I translated that last bit for everyone from the OP! ;D
----------------------------------------------------
Perhaps accurate if:
1) The Big 10 or SEC played only a 3 quarters instead of 4...;-)....a game of 45 minutes instead of 60.
2. Argentina played England in a match of only 67.5 minutes instead of 90.
3. There were no tryouts for the team or risk and tension of NOT being able to play - and get paid - unless you performed well.
4. Nobody really knew what you needed to score to win. The game would just end and you look up at a scoreboard and IT tells you if you won or not..
I dont begrudge the LIV players who did a classic "Steve Miller Band" play and took the money and ran. But, fellas, man the F up and own your decision and stop trying to butter your bread on both sides! According to El Jefe White Shark, the LIV tour is viable and not interested in discussions with the PGA or DP tours. Apparently, others agree with him. This fish stinks from its white head! Have your own "Masters" or wait on an INVITE from ANGC. Feel free to qualify for the US and British Opens. PGA? Sorry, you can have a LIV Championship.
OWGR points? NO, and a hard NO as LIV golfers are playing an abbreviated spoiled man's pussy tour. Count your money, boys. Hope it buys you happiness. But, for all the money they are making, they sure are an angry bunch of rich guys.
I translated that last bit for everyone from the OP! ;D
----------------------------------------------------
Perhaps accurate if:
1) The Big 10 or SEC played only a 3 quarters instead of 4...;-)....a game of 45 minutes instead of 60.
2. Argentina played England in a match of only 67.5 minutes instead of 90.
3. There were no tryouts for the team or risk and tension of NOT being able to play - and get paid - unless you performed well.
4. Nobody really knew what you needed to score to win. The game would just end and you look up at a scoreboard and IT tells you if you won or not..
I dont begrudge the LIV players who did a classic "Steve Miller Band" play and took the money and ran. But, fellas, man the F up and own your decision and stop trying to butter your bread on both sides! According to El Jefe White Shark, the LIV tour is viable and not interested in discussions with the PGA or DP tours. Apparently, others agree with him. This fish stinks from its white head! Have your own "Masters" or wait on an INVITE from ANGC. Feel free to qualify for the US and British Opens. PGA? Sorry, you can have a LIV Championship.
OWGR points? NO, and a hard NO as LIV golfers are playing an abbreviated spoiled man's pussy tour. Count your money, boys. Hope it buys you happiness. But, for all the money they are making, they sure are an angry bunch of rich guys.
It is really fatiguing how this cite messes with posts with the "Color/Size" paragraph nonsense.
Have been editing my OP for 10 mins and it is still not right.
Thanks, Kalen.
"OWGR points? NO, and a hard NO as LIV golfers are playing an abbreviated spoiled man's pussy tour. Count your money, boys. Hope it buys you happiness. But, for all the money they are making, they sure are an angry bunch of rich guys."
Kalen -You nailed it. Thanks!
DT
If the LIV tour switches to 90 hole events next year, would you recommend giving them more OWGR points than the PGA tour?
You can hear it in the talking points. Phil just said, "The PGATour will never again have all the best players."
Somebody is crafting that kind of messaging.
You can hear it in the talking points. Phil just said, "The PGATour will never again have all the best players."
Somebody is crafting that kind of messaging.
I think that can be said TODAY. The LIV dudes could just look at the OWGR rankings and cherry pick who they wanted to offer 7-8 figures to. That is NOT a sustainable model.
Plus, it works well (for the House of Saud) when oil was at $125+ when this mess all started.
Watch what happens when oil falls and their business model is pressured to actually sustain itself.
Oil is below $90 today.
It was $40 just two years ago.
How patient will the Saudis really be?
Why so angry? Even the NFL is streaming games on Amazon.
Why so angry? Even the NFL is streaming games on Amazon.
If the LIV tour switches to 90 hole events next year, would you recommend giving them more OWGR points than the PGA tour?Ok, forget the number of holes for a moment.
Saturday I got home from golfing my own ball and needed some dead time to unwind. Went to YouTube and watched the last 30 mins of LIV. Cam vs DJ with a taste of Pat Perez. The shotgun start is the best thing I have ever seen from strictly an entertainment perspective. Betting on the team event as opposed to individuals is what makes me tick. Just got a Four Aces tattoo on my virtual ass.
When an event like Wentworth is reduced to 54 holes for extenuating circumstances, do they only earn 75% of their original OWGR points?
I appreciate Peter's line of questions here.
There was once a time in which major championships were determined after 36 holes on the final day. When they changed to 18 a day for 4 days there was a public backlash that the change was going to water down the challenge and reduce the number of "real" champions.
There was also a time in which major championship playoffs were 18 holes. When that rule was changed there was a public backlash that the change was going to water down the challenge and reduce the number of "real" champions.
There was also a time in which the British open was contested over 3, 12 hole round, the next year 2, 18 hole rounds, and the next year 4, 9 hole rounds.
The point being. 72 holes of stroke play over 4 days is somewhat arbitrary. Saying its the only way tournaments can be played is not historically accurate in the slightest. Assuming that golf should not or can not be played in a different format is not accurate and biased. Not wanting change is very different than not recognizing that change is possible, change has happened before, and change is likely to occur in the future.
Why is the 100m sprint the crown jewel of track and field and the 1600 meter is relegated to non-prime time?
Pointing out (correctly) that final round and playoff formats have changed over the years, and then using that to say that 72 holes of stroke play is “arbitrary” requires a leap of logic over the Grand Canyon. 72 holes has been THE standard in professional golf for longer than any of us have been alive; that’s not “arbitrary”.Within the last 2 decades the pga tour has held 90 hole stroke play events, 126 hole match play events, Stableford events, and 2 man team events. 72 stroke play may be common, but it is not the only standard.
The playoff formats were changed for TV, and we could argue the merits of that endlessly. But that is quite different from moving from 72 holes over 4 days to 54 holes over 3 days.Is it? Professional Golf as it exist today is primarily an entertainment product. We all like to believe tournaments are pillars of pure sport and competition, but outside of the majors we all know that's not true. Even then the majors are a balance between pure competition and entertainment spectacle. An entertainment product that has been continuously tuned and tweaked for broad consumption. So if a 36 hole Saturday finish in a major is moved to 18 Saturday and 18 Sunday and if an 18 hole playoff is shortened to sudden death or a short series of holes all in the name of providing a better entertainment product, then why is it so far fetched to think LIV's format is not based on the same logic, or that logic is flawed?
One of the really odd things about this debate ON THIS SITE is that little or no attention is being paid to the shotgun start. I think all of us SHOULD understand that even a split tee start is problematic in terms of every player playing the same golf course, but a shotgun is well beyond that. To think that any sequence of holes is going to be the same as any other sequence of holes is just silly, and every person on a golf course architecture sire knows that. Or should…This is a continuation of golf being presented for entertainment first. If one was going to watch the entirety of a LIV tournament it would take them ~15 hours over 3 days. If one was going to attempt to watch the entirety of a PGA Tour event it would take them more than 3 times as long. The shotgun allow the event to be condensed in a way that afford more complete viewership.
Has anyone in this thread actually seen the criteria or is everyone just parroting what their preferred media source is saying?
The NBA could change to three quarters and no results would change. They’d just play hard earlier.So you're saying depth and foul trouble don't matter in the NBA? Interesting. I coached basketball for a long, long time, though never in the NBA, of course, and I always found the fourth quarter to be a test of those things, among others.
