United We Stand - uwsboard.com

Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
It is currently Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:52 pm

Time zone: America/New_York [ DST ]


UWS DWF UWS Lunch UWS Sports UWS Help TSL Football TSL Lounge TSL MBB Acronyms Top 25 Topics


Forum rules


Please be civil.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 12:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 5:01 pm
Posts: 9091
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.
CFB Apologist wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
Tiger is good for the game. His success is remarkable.

.


It is until the guy whose been to the driving range twice watches Tiger, and decides he could break 90 at the local muni if he just took a few more practice swings and lines up his putts like Tiger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, and also until the world's largest sports outlet doesn't discuss or cover the top 31 finishers at a major championship.


If you’re a media organization, discussing Tiger over every other golfer is better for your business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
I love UWS!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 1:27 pm
Posts: 2314
nolanvt wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
Tiger is good for the game. His success is remarkable.

.


It is until the guy whose been to the driving range twice watches Tiger, and decides he could break 90 at the local muni if he just took a few more practice swings and lines up his putts like Tiger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, and also until the world's largest sports outlet doesn't discuss or cover the top 31 finishers at a major championship.


If you’re a media organization, discussing Tiger over every other golfer is better for your business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Maybe, but ESPN doesn't cover "golf" - not in the slightest. they cover pop culture within golf when its there..they ignore the sport entirely when its not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 11248
Location: New York, NY
CFB Apologist wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
Tiger is good for the game. His success is remarkable.

.


It is until the guy whose been to the driving range twice watches Tiger, and decides he could break 90 at the local muni if he just took a few more practice swings and lines up his putts like Tiger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, and also until the world's largest sports outlet doesn't discuss or cover the top 31 finishers at a major championship.


If you’re a media organization, discussing Tiger over every other golfer is better for your business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Maybe, but ESPN doesn't cover "golf" - not in the slightest. they cover pop culture within golf when its there..they ignore the sport entirely when its not.


Nobody except the diehards cares about golf before the Masters, or after the U.S. Open.* That's not an ESPN thing. It's just an IWII thing.

*Unless Tiger is in position to win.

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:45 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 1:27 pm
Posts: 2314
ip_law-hokie wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
Tiger is good for the game. His success is remarkable.

.


It is until the guy whose been to the driving range twice watches Tiger, and decides he could break 90 at the local muni if he just took a few more practice swings and lines up his putts like Tiger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, and also until the world's largest sports outlet doesn't discuss or cover the top 31 finishers at a major championship.


If you’re a media organization, discussing Tiger over every other golfer is better for your business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Maybe, but ESPN doesn't cover "golf" - not in the slightest. they cover pop culture within golf when its there..they ignore the sport entirely when its not.


Nobody except the diehards cares about golf before the Masters, or after the U.S. Open.* That's not an ESPN thing. It's just an IWII thing.

*Unless Tiger is in position to win.


Good, since ESPN doesn't care about 3/4th of the season or anybpdy but Tiger, I don't have to take anything they say about golf seriously or attach any credibility to it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 11248
Location: New York, NY
CFB Apologist wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
[quote="Major Kong"]Tiger is good for the game. His success is remarkable.

.


It is until the guy whose been to the driving range twice watches Tiger, and decides he could break 90 at the local muni if he just took a few more practice swings and lines up his putts like Tiger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, and also until the world's largest sports outlet doesn't discuss or cover the top 31 finishers at a major championship.


If you’re a media organization, discussing Tiger over every other golfer is better for your business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Maybe, but ESPN doesn't cover "golf" - not in the slightest. they cover pop culture within golf when its there..they ignore the sport entirely when its not.


Nobody except the diehards cares about golf before the Masters, or after the U.S. Open.* That's not an ESPN thing. It's just an IWII thing.

*Unless Tiger is in position to win.


Good, since ESPN doesn't care about 3/4th of the season or anybpdy but Tiger, I don't have to take anything they say about golf seriously or attach any credibility to it.[/quote]

I’m OK with that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 4:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6439
CFB Apologist wrote:
Mcl3 Hokie wrote:
There is no debate that Tiger revolutionized the game. He’s an excellent player that made it cool for athletes to play golf. When Tiger first joined the tour, most of the players hit the bar after the round. With his athleticism kicking the crap out of them, those guys changed going to the the bar into going to the gym.

