McIlroy near perfect, has all the intangibles to be The Next One

I woke up this morning shortly after 6 o’clock, blinked at the clock and thought to myself: ‘What time do I need to be at the golf course?’ Then I realized I didn’t have to be at the golf course at all. The U.S. Open is over. For me, having the event a few miles from my house at Congressional was great, but it also made for a hectic week.

In all though, it was fantastic. If there was one player in the field I wanted to see win it was Rory McIlroy. Here’s a simple fact: he’s a wonderful golfer who has the potential to be a truly elite player—as in winning a half-dozen major championships or perhaps even more—before he’s done. But I honestly think he may be a better person than he is a golfer.

Seriously.

I think everyone who follows golf marveled at the way he handled himself after his Sunday meltdown at The Masters. He answered every question; never snapped at anyone; kept his sense of humor intact and made no attempt to rush off at any point. His behavior was in direct contrast to You-Know-Who.

Look, I don’t want to turn this into a “Rory-is-good-Tiger-is-bad,” deal. But it is impossible not to see the differences between the two. Tiger plays clenched-teeth golf and has played it at a level never seen before in the game. If he doesn’t break Jack Nicklaus’s record of 18 major titles it won’t be because he didn’t have the ability, it will be because he self-destructed.

I think McIlroy is sneaky competitive. He doesn’t clench his teeth and he doesn’t bark at people but the fact that he came back from The Masters disaster to not only win the next major but to absolutely dominate it from start-to-finish says a lot about him as a competitor. A lot of players would have subconsciously held back, not wanting the spotlight again so soon, not wanting to face all the questions about, ‘well what if you blow THIS lead.’ McIlroy embraced it.

If you watch the kid play golf, you have to love his game. He’s got a swing that makes other pros sigh. He’s got a smile that makes young girls sigh. He has about him a star quality that you just don’t see very often. It is no knock on guys like Graeme McDowell, Louis Oosthuizen, Martin Kaymer and Charl Schwartzel—all major champions—to say that they are champions and McIlroy is a star—who is now also a champion. It’s just a fact, one that they would probably all agree with.

That’s NOT to say—as some inevitably will because of all the record-breaking numbers he produced—that he is the “next Tiger.” There is no next Tiger. There are only four players in the history of the game who have won double-digit major titles: Nicklaus, Woods, Bobby Jones and Walter Hagen.

The likelihood that anyone will join that list anytime soon is slim. Padraig Harrington was way over the top on Saturday when he said that McIlroy could break Nicklaus’s record. The kid, who sounds more like 42 when he talks than 22, just shook his head when he heard that and said, “Oh Paddy, Paddy Paddy….I’d just like to win my first one.”

Exactly right. Now that he’s done that we can all revel in that victory and hope there will be more to come. But let’s not say the Jack or Tiger words yet. As of this moment he’s got ONE major title.

But there’s no doubt he is going to be looked at as The Next One in golf and that’s good because of all the non-golf qualities he brings along with him. He’s smart and he’s funny. The other players don’t just respect him, they like him—really like him.

Last Tuesday, I bumped into him in The Congressional locker room. I hadn’t seen him in Charlotte and I told him right away that I wanted to be the millionth person to tell him how remarkable his post-Augusta behavior had been.

He smiled. “Well, I certainly had plenty of time to think about what I was going to say didn’t I?” he said, laughing since his collapse had been pretty much complete by the 13th hole.

Then he shrugged. “Honestly, I meant it when I said I was disappointed but in the end it was a golf tournament. I would think I’ll get to play in plenty more.”

That’s just a little different from, “second place sucks.”

He had just finished playing so I asked him what he thought of the golf course. “I think,” he said, “that it’s very score-able.”

I guess he had that right. He didn’t so much score as he overwhelmed. Sure, the golf course was soft and there will be some questions if—amazingly—the USGA went TOO far in trying to give the players birdie chances since 20 players finished under par. None were within shouting distance of McIlroy although I will say this: If you don’t take note of Jason Day, who now has two second place finishes in majors this year, you’re missing something.

