OT: LIV field

[Jim_Coleman]

   The majors don’t have a dog in the hunt in the business dispute between the Tour and LIV. The only rational basis for a major banning a qualified LIV player would be the Saudi angle. I would be surprised if that happens.

[Pete_Pittock]

The director of the TV broadcast might have nightmares if players in multiple groups are in contention with different finishing holes caused by the shotgun start.
Other shotgun start problems - eighteen finishing holes; overwhelmed practice facilities with all competitors having the same start time;  pace of play issues as it will only be a guesstimate until after Friday play. Will need a lot more cameras and camera crews. If they play in three-balls there will only be 18 groups, with more downtime for spectators. 


Saudi oil money with gas currently at $US 8.15/gallon


From a golf architecture standpoint, does a shotgun start diminish an architect's routing, since only 1/18 will experience it on any given day?

[David_Tepper]

Lou D. -

The general tenor on this board is that PGA Tour pros are a pampered and spoiled bunch.  Based on your comments, one might get the impression you think they are not spoiled and pampered enough.

DT   

[Niall C]

   The majors don’t have a dog in the hunt in the business dispute between the Tour and LIV. The only rational basis for a major banning a qualified LIV player would be the Saudi angle. I would be surprised if that happens.

Jim


I kind of get what you mean however I don't agree that they don't have a keen interest as to how this plays out. Each of them want's the best players playing at their tournament (same as the PGA Tour and every other tour) and therefore need to work with whatever tour the players are signed up to.


At the moment I'm sure they are paying lip service to the status quo but I strongly suspect that if in 2 or 3 years time the LIV Tour is still going and attracting more players that they will either work to tweak the World Rankings or simply ignore them for the purposes of inviting players from the LIV.


Niall

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Each of them want's the best players playing at their tournament (same as the PGA Tour and every other tour) and therefore need to work with whatever tour the players are signed up to.

Again, that's not really true. There's nothing stopping the U.S. Open or British Open from adopting the same qualifying criteria as the Players or PGA. Heck, replace the 20 PGA Pros with "qualifiers" and you'd have a much stronger field than you do now.

[Dave Doxey]

Competition for the PGA Tour can only be good.  Better for viewers and pros.


I wonder the impact of LIV on the European Tour.  Perhaps forcing a future merger with LIV?


Not much info on TV coverage.  I’m looking forward to seeing what LIV has to offer viewers.


As was said in an earlier post, the market will decide.

[Niall C]

Dave


The PGA Tour have a stake in the former Euro Tour, now DP Tour. Therefore can't see the DP Tour breaking ranks just yet since in all practical terms it has become a junior partner to the PGA Tour.


Niall

[Niall C]

Each of them want's the best players playing at their tournament (same as the PGA Tour and every other tour) and therefore need to work with whatever tour the players are signed up to.

Again, that's not really true. There's nothing stopping the U.S. Open or British Open from adopting the same qualifying criteria as the Players or PGA. Heck, replace the 20 PGA Pros with "qualifiers" and you'd have a much stronger field than you do now.

Erik


Presumably you are inferring that the Players and PGA has a stronger field ?


Niall

[Lou_Duran]

Lou D. -

The general tenor on this board is that PGA Tour pros are a pampered and spoiled bunch.  Based on your comments, one might get the impression you think they are not spoiled and pampered enough.

DT

Not sure that I'm an outlier, but there does seem to be a pattern.


I like PGA Tour golf a lot, and its composition of players, young, old and in between, from throughout the world.  As a group, in comparison to other sports, artistic endeavors, and most professional stations, I think that they comport themselves well above average.


My attention to this whole matter has more to do with Phil's misstep originally, and how his position vis-a-vis who controls and benefits from the players' images and content seems to have been turned into something more insidious and personal.  I am unaware that he was demanding a higher distribution of purses and other means of compensation based on performance.  If he was, so near the end of his PGA Tour career, the benefits mostly inure to his successors.  And while I believe that it takes all the players to make the Show successful, there is some merit to matching rewards in line with the 80/20 principle (Pareto).


