Search "McIlroy" and "Tiger" on Twitter and you'll get a robust and varied selection of opinions on the topic.
- -Athlete of the Month: Rory Mcilroy >> will replace Tiger Woods as the face of golf
- -Rory McILROY is going to be better than Tiger.
- -Rory McIlroy dominated the US open.....though I think people should slow down with the Tiger Woods comparisons
- -Really? Rory McIlroy wins ONE major and all of a sudden he's the next Tiger Woods? Please. ESPN should be embarrassed. http://es.pn/kuxcD9
I understand the concept. As an individual sport, the prevailing wisdom is that golf needs at least one transcendent figure to rule over the sport, while simultaneously pushing it forward.
(Think Federer or Nadal in tennis currently.)
From a playing perspective, McIlroy has those credentials. For starters he has just about the most aesthetically pleasing golf swing -- maybe ever.
Then you look at his performance in the last four major championships and his ability becomes even more clear:
- His worst finish -- a tie for 15th at The Masters earlier this year -- came after he led for the first three rounds and unraveled on a nightmarish in-ward nine
- He's shot under-par rounds in 13 of the 16
- He tied the lowest ever round in a major championship with his 63 in the first round of the Open Championship at St. Andrews last year
- And he's had at least a share of the lead in three of the four, and it would have been all four if he could cash-in a birdie on the 72nd hole at Whistling Straits last August
When Ernie Els won the U.S. Open at the very same Congressional CC in 1997 -- the same year as Woods' major break through at The Masters -- he cashed a cheque for $465,000.It's pretty unlikely McIlroy can have the kind of dramatic effect on the size of the purses, even if he went out and won the next three majors.
When Woods won it in walkaway fashion at Pebble Beach in 2000, he banked $800,000. That's a 72 per cent increase in prize money in three years.
For his victory yesterday, McIlroy earned $1.35-million -- or in other words, a 40 per cent increase over Woods' total in 2000 and a 196 per cent increase over Els' winnings.
But maybe the real issue here is that it's possible that the golf world doesn't need another Tiger; they need a Rory.
Yes, television audiences -- particularly in the United States -- crave the name-brand recognition that comes from a player who is at top of mind when discussing potential victors at any and all tournaments.
The era's of golf have also been defined by the titanic players and personalities that dominated them.
Before Tiger there was Norman; before Norman there was Ballesteros; before Ballesteros there was Watson; before Watson there was Nicklaus; before Nicklaus there was Palmer; before Palmer there was Hogan and Nelson; and before that there was Jones and Hagen
The point is each player carved their own identity while also helping to shape the landscape of golf. And without some of them, maybe we wouldn't have golf on TV every week; or have non-European players regularly travel over seas every July to play the world's oldest golf tournament; or think about the concept of a golf world tour.
So maybe golf does need Rory to be a star, but they need him to do it in his way.
The dawn of a new day in golf is upon us. The game will return to the Olympics in five short years. The talent pool of high level competitive golfers may still be deepest on American soil, but that won't be much of a factor in a field of 60 at the Olympics.
Golf needs a star that wants to win every week and even if they end up taking it on the chin, they still answer questions like they played well.
Golf needs a star that shows emotion in ways other than anger and remorse and still smiles if things aren't going their way.
Golf needs a star that isn't afraid to let the public see what he's really like. One that is active enough on Twitter to know what #alicebucketlist is.
Golf could still use a Tiger, but it really needs a Rory.
