Phil or Tigers Career

[newtogolf]

Given the announcement that Tiger would not be playing professional golf this season, Colin Cowherd asked his listeners whether they'd have preferred to have Tiger's career or Phil's.  Colin stated that Tiger (now 40) hasn't won a Major since Obama has been in office (his last was in 2008) and that since that time he's gone through swing changes, injuries, divorce and scandals which have diminished his overall legacy.  

Phil on the other hand is still playing great golf at 46, has a good family life, is well liked and beyond insider trading and gambling has avoided being on TMZ for indiscretions.   

So whose career would you have rather had?

[Gunther]

Some of the things you reference have more to do with their lives outside of their careers.  

In terms of careers, for me it's Tiger, hands down, in a short amount of time he became the 2nd GOAT.  He can now retire and move on to the next phase.  Phil might be 10th GOAT.

In terms of lives, it's Phil.  He has a great family, I admire that he's still married (I'm not) and he seems to still be doing exactly what he wants to.

[saevel25]

If by career you mean his golfing accolades then I would say Tiger. I do not assume the outside of golf stuff is part of his career. A career is what you do on the course. 

 

[newtogolf]

He worded it as career but went into personal stuff, so I guess it's combo of career and life.  

[krupa]

Tiger's shenanigans affected what he did on the course, if for no other reason than he missed playing time getting it all untangled.  Also, his career certainly affected his personal life; you can't be the greatest anything in the world without it affecting your entire life.  So yeah, I think it's relevant.  

Otherwise it's a boring question;  who wouldn't want Tiger's on-course accomplishments!?  

And so, I voted for Phil.

Edited July 20, 2016 by krupa

[boogielicious]

Tiger hands down. Most spectacular golfer ever (like Jack too, but that is another discussion). Phil has had amazing moments and is undoubtedly the Harry Houdini of this generation of golfers. But Tiger's dominance is unparalleled. 

[billchao]

Tiger. Twice as many professional wins in less time, almost three times the majors.

I'd rather retire at 40 and enjoy more time with my kids and having a much easier work/travel schedule being a business man and course designer than keep grinding it on the PGA Tour at 46.

[b101]

1 minute ago, billchao said:

Tiger. Twice as many professional wins in less time, almost three times the majors.

I'd rather retire at 40 and enjoy more time with my kids and having a much easier work/travel schedule being a business man and course designer than keep grinding it on the PGA Tour at 46.

In fairness, Phil's pretty well off and could retire if he wanted! Completely agree though - Tiger is one of the very few who could tear courses apart, Phil's never been that guy, class act though he is. For the golfing stuff, it's Tigs all the way.

[newtogolf]

Although I'm a big fan of both, I voted for Tiger but because I weighed professional career more than personal life.  Tigers 14 Majors before he was 33 is an amazing accomplishment. 

[Golfingdad]

Phil, hands down.  Even if we don't count the clearly "off the field" stuff (for Tiger, it would be the marriage issues, for Phil it would be trading scandals & tax comments).

Phil has had a virtually injury free career that is into its third decade at this point (and seemingly still going strong) and he's always seemed to be having a lot of fun doing things his way, whereas Tiger's career was cut short at about 15 or so years and he's had to deal with tons of injuries and surgeries, not to mention the media microscope he dealt with his entire career, I would definitely have rather had Phil's career.

[billchao]

5 minutes ago, b101 said:

In fairness, Phil's pretty well off and could retire if he wanted!

Well yea, but I looked at it as Phil is still a professional golfer while Tiger's career is effectively over, and has been for a while.

Tiger has a head start on the next phase of his life, which is probably where I would want to be if I were in either of their shoes.

[Golfingdad]

9 minutes ago, billchao said:

I'd rather retire at 40 and enjoy more time with my kids and having a much easier work/travel schedule being a business man and course designer than keep grinding it on the PGA Tour at 46.

Wait.  Let's twist that back around to reality:  Would you rather be forced to retire at age 40 because of a series of debilitating injuries, or keep playing at 46 (when you clearly do not have to be, nor are you really "grinding" - you're setting whatever schedule you want) because you enjoy it and, more importantly, because you can? 

