Johnny Miller's Legacy

[Bucki1968]

I voted player. I too remember his playing career so I guess I always gave him more credence as a broadcaster because he'd been there as a player. But I can definitely understand picking broadcaster before player. But "I got off the fence", and voted.

[Wally Fairway]

On ‎10‎/‎18‎/‎2018 at 9:08 AM, iacas said:

Not at all.

If I ask you which fruit is your favorite, you can't say "false dichotomy." I asked which is his greatest legacy, not what contributes to his legacy.

IMO the poll is flawed because he hasn't even stopped broadcasting yet. Legacy will be defined in 10 or 20 years, at that time many people will never have heard his broadcasts, but his 63 at Oakmont, in the final round of the Open, will still stand.

I think he built his broadcasting career on the foundation of his playing career. You can't take a relative unknown (Brandel, or Maltbee) and make them what Johnny was to broadcasting golf.
Therefore I think that his legacy is a HOF golfer/broadcaster, or if you prefer a Broadcaster/HOF golfer - I'm not sure how you separate them.
Just my opinion - I'd vote both (or in the case of having to choose, I don't vote)

[nevets88]

I give Miller a lot of grief for his 63 mentions, but when I first picked up golf and started watching it on TV, he was clearly my favorite announcer. He didn't mince words, spoke plainly and seemed the least politically correct among his peers. I even bought some of his instruction videos on VCR format. While I know much more about golf now and tilt my head more often at some of his remarks, he does run hot and cold, familiarity breeds contempt and I guess having watched him for so many years, I'm a lot harder on him now than warrants. My answer is also affected by timing, I did not watch him during that 1-2 seasons when he was playing well, so didn't really experience much of him as a player. So yeah, thanks for all the memories, you did a good job, Johnny Miller. Yowza!

[3jacker]

2nd greatest Mormon to ever golf his ball.

He burned bright, but faded and his totals aren't crazy high in pro golf. 

But in announcing, he was without equal.

Edited October 19, 2018 by 3jacker

[iacas]

1 hour ago, Wally Fairway said:

IMO the poll is flawed because he hasn't even stopped broadcasting yet. Legacy will be defined in 10 or 20 years, at that time many people will never have heard his broadcasts, but his 63 at Oakmont, in the final round of the Open, will still stand.

I disagree. You can often easily determine what someone's legacy will be while they're still doing it.

But if you think the 63 is what will stand, vote "player."

1 hour ago, Wally Fairway said:

I think he built his broadcasting career on the foundation of his playing career. You can't take a relative unknown (Brandel, or Maltbee) and make them what Johnny was to broadcasting golf.

I think you could.

40 minutes ago, nevets88 said:

I give Miller a lot of grief for his 63 mentions…

… Years and years ago, maybe he did this a lot more frequently, but I've been paying attention the last 10 years and I don't think he talks about this ANYWHERE NEAR as often as people like to think he does. Almost every time it's brought up, it's Gary Koch or someone else mentioning it. He'll respond and move on, often even adding something like "but that was a long time ago" or whatever.

[NM Golf]

59 minutes ago, nevets88 said:

I give Miller a lot of grief for his 63 mentions, 

Whats so great about 63 in the US Open. Roy McAvoy shot 62! 😜

BTW I voted Broadcaster as his playing exploits, while impressive, have been overshadowed by more than a few players.

Edited October 19, 2018 by NM Golf

[BallStriker]

I voted broadcasting career because the question is about "legacy" and many, many, many more have had exposure to his broadcasting career than his playing career

But, if you want to try to compare the success, I think he was a much better golfer relative to his peers than he was a broadcaster (as a golf professional, he was the top 1% of the top 1%, if not higher......as a golf broadcaster, he was good, but hard to say he was even top 1%).....maybe apples to oranges, but I think there is some sense there.

And it also doesn't mean he still didn't shove it in Oakmont....

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, BallStriker said:

But, if you want to try to compare the success, I think he was a much better golfer relative to his peers than he was a broadcaster (as a golf professional, he was the top 1% of the top 1%, if not higher......as a golf broadcaster, he was good, but hard to say he was even top 1%).....maybe apples to oranges, but I think there is some sense there.

He's a top five (perhaps, maybe 10) golf broadcaster of all time.

He's not a top five, ten, even twenty golfer of all time.

[NM Golf]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

He's a top five (perhaps, maybe 10) golf broadcaster of all time.

He's not a top five, ten, even twenty golfer of all time.

This ^^^^. He will never even be in the conversation for the best player of all time, but he is considered to be one of the best broadcasters. I mean no one gave a crap when he quite playing, its a big deal now that he is retiring from TV.

[Wally Fairway]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

I disagree. You can often easily determine what someone's legacy will be while they're still doing it.

But if you think the 63 is what will stand, vote "player."

I think you could.

… Years and years ago, maybe he did this a lot more frequently, but I've been paying attention the last 10 years and I don't think he talks about this ANYWHERE NEAR as often as people like to think he does. Almost every time it's brought up, it's Gary Koch or someone else mentioning it. He'll respond and move on, often even adding something like "but that was a long time ago" or whatever.

I appreciate that you disagree, but you fail to persuade me about legacy.

I'm content to not vote
 

[iacas]

Just now, Wally Fairway said:

I appreciate that you disagree, but you fail to persuade me about legacy.

