or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Is the Tiger Era Over? Brandel Chamblee Thinks So
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Is the Tiger Era Over? Brandel Chamblee Thinks So

Poll Results: Is the Tiger Era Over?

 
  • 58% (17)
    Yes
  • 41% (12)
    No
29 Total Votes  
post #1 of 96
Thread Starter 

http://hotlinks.golf.com/2014/07/19/brandel-chamblee-the-tiger-era-is-over/

 

Quote:

In the wake Friday’s play at the British Open, in which Woods posted a 5-over 77, his second-worst major round in his career, GolfChannel’s Tripp Isenhour asked Chamblee whether Tiger’s struggles signified a so-called “changing of the guard.”

 

“There was a beginning of his career, middle of his career, and this is the end of his career, no question about it,” said Chamblee. “And if you want to qualify ‘era’ as dominance, then the Tiger era is over, and we’ll never see it again.”

Unlike some downfalls, Tiger’s wasn’t brought on by popular uprising, Chamblee said.

“I’d say this was a coup d’etat by self-immolation. We’re talking about a guy who has willfully dismantled a golf swing that made him the best player in the world. Saying ‘I want to get better’ is one thing. But most people say that because, well, they’re not good enough, and they’re not the best. Well, he was the best, and he willfully dismantled the golf swing that made him the best player in the world.”

It looks like he's making his judgement based on a couple of bad rounds after a long layoff due to surgery. Tiger won 5 times last year, if that's not dominance, what is?

 

You thoughts?

post #2 of 96
I wish the Brandel era was over.
post #3 of 96

Gheez... they pay him to be the shock jock at TGC ... I'm sure he believes about half of what he says. But who knows? It gets people talking, and that is what they want.

 

I don't think Tigs will do much until 2015. Still think he needs a golf shrink like Valiente. He hits it great on the range, but not on the course. Head Case, like most of us.

post #4 of 96
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond View Post

Gheez... they pay him to be the shock jock at TGC ... I'm sure he believes about half of what he says. But who knows? It gets people talking, and that is what they want.
Is he really? Seems like the only person he really bags on is Tiger, though.
post #5 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by billchao View Post


Is he really? Seems like the only person he really bags on is Tiger, though.

I think it's because he expects more from the greatest of the era.

post #6 of 96
Maybe it is, but I'm not sure who else we'd assign 2014-xxxx to. Don't see a whole lot of use in speculating.
post #7 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by billchao View Post

http://hotlinks.golf.com/2014/07/19/brandel-chamblee-the-tiger-era-is-over/

It looks like he's making his judgement based on a couple of bad rounds after a long layoff due to surgery. Tiger won 5 times last year, if that's not dominance, what is?

You thoughts?
In some respects he's correct. Tiger is in the final trimester of his career. He will never be as dominant as he was. However, the Tiger era is alive and well indicated by the media attention he continues to garner. I mean, who else has a network streaming his every move on the course? This will go one for a few years yet especially because Tiger will continue to win from time to time, might even slip in a major. This will keep the press salivating. So, I'd disagree with the verbiage BCham used, not necessarily with the sentiment I think he meant to convey.
post #8 of 96

Well he was POY last season for crap's sake.

 

It kinda reminds me of Gretzky (no, not Paulina). Set the bar sooooo incredibly high that people start calling you washed up even when you're still clearly one of the best in the entire world. People started saying Gretzky was done because he was only putting up 120 pt seasons instead of 200+ pt seasons. Hell, in 1997 he only  had 90pts, a shadow of his former self. Well sure, but only 2 players had more pts than him that season and one of them only had 1 pt more than him. So the shadow  of Gretzky's former greatness was still good enough be in the Top 3 that season. IOW, still dominant.

 

Tiger will always be compared to TIGER!!!!! which is a hard standard to meet.

post #9 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunther View Post


In some respects he's correct. Tiger is in the final trimester of his career. He will never be as dominant as he was. However, the Tiger era is alive and well indicated by the media attention he continues to garner. I mean, who else has a network streaming his every move on the course? This will go one for a few years yet especially because Tiger will continue to win from time to time, might even slip in a major. This will keep the press salivating. So, I'd disagree with the verbiage BCham used, not necessarily with the sentiment I think he meant to convey.

I don't know about final trimester. The best golfers seem to last 30+ years. Tiger is into the 2nd half of his career that may last 35 years. It depends on him and his body.

 

I consider the Tiger Era

 

1996-2009 - Greatness

 

2010-2014 - Tragedy, Injuries, intermixed with dominance.

 

2015- 2026 -?

 

2026 - ?

 

They say he hits it perfectly on the range ... and I've heard that since he was with Hank. If he could exorcise the demons inside his head.

post #10 of 96

If you read what the man said, he's right about the end of dominance.  Loss of physical strength to injury and aging, loss of mental toughness to--whatever.  I'm not so sure that he's right about self-immolation by swing destruction.  I'm inclined to give Tiger the benefit of the doubt on that--though I'm reading/hearing Chamblee's argument more and more and suppose I should be open to it.