Ben,Pointing out (correctly) that final round and playoff formats have changed over the years, and then using that to say that 72 holes of stroke play is “arbitrary” requires a leap of logic over the Grand Canyon. 72 holes has been THE standard in professional golf for longer than any of us have been alive; that’s not “arbitrary”.Within the last 2 decades the pga tour has held 90 hole stroke play events, 126 hole match play events, Stableford events, and 2 man team events. 72 stroke play may be common, but it is not the only standard.The playoff formats were changed for TV, and we could argue the merits of that endlessly. But that is quite different from moving from 72 holes over 4 days to 54 holes over 3 days.Is it? Professional Golf as it exist today is primarily an entertainment product. We all like to believe tournaments are pillars of pure sport and competition, but outside of the majors we all know that's not true. Even then the majors are a balance between pure competition and entertainment spectacle. An entertainment product that has been continuously tuned and tweaked for broad consumption. So if a 36 hole Saturday finish in a major is moved to 18 Saturday and 18 Sunday and if an 18 hole playoff is shortened to sudden death or a short series of holes all in the name of providing a better entertainment product, then why is it so far fetched to think LIV's format is not based on the same logic, or that logic is flawed?One of the really odd things about this debate ON THIS SITE is that little or no attention is being paid to the shotgun start. I think all of us SHOULD understand that even a split tee start is problematic in terms of every player playing the same golf course, but a shotgun is well beyond that. To think that any sequence of holes is going to be the same as any other sequence of holes is just silly, and every person on a golf course architecture sire knows that. Or should…This is a continuation of golf being presented for entertainment first. If one was going to watch the entirety of a LIV tournament it would take them ~15 hours over 3 days. If one was going to attempt to watch the entirety of a PGA Tour event it would take them more than 3 times as long. The shotgun allow the event to be condensed in a way that afford more complete viewership.
The shotgun format has virtually zero bearing on the leaderboard during the first 2 days. And any gripe would be similar, if not less impactful, than the morning/afternoon split you see during Thur/Fri tee times on the PGA tour. There is some gripe to the format impacting the last day, but its still also very little. The leaders still tee off on 1, 2nd place group tees off on 2, 3rd place on 3, etc... So for 17 holes you're still watching the leaders play a hole immediately after the chasers did. The only difference is what happens with the the players playing different 18th holes. But this is an area where the broadcast could do a good job of walking the viewer through the challenge faced by one player finishing up on 18 and another finishing up on 1. Especially being that both players have already played the other hole during their round. At that point you could easily speak to how hard the hole is playing on the day and how the other leader played it, to better frame the current action.
But, if viewers are unable to adapt, one modification I could see being made to the format in this regard is for the final day have the last 4 or 5 tee times all starting on 1 in sequence, and the last place 3 some starting on 12. That way the top 12-15 players would play in the sequence we're accustom to, but the overall broadcast time is still kept manageable.
Regardless. There is a significant amount of "they can't do that because that's not the way it's been done" mentality around the format, which simply isn't true. The format that golf is played under has and will continue to change. Assuming it can not change or discrediting any change is short sided.
A top skilled golfer is a top skilled golfer, regardless of which tour he plays on. Pretending otherwise is silly.
The NBA could change to three quarters and no results would change. They’d just play hard earlier.So you're saying depth and foul trouble don't matter in the NBA? Interesting. I coached basketball for a long, long time, though never in the NBA, of course, and I always found the fourth quarter to be a test of those things, among others.
Ben,
You are incorrect, and you are welcome to go the OWGR website and read it for yourself. Neither I nor anybody else has ever asserted that 72 holes with a 36 hole cut is the ONLY way that tournament golf is played, and the only format for which ranking points are awarded.
But if you are claiming that 72/36 is NOT the standard you are just wrong, and if you are claiming that somehow 54/0 is comparable, you are more than wrong. Sorry.
Ben,
You are incorrect, and you are welcome to go the OWGR website and read it for yourself. Neither I nor anybody else has ever asserted that 72 holes with a 36 hole cut is the ONLY way that tournament golf is played, and the only format for which ranking points are awarded.
But if you are claiming that 72/36 is NOT the standard you are just wrong, and if you are claiming that somehow 54/0 is comparable, you are more than wrong. Sorry.
A.G.
I feel like this point is worth reiterating:
There is a significant amount of "they can't do that because that's not the way it's been done" mentality around the format, which simply isn't true.
This seems to be where you're head is living these days. Especially when reading your reply to Peter's 90 holes question.
My participation in this thread was started on this notion that how things are done today are not the only way they could be done. While the current structure of the OWGR does not mesh with what LIV has started with, I don't see where either is set in stone, especially since LIV is operating in its infancy and the OWGR very recently changed how it operates.
Its been very clear from the start that LIV is about the money and grudges, not the integrity of the actual golf tournaments.
"Just got a Four Aces tattoo on my virtual ass."
I have minor issues with things like 54 holes, no cut, no spots for local players. I have a big problem with LIV's lack of discernible criteria for qualification. I can turn on a PGA Tour event, and despite a handful of sponsors' exemptions, I know that every player teeing it up earned their spot in the field under the criteria established by the Tour. You can argue that the Tour should change it's rules, that it allows too many older players in because of life memberships, or other earnings based exemptions. There's a good argument to be made that a non-competitive Davis Love should not be in PGA Tour fields. But the fact is that he has qualified under the Tour's rules. Meanwhile, Chase Koepka and Peter Uihlein have had years to prove that they do not belong in top tier competitive golf tournaments. I don't know anyone getting into PGA Tour events based on who is in their family. Combine that with small fields, which means much of the field is made up of guys who simply couldn't qualify for the PGA Tour, and, well, I'm not that impressed that Cam Smith and DJ can beat 12-15 good players and a bunch of tomato cans.
Can we stop pretending that there isn't already an algorithm that determines the best golfers in the world? It would be a tool worth creating in determining how much and who to sponsor.
The NBA could change to three quarters and no results would change. They’d just play hard earlier.So you're saying depth and foul trouble don't matter in the NBA? Interesting. I coached basketball for a long, long time, though never in the NBA, of course, and I always found the fourth quarter to be a test of those things, among others.
You have to respect that rare trait that distinguishes the difference between winners, maintainers and losers. 12 fewer minutes will not elevate a pretender.
All that being said it seems the board can say any event they want gets points as the Chevron World Challenge earned points with no cut, and very limited field.Tiger's event:
You could not be more wrong about my position. I have absolutely NO ties to ANY ranking system, and I would have no problem with the OWGR rules being changed. But just as with the lawsuit claiming restraint of trade by guys who left for millions of dollars, these guys HAD to know that they were going to a tour that simply does not meet the current criteria for ranking points.Ben,
You are incorrect, and you are welcome to go the OWGR website and read it for yourself. Neither I nor anybody else has ever asserted that 72 holes with a 36 hole cut is the ONLY way that tournament golf is played, and the only format for which ranking points are awarded.
But if you are claiming that 72/36 is NOT the standard you are just wrong, and if you are claiming that somehow 54/0 is comparable, you are more than wrong. Sorry.
A.G.
I feel like this point is worth reiterating:
There is a significant amount of "they can't do that because that's not the way it's been done" mentality around the format, which simply isn't true.
This seems to be where you're head is living these days. Especially when reading your reply to Peter's 90 holes question.
My participation in this thread was started on this notion that how things are done today are not the only way they could be done. While the current structure of the OWGR does not mesh with what LIV has started with, I don't see where either is set in stone, especially since LIV is operating in its infancy and the OWGR very recently changed how it operates.
To my surprise, LIV's five tournaments so far have had a better ranking than the five PGA Tour tournaments they have gone up against. The LIV tournament ranking has also improved from week to week as more players have been signed.
Make of it what you will.
Isn’t a fundamental issue with LIV that players are getting access to limited field, no cut events for reasons other than golfing merit - and may continue to do so for years even if they play terribly?
If OWGR points were to be available, a contracted player could come last by 10 shots every week for a couple of years and still earn considerably more points, and a higher ranking, than someone who was beating half the field every week on the PGA or European Tours.
i think in the aggregate LIV golf suffers from a case of too many Bs, and the OWGR has sniffed it out
Bogus Tour Backing
Bogus Business Plan
Bogus Team Structures
Bogus Strength of field
Bogus Qualifying System & Signing structure
Bogus Tourney setups with 54 hole, no cut, shotgun starts
Bogus Incentive to perform with prize money counting against signing bonuses
Bogus Tournament coverage
Bogus Lawsuits
Bogus Premises that other Tours must accept them with open arms
P.S. I would use Wrestling as an analogy. There are plenty of legitimate forms to watch, Freestyle, Greco-Roman, etc in various competitions at the high school, college, and Olympic levels.
