Dutch1008

It is. But has there ever been a good sequel to a comedy? Ever? My expectations were below ground here. The fact that I somewhat enjoyed the 1st half or 2/3 of the movie was quite the surprise.

Not a good movie but had some good elements and is certainly better than Caddyshack 2. The pro cameos are almost all great. Jack, Freddie, Speith, Xander, Zalatoris, and Scottie all boost the movie. Unlike others, I think Daly was a highlight. Sure he plays a drunk bum, but he's also the character holding Happy accountable and pushing him to turn his life around. The surprisingly wise bum/drunk is a common trope and having a guy like Daly play that role is perfect. I thought the Maxi stuff was pretty lame. I appreciate Sandler taking a shot at the stupidity of LIV and commend him for using LIV players to do it*, but I just don't think it landed. Like why did the douchey tech bro need chronic bad breath and why did you keep going back to that joke? Douchey influencers and adventure golf w/ crowds was a joke enough, did they really need an elaborate hip surgery subplot? It's all just a hat on a hat. I honestly think there is like 75% of a decent comedy sequel in there. A decent writer or editor w/ the ability to say no to Sandler's worst impulses would have done wonders. * These guys have to be getting reprimanded by Yassir right? No way LIV signed off on this.

I don't really think Scottie is a threat to Jack or Tiger and I don't think anybody is really arguing that position. Scottie just didn't have the early career success that could open those possibilities. Scottie didn't start eating the world until he was 26. Jack, Tiger, Rory, Jordan started knocking off majors at 21. Had Scottie match Rory or Jordan from ages 21-25 we could be having some interesting conversations. But he didn't. Early career not withstanding, Scottie has matched Tiger win for win between the ages 26 to 29. Which is pretty bananas. If he can match Phil is his 30s (monumental task), we'll be talking about a guy on golf's Mt Rushmore.

Again, how is this different from the Tiger era? Who were the guys, younger than Tiger, that put pressure on him? Sergio, DJ, Adam Scott, Justin Rose, none of those guys won majors in their 20's. Each is a HOF caliber player and those players are effectively ignored in your analysis. I just don't see a big difference in the competitive landscape faced by Tiger or Scottie.

You marked this "satire" but it really isn't. That is exactly what the headline writers did. Scottie's statement was far more nuanced than any of the coverage gave him credit for. Yes, he said that faith and family come first and that is where his deepest joy comes from. However, despite knowing where his true joy comes from, he struggles w/ his personal desire to win. Scottie is personally struggling with reconciling the two sides of himself. Scottie has achieved many of his professional goals. He knows what it feels like to win the Masters, to win the hometown event he dreamed about. He knows the joy those accomplishments brought and he also knows that he gets more joy from his faith and family. What is interesting about it all, is the despite knowing this 1st hand, he still desperately wants to win at Augusta, at the Open. A guy with a world of accomplishment and a thriving family life is still struggling to tame the competitive sociopath that lies within. That is freaking fascinating and the media completely short changed it. They focused on cheap sound bites vs an interesting exploration of a man's relationship w/ his work and obsession.

I'm not really sure what this is trying to say. Why does Scottie competition need to come from guys younger than him? Tiger's primary competition was Phil, Ernie, Vijay, Duval. All dudes older than him. By the time guys like Sergio, Rose, Adam Scott, DJ, Rory, Jason Day came into their own, injuries and scandal had wiped away the bulk of Tiger dominance. Scottie's competition over the next 5 years is likely going to come from Rory, Xander, Rahm, and Bryson. That is a pretty stout group every bit the equal of Tiger's main rivals. Perhaps Jordan, JT, and Hovland find their games. Perhaps Ludvig develops his short game. Perhaps Morikawa follows Matt Fitzpatricks lead and adds some speed which would help his amazing iron play really shine?

Lame...

Dull...

Boring...

Eh, they kind of did this to themselves. Growing up, this was warmly known outside the UK as The British Open. That implies Scotland/England/Wales. Media, players, international fans all called it "the British". Now the R&A insist on The Open Championship, which is territorially neutral. And sure, the Irish Open exits (I wish they'd make that another co-sanctioned event), but so does the Scottish Open. Should it then be contained to England and Wales? Truthfully, I don't really care. I have no dog in this fight. If the R&A wants to host in Dublin because they think they can make more money, more power to them. All I really care about it that it's on a firm, fast, championship caliber, links course where wind and rain occasionally cause havoc. Regarding the US Open, perhaps if the USGA insisted in calling it the North American Open or New World Open, there'd be an argument to include Mexico. But that hasn't happened yet.

I know. I literally typed that it was from Troon. Just pointing out that he does sign. A quick google search will show hundreds of photos of him signing. I grabbed the 1st Open I saw. I have no idea why Scottie didn't sign the day you attended. Perhaps he was scheduled for media. Maybe he had some corporate obligation w/ Nike or Rolex. Maybe he just wanted to get a moment with his son before they put him down for the night. There are endless legitimate reasons. Professional athletes are asked for signatures and photos constantly. None of them stop at every opportunity. If Scottie was in the habit of brushing off kids, we'd know about it. The media loves noting more than knocking a guy off his pedestal.