I am less impressed with the Tour bureaucracy, its substantial "retained earnings", and what appears to be a lack of transparency in its financial structure (one of the things that impresses me about our club is the complete, detailed, audited financial statements we get each year- sunlight is a great disinfectant).  I am sure that there are good reasons for its opaque structure; I just don't know that it benefits its broad membership or the consumer.


Now, one may ask, how is this any of my business.   Well, the Tour operates as a non-profit, exempted from paying all sorts of taxes that even some charities can't escape (see linked article below).  It also relies on thousands of unpaid volunteers to operate its events.  I've worked several tournaments as a volunteer out of my own freewill.  I'd like to see a better utilization of its proceeds outside the bureaucracy and a more competitive environment where its players, without being coerced, will choose to play most of its tournaments because the compensation is more commensurate with the quality of play. 


 https://www.forbes.com/sites/monteburke/2013/05/08/the-pga-tour-a-not-for-profit-money-machine/?sh=5b9f99de5733

[Mark Kiely]

Kevin Na just posted a message on Instagram announcing his resignation from the PGA Tour.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Presumably you are inferring that the Players and PGA has a stronger field?

They do.

[Mike_Trenham]

Presumably you are inferring that the Players and PGA has a stronger field?

They do.

Yes - but the fields for the Open and US Open are much more interesting and create better storylines.

[Sean_A]

Presumably you are inferring that the Players and PGA has a stronger field?

They do.

Yes - but the fields for the Open and US Open are much more interesting and create better storylines.

Indeed. The open qualifying aspect of two majors is wonderful. Besides, who says strength of the field is that important especially given the somewhat subjective nature of world rankings? The field strength of majors is plenty good enough. We must remember that somebody made these events majors...not the organizers of the events themselves. So a certain degree of latitude as to who qualifies is most welcome as far as I am concerned. Its part of what make the majors different from one another.


Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

Lou D. -

The general tenor on this board is that PGA Tour pros are a pampered and spoiled bunch.  Based on your comments, one might get the impression you think they are not spoiled and pampered enough.

DT

Not sure that I'm an outlier, but there does seem to be a pattern.


I like PGA Tour golf a lot, and its composition of players, young, old and in between, from throughout the world.  As a group, in comparison to other sports, artistic endeavors, and most professional stations, I think that they comport themselves well above average.


My attention to this whole matter has more to do with Phil's misstep originally, and how his position vis-a-vis who controls and benefits from the players' images and content seems to have been turned into something more insidious and personal.  I am unaware that he was demanding a higher distribution of purses and other means of compensation based on performance.  If he was, so near the end of his PGA Tour career, the benefits mostly inure to his successors.  And while I believe that it takes all the players to make the Show successful, there is some merit to matching rewards in line with the 80/20 principle (Pareto).


I am less impressed with the Tour bureaucracy, its substantial "retained earnings", and what appears to be a lack of transparency in its financial structure (one of the things that impresses me about our club is the complete, detailed, audited financial statements we get each year- sunlight is a great disinfectant).  I am sure that there are good reasons for its opaque structure; I just don't know that it benefits its broad membership or the consumer.


Now, one may ask, how is this any of my business.   Well, the Tour operates as a non-profit, exempted from paying all sorts of taxes that even some charities can't escape (see linked article below).  It also relies on thousands of unpaid volunteers to operate its events.  I've worked several tournaments as a volunteer out of my own freewill.  I'd like to see a better utilization of its proceeds outside the bureaucracy and a more competitive environment where its players, without being coerced, will choose to play most of its tournaments because the compensation is more commensurate with the quality of play. 


 https://www.forbes.com/sites/monteburke/2013/05/08/the-pga-tour-a-not-for-profit-money-machine/?sh=5b9f99de5733

Lou,

You and I have been both critical of the Tour relying so heavily on unpaid volunteers to make tournaments run.