But if you wanna watch "Wrastlin" then turn on WWE ...and no doubt those guys certainly get paid much better to boot.
LIV is effectively the WWE of golf.
Has anyone in this thread actually seen the criteria or is everyone just parroting what their preferred media source is saying?
Someone posted a list to twitter yesterday. I can't vouch for its veracity or exclusivity, but the criteria are all things that have been discussed in media reports:
1. An embrace of inclusion and promoting non-discriminatory practices.
2. Competitions contested over 72 holes, except for developmental tours (like the Abema TV Tour, the Alps Golf Tour, or the Europro Tour, among others) which are permitted to be 54 hole events.
3. An open annual qualifying school held before the start of each season.
4. A field size on average of 75 players over the course of the season.
5. a 36-hole cut, whether playing 54 or 72 holes.
6. A clear opportunity to progress to a full member tour, that is, to one of the six members of the International Federation of PGA Tours.
7. Reasonable access for local and regional players (i.e. Monday qualifiers) at each of its tournaments.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/oct/05/liv-claims-breakaway-rebels-can-earn-world-ranking-points-in-mena-deal (https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/oct/05/liv-claims-breakaway-rebels-can-earn-world-ranking-points-in-mena-deal)
I'm curious to know how an alliance with the Mena Tour will allow LIV Golf players to earn OWGR points, when the format of their tournaments are STILL at odds with the criteria listed above.
How can you get points for an affiliation with a tour that hasn’t had a tournament in 2 and a half years? This just gets better by the minute.
How can you get points for an affiliation with a tour that hasn’t had a tournament in 2 and a half years? This just gets better by the minute.
Exactly Rob,
It wreaks of desperation to be leeching on to a Tour like that. And then to hear high profile players like Phil try to justify it? Just pathetic....
So the MENA Tour which hasn't held a tournament for two years and was previously recognised by OWGR has been dropped by OWGR now that they are looking to do a deal with LIV. Is it not about time that we all acknowledged that the OWGR opposition to LIV has nothing to do with limited fields and all that and everything to do with some, if not all, of the members of the OWGR trying to protect their businesses ?
Niall
So the MENA Tour which hasn't held a tournament for two years and was previously recognised by OWGR has been dropped by OWGR now that they are looking to do a deal with LIV. Is it not about time that we all acknowledged that the OWGR opposition to LIV has nothing to do with limited fields and all that and everything to do with some, if not all, of the members of the OWGR trying to protect their businesses ?:o ???
shouldn't the PGA Champions Tour players also earn these points.
shouldn't the PGA Champions Tour players also earn these points.
If the purpose of the OWGR was to rank order the best players in the world, the Champions tour events should get world rankings points. Unfortunately, identifying the best players in the world is not the purpose of the OWGR.
This only matters because 4 events (some might also care about WGC events and the Players) use the OWGR as an entry qualifier. OWGR was used by those events because it claimed to identify the best players in the world, the OWGR clearly doesn't do that now. I'd be quite happy if some programmer wrote a new program to better attempt to identify the best players in the world and the Open, US Open, Masters and PGA moved to that system.
shouldn't the PGA Champions Tour players also earn these points.
If the purpose of the OWGR was to rank order the best players in the world, the Champions tour events should get world rankings points. Unfortunately, identifying the best players in the world is not the purpose of the OWGR.
This only matters because 4 events (some might also care about WGC events and the Players) use the OWGR as an entry qualifier. OWGR was used by those events because it claimed to identify the best players in the world, the OWGR clearly doesn't do that now. I'd be quite happy if some programmer wrote a new program to better attempt to identify the best players in the world and the Open, US Open, Masters and PGA moved to that system.
I agree. OWGR is meant to identify the best players. Not the best players which play on a tour which meets their requirements. The OWGR should alter requirements to match the landscape of professional golf. Otherwise it isn't doing its job. In which case, what is the point?
Ciao
shouldn't the PGA Champions Tour players also earn these points.
If the purpose of the OWGR was to rank order the best players in the world, the Champions tour events should get world rankings points. Unfortunately, identifying the best players in the world is not the purpose of the OWGR.
This only matters because 4 events (some might also care about WGC events and the Players) use the OWGR as an entry qualifier. OWGR was used by those events because it claimed to identify the best players in the world, the OWGR clearly doesn't do that now. I'd be quite happy if some programmer wrote a new program to better attempt to identify the best players in the world and the Open, US Open, Masters and PGA moved to that system.
I agree. OWGR is meant to identify the best players. Not the best players which play on a tour which meets their requirements. The OWGR should alter requirements to match the landscape of professional golf. Otherwise it isn't doing its job. In which case, what is the point?
Ciao
Well, actually the OWGR website says that the ranking system measures “relative performance” on “eligibile golf tours”. Nowhere do they claim to be identifying the “best” players, and the word “eligible” seems important. You are advocating that the OWGR change the standards, rather than that the LIV comply with standards that were already long since in place.
Which simply brings us back to the original problem. Knowing that the LIV format was radically different in multiple respects from “eligible” tours worldwide, players went there, as is/was their right. So live with that choice instead of asking others to then accommodate. It’s what grown ups do.
It really isn’t very complicated.
Well, actually the OWGR website says that the ranking system measures “relative performance” on “eligibile golf tours”. Nowhere do they claim to be identifying the “best” players, and the word “eligible” seems important. You are advocating that the OWGR change the standards, rather than that the LIV comply with standards that were already long since in place.
Which simply brings us back to the original problem. Knowing that the LIV format was radically different in multiple respects from “eligible” tours worldwide, players went there, as is/was their right. So live with that choice instead of asking others to then accommodate. It’s what grown ups do.
It really isn’t very complicated.
Knowing that the LIV format was radically different in multiple respects from “eligible” tours worldwide
Its can't be difficult to come up with a formula suitable for LIV. Maybe points earned are worth 25% or whatever percentage of US Tour points. It makes it difficult for LIV guys to make the grade, but not impossible.
Ciao
You are advocating that the OWGR change the standards, rather than that the LIV comply with standards that were already long since in place.
Its can't be difficult to come up with a formula suitable for LIV. Maybe points earned are worth 25% or whatever percentage of US Tour points. It makes it difficult for LIV guys to make the grade, but not impossible.
Ciao
It can’t be difficult for the LIV Tour to come up with a format suitable for receiving ranking points. 72 holes, tee times, a 36 hole cut, ALL players competing for actual prize money instead of some playing for credits against their signing bonuses.
You know; kind of like EVERY pro Tour that gets OWGR points.
Or you could look at the LIV guys as entitled to special treatment that no other Tour gets. That would make good sense.
Its can't be difficult to come up with a formula suitable for LIV. Maybe points earned are worth 25% or whatever percentage of US Tour points. It makes it difficult for LIV guys to make the grade, but not impossible.
Ciao
It can’t be difficult for the LIV Tour to come up with a format suitable for receiving ranking points. 72 holes, tee times, a 36 hole cut, ALL players competing for actual prize money instead of some playing for credits against their signing bonuses.
You know; kind of like EVERY pro Tour that gets OWGR points.
Or you could look at the LIV guys as entitled to special treatment that no other Tour gets. That would make good sense.
A ranking system's job is to identify the best players. That's all that really needs saying. Otherwise there is no point. You could theoretically have loads of top 100 players not labelled as such because of their tour. Sorry, that makes no sense.
Ciao
Its can't be difficult to come up with a formula suitable for LIV. Maybe points earned are worth 25% or whatever percentage of US Tour points. It makes it difficult for LIV guys to make the grade, but not impossible.
