DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Brandel Chamblee Q&A: Tiger's fatal swing flaw

**Uzezqelj** · 08-11-2009, 05:23 PM

So a guy like Tom Purtzer who was known for years as having one of the greatest golf swings ever, but had little success on tour should not give advice on the golf swing? A great color commentator is not made because he won tournies. He is made because he is good at his job after golf.

While the only people that should really give advice are instructors, to say that because he won once and not as many as the other guys, he should not is ridiculous. Its HIS JOB TO DO SO! Your thoughts on Jaws say it all. What the heck did Jaworski ever do in his NFL career? Yet he is looked at as an expert.

He has far more thoughts and abilities than you, me, and everybody else here, yet given the opportunity most are not shy on shedding light on Tiger's game.

Your analogy that you chose with Jaws simply is perfect. He is looked at as a genius now and was an average to above average QB at best. Yet Dan Marino who was one of the best ever cannot hold a candle to him.

It's his job?

What job is that? To babble into a microphone all day long?

Once again, you've completely missed my point which is that from Tiger's point of view, I hardly think that he'd put a whole lot of stock in anything a no-name like Chamblee would have to say.

That's it.

Whether or not Chamblee knows what he's talking about is irrelevant - he simply has no "history".

And as far as the MNF analogy goes, I'm comparing Tirico (a civillian) to Jaworski (a player) and Gruden (a coach). In that food chain, Tirico knows to keep his mouth shut when it comes to the technicalities of playing pro football because he has no history in that regard. Tirico may very well have some great insight, but from a player's point of view that would be worthless because he's never been there. The similarity between that and Chamblee/Tiger is that Chamblee has never walked Tiger's walk, so from a player's point of view, Chamblee's credibility is less than someone like Faldo whether he knows what he's talking about or not.

Perception is reality.

And what was so great about Marino anyway? He's a nice guy, he put up a bunch of gaudy numbers, but where are the rings? The stats may prove that someone has the experience but the rings give him the street cred.

Is that fair? No. But that's the way it is.

-JP

08-11-2009, 05:23 PM	#22
Uzezqelj Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 585 Senior Member	So a guy like Tom Purtzer who was known for years as having one of the greatest golf swings ever, but had little success on tour should not give advice on the golf swing? A great color commentator is not made because he won tournies. He is made because he is good at his job after golf. While the only people that should really give advice are instructors, to say that because he won once and not as many as the other guys, he should not is ridiculous. Its HIS JOB TO DO SO! Your thoughts on Jaws say it all. What the heck did Jaworski ever do in his NFL career? Yet he is looked at as an expert. He has far more thoughts and abilities than you, me, and everybody else here, yet given the opportunity most are not shy on shedding light on Tiger's game. Your analogy that you chose with Jaws simply is perfect. He is looked at as a genius now and was an average to above average QB at best. Yet Dan Marino who was one of the best ever cannot hold a candle to him. It's his job? What job is that? To babble into a microphone all day long? Once again, you've completely missed my point which is that from Tiger's point of view, I hardly think that he'd put a whole lot of stock in anything a no-name like Chamblee would have to say. That's it. Whether or not Chamblee knows what he's talking about is irrelevant - he simply has no "history". And as far as the MNF analogy goes, I'm comparing Tirico (a civillian) to Jaworski (a player) and Gruden (a coach). In that food chain, Tirico knows to keep his mouth shut when it comes to the technicalities of playing pro football because he has no history in that regard. Tirico may very well have some great insight, but from a player's point of view that would be worthless because he's never been there. The similarity between that and Chamblee/Tiger is that Chamblee has never walked Tiger's walk, so from a player's point of view, Chamblee's credibility is less than someone like Faldo whether he knows what he's talking about or not. Perception is reality. And what was so great about Marino anyway? He's a nice guy, he put up a bunch of gaudy numbers, but where are the rings? The stats may prove that someone has the experience but the rings give him the street cred. Is that fair? No. But that's the way it is. -JP
	Quote