Bryson must have a bad memory. Take a quick peak at Scottie's wiki page. Dude won the 2013 US Jr Am. He matched Jordan Spieth's record of winning the Texas HS championship 3 times. Was the #1 ranked Am in 2014. Played in the Byron Nelson at 17. He won the Western Intercollegiate at Pasatiempo as a Freshman, won the Big XII individual title and was named the Phil Mickelson Freshman of the Year. Qualified for the 2016 USO at 19 and was the round 1 leader. Qualified again in 2017 and won low am. Hurt his back as a Sophomore and didn't do much after that. Perhaps that is when he tangled w/ Bryson? Bryson was an unbelievable amateur but Scottie was no late blooming slouch. Prior to the back injury he was the dude. He didn't burst on to the scene like Jordan Spieth but his ascent hasn't really been slow... 2019 - KFT POY 2020 - PGAT ROY 2021 - 3 major Top 10s + Ryder Cup 2022 - World #1, 4 wins, 1st major 2023 - 2025 - World #1, 16 wins, 3 more majors

What are you talking about? He didn't complain. He acknowledge that the crowd was pulling for Rory and Shane. Which was obvious on TV and probably more obvious to the guy paired w/ Shane Lowry over the 1st two rounds. Further, a quick google search will show endless pictures and videos of Scottie signing autographs for kids. Here's a video from Royal Troon... https://www.pgatour.com/video/features/6358090438112/scottie-scheffler-signs-autographs-at-royal-troon You're entitled to think he's boring but lets not make up stories that imply he's a garbage person. By all accounts, prodigal son Rory included, Scottie is a great guy.

I find Andy Johnson a bit insufferable, but yeah, they're not being serious. The stuff they do on the Fried Egg website focused on golf architecture is really good. The podcasts they do on pro golf are intended to be humorous but just not my tempo. So yeah, if you're trying to compare Rory's poor wedge shots at the Masters to Wydham's temper tantrum, and fact checking Justin Leonard's driving distance, you really missed the tone.

I would be. Tiger went 11 years between majors but that was really due to injury and scandal. Rory went 11 years but Scottie is just flat out better than Rory. Outside of a serious injury or Scottie weirdly walking away to become a minister of the church or something, I'd be completely floored if he goes a decade w/o a major.

You're comparing Keith Mitchell, the best dressed dude on tour, with Ian Poulter? Bleached tips, ridiculous pants, loud mouth, Ian Poulter? There is more to life than a visor my man. BTW I really like Keith Mitchell. Interesting dude and a good course fit. But he's the 78th ranked golfer on datagolf. He's done nothing worthy of consideration.

My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings; Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair! Nothing beside remains. Round the decay Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare The lone and level sands stretch far away. In the end, we're all worm food spanning a micro fraction of the universe's time. Kings and peasants alike.

Depends how you define better year. 2019 Rory - 3 wins (Players, Canadian Open, Tour Championship) - +2.38 STG Brooks - 3 wins (CJ Cup, PGA Championship, Fed Ex St Jude) - +1.82 STG This is pre LIV so the Players and the PGA are pretty comparable victories. IMO. Each guy won 3 times and Rory was > 0.5 strokes better than Brooks across the season. That's a big margin. That said, Brooks won a major, was 2nd at the Masters and USO, and 4th at the Open. Rory had 2 MCs and 2 Top 10s. I'd personally vote for Brooks in that scenario but I can see where someone would reward Rory for consistent play through the season. Rory was a top 5 and top 10 machine in 2019. Brooks had 8-10 events where he was uncompetitive. Really just comes down to how you value the regular season. If you think it matters, Rory has a decent case. If it's purely about the biggest events, Brooks was the right choice.