Ciao
It can’t be difficult for the LIV Tour to come up with a format suitable for receiving ranking points. 72 holes, tee times, a 36 hole cut, ALL players competing for actual prize money instead of some playing for credits against their signing bonuses.
You know; kind of like EVERY pro Tour that gets OWGR points.
Or you could look at the LIV guys as entitled to special treatment that no other Tour gets. That would make good sense.
A ranking system's job is to identify the best players. That's all that really needs saying. Otherwise there is no point. You could theoretically have loads of top 100 players not labelled as such because of their tour. Sorry, that makes no sense.
Ciao
Michael Jordan was almost certainly the “best” basketball player in the world in 1994 and 1995, given that he had been the NBA MVP in 1993 and was again in 1996.
But in 1994 and most of the 1995 basketball season, Jordan was playing minor league baseball. (Minor league in a different sport; see what I did there?) So Jordan didn’t win the MVP, o make the All-Star team, or win any awards,or get to play in the playoffs. Perhaps more to the point, I suspect Jordan knew all that before he left the NBA, and I don’t recall him bitching because he wasn’t getting recognition.
See, even though he was the “best”, his “relative performance” in basketball just wasn’t any good at all.
Michael Jordan was almost certainly the “best” basketball player in the world in 1994 and 1995, given that he had been the NBA MVP in 1993 and was again in 1996.
But in 1994 and most of the 1995 basketball season, Jordan was playing minor league baseball. (Minor league in a different sport; see what I did there?) So Jordan didn’t win the MVP, o make the All-Star team, or win any awards,or get to play in the playoffs. Perhaps more to the point, I suspect Jordan knew all that before he left the NBA, and I don’t recall him bitching because he wasn’t getting recognition.
See, even though he was the “best”, his “relative performance” in basketball just wasn’t any good at all.
When a player comes straight out of college and is invited to play on LIV and wins an event, there is no way of determining that he is a better golfer than his college teammate who was not invited to play on the LIV tour. The OWGR system is based on players qualifying for tours and events on merit.What about when player receive a sponsor's exemption into a PGA Tour event and wins?
You know what just continually shocks me about this particular debate in this particular place?Can you quantify how much of a difference there is between a shotgun start and playing split tees with half the field going off of 10, or having a morning and afternoon wave with varying weather? At least with a shotgun, the weather will impact the field equally.
That you guys NEVER focus on the difference that a shotgun start makes compared to playing the course the way it was freaking designed to be played. And this from guys who claim to be all about the subject.
If you don’t think it matters a LOT, or that it fundamentally changes the golf course, you just aren’t paying attention. I’ve written this before, but that to me is as big a deal as the 54 hole no cut aspects of LIV. Maybe bigger.
playing the course the way it was freaking designed to be played.Right, because at no time has a PGA Tour sanctioned event ever flipped the 9's, or changed the hole sequence, or deviated from the original design in any way.
You are advocating that the OWGR change the standards, rather than that the LIV comply with standards that were already long since in place.
A.G. I'm advocating that the 4 tournaments people really care about use a system that identifies the best players in the world, not the current system that as stated ranks only those players playing on the tours the ranking system deems eligible.
The USGA, R&A, Masters and PGA shouldn't care where the golfers in their championship play other than the week of their event. They should want the best players in the field.
On the second page Tim Cronin mentions the Sagarin Golf Rankings, something like that is what I want the majors to use as a qualifying method.
Ben, I feel certain that if you go and sit in a quiet place and just think a bit, you'll see the difference between course changes made over time (in the case of The Masters, nearly 90 years) vs a shotgun start. I know you can do it, because I know you can eventually understand the difference in playing holes in the same sequence IN A GIVEN YEAR vs. random hole assignments and hole order. The split tee thing is a complete red herring, because when that device is used for a LARGE field, each player plays the course in the same order as everyone else one time.When a player comes straight out of college and is invited to play on LIV and wins an event, there is no way of determining that he is a better golfer than his college teammate who was not invited to play on the LIV tour. The OWGR system is based on players qualifying for tours and events on merit.What about when player receive a sponsor's exemption into a PGA Tour event and wins?You know what just continually shocks me about this particular debate in this particular place?Can you quantify how much of a difference there is between a shotgun start and playing split tees with half the field going off of 10, or having a morning and afternoon wave with varying weather? At least with a shotgun, the weather will impact the field equally.
That you guys NEVER focus on the difference that a shotgun start makes compared to playing the course the way it was freaking designed to be played. And this from guys who claim to be all about the subject.
If you don’t think it matters a LOT, or that it fundamentally changes the golf course, you just aren’t paying attention. I’ve written this before, but that to me is as big a deal as the 54 hole no cut aspects of LIV. Maybe bigger.playing the course the way it was freaking designed to be played.Right, because at no time has a PGA Tour sanctioned event ever flipped the 9's, or changed the hole sequence, or deviated from the original design in any way.
I guess in your eyes the only Masters that counts is the first one, as that was the only Masters played the way it was freaking designed to be played?
You are advocating that the OWGR change the standards, rather than that the LIV comply with standards that were already long since in place.
A.G. I'm advocating that the 4 tournaments people really care about use a system that identifies the best players in the world, not the current system that as stated ranks only those players playing on the tours the ranking system deems eligible.
The USGA, R&A, Masters and PGA shouldn't care where the golfers in their championship play other than the week of their event. They should want the best players in the field.
On the second page Tim Cronin mentions the Sagarin Golf Rankings, something like that is what I want the majors to use as a qualifying method.
Well said! The majors should invite the best players. If LIV consists of "has beens" as some have said, the PGA Tour has nothing to fear.
AG,
It seems pretty clear to me that you are unaware that the European Tour has multiple times used a Shotgun start during an event.
It also seems preposterous that you believe it would be impossible to measure the impact a shotgun start could have on tournament scoring.
Why are they so concerned about ranking points and majors? They didn’t leave for prestige; they left for the money; they’re making more money. Most decisions require a balancing of pros and cons. For some, money trumped prestige. For others, prestige trumped money. This is a have your cake and eat it too situation.
Why are they so concerned about ranking points and majors? They didn’t leave for prestige; they left for the money; they’re making more money. Most decisions require a balancing of pros and cons. For some, money trumped prestige. For others, prestige trumped money. This is a have your cake and eat it too situation.
That is 100% what Harold Varner articulated in his own humble way.
He knew the issues when he signed the deal and has nothing but positive things to say.
I dont think anyone begrudges any of the "LIVers" who sought the fast payday.
It's just so ridiculous that many of them want to double-dip.
Why are they so concerned about ranking points and majors? They didn’t leave for prestige; they left for the money; they’re making more money. Most decisions require a balancing of pros and cons. For some, money trumped prestige. For others, prestige trumped money. This is a have your cake and eat it too situation.
That is 100% what Harold Varner articulated in his own humble way.
He knew the issues when he signed the deal and has nothing but positive things to say.
I dont think anyone begrudges any of the "LIVers" who sought the fast payday.
It's just so ridiculous that many of them want to double-dip.
So is it also ridiculous that guys on the US Tour want to "double-dip" also by playing on other tours and also the majors ?
Niall
Why are they so concerned about ranking points and majors? They didn’t leave for prestige; they left for the money; they’re making more money. Most decisions require a balancing of pros and cons. For some, money trumped prestige. For others, prestige trumped money. This is a have your cake and eat it too situation.
Why are they so concerned about ranking points and majors? They didn’t leave for prestige; they left for the money; they’re making more money. Most decisions require a balancing of pros and cons. For some, money trumped prestige. For others, prestige trumped money. This is a have your cake and eat it too situation.
That is 100% what Harold Varner articulated in his own humble way.
He knew the issues when he signed the deal and has nothing but positive things to say.
I dont think anyone begrudges any of the "LIVers" who sought the fast payday.
It's just so ridiculous that many of them want to double-dip.