Tiger’s still a top 10 talent, but in his run of wins, he didn’t compete against guys that could hit it just as long as he could. Length intimidates, but this new breed of golfer can hit it just as far. So, Tiger is back, but he may never win another major because of the level of golf he brought to the game.


I agree with this 100%. I think he will play well again, and win on tour- probable this year. Is he going to be "Tiger" again? no, not in my opinion. He admitted this week that he and Phil "don't have that many left" in terms of major chances. That is not the Tiger Woods that dominated golf and said he wouldn't show up unless he could win. And despite 123456hokie being the only person on earth to disagree- golf is deeper and more competitive now than it's ever been. There is more parity, there are more top flight international and now asian players. The field is much deeper than when he won the masters in 1997. Speith shot two rounds under 67 this week and finished 3rd. David Toms, a mentally weak Duval, DA points, Davis love this is not.

Well, at least you've changed your tune and recognize that he may actually win a tournament this year. That's progress. Now if we could just get you to not twist people's words we'd be alright.

Now which was it. A strong field of no names or a weak field of name players finishing top 10? Hard to keep your thoughts straight on this one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 5:01 pm
Posts: 9091
Alma Mater: Marshall Univ.
CFB Apologist wrote:
nolanvt wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
Tiger is good for the game. His success is remarkable.

.


It is until the guy whose been to the driving range twice watches Tiger, and decides he could break 90 at the local muni if he just took a few more practice swings and lines up his putts like Tiger.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, and also until the world's largest sports outlet doesn't discuss or cover the top 31 finishers at a major championship.


If you’re a media organization, discussing Tiger over every other golfer is better for your business.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Maybe, but ESPN doesn't cover "golf" - not in the slightest. they cover pop culture within golf when its there..they ignore the sport entirely when its not.


As they should


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
I love UWS!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:53 pm
Posts: 2887
Alma Mater: VT
Party: Surprise Party
Serious question. What has he changed in his swing such that he won’t need another surgery in a year or two?

The body usually doesn’t get back to as good as it was before the damage, after surgery. So why won’t he just be injured again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 11248
Location: New York, NY
Bay_area_Hokie wrote:
Serious question. What has he changed in his swing such that he won’t need another surgery in a year or two?

The body usually doesn’t get back to as good as it was before the damage, after surgery. So why won’t he just be injured again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


He has a more traditional swing now. He used to clear his hips violently. I don’t think he has the swing speed and relative distance against the field that he had in his hey day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 7:57 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6439
ip_law-hokie wrote:
Bay_area_Hokie wrote:
Serious question. What has he changed in his swing such that he won’t need another surgery in a year or two?

The body usually doesn’t get back to as good as it was before the damage, after surgery. So why won’t he just be injured again?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


He has a more traditional swing now. He used to clear his hips violently. I don’t think he has the swing speed and relative distance against the field that he had in his hey day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah, don't know all the details but it is more traditional. He isn't popping his left knee like before (several knee injuries) and isn't snapping his back un-torquing like before. Apparently he's his own swing coach now from what I've read. That said he still has one of the fastest swing speeds out there, which is surprising.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 1:27 pm
Posts: 2314
133743Hokie wrote:
There is no debate that Tiger revolutionized the game. He’s an excellent player that made it cool for athletes to play golf. When Tiger first joined the tour, most of the players hit the bar after the round. With his athleticism kicking the crap out of them, those guys changed going to the the bar into going to the gym.

Tiger’s still a top 10 talent, but in his run of wins, he didn’t compete against guys that could hit it just as long as he could. Length intimidates, but this new breed of golfer can hit it just as far. So, Tiger is back, but he may never win another major because of the level of golf he brought to the game.


