships.

 

Only 19 players have won 5 majors or more and with the rest of Raymonds accomplishments, he should be in the HOF.

[iBanesto]

4 hours ago, grm24 said:

They don't. It's every two years with a maximum of four people inducted. Next induction is set for March 2022. Tiger is being inducted.

 

https://www.worldgolfhalloffame.org/inductions/2022/

 

 

 

My bad.

 

But then again it should probably be every 5 years which would make an induction even more prestigious.

[iBanesto]

1 hour ago, Simmer7 said:

With all due respect their careers are not close. 

 

Floyd has 63 Professional wins including 4 majors and 4 Senior Tour Majors and 1 Players Championship

 

Davis has 37 Professional wins including 1 Major and 2 Player Championships.

 

Only 19 players have won 5 majors or more and with the rest of Raymonds accomplishments, he should be in the HOF.

 

There is a massive chasm when comparing 4 majors to 1 major win.

 

Floyd won 3 out of the 4 majors. Only 17 golfers in the history of golf have won 3 majors out of 4.

 

Love III is not even close to Floyd's achievements.

Edited May 16, 2021 by iBanesto

[Loose_Ferrule]

1 minute ago, iBanesto said:

 

There is a massive chasm when comparing 4 majors to 1 major win.

 

Floyd won 3 out of the 4 majors, not many players have achieved that.

 

Love III is not even close to Floyd's achievements.

100%

[Shilgy]

8 hours ago, dalehead said:

Nice career. A shoo in for the Hall of the Very Good. But an all time great? No. I think the HOF should be for those who have had an outstanding career, not just a very good career. I also can’t get very excited about inductees who meet the 2 majors requirement with a PGA and a Players. Maybe the requirement should be 2 majors, at least one of which must be a Masters, US Open, or Open Championship.

Look at at it this way

Jack Nicklaus

Lee Trevino

Phil Mickelson

Sam Snead

Nick Faldo

Davis Love III

Which one doesn’t belong?

Wow , that’s the whole rest of the Hall? 🧐
 

Like I said in an earlier post the Hall of Fame is the story of pro golf.  And Love is one of the top 50 or so. 
 

Here is the problem I have with the suggestion it should be the Hall of Very Best. The list gets entriched and are impossible to replace as their careers get retold and embellished over the years. So in baseball, for instance (and yes I just looked), the only guy to crack the top 10 all time that played in the last 50 years as Ken Griffey Jr.  Golf would be the same way. In fact it is even worse. Golf has grown in a high way over the years. And yet a win in 1910 is valued as highly as a win today. And even a win during the war years, when most of the normal field was away fighting a world war, is valued as highly. It’s a lot of the reason Hogan Nelson and Snead are revered.

  According to every top 10 all time list I could find Tiger is the only player to have started his career in the last 50 years. Half of them started nearly a century ago when the tour as we know it was very very young.  There is a reason most of the all time wins list is populated by guys from long ago. They shared a majority of the wins because they were very few talented golfers.  Even as late as Jack’s era many of the players each week were club pros and wannabe’s.  Is it possible they set a standard that could never be equaled?  That through some evolutionary quirk the golf gene was strong for 30 years or so and birthed the greats and has faded away?  I suppose so but I doubt it. With years of instruction and most playing the game from a very early age has the skill level has dropped over the years? 
  The problem is the hall would be an old dusty place as the list of greats becomes entrenched and irreplaceable. And their stories and careers are embellished. Like the post above claiming 63 wins for Floyd. While technically true “just” 22 of them were on the PGA Tour. The 63 includes the Skins Game and he Father Son challenge!  A nice career and Hall of Fame worthy in my book. But not exponentially better than Love. And not worthy iif we are doing a Hall of Fame of the Very Best.

 

 

Rant over, for now.  
 

 

Edited May 16, 2021 by Shilgy

[cdnglf]

12 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Wow , that’s the whole rest of the Hall? 🧐
 

Like I said in an earlier post the Hall of Fame is the story of pro golf.  And Love is one of the top 50 or so. 
 