It's like they all worked their way up in a company to the top then a rich competitor offered them a guarantee and more $$ to come work for them then they are now all somewhat butt-hurt that they are not invited to their old company's 1) annual meeting 2) holiday parties 3) summer retreat and 4) top-performer reward trip.
Worse...their new CEO is an aggressive and sharp-elbowed ex-player with a chip on his shoulder instead of a smooth, consensus-building executive that seeks real partnerships.
Someone should just lay it on the line: If 54 hole events were the norm "back in the day", then Greg Norman would have won 7 majors.
Ooops...that 4th round is indeed meaningful.
Guess I was “double dipping” when as a pga tour member I earned an exemption for the ‘95 Open with my play in Australia as a member of that tour.
By the way, when I asked for a release to defend the event I won the year before in Australia , the pga tour would not give me a release due to conflict with the LA Open, which I didnt get in the previous year, and didn’t even respond to requests for sponsor exemption consideration when I reached out (multiple times in different ways [letter/fax/call])
Have rules changed Pat or are they still the same? Asking because I don’t know. Not being a wise guy.
Players often played their home tours and racked up owgr points trying to get high enough for exemptions.
I have voiced my bias previously, but to explain, there is a LOT that the pha tour has done to allow a competitor an opening.
And again, it’s too bad what is going on, but I can see a lot of it from many angles.
Guess I was “double dipping” when as a pga tour member I earned an exemption for the ‘95 Open with my play in Australia as a member of that tour.
By the way, when I asked for a release to defend the event I won the year before in Australia , the pga tour would not give me a release due to conflict with the LA Open, which I didnt get in the previous year, and didn’t even respond to requests for sponsor exemption consideration when I reached out (multiple times in different ways [letter/fax/call])
Have rules changed Pat or are they still the same? Asking because I don’t know. Not being a wise guy.
Players often played their home tours and racked up owgr points trying to get high enough for exemptions.
I have voiced my bias previously, but to explain, there is a LOT that the pha tour has done to allow a competitor an opening.
And again, it’s too bad what is going on, but I can see a lot of it from many angles.
From today's Guardian:Bigger text.
"Analysis of this weekend’s format – entirely based on teams – can trigger a sore head. LIV is not making golf simple again. Friday sees teams seeded from five to 12 – the top four have received a bye – compete in both individual and foursome matches. The higher ranked teams selected their opposition. With teams one to four joining Friday’s winners on Saturday, four groups will progress to the “Team Championship”. Day three is of stroke play, with the lowest aggregate score marking the overall winners. For their troubles, a share of $16m before LIV enters cold storage for the remainder 2022."
And they want ranking points? Its a carnival not a golf tour.
Unlike Pat Burke, I am a "never was" versus a "has been".
I'm a very good landscape architect & land/urban planner; neither a has been or never was.
Am I a top 1,000 in the world in either profession - which is the skill level some like Pat Burke has to play for real money on the professional golf tour - probably not.
Would I enjoy having access to that skill set for landscape architecture/planning or golf to see how the top 0.1% do things - yep - in a New York Minute.
it's way easier in life to be successful and financially very well off in the business world than in professional sports of any time - many more opportunities to succeed in the business world.
Steve S. -
Thanks for the link to the blog regarding "LIV Golf's future."
I think the notion that there is a market for regular/recurring golf competition based on teams to be rather far-fetched. Yes, the Ryder, Walker, Curtis and Presidents Cups do attract interest and viewers, but those events occur not more than once a year and the teams competing are representing countries and/or regions of the world.
In a sport that is been about golfers competing against each other as individual for almost 150 years, will anyone care who wins when Team Mickelson plays Team Johnson? I will not. ;)
DT
Steve S. -
Thanks for the link to the blog regarding "LIV Golf's future."
I think the notion that there is a market for regular/recurring golf competition based on teams to be rather far-fetched. Yes, the Ryder, Walker, Curtis and Presidents Cups do attract interest and viewers, but those events occur not more than once a year and the teams competing are representing countries and/or regions of the world.
In a sport that is been about golfers competing against each other as individual for almost 150 years, will anyone care who wins when Team Mickelson plays Team Johnson? I will not. ;)
DT
The sports where teams are popular are TEAM SPORTS. Team tennis is an afterthought. The Ryder and Presidents Cups are international team competitions, like the Olympics. There is no professional team track, team gymnastics, team swimming, etc.I'll add one sport to the Olympics list which is inherently individual, but we do care about the team results. That is gymnastics. Although we are talking patriotism and Kerry Strug vault on a twisted ankle, knowing it will be 4 more years until we see it again.
Niall -
Yes, there are existing team/league competitions in (amateur) golf. They occur where there are already existing affiliations: students at a college, members at a golf club, residents of a county, etc. For the most part, the only people who care about the results of those competitions are the participants themselves or people affiliated in some way to the participating group. Agreed. It's about the connection and creating that connection. What happens in US team sports when someone buys a franchise, renames it and moves it to another town ? I suspect that initially it takes a bit of a hit in terms of support as its previous fanbase drifts away but in due course or even early course a new fanbase takes its place.
Starting a professional league from scratch where there are no prior affiliations among the pool of players or the fans is a dubious task. No but the fans already know the players and have their preferences.
About the only way I can think of that might work is to have teams representing the various brands of golf clubs. A competition of Team Titleist vs. Team Taylormade or Team Ping vs. Team Mizuno might attract some interest. That seems to be how the Formula One competition works. But a league of Team Mickleson vs. Team Johnson will be a snoozer. I doubt there's enough golf brands to make that a possibility. Besides I'm sure they will be looking widen the scope of sponsors.
DT
Kalen
You certainly cared enough to post on the team results on the recent Maidstone thread ;)
Niall
Formula 1 has had team racing for years.
Do you know what team wins every week or do you only know what individual crosses the finishing line first?
The ONLY team victory I have EVER been aware of in motor sports is the 1967 LeMans race only becuase I loved the movie "Ford vs Ferrari"...;-)
That said, I tend to think that perhaps football (the real football) is a better example. Does everyone know who Messi is or Ronaldo ? You bet they do, but they also have their own team that they support, often for reasons that can be a bit spurious but once you support a team.......🤦🏼♂️
"The (LIV Tour) is a like a mail-order bra. While it is designed to lift and separate, it only draws attention to the cleavage."
It seems like the high school and college team golfers will have more interest in LIV stuff, more relatable to their direct experience...IF high school and college golfers have more interest, it's much more likely because it's on YouTube and because they've never really been "traditional TV watchers" like older golf watchers. My college team players couldn't care less about any pro golf outside of liking maybe Jordan Spieth or Rory or something.
Kalen, your sponsor paying you to show up at an event to promote their product is quite a lot different than the PGA Tour giving you money to show up.
Let’s keep the lowest score wins thing. No moral judgements.
Let’s keep the lowest score wins thing. No moral judgements.
For sure. People fail to realize that nobody in the US is free from moral judgement.
Ciao
Kalen, your sponsor paying you to show up at an event to promote their product is quite a lot different than the PGA Tour giving you money to show up.
Bubba knows that…..
Kalen, your sponsor paying you to show up at an event to promote their product is quite a lot different than the PGA Tour giving you money to show up.
Bubba knows that…..
Yes he does know that...
However, as I understand the rule from the PGA, players aren't allowed to take money from anyone to play an event. Full stop.
"The PGA Tour reiterated to ESPN that it "prohibits the payment of appearance money to players as an inducement to play in a particular tournament."
If this only applies to the PGA Tour, then they should be more specific.
Let’s keep the lowest score wins thing. No moral judgements.
For sure. People fail to realize that nobody in the US is free from moral judgement.
Ciao
Europe is different?
Kalen, your sponsor paying you to show up at an event to promote their product is quite a lot different than the PGA Tour giving you money to show up.
Bubba knows that…..
Yes he does know that...
However, as I understand the rule from the PGA, players aren't allowed to take money from anyone to play an event. Full stop.
"The PGA Tour reiterated to ESPN that it "prohibits the payment of appearance money to players as an inducement to play in a particular tournament."