Day is also very likeable but he plays at a snail’s pace. That’s another thing about McIlroy: he plays FAST. Woods always copied Nicklaus and plays as if he is being paid by the hour. McIlroy is more like Tom Watson: pick a club, check your target, stand up and swing. My dream final twosome in a major would be McIlroy and Rickie Fowler, not just because having the two most like-able kids in golf going head-to-head would be great, but because they might play through the entire field.

Put those two on a golf course with no one in front of them and they’ll play 18 holes in under three hours with time to spare. And both will probably shoot in the 60s.

For now though, Fowler is still about potential. McIlroy is here and we can only hope he is here to stay for a long, long time. My wife, who knows me very well, said to me on Sunday night, “I just know you cried when he hugged his father and said, “Happy Father’s Day.”

Damn right I did. It was one of those sweet, genuine moments—the word genuine is important here—that make sports and the people in them worth caring about. (By the way, am I the only one who thinks Mr. McIlroy looks like a Bill Parcells double?).

Honestly, I’m not sure how the week could have turned out much better than it did. Okay, I do have one complaint: Why couldn’t McIlroy’s six-iron at No. 10 on Sunday have gone in? That would have been one of the most amazing moments ever in major championship golf. He missed by about 10 inches.

So, as it turns out, he's not perfect. But boy does he come close.

The US Open at Congressional; Notes from last week, including The National and the 'cat' incident

AT THE U.S. OPEN…

A week ago it was so hot in Washington I was dreading the thought of spending a week at Congressional because just walking out the door when it is 100 degrees out is miserable. The thought of walking a hilly golf course in that kind of weather makes me want to become an editor.

Okay, that may be a bit radical but you get the point.

So, the weather thus far has been spectacular---cool, low humidity—everything you could possibly want. Of course by the weekend it will probably be awful again.

Right now though walking around here is a delight and, for once, I actually know my way around, which is a bonus.

Since I’m the local guy for this event, I’ve had more requests for radio and local TV interviews than normal. I bring that up only because it is so easy to tell the difference between those who follow golf regularly and those who don’t: The golf types want to know about the tournament. The non-golf types want to know about Tiger.

C’est la vie.

When I did my regular bit on Washington Post Live on Monday (from the golf course as opposed to the studio) Ivan Carter told me before we went on that his first question was going to be, “Why should I come out there if Tiger’s not there?”

Ivan and I joke about this all the time. I say he isn’t a golf fan because he only cares about Tiger. He insists that he is a golf fan because he likes Tiger.

So, I said, “My answer’s going to be that no one really cares if you come out here or not—they can hold the tournament without Tiger, they can certainly hold it without you.”

Ivan never asked the question.

Here’s my latest theory on Tiger: If he doesn’t play in his tournament in two weeks he won’t play the rest of the year. (It is worth remembering that I’m oh-for-Tiger this year predicting what he’s going to do: I thought for sure he would skip The Players Championship because the event means nothing to him and he’s never liked the golf course. So, he tries to play, shoots 42 for nine holes and withdraws. I thought for sure he would be healthy for the Open and he’s not here. So, take anything I say here with a grain of salt and, no, he hasn’t consulted with me on what to do next.)

The reason I believe Philadelphia will be the tipoff is this: Because of various injuries and off-course issues, Woods has missed events that he’s the ‘host,’ of on a couple of occasions since 2008. He missed that 18-man exhibition in California after his knee surgery in 2008 and missed it again after hydrant-gate in 2009.

Earlier in 2008 he couldn’t play in his tournament when it was played here at Congressional after his knee surgery. The sponsors—notably AT+T—understood that Woods couldn’t play but they very much hoped he would get on a private plane and fly in for a day to glad-hand with all their clients. Woods couldn’t make it.

