It's not very clear to me what he's saying. He says at one point that the ball has changed the game, at another he doesn't want different rules for pros regarding either clubs or balls, and he also says this (emphasis added):
"And when I played, if I would play with an amateur at his club, and we both played from the back tees, I might out hit him 15 or 20 yards. It wasn't a big deal. You play with him today, the guys out hitting 100 yards. It's not even close to a contest. They are playing with the same equipment.
Something's different. And whether it's the golf ball or the club or a combination; the only issue that I have always had with this thing is that the TOUR is a showcase of the game, and the TOUR should be the example of how the game should be played for the average golfer. And when the average golfer cannot relate to the game that the TOUR guy is playing, how can you say it's the same game."
The best I can make out is that he's saying, using the best equipment of each era, the pros get a much bigger distance differential over the amateurs today than they did when he was playing. Which seems to be saying that the real difference is how much better the pros are today.
But that can't be right, can it?