However, if the PGA Tour started compensating these volunteers, prize pools for players would almost certainly go down, not up...which it seems from your previous post you are implying player compensation should increase.

P.S.  The NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL, etc. are all non-profits, so the fact that the Tour gets this benefit also is neither unusual or surprising.

[David_Tepper]

Kalen -

The NFL ceased to operate as a non-profit in 2015:

https://www.brysonlawfirm.com/news/122-touchdown-pay-up-nfl-is-a-nonprofit-no-more.html#gref

DT

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Yes - but the fields for the Open and US Open are much more interesting and create better storylines.

That's not the argument; I'm only pushing back against statements like "majors want the strongest possible fields." They clearly don't.

[Wayne_Kozun]

All that said, it wouldn't surprise me if the NFL and NBA eventually had international teams. If enough money can be made, why not?

{Clears throat} Canada here. We haven't been subsumed into the US quite yet.

[Kalen Braley]

All that said, it wouldn't surprise me if the NFL and NBA eventually had international teams. If enough money can be made, why not?

{Clears throat} Canada here. We haven't been subsumed into the US quite yet.

Hilarious


Nice catch!   


P.S.  Thank you David, I wasn't aware the NFL gave up thier's in 2015.

[Bruce Katona]

Wayne:

If we ask nicely (we're Americans, we won't) can we subsume our northern neighbors into the US?

[Greg Clark]

Others besides Na have supposedly resigned as well.  It is a tactic to be able to play in the U.S. Open.  The Tour can't suspend a player that is no longer a member.  The idea being that the USGA wouldn't be able to honor a PGA Tour suspension.  I'm not sure they would have anyway.

Even if world golf points are given to LIV events, the current fields are small and don't have a lot of quality depth.  As a result, the points won't be great.  Couple that with only playing in a few events, and NA will see a big drop in his ranking by next year.  He may not be eligible for any of the majors as a result.  He'll have a bigger bank account.

[John Kavanaugh]

I was just accidentally exposed to about 30 minutes of a Champions Tour event. My God. Fat fucks in bucket hats running from a long puttered German Freddy Kruger. They are already dead.


The LIV will take any fresh meat that’s ever won a major. Sorry Charles.

[Peter Pallotta]

Greg - your post reminds me that I can count on one hand the number of tour players who say that "careers are defined by major championships"  -- and that all of those are young and still in their primes, have already won at least one major title, and are (rightly so) media and corporate darlings who can strive for greatness secure in the knowledge that "the money will take care of itself". For all the rest, the vast majority of tour players,  they are secure only in the knowledge that money will most definitely *not* take care of itself, and so are neither romantic about winning championships or sentimental about the reasons they play the game, nor all that much interested in aspiring to greatness and having their careers defined by majors, both of which must seem to them (probably rightly) as luxuries that they cannot afford and dreams that, to use an old fashioned phrase, are 'above their station in life'. Now, that's not what fans want to think about our sports stars, because we have no real stake in the matter and so prefer to happily indulge our romanticism and child-like hero worship -- but I can't really blame Kevin Na or Lee Westwood or DJ or even a young Mr. Piot for that.

[John Kavanaugh]

The fans want to watch people they know win. Tiger taught us that. No. Jack taught us that. Tiger reinforced it.


The LIV tour is the fans tour. We will soak it up like a ducks wing in Valdez.

[Brian_Ewen]

 

[Lou_Duran]

To be clear, I wasn't suggesting that volunteers should be paid.  Most are happy to be part of the events.  The Tour and the sponsors could be a bit more generous in terms of uniforms, food, and making it easier to serve, but these are very minor points.  I am suggesting that less money should stay with the bureaucracy and more allocated to the players, and that the response to competition might be more consistent and measured.  I also believe that the Tour's financial structure should be very transparent.