If this only applies to the PGA Tour, then they should be more specific.
Kalen,
If have a Buick logo on your bag. Buick is going to expect you to play in the Buick open. They are probably also going to expect you to mingle with their guests. You get paid to do that. That is not the same as an appearance fee.
Bubba IMO is trying to mislead, which is why Kevin Kisner called him out. Bubba likes to paint a picture of himself which doesn't go along with his actions. We've seen it his entire career.
Kalen, your sponsor paying you to show up at an event to promote their product is quite a lot different than the PGA Tour giving you money to show up.
Bubba knows that…..
Yes he does know that...
However, as I understand the rule from the PGA, players aren't allowed to take money from anyone to play an event. Full stop.
"The PGA Tour reiterated to ESPN that it "prohibits the payment of appearance money to players as an inducement to play in a particular tournament."
If this only applies to the PGA Tour, then they should be more specific.
Kalen,
If have a Buick logo on your bag. Buick is going to expect you to play in the Buick open. They are probably also going to expect you to mingle with their guests. You get paid to do that. That is not the same as an appearance fee.
Bubba IMO is trying to mislead, which is why Kevin Kisner called him out. Bubba likes to paint a picture of himself which doesn't go along with his actions. We've seen it his entire career.
Rob,
100% agreed with that scenario.
But what if Bubba has a smaller sponsor, which isn't the headline Tour event sponsor. And they're having a corporate retreat that aligns with a different 2nd tier tourney that Bubba had no intention of playing otherwise.
This sponsor pays him extra to come out and participate in a few meet and greets and since he's already there, enters the tourney (which at that point is an almost explicit expectation anyways). He is effectively being paid to show up and play that tournament, even if its not the only thing, and that's what I believe he was referencing with this statement: ""I miss the cut, I still make money. I make the cut, I make extra money."
And don't get me wrong, I have zero issue with this arrangement, but technically it violates the spirit of the PGA Rule of no appearance fees.
hope it was declared taxable incomeMy guess is they're paid in cash so they can avoid declaring it and exposing themselves to fines and sanctions from the PGA Tour for rules violations.
Kalen, your sponsor paying you to show up at an event to promote their product is quite a lot different than the PGA Tour giving you money to show up.
Bubba knows that…..
Yes he does know that...
However, as I understand the rule from the PGA, players aren't allowed to take money from anyone to play an event. Full stop.
"The PGA Tour reiterated to ESPN that it "prohibits the payment of appearance money to players as an inducement to play in a particular tournament."
If this only applies to the PGA Tour, then they should be more specific.
Kalen,
If have a Buick logo on your bag. Buick is going to expect you to play in the Buick open. They are probably also going to expect you to mingle with their guests. You get paid to do that. That is not the same as an appearance fee.
Bubba IMO is trying to mislead, which is why Kevin Kisner called him out. Bubba likes to paint a picture of himself which doesn't go along with his actions. We've seen it his entire career.
Rob,
100% agreed with that scenario.
But what if Bubba has a smaller sponsor, which isn't the headline Tour event sponsor. And they're having a corporate retreat that aligns with a different 2nd tier tourney that Bubba had no intention of playing otherwise.
This sponsor pays him extra to come out and participate in a few meet and greets and since he's already there, enters the tourney (which at that point is an almost explicit expectation anyways). He is effectively being paid to show up and play that tournament, even if its not the only thing, and that's what I believe he was referencing with this statement: ""I miss the cut, I still make money. I make the cut, I make extra money."
And don't get me wrong, I have zero issue with this arrangement, but technically it violates the spirit of the PGA Rule of no appearance fees.
hope it was declared taxable incomeMy guess is they're paid in cash so they can avoid declaring it and exposing themselves to fines and sanctions from the PGA Tour for rules violations.
Mike the Tour fessed up to it today. That reads vague enough to suggest a tournament sponsor could do this on a one-off basis, where the people at home wouldn't even know cause the logo won't show up on the apparel like a typical sponsor arrangement. But it certainly seems to confirm what Bubba said.
“We are aware that certain tournament sponsors may contract with a player to perform a sponsor-related activity during tournament week for which they receive nominal compensation. This is permissible under our guidelines,” the PGA Tour’s statement to ESPN said.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/bubba-watson-says-he-was-paid-behind-closed-doors-to-play-pga-tour-events/ar-AA13KzNj?cvid=ef8d4fc0e21d489084451a574ecf8dca (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/bubba-watson-says-he-was-paid-behind-closed-doors-to-play-pga-tour-events/ar-AA13KzNj?cvid=ef8d4fc0e21d489084451a574ecf8dca)
Mike the Tour fessed up to it today. That reads vague enough to suggest a tournament sponsor could do this on a one-off basis, where the people at home wouldn't even know cause the logo won't show up on the apparel like a typical sponsor arrangement. But it certainly seems to confirm what Bubba said.
“We are aware that certain tournament sponsors may contract with a player to perform a sponsor-related activity during tournament week for which they receive nominal compensation. This is permissible under our guidelines,” the PGA Tour’s statement to ESPN said.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/bubba-watson-says-he-was-paid-behind-closed-doors-to-play-pga-tour-events/ar-AA13KzNj?cvid=ef8d4fc0e21d489084451a574ecf8dca (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/bubba-watson-says-he-was-paid-behind-closed-doors-to-play-pga-tour-events/ar-AA13KzNj?cvid=ef8d4fc0e21d489084451a574ecf8dca)
Bubba said he was paid to “play events”. The tour said they can be paid a “nominal” amount to perform a sponsor related activity. That’s not playing the event. I don’t see a confirmation in that. But I could be very well be wrong and I understand your point.
Kalen, the word the tour used was nominal. The appearance fees paid overseas are millions. Bubba should give an example with the $. I don’t think Bubba is playing the old BC open for a $25,000 fee to attend a cocktail party and shake a few hands. If $500,000 is nominal to the tour then I would be in agreement with you.
The real tour is on a Doak this week. Thank God we get to watch four rounds.
Here's how the Bubba pitch works. Agent calls tournament director.
"Hey, we know your field is thin. Bubba will play if you pay him $250,000 to appear at a youth clinic during tournament week."
"No thanks."
But some say yes.
Sounds like something Bubba would do. Then tell everyone how he loves helping kids..........
Finau is winning on a Doak and this architectural website can't stop talking about the LIV. Has Koepka been providing commentary? Is he banned from the grounds?LOL! Sucks one of the co-designers isn't playing/competing on his own course this week.
Finau is winning on a Doak and this architectural website can't stop talking about the LIV. Has Koepka been providing commentary? Is he banned from the grounds?LOL! Sucks one of the co-designers isn't playing/competing on his own course this week.
My comment about Brooks being a co-designer was said in jest as a means of playing off JK's funny comment. ;D
BK as "Co-designer" ??? consultant/opinion provider I believe more like it...
With the rapid rise in prize money on the PGA Tour is it not about time that Rory, Billy Horschel and all raised a glass to Phil and Greg for significantly increasing their earning potential?No.
With the rapid rise in prize money on the PGA Tour is it not about time that Rory, Billy Horschel and all raised a glass to Phil and Greg for significantly increasing their earning potential ?
Obviously Jay Monahan will be pissed at them reducing the net amount left for him to take his pay out of but all the same, is this not a good result for professional golf ?
Niall
Looks like Norman may be out...Norman not even getting his Ausie buddy Murdoch to carry LIV on his TV network sealed his fate. Just being an obnoxious person wasn't enough.
https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/10/eamon-lynch-problems-liv-golf-greater-greg-norman-incompetence/?itm_source=parsely-api (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/10/eamon-lynch-problems-liv-golf-greater-greg-norman-incompetence/?itm_source=parsely-api)
The players own the tour. The players hired Monaghan and if they don’t like the job he is doing they can fire him. I’m sorry that the best Euro’s and international players prefer to play the PGA tour than the DP tour. It’s been that way for what, the last 30+ years. Get over it.