 

Rather than denial, maybe some sympathy is in order?  Tiger is closer to being eligible for the Senior Tour than he is to the date he turned pro.  And to anyone who dismisses his performance in this year's Open, all I'll ask you is, if he'd won it, or even finished four off the lead instead of four off the anchor, would you be dismissing that as a one-off, not enough to establish his return to form?

 

One prediction I wouldn't have made last week--that Tom Watson's best round of the tournament would be one stroke better than Tiger's and Watson's finish would be five strokes better.  I wonder what the Captain of the Ryder Cup makes of that.

post #11 of 96

I have never paid much attention to what Chamblee had to say. He always reminded of a bully, who was actually a sissy, who could never back up his words. Someone who was always looking for the dark side of everything. Then again I feel that way about quite a few sports journalists. Too little facts, and too much speculation in their reports. Chamblee just took up air time when the GC  could have been showing Bobby Jones re-runs.  That, or those Shell's Wonderful World of Golf episodes. Heck, even some of those non golf related infomercials could have taken his time slots.  I don't watch the GC any more, and he's one of the major reasons for that decision.

 

Personally, I  expect Woods to get better, and he will start his 2015 golf campaign better than most pro golfers. He may even win a tournament before 2015 depending on the field he may go up against. Seeing him play with out hurting was the best I hoped for. I do like watching him play when he has his "A" game.
Even his "B" game is better than most of his competition. He made the cut, and I won a money line bet. Good enough for me. Tommy Watson making the cut was also a good thing. :dance:   


Edited by Patch - 7/20/14 at 10:24am
post #12 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond View Post
 

 

 

2010-2014 - Tragedy, Injuries, intermixed with dominance.

 

 

Is that a joke?

post #13 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond View Post

I don't know about final trimester. The best golfers seem to last 30+ years. Tiger is into the 2nd half of his career that may last 35 years. It depends on him and his body.

I consider the Tiger Era

1996-2009 - Greatness

2010-2014 - Tragedy, Injuries, intermixed with dominance.

2015- 2026 -?

2026 - ?

They say he hits it perfectly on the range ... and I've heard that since he was with Hank. If he could exorcise the demons inside his head.
Paddy was on Feherty last week and said something interesting. He feels top level golfers have 20 years in them. So, golfers that were great early tend to peter out earlier and similar with golfers who started later. Not sure the numbers are on target and obviously each person is different but I think generally, that's probably pretty close. I haven't done a study of all the historic golfers and measured their runs but I'd bet he has and that's where that thought came from. He's an interesting guy, one of the most insightful Feherty's yet, I think.
post #14 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunther View Post


Paddy was on Feherty last week and said something interesting. He feels top level golfers have 20 years in them. So, golfers that were great early tend to peter out earlier and similar with golfers who started later. Not sure the numbers are on target and obviously each person is different but I think generally, that's probably pretty close. I haven't done a study of all the historic golfers and measured their runs but I'd bet he has and that's where that thought came from. He's an interesting guy, one of the most insightful Feherty's yet, I think.

I tend to throw history out the window in this era of staying in shape and golf technology. If not for injury, Tiger may have dominated for his full 30 years. But reality gets in the way of fantasy, and ifs and buts...

 

I'm sure most top level guys have 20 years -- but Tiger is not merely a top level golfer --- his is Tiger freakin' Woods.

post #15 of 96

Clearly truth in what Chamblee said. The dominant era is obviously over. And Tiger did willfully dismantle the best swing in golf.

post #16 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by phan52 View Post
 

 

Clearly truth in what Chamblee said. The dominant era is obviously over. 

Definitely a lot more parity and depth. Harder to dominate for sure.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by phan52 View Post
 

 

And Tiger did willfully dismantle the best swing in golf.

 

It was also a swing that was crippling his body.

post #17 of 96
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunther View Post


Paddy was on Feherty last week and said something interesting. He feels top level golfers have 20 years in them. So, golfers that were great early tend to peter out earlier and similar with golfers who started later. Not sure the numbers are on target and obviously each person is different but I think generally, that's probably pretty close. I haven't done a study of all the historic golfers and measured their runs but I'd bet he has and that's where that thought came from. He's an interesting guy, one of the most insightful Feherty's yet, I think.

 

There's a lot of truth in this. 20 years is a long time to do the same thing day in and day out, especially with this much pressure.

post #18 of 96

Hasn't he been blurting this stuff for years already?


 

I agree with caniac6.

Quote:
Originally Posted by caniac6 View Post

I wish the Brandel era was over.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tour Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Is the Tiger Era Over? Brandel Chamblee Thinks So