B&S,
Your observations of my post seem to me, very confusing and therefore your conclusions seem inaccurate. I'll try to explain a bit better my point.
I don't understand how anyone can conclude that just because there are many different winners, that the fields are so strong and therefore deep and players are so equal. Equal in what? Ineptitude? Inconsistency? These are traits I see, not talent.
Do you really mean in comparison to each other? Then, you must agree that there is not much talent outside of Tiger on the tour right now. Otherwise, we wouldn't all have the feeling, when Tiger plays, that he should win! If there was a huge amount of talent, then they would dominate the older players with their length, accuracy and lack of fear putting. These are things Tiger possessed at the outset of his career. Pure talent!
If I saw more tournaments being decided by two or three players finishing in birdie, par, birdie fashion, then I would give your conclusion some credit. What I do see are players folding coming down the stretch. If not completely folding, then at least not doing anything but maintaining position. This past weekend alludes to that fact.
Perry: Birdie, par, par
Austin: Birdie, bogey, bogey
Watson: Birdie, par, par
Tway: Birdie, par, par
Duke: Birdie, par, par
Sixteen was a par five, and played as the easiest hole on the course, hence the birdies by all the golfers. It was basically playing as a par four. Why didn't we see one eagle from these players? Why weren't there more birdies on seventeen? Weren't these players confident about their game to go pin hunting? I realize 18 played the hardest all week but were they all waiting for the others to faulter? I'd like to think not but I feel this is true. Nobody seized the moment and played for birdie to win. I think they thought they were but just couldn't pull it off! Their lack of talent didn't alllow them to accomplish the task at hand.
I'm not talking just about all the 20 somethings in general either. I'm talking about a breakout player/players who will win consistently and actually give Tiger some pressure akin to Jack and Arnie. (Read my last sentence about the consistency factor in my previous post.)
I agree we will see a bunch of wins by the 20 somethings in the coming years. That statement in itself is a paradox. Of course this will happen by sheer numbers, they will share wins as a group. What we won't see is anyone stepping up consistently and showcasing their talent. Then doing it again, and again. That is the key...TALENT. Repeatable performance equals talent. Talent is not a fluke or something which comes and goes. It is not a hot streak, or all the other causes of these multiple player wins over the course of a year. Talent wins five or six tourneys a year, the way Faldo, Nicklaus, Jones, Hogan did. The way Tiger does. (Or atleast a few tourneys and a Major.) (I'm talking generally too. I know they didn't win that many every year.)
You can't say that the tour is so chocked full of talent when one player dominates everyone else the way Tiger does. I can conclude the ones being dominated are clones and not very good clones either. Thus the high number of winners in Tiger's absence. Think about it: Kenny Perry @ 47 is a two time winner this year!! That alone says little for the younger guys.
A tour is full of talent when there are three to five players who stand out and then the next 10 are close but just can't break the big boys more often. They consistently are in the top 10 at tourney conclusion. How many times do players perform one week and miss the cut the next week. I see it all the time. Talent would enable a player to make a good showing for four to eight weeks and win one or two during the course of a year. Also rans are the ones who you hear from once, then never break through the top 20 again.
Don't let the sizes of the purses and what the 99th player earned fool you. A player may play in 31 tournaments a year to earn that 99th spot and over $985,000 but that doesn't mean he has as much talent as that guy sitting above him at 100th who entered 19 tournaments and has $1,000,000+ in earnings, each with one win on the year. In my opinion neither one had talent, just one lucky week and a few others where they maintained. In fact the one who enterd 31 turneys had far less talent because of the $'s per tourney was pathetic in comparison.
Talent on the tour would get you 10 top 10's, 5 top 5's, and a few wins in 23 tournaments and over $8,500,000. Talent wouldn't get you missed cuts!!!! Look at last years earnings and see if anyone is close to the only one with talent today. http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/2007/109.html
No, I don't think I can put any single player in those parenthesis with Tiger just yet. The field is just too weak from #2 on down.