The players own the tour. The players hired Monaghan and if they don’t like the job he is doing they can fire him. I’m sorry that the best Euro’s and international players prefer to play the PGA tour than the DP tour. It’s been that way for what, the last 30+ years. Get over it.
Why are you sorry ? I'm not. Good on them. They're professionals who are just trying to do the best for themselves, just like the guys playing on LIV. No need for rancour.
Niall
The players own the tour. The players hired Monaghan and if they don’t like the job he is doing they can fire him. I’m sorry that the best Euro’s and international players prefer to play the PGA tour than the DP tour. It’s been that way for what, the last 30+ years. Get over it.
Why are you sorry ? I'm not. Good on them. They're professionals who are just trying to do the best for themselves, just like the guys playing on LIV. No need for rancour.
Niall
I am with you. I don't particularly care about any tour nor 90% of tournaments. However, IMO, any leading tour in the long run will be better off for being more international than is currently the case. The Tour is a bit like politicians in that they won't see beyond an election cycle.Why should the PGA Tour be so much more "international"? The U.S. is where the market is, and where the money is. And where the PGA Tour is, too.
Press the button, get a cookie.
It looks like Rory is starting to capitulate somewhat as to finding a compromise with LIV on the condition that Greg Norman goes. The Saudi Golf Federation has indicated publicly that there is no plan to get rid of Norman. Game on!
It looks like Rory is starting to capitulate somewhat as to finding a compromise with LIV on the condition that Greg Norman goes. The Saudi Golf Federation has indicated publicly that there is no plan to get rid of Norman. Game on!
I feel as though McIlroy's public comments have been in this vein for several months now. He obviously doesn't care for Norman, but the fact of the matter is that if LIV were truly seeking to work with the PGA Tour in a collaborative manner that would allow the two to coexist and complement one another, Greg Norman would be possibly the worst choice to head up LIV.
I feel as though McIlroy's public comments have been in this vein for several months now. He obviously doesn't care for Norman, but the fact of the matter is that if LIV were truly seeking to work with the PGA Tour in a collaborative manner that would allow the two to coexist and complement one another, Greg Norman would be possibly the worst choice to head up LIV.To LIV's credit, they've purposely avoided scheduling events that conflict with the majors, for obvious reasons, and the PGA Tour's elevated events. Which begs the question, why wouldn't the PGA Tour welcome the LIV contracted golfers to these events if it it elevates the quality of the field and viewership interest? Most of the guys on LIV didn't support lesser PGA Tour events when they were PGA Tour members anyway, so it's really no loss to the Tour as far as the quality of field that shows up to a Sanderson Farms Championship, Valero Open or John Deere Classic, to site some examples. Those events should either a) disappear entirely from the Tour calendar or b) become Korn Ferry tournaments.
Looks like Reeds attorney is all in on golf…….
https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/ (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/)
Professional men's golf has become a freaking side show better suited for the National Enquirer! All these frivilous lawsuits need to stop so that cooler heads can prevail in order to arrive at some kind of truce, as this is doing nothing but causing irreperable harm to the sport.Looks like Reeds attorney is all in on golf…….
https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/ (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/)
Larry Klayman representing Patrick Reed is perversely poetic.
I feel as though McIlroy's public comments have been in this vein for several months now. He obviously doesn't care for Norman, but the fact of the matter is that if LIV were truly seeking to work with the PGA Tour in a collaborative manner that would allow the two to coexist and complement one another, Greg Norman would be possibly the worst choice to head up LIV.To LIV's credit, they've purposely avoided scheduling events that conflict with the majors, for obvious reasons, and the PGA Tour's elevated events. Which begs the question, why wouldn't the PGA Tour welcome the LIV contracted golfers to these events if it it elevates the quality of the field and viewership interest? Most of the guys on LIV didn't support lesser PGA Tour events when they were PGA Tour members anyway, so it's really no loss to the Tour as far as the quality of field that shows up to a Sanderson Farms Championship, Valero Open or John Deere Classic, to site some examples. Those events should either a) disappear entirely from the Tour calendar or b) become Korn Ferry tournaments.
The problem is you have butt-hurt, egotistical jerks running both leagues. The best thing that can happen is for both Jay Monahan and Greg Norman to step down from their respective positions and hire executives willing to make this work for the benefit of all. There will most likely be a merger of the two at some point, but that's year's off in the distance.
Please give me an example of what makes Monahan a egotistical jerk? I see a guy doing his job protecting the tour and the tours owners who happen to be the players.Jay Monahan has let his anger and bitterness with Greg Norman and LIV cloud his decision making. As with Norman hard line in the sand, his inflexibility on the issue of allowing LIV contracted golfers to play PGA Tour events has greatly hurt the Tour's product. Their ratings are tanking - especially the lesser events. Viewership of this past week's tournament in Houston was down 50% from last year. Gee, I wonder why? Could it have been that four of the Top 5 finishers from last year's event were banned from playing due to their association with LIV? Methinks, yes.
To LIV's credit, they've purposely avoided scheduling events that conflict with the majors, for obvious reasons, and the PGA Tour's elevated events. Which begs the question, why wouldn't the PGA Tour welcome the LIV contracted golfers to these events if it it elevates the quality of the field and viewership interest?
Please give me an example of what makes Monahan a egotistical jerk? I see a guy doing his job protecting the tour and the tours owners who happen to be the players.Jay Monahan has let his anger and bitterness with Greg Norman and LIV cloud his decision making. As with Norman hard line in the sand, his inflexibility on the issue of allowing LIV contracted golfers to play PGA Tour events has greatly hurt the Tour's product. Their ratings are tanking - especially the lesser events. Viewership of this past week's tournament in Houston was down 50% from last year. Gee, I wonder why? Could it have been that four of the Top 5 finishers from last year's event were banned from playing due to their association with LIV? Methinks, yes.
Mike,You may be right, but I disagree you can't have players participate in events in both leagues and have them survive in their present form. Were LIV to increase the number of events from 14 say to 18 or 20, then that changes things. Also depending on how LIV contracts are structured, players may only be required to show up to 10 or 12 of the 14 events next year, which provides opportunity for the alternates on each team to play and gives them time to play elsewhere if they so choose.
If they did this, that would be the death knell of the PGA Tour, because then players could have thier cake and eat it too.
As I see it, the only thing keeping more top guys from jumping right now at the massive money is being cut off from PGA Tour events and OWGR points to get into majors. If you let them back in for select events, the PGA Tour would be LIV's bitch within a year.
P.S. The reason ratings were down are due to football... golf always underperforms against that. Hell it wasn't even on TV on Saturday, I had to find it on the Peacock App just to watch a bit of footage.The tournament is always pitted against college and pro football given its place on the calendar, which is unfortunate, as Memorial Park presents itself great on TV and it's a pity so few see it.
What? Top 5 from 2021 were Kokrak, Scheffler, Tway, Kickok, Dahmen and Trainer.My bad. I meant 2020. The one and only time the event had a respectable field.
You think the ratings are down because the guys listed other than Scheffler were banned? BTW isn't the Kokrak the only one on LIV. I must have something wrong here. Please correct me because one of us has the facts wrong.
Jon Rahm certainly seems to be the voice of reason on all of this...for now.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/jon-rahm-blasts-new-world-ranking-formula-as-laughable-takes-swipe-at-greg-norman-for-his-vendetta/ar-AA14bb06?cvid=57e5d9b4488542d5af069928ae420e16 (https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/golf/jon-rahm-blasts-new-world-ranking-formula-as-laughable-takes-swipe-at-greg-norman-for-his-vendetta/ar-AA14bb06?cvid=57e5d9b4488542d5af069928ae420e16)
I read through that. Toward the end he defended Sergio saying "I don't think his fans care where he plays". I suppose technically that's right... if you don't have any fans, by definition they can't care where you play.