I agree with this 100%. I think he will play well again, and win on tour- probable this year. Is he going to be "Tiger" again? no, not in my opinion. He admitted this week that he and Phil "don't have that many left" in terms of major chances. That is not the Tiger Woods that dominated golf and said he wouldn't show up unless he could win. And despite 123456hokie being the only person on earth to disagree- golf is deeper and more competitive now than it's ever been. There is more parity, there are more top flight international and now asian players. The field is much deeper than when he won the masters in 1997. Speith shot two rounds under 67 this week and finished 3rd. David Toms, a mentally weak Duval, DA points, Davis love this is not.[/quote]
Well, at least you've changed your tune and recognize that he may actually win a tournament this year. That's progress. Now if we could just get you to not twist people's words we'd be alright.

Now which was it. A strong field of no names or a weak field of name players finishing top 10? Hard to keep your thoughts straight on this one.[/quote]

Nobody is twisting your words. You were wrong about the Bahamas indicating Tiger was " back" , and you are wrong about parity on tour. Flat wrong on both. I could post that I look exactly like Brad Pitt 100 times. Same thing you are doing. And link me to where I said Tiger wouldn't win an event on tour this year. Thanks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6439
CFB Apologist wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
There is no debate that Tiger revolutionized the game. He’s an excellent player that made it cool for athletes to play golf. When Tiger first joined the tour, most of the players hit the bar after the round. With his athleticism kicking the crap out of them, those guys changed going to the the bar into going to the gym.

Tiger’s still a top 10 talent, but in his run of wins, he didn’t compete against guys that could hit it just as long as he could. Length intimidates, but this new breed of golfer can hit it just as far. So, Tiger is back, but he may never win another major because of the level of golf he brought to the game.


I agree with this 100%. I think he will play well again, and win on tour- probable this year. Is he going to be "Tiger" again? no, not in my opinion. He admitted this week that he and Phil "don't have that many left" in terms of major chances. That is not the Tiger Woods that dominated golf and said he wouldn't show up unless he could win. And despite 123456hokie being the only person on earth to disagree- golf is deeper and more competitive now than it's ever been. There is more parity, there are more top flight international and now asian players. The field is much deeper than when he won the masters in 1997. Speith shot two rounds under 67 this week and finished 3rd. David Toms, a mentally weak Duval, DA points, Davis love this is not.

Well, at least you've changed your tune and recognize that he may actually win a tournament this year. That's progress. Now if we could just get you to not twist people's words we'd be alright.

Now which was it. A strong field of no names or a weak field of name players finishing top 10? Hard to keep your thoughts straight on this one.[/quote]

Nobody is twisting your words. You were wrong about the Bahamas indicating Tiger was " back" , and you are wrong about parity on tour. Flat wrong on both. I could post that I look exactly like Brad Pitt 100 times. Same thing you are doing. And link me to where I said Tiger wouldn't win an event on tour this year. Thanks.[/quote]
Tiger is back being competitive in traditional events. So you dispute this?

And there are still about 20 to 25 players that dominate the game, i.e win one or more times every year and/or consistently finish top 15 or so week after week. There are always going to be times when someone rises up, plays lights out, and wins. That doesn't mean there is parity.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 12:13 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 1:27 pm
Posts: 2314
133743Hokie wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
There is no debate that Tiger revolutionized the game. He’s an

I agree with this 100%. I think he will play well again, and win on tour- probable this year. Is he going to be "Tiger" again? no, not in my opinion. He admitted this week that he and Phil "don't have that many left" in terms of major chances. That is not the Tiger Woods that dominated golf and said he wouldn't show up unless he could win. And despite 123456hokie being the only person on earth to disagree- golf is deeper and more competitive now than it's ever been. There is more parity, there are more top flight international and now asian players. The field is much deeper than when he won the masters in 1997. Speith shot two rounds under 67 this week and finished 3rd. David Toms, a mentally weak Duval, DA points, Davis love this is not.

Well, at least you've changed your tune and recognize that he may actually win a tournament this year. That's progress. Now if we could just get you to not twist people's words we'd be alright.

Now which was it. A strong field of no names or a weak field of name players finishing top 10? Hard to keep your thoughts straight on this one.


Nobody is twisting your words. You were wrong about the Bahamas indicating Tiger was " back" , and you are wrong about parity on tour. Flat wrong on both. I could post that I look exactly like Brad Pitt 100 times. Same thing you are doing. And link me to where I said Tiger wouldn't win an event on tour this year. Thanks.