Now, three years later, with the future venue of the tournament in question—it is supposed to come back to Congressional next year for the next three years but neither the club nor the Woods Foundation is thrilled with the idea—Woods’ absence this year would be a very big deal and not a good thing at all.

So, my theory is this: if there’s any way he can play he will. If he really can’t play, I think he’ll take the break a lot of people believe he should take and MAYBE play the PGA if he can get himself healthy to play at least once, maybe twice, before then.

Okay, enough Tiger. There is, after all, a major championship starting here on Thursday.

Congressional—my biases aside—is a very good venue for The Open. It isn’t Pebble Beach or Shinnecock but it is long and hard but not unfair. Rory McIlroy—who I would LOVE seeing with the trophy on Sunday—described it this morning as, ‘scoreable.’

I think that’s accurate and it is what the USGA, under Mike Davis, has wanted the last few years: play well, you score; play anything less than well and you have serious issues. A lot of players think the 16th hole might be pivotal. The area around the green—especially right and back—has been shaved to the point where if you miss the green at all you’re in big trouble. McIlroy told me his instinct after playing it a couple of times might be to lay-up rather than risk bringing six into play by hitting a long iron in. Keep an eye on how guys play the hole beginning on Thursday.

Oh, one other reason Congressional probably isn’t in the long term future for Woods’ event: The USGA has made it clear to the club that if it wants The Open back in the future, it can’t host a PGA Tour event. The USGA will look the other way on that issue for Pebble Beach but that’s because it’s Pebble Beach AND because the golf course in February is a lot different (especially with a USGA set-up) than in June.

Of course the question I’m asked most often is who I’m picking to win. That’s understandable since I’m the only media member who was smart enough to walk the first round last year with Graeme McDowell.

He was playing with Rocco Mediate and Shaun Micheel who were key figures in my last two books. I was out there to watch them. The thought that I might be walking with the winner of the championship never crossed my mind once all day.

Any of you who picked McDowell—or Louis Oosthuizen at St. Andrews or Charl Schwartzel at Augusta in April—please let me know. I’d love to get some stock tips from you.

Which of course is the beauty of golf.

******

Couple notes from last week: Final word on my friend Scott Van Pelt: First, thanks to Scott for naming me the ‘arbiter of all things.’ That’s just about as good as being the ‘czar of sports,’ as Tony Kornheiser used to call me. I’m flattered. Second, to the couple of posters who said I mis-quoted Scott by saying he met Jordan Williams when he spoke to the Maryland team before a Duke game two years ago (not that he had ‘crossed paths with him at a couple games,’ as Scott said. How did that happen since Scott doesn’t actually DO basketball games?) I was quoting JORDAN WILLIAMS who said he met Scott when he spoke to the team. Bad writing on my part if anyone misunderstood….

Oh, and then there was the question about the alleged, ‘cat,’ incident that supposedly sunk The National in 1991. If you read the story Frank Deford pretty much has it right. There were a number of reasons I wanted to come home and the cost of my coming home between The French open and Wimbledon was LESS than if I stayed. I did NOT fly home on The Concorde. The only time I flew on the Concorde was when I used USAIR points to fly on it to and from the British Open in 1994. The return flight left London at 3:30 and arrived in Washington at a little before 2 p.m.

That was cool.

Phelps Trapped by Technology and Marketing; Other Notable Tidbits from Yesterday’s Headlines

I’ve written often in the past about how amazed I am by Michael Phelps. Of course that’s a little bit like saying I’m amazed by the earth, the moon and the stars because one doesn’t have to know anything about swimming to know that Phelps is the greatest swimmer of all time.

And yet, as an old swimmer, even though I never came within light years of Phelps, I always felt that if it was possible, Phelps didn’t get the credit he deserved. He was always measured against Mark Spitz’s seven gold medals at the Munich Olympics and if he had ‘only,’ won seven golds or, God Forbid six, in Beijing, most people would still have believed that Spitz was the best.