Hey, if you want to be unreasonable and/or unrealistic, by all means…

Tiger's legacy is pretty well cemented. Jack's was cemented pre-1986 (that added to it, but many already figured him as the #1 golfer in 1982…). In other sports, players make themselves seen as first-ballot Hall-of-Famers while they're still playing.

Legacies can change. Bill Cosby's legacy was going to be one of the all-time comedians, and it's not that anymore. But legacies are not things you have to wait 20-30 years to understand.

You get to have your opinion, and apply your criteria as you wish… but I also get to point out that needing to wait 20-30 years is ridiculous. 🙂

[Wally Fairway]

31 minutes ago, iacas said:

Hey, if you want to be unreasonable and/or unrealistic, by all means…

Tiger's legacy is pretty well cemented. Jack's was cemented pre-1986 (that added to it, but many already figured him as the #1 golfer in 1982…). In other sports, players make themselves seen as first-ballot Hall-of-Famers while they're still playing.

Legacies can change. Bill Cosby's legacy was going to be one of the all-time comedians, and it's not that anymore. But legacies are not things you have to wait 20-30 years to understand.

You get to have your opinion, and apply your criteria as you wish… but I also get to point out that needing to wait 20-30 years is ridiculous. 🙂

Thanks - but I still think that legacy is not defined before you retire or even the day after.

Lots more examples than you mention, and yes most of them are due to negative things (OJ, Madoff, Jenner, Roseanne, Paula Deen, Michael Jackson, Kurt Cobain, lots of folks caught in the #metoo movement, etc), a legacy can also be created by one moment (Chesley Sullenberger)
But time does change how people are viewed - Henry Ford, Benjamin Franklin, JFK, Ronald Reagan, Ty Cobb - 'little" details are more or less forgotten. I think it is safe to say that in 40 years Tigers legacy will be all about golf and not his marital issues. But were the question to be asked in 2010, his personal life would have been voted his legacy by many people (albeit non-golfers)

 and thanks for saying my opinion is not just different but unreasonable and unrealistic; that seems like an open minded point. 
 

[Vinsk]

10 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:

But were the question to be asked in 2010, his personal life would have been voted his legacy by many people (albeit non-golfers)

That’s actually laughable.

[iacas]

28 minutes ago, Wally Fairway said:

And thanks for saying my opinion is not just different but unreasonable and unrealistic; that seems like an open minded point.

There’s nothing close minded about it. It’s my opinion of your method or definition.

I said above how legacies can change by another act. But OJ’s legacy was what it was the day he retired. It didn’t change until a completely unrelated NEW legacy supplanted it.

Tiger’s legacy is known. GOAT. He’s still playing.

Jim Nantz is another in the same field. His legacy is as one of the best broadcasters ever. Doesn’t matter if he retires in 20 years or 20 seconds.

[BallStriker]

6 hours ago, iacas said:

He's a top five (perhaps, maybe 10) golf broadcaster of all time.

He's not a top five, ten, even twenty golfer of all time.

Meh....thousands and thousands of more professional golfers than golf broadcasters....to simply say "top whatever" all time the respective categories isn't really a fair measure.

Let's look at bigger picture question.....is he higher (from a percentage standpoint) as a golfer in comparison to all the golfers that have every played....or higher on the ladder in comparison to all broadcasters that ever played

[Buckeyebowman]

Johnny Miller's career as a pro golfer burned bright, but for far too short a time! As for his 63 at Oakmont, I was there that weekend. Oakmont was rain soaked, and when Miller got hot on Sunday it played right into his hands. Miller's game featured mile high long irons that landed, to quote Sam Snead, like a butterfly with sore feet! He took full advantage, but I felt he could have done a lot more as talented as he was.

And let's not forget that Miller was ready to quit the broadcast job after his first year! Why? It seemed everybody was pissed at him because he told it like it was. In his book I Call the Shots he relates an instance where a Tour pro confronted him ready to throw down because the pro had been told that Miller said he would choke a shot!

Miller had said no such thing, and once the pro saw the actual clip came and apologized. But Miller riled a lot of people early on. I don't mind that. What I mind is commentators praising guys who hit a choke, gouge wedge into a green and put it 40 feet from the cup! Sorry, that's not pro grade golf!

Top of the list is Ken Venturi, but Miller is not that far behind!

[iacas]

3 hours ago, BallStriker said:

Meh....thousands and thousands of more professional golfers than golf broadcasters....to simply say "top whatever" all time the respective categories isn't really a fair measure.

I wouldn't be so sure. My local high school team has broadcasters. Every radio station. Local sportscasters. Yeah, the pool of national golf broadcasters is small, but the pool of "broadcasters" is actually quite large. Erie, PA alone has probably 30-50. We don't have many PGA Tour players…

Plus, he was a top broadcaster for three decades. He was a top golfer for a much shorter period of time.

Heck, I've been a broadcaster. And a radio DJ. College.

57 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Oakmont was rain soaked, and when Miller got hot on Sunday it played right into his hands.

Myth.

https://www.foxsports.com/golf/story/16-things-to-know-about-johnny-miller-s-underrated-yes-underrated-63-at-oakmont-061516

Only four players broke par that day. The stories about the rain or the sprinklers is a myth.

[saevel25]

I think the only thing about Miller's golfing career he is remembered for is Oakmont. He's had many more memorable candid broadcasting moments. Even though he can be annoying sometimes, I like that he speaks his mind.