Tiger is back being competitive in traditional events. So you dispute this?

And there are still about 20 to 25 players that dominate the game, i.e win one or more times every year and/or consistently finish top 15 or so week after week. There are always going to be times when someone rises up, plays lights out, and wins. That doesn't mean there is parity.[/quote]

I look exactly like Brad Pitt


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 5:00 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6439
CFB Apologist wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
CFB Apologist wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
There is no debate that Tiger revolutionized the game. He’s an

I agree with this 100%. I think he will play well again, and win on tour- probable this year. Is he going to be "Tiger" again? no, not in my opinion. He admitted this week that he and Phil "don't have that many left" in terms of major chances. That is not the Tiger Woods that dominated golf and said he wouldn't show up unless he could win. And despite 123456hokie being the only person on earth to disagree- golf is deeper and more competitive now than it's ever been. There is more parity, there are more top flight international and now asian players. The field is much deeper than when he won the masters in 1997. Speith shot two rounds under 67 this week and finished 3rd. David Toms, a mentally weak Duval, DA points, Davis love this is not.

Well, at least you've changed your tune and recognize that he may actually win a tournament this year. That's progress. Now if we could just get you to not twist people's words we'd be alright.

Now which was it. A strong field of no names or a weak field of name players finishing top 10? Hard to keep your thoughts straight on this one.


Nobody is twisting your words. You were wrong about the Bahamas indicating Tiger was " back" , and you are wrong about parity on tour. Flat wrong on both. I could post that I look exactly like Brad Pitt 100 times. Same thing you are doing. And link me to where I said Tiger wouldn't win an event on tour this year. Thanks.

Tiger is back being competitive in traditional events. So you dispute this?

And there are still about 20 to 25 players that dominate the game, i.e win one or more times every year and/or consistently finish top 15 or so week after week. There are always going to be times when someone rises up, plays lights out, and wins. That doesn't mean there is parity.


I look exactly like Brad Pitt[/quote]
Usually Pitt wipes the egg off his face before going out in public.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:35 pm
Posts: 10418
Location: Somewhere between Marion and Seven Mile Ford
Alma Mater: Ferrum VT ASU
Party: Independent
I only watch the British Open. :)

_________________
I only post using 100% recycled electrons.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:42 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6439
Major Kong wrote:
I only watch the British Open. :)

Ahem, the Open Championship. They take their golf seriously over there. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 11248
Location: New York, NY
133743Hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
I only watch the British Open. :)

Ahem, the Open Championship. They take their golf seriously over there. :)


I think St. Andrews should be on any golfer’s bucket list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:18 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6439
ip_law-hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
I only watch the British Open. :)

Ahem, the Open Championship. They take their golf seriously over there. :)


I think St. Andrews should be on any golfer’s bucket list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Played there two years ago, along with the New Course, Kings Barnes and Carnoustie, then went to the west coast for Royal Troon, Prestwick and Western Gailes. 7 courses in 7 days.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:53 pm 
Online

Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 10:50 am
Posts: 887
I liked Northern Ireland better. Royal Portrush and Royal County Down are two spectacular courses.

133743Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
I only watch the British Open. :)

Ahem, the Open Championship. They take their golf seriously over there. :)


I think St. Andrews should be on any golfer’s bucket list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Played there two years ago, along with the New Course, Kings Barnes and Carnoustie, then went to the west coast for Royal Troon, Prestwick and Western Gailes. 7 courses in 7 days.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 8:29 pm
Posts: 6439
Mcl3 Hokie wrote:
I liked Northern Ireland better. Royal Portrush and Royal County Down are two spectacular courses.

133743Hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
Major Kong wrote:
I only watch the British Open. :)

Ahem, the Open Championship. They take their golf seriously over there. :)


I think St. Andrews should be on any golfer’s bucket list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Played there two years ago, along with the New Course, Kings Barnes and Carnoustie, then went to the west coast for Royal Troon, Prestwick and Western Gailes. 7 courses in 7 days.

I've heard Ireland is more picturesque


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 45 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Time zone: America/New_York [ DST ]


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: