Par4QC No
He's playing limited field events mainly.
You can't be the best if you don't prove you can beat the worst.
Right, and he’s practically playing against the Korn Ferry Tour now. Anybody giving him a run for his money is on LIV. If he were that great he’d be blowing the field away.
sdandrea1 Too debatable. Define "best".
Let’s just take his 28 PGA Tour wins and 4 Majors. And basically never leave the top 10 in world rankings for 15 years.
Par4QC No
He's playing limited field events mainly.
You can't be the best if you don't prove you can beat the worst.
Ok….. LIV started in the middle of 2022. Rory has 5 wins from 2022 till now. So worst case scenario he has 23 PGA Tour wins instead of 28 and still has 4 Majors. And not all the top players who went to LIV went as soon as it was announced.
Who’s done better?
There’s also this from last year.
“But what if you basically never leave the top 10 in world rankings for 15 straight years?
McIlroy, who first entered the top 10 at the end of 2009, has rarely ventured south of that mark since (and never south of No. 20). In that sense, Rory stands nearly peerless in the game; the likes of Jordan Spieth, Justin Thomas and Viktor Hovland -- choosing three tremendously talented peers -- have failed to accomplish this feet.”
Sneakylong Is Rory McIlroy currently the best golfer this century? He has 28 PGA Tour wins with 4 Majors. Tiger and Phil are still playing, but their best is behind them.
I read this as 'best' not meaning winningest, even tough you threw in the 28 & 4 numbers.
As such, it is a statement that could easily be debated.
But, he has picked a very good year to cut back his schedule and play tracks/tourneys he has best chances in/on. Finally getting smart. The other really good Pros are coming unglued in life and their games. He has a great chance to win a lot of tourneys this season. Consistency, with time off, is going to reap huge bounties.
Par4QC read this as 'best' not meaning winningest
Yeah, best would be more subjective. Best as in most accomplished / winningest is more definitive. I heard Gary Williams Golf Channel / Sirius XM PGA Radio mention this (this) morning. I only heard the end of his remarks.
But when you look at his numbers there’s a very good argument that can be made that he is the ‘best’ certainly as @MartinD said since 2007.
Rory is one of the greats. So far this century Tiger and Phil are both better and Brooks is about as good. Rory can, and has dominated majors before and I think he has more ahead. Used to like him but have soured on his virtue signaling self-righteousness in recent years.
johnnydoom Used to like him but have soured on his virtue signaling self-righteousness in recent years.
Agree. He should get points taken away from Sneakylong's criteria. 
This quote below tells the story. He’s learning how to win without his A game. Basically has more shots in his arsenal.
“To use the analogy of a baseball pitcher, he’s finding ways to get outs without relying purely on his fast ball. He’s found other ways to produce success. He has more tools available to him now that perhaps he’s ever had in his career. He is a more complete player.”
johnnydoom Brooks is about as good.
Has everyone forgotten what DJ has done?
Par4QC Has everyone forgotten what DJ has done?
24 wins on the PGA Tour with two Majors. Not too shabby. Not counting what he’s done on the exhibition tour. lol Majors seem to get more weight.
That’s why Brooks has a good argument for being in contention with Rory with five Majors, but only has 9 wins on the PGA Tour.
Sneakylong also it's kinda strange where the likes of Spieth, McElroy and Koeppa won their majors in bunches and none since. Is it lack of concentration/motivation that maybe results from princely sums of $$?
Of course, nobody knows answer.
propman also it's kinda strange where the likes of Spieth, McElroy and Koeppa won their majors in bunches and none since. Is it lack of concentration/motivation that maybe results from princely sums of $$?
Of course, nobody knows answer
Yeah, hard to say. The competition was pretty strong in the last 15 years though. These guys are not dissimilar to any golfer. Just at the highest level. They find it lose it etc..
I’m also amazed at how a lot of them tinker with their swing when they seem to be at the top of their game.
The latest to do this is Viktor Hovland. He was at the top of his game and then fired his coach Joe Mayo. Mark Rolfing thinks he has more to fall before he turns it around.
Winning golf tournaments isn't always about just what the player does - there are days where opportunities get handed to you. Nick Faldo's major championships are a good example of this:
1987 Open: Azinger is one ahead with two to play, finishes bogey-bogey.
1989 Masters: Hoch misses a 2-foot putt to win on the first playoff hole.
1990 Masters: Floyd drops a shot on 17 when one ahead with two to play, hits his second shot at 11 (2nd playoff hole) into the water.
1992 Open: Cook three-putts the 17th when one shot ahead.
1996 Masters: Norman has a 78 in the final round after starting the day six shots ahead.
(The 1990 Open was the only one of Faldo's six majors that he won without needing help from others in the closing stages.)
That isn't to say that Faldo didn't earn those wins with his own play, but he was definitely handed quite a few opportunities by his nearest competition.
sdandrea1 Yes, definitely someone I can say I was rooting for him to win. Always liked his response when he said he is a pro and should be able to hit a long iron. Was sorta happy with his Ryder Cup victory. A small sorta.
Bravopilot Yes, definitely someone I can say I was rooting for him to win.
I was "mad" at him for not playing that last hole conservatively, given the lead he had. He could have par'd that hole with three 8 iron shots and two putts. Tin Cup.
sdandrea1 I did think hitting out of the water was doable. Have tried that before in my youth.
