stevie was on the bag for 13 of tiger's 14 major wins.

i don't think so.

it has nothing to do with whether or not one thinks stevie is a bad person.

successful, yes, as successful as stevie, no. i don't see tiger getting to 27 majors. lacava may win the most likeable caddy award, but he's not going to outdo steve williams. and like i said to shenlee, it has nothing to do with how you feel about him.

Obviously, twitb, you are equating success with majors only.......I'm not.  I do believe Tiger will top Jack's record......but I don't believe that will be the sole marker of a successful career. 

Hey....and since when did Stevie or anyother caddy swing the clubs and putter to "win" a tournament????

But it shouldn't have been said. It wasn't his place to say it. He shouldn't have been interviewed. Adam Scott won, not him.

He opened that can of worms when he said, "The only place I'm interested in finishing is first." That's fine and all, but Tiger's been more successful in a shorter time with Joe than Steve has been with Adam when it comes to winning.

i was just referring to what coltcub said about stevie, i wasn't defending the man. i know that most people around here think he's a big jerk, but you can't take away the fact that someone had to do the heavy lifting for tiger while he was winning all those tournaments. why not just get rid of caddies altogether and make the players carry their own bags?

Yes, but I'd argue Joe Lacava is just as good a caddy. For years, Steve Williams carried the bag for the most dominant player ever. That doesn't mean Tiger wouldn't have been as dominant with another caddy. He would have still. He was there, but he didn't contribute anything more than say a Joe Lacava would have. Tiger's made a career of clutch putts. He's the one that felt all the pressure, not the caddy.

The only player-caddy relationship out there that I can honestly say the caddy means something is Phil-Bones. Bones keeps Phil undercheck for most of the time. He has in his 4 major victories.

he said that about his racing career. he wasn't so sure about when it came to golf. he realizes that unlike racing, in golf, he has less control about the outcome.

so david feherty, the guy everyone talked up on a prior thread about being tiger's friend and champion, should now be held responsible for holding an interview with steve williams that should've never happened? are you saying that feherty had a lapse in judgement in agreeing to interview williams?

Feherty was a pawn in CBS' game. He still has bosses remember. CBS wanted the interview and Feherty was the one covering the group, so it was his to do. I doubt he actually had a choice in the matter.

 

there have been other relationships that have been just as important: jack nicklaus and angelo argea, tom watson and bruce edwards, tom lehman and andy martinez for example. you think that fluff could've easily had won all those tournaments with tiger, had he not popped out of a suitcase? he has done pretty well with jim furyk with a major and a fedex cup.

just like feherty is a pawn in NBC's game in having to interview the likes of fuzzy zoeller. is he not important enough to the networks to be able to take a stand and say 'no' every once in a while? or maybe he just doesn't care?