PITTSBURGH — Jack Nicklaus and Johnny Miller — two guys who know a thing or two about what it takes to win a U.S. Open at Oakmont.

A bunch of golfers have said a bunch of words the past few days at Oakmont Country Club.

Few — if any — carry the same weight as those delivered by Jack Nicklaus and Johnny Miller on Saturday for Day 3 of the U.S. Open.

Nicklaus and Miller held court with members of the media for about a half-hour, reliving their incredible memories here, discussing how much the game has changed, the brutal test that remains on this course and much more.

The whole thing was awesome, a peek into the minds of two men responsible for the rich history that exists at this place, specifically for this event.

Here's a look at my five favorite discussion points from the session:

'Perfect round of golf'

It's still wild that this is where it all started for Nicklaus. Oakmont in 1962 was the site of his first professional win, the first of four U.S. Open titles and the first of a record 18 major championships.

Oh, and ...

"The key was to beat Arnold Palmer," Nicklaus said. "I didn't know anything about Oakmont. I came in 10 days before the tournament and played a couple of times.

"I had played with Palmer the first two rounds, which back then was a crazy experience with his gallery. Handling the pressure that week was tough."

Palmer, of course, was the best player in the world at the time, not to mention the hometown hero. Fans booed Nicklaus. They cheered Palmer, who had won his third Masters a couple months prior. It didn't matter.

"I finished second in 1960 and fourth in '61, and I sort of felt like this was my Open," Nicklaus said of 1962. "I didn't realize that — as a 22-year-old might not — that I was in Arnold Palmer's backyard."

We'll get to how Nicklaus feels he accomplished that, but it was similarly cool to hear Miller talk about his final-round 63 in 1973 and how it gave him a 1-shot victory over John Schlee.

Impressive work for someone who shot a 76 and looked like he was out of contention after the third day.

"I was pretty down in the dumps after the 76 and thought, 'Well, that's the end of that,' " Miller recalled. "Then in the last round, it was like my guardian angel out there said, 'OK, we're going to put together a perfect round of golf.'

"And it was literally a perfect round of golf."

'Be patient with it'

All these years later, it's funny, not a ton has changed when it comes to how golfers can win here.

Nicklaus gave some mental advice.

Miller was slightly more practical.

"Patience," Nicklaus said. "Basically that's what you have to have. Obviously you have to play good golf, but just be patient with it."

As someone who missed just two fairways in 1973 and reached every green in regulation, Miller's advice also made sense, though it's certainly easier said than done here.

"Just get it in the fairway," Miller said. "When you can get the ball in the fairway, you can work the ball if you need to. You eliminate so many mistakes upon mistakes.

"You see the guys that don't ... Bryson DeChambeau was living in the rough the past two days. Now, he's watching on TV."

Times have changed

The money involved for Nicklaus and Miller and players today has absolutely changed a ton. Nicklaus got $17,500 in 1962. Miller made $35,000 by winning in 1973.

That's what some of the tournament's lowest finishers will pull in this weekend.

It's foolish to compare anything from this era to that one, but I liked Nicklaus' answer when he started discussing how much things changed. It added awesome perspective and emphasized the continual evolution of the sport.

"Would I have loved to have had what's going on here when we played? Yeah. Obviously, all of us would," Nicklaus said. "But Johnny and I also trail-blazed the way for what's happening today. If you look back at [Ben] Hogan and [Sam] Snead and those guys, they trail blazed it for us."

The current best player in the world, Scottie Scheffler, sat tied for 23rd at 4-over entering the weekend. He hasn't been in contention, but the three-time major winner also isn't out of it.

Both were asked about Scheffler's swing, Nicklaus specifically when it comes to a few links that have been drawn between the two.

"I don't think there's a whole lot of resemblance," Nicklaus said. "Scottie has an unusual way of coming into the ball and having his right foot slide behind him.

"That evidently allows him to get his right hip out of the way, and allows his hands to stay close to his body and swing down a plane."

Miller called Scheffler's footwork "unusual" and compared his swing to that of Mark Calcavecchia or Greg Norman, saying the foot movement contributes to something Nicklaus always loved: a high fade.

"Scottie has got sort of an old-fashioned swing," Miller said.

Arnie's 'enormous impact'

The impact of the Latrobe native Palmer obviously can't be overstated, here or anywhere. He and Nicklaus became lifetime rivals and good friends, somewhat of a rarity in pro sports.

Much of that started during the 1962 U.S. Open.

"Arnold obviously had an enormous impact on the game," Nicklaus said. "Arnold in many ways popularized the game of golf. He came along basically when television came along. Television was great for Arnold, but Arnold was great for television and great for the game.

"He had a flair about him that nobody else had, and people loved him. And rightfully so. He earned what he got. He did a great job."

Miller again drew a comparison, this time to flamboyant players such as Seve Ballesteros or Chi-Chi Rodriguez. Not necessarily because of his actions, but more because of the aura that surrounded Palmer.

"Arnie was a man's man, a big-time man's man," Miller said. "He could have been with John Wayne as two leading guys in a movie."

'Fault the system'

Prior to beginning what became arguably the most successful career in golf history, many forget Nicklaus was an NCAA champion at Ohio State.

He also hates what has become of college sports when it comes to the name, image and likeness (NIL) era that has drastically reshaped its financial landscape.

"I do not like what's going on in college athletics today," Nicklaus said. "I don't think a lot of people do. I think the athletes like it."

Nicklaus clarified that he's not against athletes receiving some sort of stipend. But he thinks the entire thing has gone too far, regardless of what sport anyone wants to reference.

"I don't like the idea that you've got the best team money can buy," Nicklaus said. "I don't fault [the student-athletes]. I fault the system."

© 2025 the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. Visit www.post-gazette.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.