[b101]

1 minute ago, billchao said:

Well yea, but I looked at it as Phil is still a professional golfer while Tiger's career is effectively over, and has been for a while.

Tiger has a head start on the next phase of his life, which is probably where I would want to be if I were in either of their shoes.

I think I'd try to compete until 50 then pack it in and go with the course designing - that must be so much fun.

[No Mulligans]

14 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Phil, hands down.  Even if we don't count the clearly "off the field" stuff (for Tiger, it would be the marriage issues, for Phil it would be trading scandals & tax comments).

Phil has had a virtually injury free career that is into its third decade at this point (and seemingly still going strong) and he's always seemed to be having a lot of fun doing things his way, whereas Tiger's career was cut short at about 15 or so years and he's had to deal with tons of injuries and surgeries, not to mention the media microscope he dealt with his entire career, I would definitely have rather had Phil's career.

Phil does seem to have a good time and other pga tour players have said they enjoy playing with him.  I don't see the same for Tiger.

I've known a couple of amature golfers that have played casual rounds with Phil, they both said he was gracious and fun to play a round with (and these rounds where outside of the media's eye).  One was a coworker, he meet Phil at the driving range at his club.  Phil came right up to him and chatted with him.  This guy being also a lefty and playing Callaway said to Phil that he wished he could get a lower loft on his driver than what was available.  Weeks later he discovered that a lower lofted driver of that model had found it's way to his locker.

[billchao]

13 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Wait.  Let's twist that back around to reality:  Would you rather be forced to retire at age 40 because of a series of debilitating injuries, or keep playing at 46 (when you clearly do not have to be, nor are you really "grinding" - you're setting whatever schedule you want) because you enjoy it and, more importantly, because you can? 

Given what the two have accomplished? Option 1. There's nothing else to prove unless you really think 19 is that important, or even reachable, so if anything I see the injuries as a sign that it's time to move on. At the very least it is a good excuse to stop playing if the drive isn't there.

I believe it has to be a grind. You can't just expect to show up at an event and be great. You're still practicing, traveling, making appearances, playing in pro ams, talking to the media, etc. Trying to shoot low scores in 60° rainy weather and 25mph winds seems a lot less enjoyable than kicking it back in Florida doing whatever.

[14ledo81]

6 minutes ago, billchao said:

Given what the two have accomplished? Option 1. There's nothing else to prove unless you really think 19 is that important, or even reachable, so if anything I see the injuries as a sign that it's time to move on. At the very least it is a good excuse to stop playing if the drive isn't there.

I believe it has to be a grind. You can't just expect to show up at an event and be great. You're still practicing, traveling, making appearances, playing in pro ams, talking to the media, etc. Trying to shoot low scores in 60° rainy weather and 25mph winds seems a lot less enjoyable than kicking it back in Florida doing whatever.

Maybe true, but Phil can choose between the two.  Right now, Tiger does not even have that choice.

[70sSanO]

Phil

Phil is healthy and I'll take health over legacy any day.

Hopefully he'll follow Watson's career path and play for years on the Champions Tour and show up for the PGA exemption tournaments as long as he can.

Maybe a better question would be... Do you want to give up the game for decades just to be one of the greatest?

Not too many around here gets paid to play golf and we all hack our way around a course with all physical limitations and would not give up the game.  Tiger can still play, maybe not at a tour level, at 40, but will he be able to play at 50 or 60?  And if he can will he be satisfied with possibly hitting 220 yard drives?

Personally, I want to see Phil, at 59, strolling up the 18th at Turnberry and hopefully pulling off what Watson almost did.

John

[boogielicious]

29 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Phil, hands down.  Even if we don't count the clearly "off the field" stuff (for Tiger, it would be the marriage issues, for Phil it would be trading scandals & tax comments).

Phil has had a virtually injury free career that is into its third decade at this point (and seemingly still going strong) and he's always seemed to be having a lot of fun doing things his way, whereas Tiger's career was cut short at about 15 or so years and he's had to deal with tons of injuries and surgeries, not to mention the media microscope he dealt with his entire career, I would definitely have rather had Phil's career.

I guess you don't count an auto-immune disease as injury. When he was first diagnosed, you could tell it was wearing on him by Sunday. It is not going to get better either. The surgeries stink, but Tiger transcended the sport as a player.