[Chi-Town]

I thought it was an entertaining tournament to watch. The only thing rhat bothered me was when Brooks Koepka tapped in his par putt while Adam Scott was contemplating his putt for second place. I know Scott gave the nod, but that was out of politeness. It would have much better for Koepka to wait and then finish up to a cheering crowd.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk

[Fredman]

[QUOTE=Dr Winston O Boogie jr;1571822]It was a thrilling tournament because had Tiger won it would have had major historical significance. Brooks winning also had historical significance as he became one of only five players in history to win both the US Open and PGA Championship in the same year. The other four are Gene Sarazen, Ben Hogan, Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods. Imagine being the same category as those four guys.

In addition, he is only the seventh player in history to win back to back US Opens.

You can't blame the media for covering Tiger. His winning would be the sports story of the decade and maybe the century.

Sport story of the century? Hardly think so. Willing to bet he will never win another major.

[ColdNoMore]

Tiger hater's...gonna hate.

I wonder whose fault it is that the vast majority of crowds on the course, were following Tiger...and not the last group?

Is the media/television coverage to be blamed for that too?

[billethkid]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

Tiger hater's...gonna hate.

I wonder whose fault it is that the vast majority of crowds on the course, were following Tiger...and not the last group?

Is the media/television coverage to be blamed for that too?

I did not read any posts that indicated "hate" for Woods.
Too many Woods fans are of the mind if one does not root for him they hate him.....the dislike of the disrespectful coverage of the winner had nothing to do with love or hate for the guy who DID NOT WIN, placing second.

[ColdNoMore]

Originally Posted by billethkid

I did not read any posts that indicated "hate" for Woods.
Too many Woods fans are of the mind if one does not root for him they hate him.....the dislike of the disrespectful coverage of the winner had nothing to do with love or hate for the guy who DID NOT WIN, placing second.

I think it's pretty evident and doesn't take a genius, to read between the lines...when it comes to Tiger.

But riddle me this, why aren't we seeing comments about the crowds on the course following Tiger, instead of the last group...as being "disrespectful?"

[billethkid]

Originally Posted by ColdNoMore

I think it's pretty evident and doesn't take a genius, to read between the lines...when it comes to Tiger.

But riddle me this, why aren't we seeing comments about the crowds on the course following Tiger, instead of the last group...as being "disrespectful?"

///

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by billethkid

I did not read any posts that indicated "hate" for Woods.
Too many Woods fans are of the mind if one does not root for him they hate him.....the dislike of the disrespectful coverage of the winner had nothing to do with love or hate for the guy who DID NOT WIN, placing second.

[rjn5656]

Honestly without Tiger playing, my viewing of the PGA has drasticaly diminished. With him playing, I am watching more.

[Bay Kid]

It is great to see Tiger back.

[John_W]

Even though in an earlier post I said Brooks was my favorite golfer and was pulling for him the entire time, I still love to see Tiger and if Brooks didn't win I was hoping Tiger would win instead of Adam Scott or some other player. I noticed when Brooks finished and had walked through the stands, Tiger was there to congratulate him. I think Brooks and Tiger may be the new future of the PGA.

I guess some 10 to 15 years ago we have a few Monday Night matches between Tiger and Sergio the week before the NFL kicked off. Maybe next year they can put Tiger and Brooks on together playing some night golf on the Monday before the football season.