Which isn’t even close to true. Spitz did two things: he swam butterfly and sprint freestyle. He was absolutely fabulous at both—unbeatable in the 100 and the 200 in both strokes. Phelps can do just about anything you ask him to do in a swimming pool. He can sprint and he can swim distances—he’s never tried the 1,500 but I would bet serious money if he ever trained for it he’d blow everyone away. He’s the greatest butterflyer who ever lived and he’s one of the three best backstrokers in history. He’s even made himself a very good breastroker which is why he’s so unbeatable in the individual medley, the event that definitively proves a swimmer’s versatility.

Now, unfortunately, Phelps is trapped by both technology and marketing. You probably read in today’s papers—or online—about Phelps getting hammered by a previously unheralded German in the 200 freestyle. Much of the story is about the fact that the German, like a lot of swimmers, is wearing a suit that has already been declared illegal by the international swimming federation—except that the suit hasn’t been banned just yet because FINA (the initials for the federation since French is the officials language of international sport) doesn’t want to upset the manufacturer’s too much by banning their suits right this instant.

This reminds me a lot of the ongoing battle between the U.S. Golf Association and the golf manufacturers over equipment. On the one hand, the USGA doesn’t want to see great golf courses completely obliterated by how far players can now hit the ball. On the other hand, it doesn’t want to upset its key business partners to much.

Phelps can’t wear the latest and greatest suit because it is made by Arena and he’s under contract to Speedo. Personally, if I were Speedo, I’d tell him to wear whatever he wants if that’s what it takes to win on a short term basis. Everyone knows they’ve fallen a step behind in the suit wars for the moment whether Phelps is wearing their stuff or not.

In my opinion, Phelps hasn’t gotten a lot of help from the non-swimming people around him. It’s fortunate that most of his career has been shaped by his mom (Debbie) and his coach (Bob Bowman). But he was badly let down by his so-called management team at Octagon during bong-gate last fall when they decided the best way to handle the photo of him taking a hit from a bong at a party was to try to bribe the British tabloid that had the photo. Now, the Speedo people, who could look both smart and magnanimous by telling Phelps to wear the fastest suit allowed—regardless of label—have gone underground.

To be fair, Phelps isn’t the swimmer this summer he was last summer. His time in the 100 free leading off the winning U.S. relay Sunday (by the way, do the French surrender at EVERYTHING, including relays?) was slower than his split in Beijing. His 200 free on Tuesday night was more than a ½ second slower than his world record swim at the Olympics. All of that’s understandable. He took off six months from training and decided (mistakenly) to try to re-invent his freestyle stroke.

Again, this reminds me of golf: Padraig Harrington wins two straight majors and decides he needs to change his swing. Tiger Woods is almost constantly trying to reinvent his swing.

In the long run, Phelps is going to be fine. FINA will eventually figure out what to do about the supersonic suits—the key in the end is that everyone is using the same equipment one way or the other—and Phelps will be swimming in a level pool in London in 2012, which, as he pointed out, is the only meet he’s really pointing to at this point in his life.

One other note that has nothing to do with the suit controversy: After finishing third in the relay on Sunday, the French ducked out on the post-race press conference. Gee, what a surprise.

OTHER THINGS WORTH NOTING TODAY: So Brett Favre decided in the end not to un-retire again. Thank God we can all now focus on Michael Vick, huh?...

If I were Omar Minaya, the Mets general manager, I wouldn’t apply for a new mortgage on my house. A day after his embarrassing attempt to somehow blame New York Daily News reporter Adam Rubin for the fact that he had to fire his pal Tony Bernazard, Minaya received a decided non-vote of confidence from team owner Jeff Wilpon. Even the Mets broadcasters on SNY—the one thing the Mets do have going for them is their broadcast team of Gary Cohen, Keith Hernandez and Ron Darling—blasted Minaya.

Lance Armstrong and Alberto Contador are ripping one another publicly. Thus begins 49 weeks of hype leading to next year’s Tour de France…