[Sam Maryland]

Could Chicago jump in and take the event?

I'm not sure why they would considering the Western has a tough enough time to get spectators and it couldn't support the Nationwide Tour at The Glen Club.

I always found it amazing that for such a golf town they could never sell out Golf Tournaments in Chicago.

Do the majors sell out?

at what point is an event declared a sellout?  I kind of always thought "well there aren't really any seats out there, just keep printing tickets".  obviously if you reached the point where transportation/parking/infrastructure is overwhelmed you'd have to stop but only a handful of events really "sell out".

Dan mentioned following a late group at the Barclays and only having to fight 14 other people for the best spot on the ropes...  I know there was a lot of behind the scenes stuff as a part of the move from Westchester but to me that move was almost as dumb as the one Bivens/LPGA made from Atlantic City (Shoprite event) to Charleston (Ginn) -- just stupid. 

Westchester was one of the most fan friendly events ever.  crowds were just right, so easy to get in and out from NYC, great local support, etc...
Ridgewood is a special place but it's just not the place for this event -- Westchester CC is the place.

[George Pazin]

One dirty little secret is that golf isn't a great live spectator sport, except for 1) if you want to see a course you don't ordinarily have access to 2) you go to an Am event or Nationwide event or something where the crowds are tiny or 3) your idea of a spectator sport is a drinkfest ala TPC Scottsdale.

Having said that, I think Dick's right, too - Tour Golf isn't such a draw even on the tube anymore, especially sans Tiger.

[Phil McDade]

Watching a few of Arnie's comments last week, I think possibly the older players and those that have memories of golf pre-70s, might have some inkling of what is coming and what needs to be done by players as their responsibility to promote and work hard for the tour's health.  But, I tend to think that the active younger players have no clue, and no motivation (yet) to really dig in and work very hard on their own individual efforts and assumed responsibility to promote all that they can manage to attempt to maintain their sports relavance in comparison to the public's perceptions of the merits of the sport of golf and need for diversion of a stunned and economically depressed population. 

I think that the current perception of those that follow golf may be that "Tour Golf" is purse oriented.  But a significant number of people only get charged up when the sport is 'competitive' oriented, with the example of the competition of the Ryder cup (non-purse in theory) capturing the most enthusiasm.  If the tour can't keep the competition interest higher, with interesting venues and formats, I think they are in for a real and prolonged slide. 

Dick:

What I've been wondering during the post-golf-season economic fallout is whether the nature of the Tour might change. Right now it's kind of a three-tier Tour:

A) The majors and anything else Tiger plays in;

B) Big tourneys like the Memorial, the old Crosby clam-bake, the LA/Nissan Open, and some others that may not draw Tiger, but get Mickelson, Singh, Els, and assorted other top-50 players, and have some stature and favorable locations on the schedule;

C) Places like Milwaukee which get the leftovers, and are hurt by scheduling.

I think the all-exempt Tour, and the rise of the Nationwide Tour, has actually exacerbated this situation. Lots of guys, I'm convinced, don't "work hard" at promoting the Tour ala the 1960s and 70s, as you referenced, because they are primarily concerned with keeping their card, and these days that takes just a few high finishes. And there are lots of golfers jumping back and forth between 2nd-and 3rd tier tour events, and the Nationwide Tour, and making a pretty decent living -- enough to stave off the teaching pro/college coach line of work.

I wonder if going back to a system that, say, cuts off card renewal at the top 60, or 75, might inject some needed energy into the Tour. It needs it.

[Mark Smolens]

I'm not sure that criticism of Chicago as a venue for the PGA Tour in the summer is quite accurate -- and I certainly don't accept as valid an assertion that PGA Tour was not a large draw in Chicago. 

Yes, I will concede that the crowds were certainly down in '07 for the September playing of Tim F's bastard event, the "BMW Open," at least as compared to the prior years of the Western Open during 4th of July week.  But Chicago's attendance at Cog Hill during the previous Westerns in July was more than enough to generate enough income to keep the Evans Scholars in school.  Moreover, the fact that Mr. Woods appears to like the venue makes Cog Hill a place that will consistently attract the kinds of crowds that the WGA needs. . .

Nonetheless, it is equally true that notwithstanding the weather issues, the attendance at the BMW in St. Louis last year was allegedly outstanding -- which supports an assertion that areas which don't regularly have access to the tour will come out in force when it does come to town.

[PCCraig]

Sure the once-or-twice every decade major that comes to town. But the Western and the LaSalle Bank...nope. Last year the 3rd largest market in the country had no PGA, LPGA, or Senior Tour event. And even with no semi-major golf events the LaSalle Bank event was a dud in that @ a $10 weekly badge they still couldn't get more that 200 spectators a day.   

C'mon, that's ridiculous.  I was there with my kids.  There were thousands at the Nationwide event at the Glen Club.  Granted, it wasn't 30-40,000 like at Cog, but there was a nice crowd there when I was there....

Dave-

In the years that I caddied in the event I had seen more spectators at Junior events. There would maybe be 300 people on the course...including the players!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()