While Norm Duke has been my favorite nationally touring/exempt player for a number of years and while his winning two majors this year is impressive, I'd still not consider him for player of the year.
It's the "year" part that is important. Barnes, Williams, and Scroggins were constantly in the mix of things this year, all year. You could even make a case for Rhino Page if he had won another title. Because there wasn't a bowler making as many shows as these three, a bowler constantly in the mix of things, it was easier for Kent to win POY last year with the same title resume as Duke this year.
To me it would be like giving Mark Roth bowler of the century based solely on his performance in 1978 alone: 8 titles in one season. That's not to discount all of Roth's other achievements, but I'm just trying to emphasis that as bowler of the century should be awarded do to longevity over a number of years, bowler of the year should be for consistent success over the entire year.
--------------------
J.J. "Waterola Kid" Anderson, the bLowling King : Kill the back row
Edited on 3/31/2008 10:55 AM