Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Overzealous sports parents


LinvilleGorge
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Even golf leans heavily toward natural talent. The field is just significantly narrowed because you pretty much have to be rich to play enough golf as a youngster to have a chance.

You can be a shrimp, a fatty, or a world class athlete to play that sport at a high level...but you do need some athletic ability.

As far as "rich" I disagree with that, but I grew up in an area that it didn't work like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, thefuzz said:

You can be a shrimp, a fatty, or a world class athlete to play that sport at a high level...but you do need some athletic ability.

As far as "rich" I disagree with that, but I grew up in an area that it didn't work like that.

You have to have ELITE eye/hand coordination and in today's game good athleticism is becoming more and more important with everyone knocking the ball a mile.

I bet there's not many poor folks on college golf teams and hardly any on the PGA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

You have to have ELITE eye/hand coordination and in today's game good athleticism is becoming more and more important with everyone knocking the ball a mile.

I bet there's not many poor folks on college golf teams and hardly any on the PGA.

I'm still going to disagree with you on the rich thing,....as to the poor portion, no clue...but I bet a LOT of college players come from normal middle class families, never looked into the PGA and where they come from, but it's most famous player most certainly didn't come from a rich family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, thefuzz said:

I'm still going to disagree with you on the rich thing,....as to the poor portion, no clue...but I bet a LOT of college players come from normal middle class families, never looked into the PGA and where they come from, but it's most famous player most certainly didn't come from a rich family.

Golf is expensive. Really expensive. Poor folks need not apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, it pretty much does.

You are out of touch on this man.

I didn't grow up rich, far from it, and I could play as much as I wanted...free.  I know I'm not the only person like that.  But go right ahead, think you have to be rich to be good at golf.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, thefuzz said:

You are out of touch on this man.

I didn't grow up rich, far from it, and I could play as much as I wanted...free.  I know I'm not the only person like that.  But go right ahead, think you have to be rich to be good at golf.

You were able to play free. 

That is FAR from the norm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, LinvilleGorge said:

You were able to play free. 

That is FAR from the norm.

Maybe in cities, but not on small town courses...and if you had any talent at all, then you really got to play free.  High School golf teams as well, that was free.  Again, not saying that poor folks are out there all the time, but lower middle class and middle class folks play a lot of golf...much more than my "rich" friends.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/9/2022 at 9:07 PM, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, it pretty much does.

I was on the high-school golf team playing with clubs that I got from a second hand store. We were pretty much the definition of poor at that point. We didn't even have a refrigerator a few years prior and had to put our perishables in the water trough that ran through the attached "spring house". We got to walk the course for free every day, 5 days a week for most of the school year to practice and played matches on legit Club courses. I went from there and played for App for three years. 

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gotcha. So if you're really good and you live somewhere with local golf courses then you can play for free. Yeah, acknowledged. But how many poor people have that initial exposure to golf? How many underprivileged inner city kids have ANY exposure to golf. 

There's a reason golf has it's reputation. Same as skiing. There's a huge bias toward toward the wealthy because the poo ain't cheap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I grew up in a small town and golfing was pretty much out of most people's price range but maybe things have changed.   The places to golf growing up were clubs basically.   I feel like growing up there was a lot of other sports that were far cheaper to be honest.  But I remember some years ago my nephew was doing sports and everything is pretty pricey now to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2022 at 1:31 PM, LinvilleGorge said:

Gotcha. So if you're really good and you live somewhere with local golf courses then you can play for free. Yeah, acknowledged. But how many poor people have that initial exposure to golf? How many underprivileged inner city kids have ANY exposure to golf. 

There's a reason golf has it's reputation. Same as skiing. There's a huge bias toward toward the wealthy because the poo ain't cheap.

There are positives and negatives no matter where you grow up.  Inner city kids?  They have all the things that come along with city life...LOTS and lots of "free" stuff out there.

Growing up in a small town..(much of NC) has it's own set of positives and negatives.  One being that things are cheaper....pretty much everything, including playing sports.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/11/2022 at 11:40 AM, Floppin said:

I was on the high-school golf team playing with clubs that I got from a second hand store. We were pretty much the definition of poor at that point. We didn't even have a refrigerator a few years prior and had to put our perishables in the water trough that ran through the attached "spring house". We got to walk the course for free every day, 5 days a week for most of the school year to practice and played matches on legit Club courses. I went from there and played for App for three years. 

My experience as well.  Passed down clubs, or the one of the golf coaches old sets...play as much as you wanted...hardest part was getting to the golf course, but we managed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I can't help but think that you are equating physical attributes alone with wins. I don't subscribe to that thought. No one will argue that Young has a strong arm, but he makes up for it in other ways. The real limitation for him is he needs good route runners with great hands. That's why Young was so good at the end of the 24 season. Thielen and Coker were perfect receivers for him and he had his best games with them. Not having them to start the 25 season hurt. Look at the first 10 games in 25 with a rookie receiver and no Coker and then look at the final 7 games with a more experienced rookie and Coker back and there is a telling difference in Young's performance. Prior to week 10, Young had 1 game with a QB rating above 100, 2 games with a rating above 90 and 6 games with a rating below 90. In the last 7 games with Coker back, Young had 3 games with a QB rating above 100, 2 games with a rating above 90 and only 2 games with a rating below 90. The tools a QB has to work with matter more than their arm strength.  To go back to Darnold and Stafford, yes they both have great arm strength but neither had much success with that alone. As I already pointed out, Stafford, even with a canon for an arm, only had 4 winning seasons in his first 12 years. It was only when he went to the right environment that he had true success.
    • I don't love this role for him if I'm being totally honest The pregame show is much more flash than substance and doesn't seem like the right fit for what Luke would bring to the table, and that's his vision of the game. I'd like to see him do something where it more involves him breaking down film and explaining what he's seeing out there, as he sees the game in a way very few ever have.
×
×
  • Create New...