Here is the problem I have with the suggestion it should be the Hall of Very Best. The list gets entriched and are impossible to replace as their careers get retold and embellished over the years. So in baseball, for instance (and yes I just looked), the only guy to crack the top 10 all time that played in the last 50 years as Ken Griffey Jr.  Golf would be the same way. In fact it is even worse. Golf has grown in a high way over the years. And yet a win in 1910 is valued as highly as a win today. And even a win during the war years, when most of the normal field was away fighting a world war, is valued as highly. It’s a lot of the reason Hogan Nelson and Snead are revered.

  According to every top 10 all time list I could find Tiger is the only player to have started his career in the last 50 years. Half of them started nearly a century ago when the tour as we know it was very very young.  There is a reason most of the all time wins list is populated by guys from long ago. They shared a majority of the wins because they were very few talented golfers.  Even as late as Jack’s era many of the players each week were club pros and wannabe’s.  Is it possible they set a standard that could never be equaled?  That through some evolutionary quirk the golf gene was strong for 30 years or so and birthed the greats and has faded away?  I suppose so but I doubt it. With years of instruction and most playing the game from a very early age has the skill level has dropped over the years? 
  The problem is the hall would be an old dusty place as the list of greats becomes entrenched and irreplaceable. And their stories and careers are embellished. Like the post above claiming 63 wins for Floyd. While technically true “just” 22 of them were on the PGA Tour. The 63 includes the Skins Game and he Father Son challenge!  A nice career and Hall of Fame worthy in my book. But not exponentially better than Love. And not worthy iif we are doing a Hall of Fame of the Very Best.

 

 

Rant over, for now.  
 

 

 

Agreed. The annual discussion and induction ceremony keeps Halls of Fame (and the associated Museum) relevant and operating, especially in Baseball.

Golf is a smaller sport, so every two years make sense. But if you're only going to add one guy every 5 years.. might as well not have a Hall at all.

[cdnglf]

15 hours ago, Bad9 said:

Agree. Couples and Love III lowered the threshold so much it really doesn't mean anything anymore. Its better than the NHL though.

 

Cam Neely, LOL.

[Loose_Ferrule]

2 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Wow , that’s the whole rest of the Hall? 🧐
 

Like I said in an earlier post the Hall of Fame is the story of pro golf.  And Love is one of the top 50 or so. 
 

Here is the problem I have with the suggestion it should be the Hall of Very Best. The list gets entriched and are impossible to replace as their careers get retold and embellished over the years. So in baseball, for instance (and yes I just looked), the only guy to crack the top 10 all time that played in the last 50 years as Ken Griffey Jr.  Golf would be the same way. In fact it is even worse. Golf has grown in a high way over the years. And yet a win in 1910 is valued as highly as a win today. And even a win during the war years, when most of the normal field was away fighting a world war, is valued as highly. It’s a lot of the reason Hogan Nelson and Snead are revered.

  According to every top 10 all time list I could find Tiger is the only player to have started his career in the last 50 years. Half of them started nearly a century ago when the tour as we know it was very very young.  There is a reason most of the all time wins list is populated by guys from long ago. They shared a majority of the wins because they were very few talented golfers.  Even as late as Jack’s era many of the players each week were club pros and wannabe’s.  Is it possible they set a standard that could never be equaled?  That through some evolutionary quirk the golf gene was strong for 30 years or so and birthed the greats and has faded away?  I suppose so but I doubt it. With years of instruction and most playing the game from a very early age has the skill level has dropped over the years? 
  The problem is the hall would be an old dusty place as the list of greats becomes entrenched and irreplaceable. And their stories and careers are embellished. Like the post above claiming 63 wins for Floyd. While technically true “just” 22 of them were on the PGA Tour. The 63 includes the Skins Game and he Father Son challenge!  A nice career and Hall of Fame worthy in my book. But not exponentially better than Love. And not worthy iif we are doing a Hall of Fame of the Very Best.

 

 

Rant over, for now.  
 

 

Floyd won 4 Majors to Love's 1.....that's "exponentially better" when it comes to golf. Like I said there's only 19 people that have won 5 or more, 10 that have won 4, while 138 have won 1.

 

Of Davis Love's 15 other wins, 10 of them were with Partners including 2 in the Father Son. Most players other wins come in silly season and or team events.