Phil won a pro tournament as an amateur. That's about as early as you can do it. I grew up a Phil fan. I loved the dude. His 1st win at Augusta is one of my favorite golfing memories. He's one of the greatest of all time and yes, he had a complete game. But numbers don't lie. Phil's best year, from a pure scoring perspective, was 2000 (bad timing 😬). He clocked in at +2.44 Strokes Gained Total. From that year through 2008, he was mostly a +2 SGT golfer. That's exceptional golf. A +2 SGT is pretty much a guaranty that you are one of the 3 best golfers walking the planet at any given time. That is the type of golf that Rory, Xander, and Rahm have been playing. But that is nowhere close to the golf that Scottie has played for the last 3 years. So what's the difference? Personally, I don't think Scottie has a shot in his bag that Phil can't pull off and I also believe that Phil has shots in his bag that Scottie can't do. So why is Scottie so much better? I think it's simple and is golf's holy grail, Scottie's bad shots are materially better than Phil's. It's not about how good your good is, it's about how good your bad is. When Scottie makes a mistake, one, it's usually small, two, he doesn't let it compound, and three, he flips the momentum back better than everyone (at Majors, he follows up bogeys w/ birdies like 45% of the time). People tend to remember big shots, big blowups, and final rounds. Maybe a hot putter truly is all that separated Phil from Payne and Retief. However, I bet if you dug into the full tournament, there is probably a sloppy bogey or two on Thu or Fri or an easy birdie missed early. Small events were Phil went after a pin he shouldn't, tried to pull off an impossible chip, but didn't. If they don't happen on a back 9 on Sunday, we don't remember, but those little mistakes add up in the end. That aggression and risk taking means Phil is going to pull off some miracles that Scottie is not even going to attempt. But it also means he's going to get his hand stuck in the cookie jar on occasion. A whole lot of things need to go right for Scottie to match Phil's production in his 30s. He needs to stay healthy, he needs to stay focused, some wunderkind like Blades Brown or Miles Russell can't evolve into Tiger 2.0. But Scottie has a couple things going for him that Phil didn't. One, Scottie is better than Phil, like 1 shot per round and 4 shots per tournament better than Phil. Two, Scottie doesn't have to compete w/ Tiger Woods like Phil did. Scottie IS the Tiger Woods of his era. Scottie isn't going to win them all. He's going to get clipped by Rory, Rahm, Xander, Bryson, and others on occasion. But Scottie is the alpha, as Rory said, "he is the bar". Scottie doesn't need to get better, everybody else does.

Bryson hasn't changed, only his public perception.

This is kind of mind melting. From the Normal Sport news letter... Scottie from 2022-2025 (age 26-29) • 81 events • 20 wins • 4 majors • 2 Players • 2.8 SG/round Tiger from 2002-2005 (age 26-29) • 79 events • 18 wins • 4 majors • 0 Players • 2.8 SG/round* *per Data Golf, which only includes 2004-2005. Scottie certainly didn't match Tiger's production from 21-25, but it is unreasonable to think that Scottie doesn't do more in his 30's than Tiger did? Never say never but I don't think there is a massive infidelity scandal hiding in Scottie's closet. Scottie does GolfForever workouts, he's not doing Seal training and heavy lifting. I don't think an injury or tabloid takedown are high probability events. Phil won 6 majors after 30 and never possessed the complete game Scottie does. Phil did the bulk of his damage from '04 thru '08 and was consistently between +2 and +2.2 SGT. Scottie has spent the last 3 years between +2.8 and +3.2. That is a massive difference. +1 SGT is the difference between John Rahm and Nick Taylor. Between Bryson and Patrick Reed. Between Rory and modern day Jordan Spieth. I don't think Scottie getting to 10 is all that crazy.

Well for $20/month you can build a custom querie on datagolf and do exactly that. The world is your oyster.

I understand personal preferences. I get more excitement watching Rory when he's cooking than watching Scottie dissect a course. Who doesn't enjoy watching Tiger peel a 3i from 240 yds or Phil pull off an impossible flop shot. Those things are great but they don't diminish Scottie's greatness. People thought Mike Trout was boring because he didn't flip his bat after HRs and stare down the pitcher. The dude just hit his 40 HRs, stole his 40 bases, and played gold glove defense every damn day. Djokovic didn't possess the biggest serve. He wasn't as graceful as Fededer or as athletic as Nadal. He was just good at everything and extremely competitive. He's not as cool as Bjorn Borg, a rebel like Agassi, or a hot head like McEnroe. He just wins. Jerry Rice didn't run a 4.3 / 40, he didn't do choreographed celebrations after touchdowns. He was simply a technician that worked effortlessly on his craft. Jack was no different. He drove it straight an hit his baby cut to the middle of the green. He did nothing but win tournaments and hang w/ his family. Scottie doesn't need to be Tiger or MJ. Just keep winning. If people don't like his version of greatness, that's their issue, not his.

Phil is an incredible shot maker. One of the best ever. That talent helped him win at Augusta. But that full throttle nature probably cost him a USO. Scottie doesn't blow that lead at Winged Foot. He rips a 4i down the fairway and taps in for par. The goal is to win, not accrue style points.

Lame, but did Arnie make it right? Wyndham isn't the first guy to lose his cool and wont be the last. Hi actions shouldn't be excused, but had he taken responsibility and solved the problem, he would have been forgiven. We all screw up. Take responsibility and own your mistake. As someone pointed out above, it's not hard. Apologize to the clubhouse attendant, tell him to send you the bill. Call the president of the club, apologize and offer a donation to the junior program. That would have been the end of it. Instead, he snuck away and tried to negotiate a resolution through his freaking agent. That's like a parent calling on their kid's college professor to negotiate a better test score. Grow up Peter Pan.