The problem when someone roars past the field in the early going is that there are only two possibilities, either he’s never seriously challenged (which is boring), or he collapses and we get a 75-post treatise on how Greg Norman and Jean Van De Velde match up (which is nauseating). Remember the days when Bill Elliott had a 20 car length lead by about lap 10 and the ESPN commentators had to talk about team owners and proposed rule changes and chassis manufacturers for two freaking hours? Same deal here.
I do want to chime in a bit, though, so random stuffs on the big names:
Spieth - Let’s just get this out of the way: this is a well-mannered, classy gentleman who respects the traditions of the game, who also happens to be hotter than molten lead and has his whole future ahead of him. Whatever place his win occupies on any dominance list, you have to concede that he is a SUPER MEGA AWESOME thing for American golf. I’m not sure if you’ve noticed it, but the big names we have are starting to get old, and the new blood is either inconsistent, flawed, or just not that great. I have no idea how far he’s going to go, but I do know for absolute certain that it’s going to be a thrilling ride, and that’s something I haven’t been able to say for any American for a while.
Mickelson - Strong, made the clutch shots he had to, caught a few breaks, just not quite overwhelming enough to do better than 2nd. His postgame interview spoke volumes; he was…gasp…humble, and he didn’t begrudge the champion anything. Look, I know there’s been this or that rap on him, but he’s come so far from the spastic gravelbrain who ranted about how it was so impressive Tiger could win with such crappy equipment (remember that one?), I gotta give him props. He’s one of the good guys now…deal with it.
McIlroy - Once again proving that he’s the real deal and making me very relieved that I will not have to hear any nonsense about a “PGA Tour Game Curse”. I think the relatively tame hype around him has mostly to do with the fact that we’re not used to a dominating Brit. Luke Donald was a flash in the pan, Lee Westwood never panned out, and the less said about Colin flippin’ Montgomerie, the better. That plus Tiger’s raised the bar so much, it’s taking a while for McIlroy’s dominance to really sink in. Barring some catastrophe, however, he’ll continue making an impact and won’t surrender the crown easily.
Woods - This won’t be a popular opinion (“No, Darrell, really??” 
), but I watched him for four rounds, and he did…pretty much as I expected. Struggle a bit early due to rust, put up an okay but not impressive first round, gradually regain his form and confidence, make the cut comfortably, make a bit of a move but never catch fire, and finish somewhere in the middle of the pack. I’m not about to make any predictions about him (I’m no glutton for punishment), but I’d be very surprised if he ever returned to his 2013 form. All those crushing shots have taken a heavy toll (the full extent of which we probably won’t even know until well after he’s retired), and he’s not getting any younger. If you’re a big fan, just keep watching and hoping. If you’re a hater…best move on; this horse may not be dead just yet, but it’s pretty ill.
Just like to throw a question out there, though: Does anyone here actually want him to break Sam Snead’s record of 82 tournament wins? Let’s be honest; in any sport with a wide variety of levels and fields, just “winning a tournament” doesn’t mean a lot in the grand scheme of things. In tennis, journeymen regularly clobber superstars in low-level events because the journeyman needs the win and the superstar is only there to fill a quota. Especially given that Tiger isn’t, y’know, all that popular right now, I could very well see this going the the way of the single-quarter assists record in basketball, an answer to a trivia question. (“How did a short, skinny, balding guy who’s whiter than a radish dipped in cornstarch get to be in NBA Jam?”)