The failure of the WGC series to gain traction after it was started only proves to me that he was wrong back in the 90s, there's not great attraction for fans in seeing the best players pulled out of normal Tour events so they can play against each other here, or around the world.
Maybe the inability for the WGC’s to gain traction was because Norman was wrong. Or maybe it is because 70% of all WGC events still took place in the US, during the regular PGA Tour season, diminishing the perspective that they were anything other than regular events to much of the golf watching audience.You're 100% spot on in both assessments. I coudn't agree more.
The failure of the WCG’s from becoming anything more than they have has a lot more to do with the PGA Tour desire to only provide them lip service, rather than truly boost them as strong international events.
Which begs the question, why wouldn't the PGA Tour welcome the LIV contracted golfers to these events if it it elevates the quality of the field and viewership interest?Because then the threat of suspension (and the follow-through) lacks teeth.
There will most likely be a merger of the two at some point, but that's year's off in the distance.I wouldn't bet on that.
In short, this doesn't have to be an "us" vs. "them" proposition. Were Rory McIroy, Jordan Spieth, Justin Thomas and Jon Rahm to walk into Jay Monahan's office today and present him with an ultimatum to the effect of "Allow the LIV guys to play whatever PGA Tour events they want for the good of the league or we're walking", watch how quickly Monahan capitulatesWell no shit, but why would they do that at this point? The fact is they haven't… and they all could have gone to LIV.
Jay Monahan has let his anger and bitterness with Greg Norman and LIV cloud his decision making.A) That's very different than being "an egotistical jerk" and
What? Top 5 from 2021 were Kokrak, Scheffler, Tway, Kickok, Dahmen and Trainer.My bad. I meant 2020. The one and only time the event had a respectable field.
You think the ratings are down because the guys listed other than Scheffler were banned? BTW isn't the Kokrak the only one on LIV. I must have something wrong here. Please correct me because one of us has the facts wrong.
1. Carlos Ortiz
2. Dustin Johnson
3. Hideki Matsuyama
4. Talor Gooch
5. Brooks Koepka
You and me will have to agree to disagree on Jay Monahan, as the only reason he's brought anything of value to the PGA Tour is because of the pressure he was under to prevent more top golfers from defecting to LIV. He's been reactive, not proactive the entirety of the dispute.
LIV didn't exist in 2021. Wonder why the LIV guys didn't play then?Good question. Perhaps it ties back to not wanting to play in the lower tier events or there may have been financial incentives for players to support the new tournament year one? Brooks was obligated to be there given his role as a consultant to Tom on the restovation project. I suspect he may have gotten D.J. to turn out for it given their friendship. Talor Gooch hadn't yet established himself to the level he did in 2021 and Carlos Ortiz was a relatively young unknown on tour at the time with a lot of promise and potential. Interestingly, of those four Brooks was the only one to play the event in 2021 where he proceded to miss the cut. The defending champ, Carlos Ortiz, didn't even bother showing up.
LIV didn't exist in 2021. Wonder why the LIV guys didn't play then?Good question. Perhaps it ties back to not wanting to play in the lower tier events or there may have been financial incentives for players to support the new tournament year one? Brooks was obligated to be there given his role as a consultant to Tom on the restovation project. I suspect he may have gotten D.J. to turn out for it given their friendship. Talor Gooch hadn't yet established himself to the level he did in 2021 and Carlos Ortiz was a relatively young unknown on tour at the time with a lot of promise and potential. Interestingly, of those four Brooks was the only one to play the event in 2021 where he proceded to miss the cut. The defending champ, Carlos Ortiz, didn't even bother showing up.
Financial incentives like large unreported cash payments as you previously suspected.....Or reported gifts/payments. Who knows? It all depends on the the player and or the player's agent, the tournament sponsor(s) and the terms of the deal negotiated between the parties.
Financial incentives like large unreported cash payments as you previously suspected.....Or reported gifts/payments. Who knows? It all depends on the the player and or the player's agent, the tournament sponsor(s) and the terms of the deal negotiated between the parties.
All the LIV tour has done is make PGA tour members richer. ;D
I can't comment about Monahan being an egotistical jerk, but its fair to question his leadership recently.
The PGA Tour acted like they were blindsided by LIV and all subsequent actions appear to have been reactionary. Monahan has for years known about the development of the PGL and the concept of an elevated tournament series that became LIV, but simply ignored the potential for change. When it came, Monahan was ill prepared to control the golf world like the PGA Tour has for decades, creating the current fractured future.
I can't comment about Monahan being an egotistical jerk, but its fair to question his leadership recently.
The PGA Tour acted like they were blindsided by LIV and all subsequent actions appear to have been reactionary. Monahan has for years known about the development of the PGL and the concept of an elevated tournament series that became LIV, but simply ignored the potential for change. When it came, Monahan was ill prepared to control the golf world like the PGA Tour has for decades, creating the current fractured future.
Ben
I agree. He appears to have been either complacent or a bit naive. He's only now trying to lock in the players with a guaranteed payment which is like bolting the stable door when half the herd have already legged it. I'd have thought the biggest thing in any sport business is surely securing your players on contract. He failed to do that.
He's now pulling out all the stops to compete but I sincerely wish the one stop he hadn't pulled was the one where he wound up the players and it started getting all personal, which I don't think was necessary.
Niall
I can't comment about Monahan being an egotistical jerk, but its fair to question his leadership recently.
The PGA Tour acted like they were blindsided by LIV and all subsequent actions appear to have been reactionary. Monahan has for years known about the development of the PGL and the concept of an elevated tournament series that became LIV, but simply ignored the potential for change. When it came, Monahan was ill prepared to control the golf world like the PGA Tour has for decades, creating the current fractured future.
Ben
I agree. He appears to have been either complacent or a bit naive. He's only now trying to lock in the players with a guaranteed payment which is like bolting the stable door when half the herd have already legged it. I'd have thought the biggest thing in any sport business is surely securing your players on contract. He failed to do that.
He's now pulling out all the stops to compete but I sincerely wish the one stop he hadn't pulled was the one where he wound up the players and it started getting all personal, which I don't think was necessary.
Niall
The LIV players made it personal when they started bashing the PGA tour to justify leaving. Instead of saying "I did it for the money" like Varner they lied about things like less travel, more time off, growing the game, blah blah blah. It's only about the money.
It's also ONLY personal for Greg Norman.
I can't comment about Monahan being an egotistical jerk, but its fair to question his leadership recently.
The PGA Tour acted like they were blindsided by LIV and all subsequent actions appear to have been reactionary. Monahan has for years known about the development of the PGL and the concept of an elevated tournament series that became LIV, but simply ignored the potential for change. When it came, Monahan was ill prepared to control the golf world like the PGA Tour has for decades, creating the current fractured future.
Ben
I agree. He appears to have been either complacent or a bit naive. He's only now trying to lock in the players with a guaranteed payment which is like bolting the stable door when half the herd have already legged it. I'd have thought the biggest thing in any sport business is surely securing your players on contract. He failed to do that.
He's now pulling out all the stops to compete but I sincerely wish the one stop he hadn't pulled was the one where he wound up the players and it started getting all personal, which I don't think was necessary.
Niall
The LIV players made it personal when they started bashing the PGA tour to justify leaving. Instead of saying "I did it for the money" like Varner they lied about things like less travel, more time off, growing the game, blah blah blah. It's only about the money.
It's also ONLY personal for Greg Norman.
I can't comment about Monahan being an egotistical jerk, but its fair to question his leadership recently.Very astute summary of the current situation we're in and how we got here. You're spot-on about Monahan and the PGA Tour's knowledge of the SGL (Saudi Golf League/LIV) and PGL prior to that. It wasn't as if there weren't rumors swirling around for years of a competing tour or golf league challenging the PGA Tours power structure. I honestly think they never thought it would come to fruition - especially after Phil Mickelson so ingloriously blew himself and any thoughts of the SGL (LIV) becoming a reality up until it did. The Tour and Monahan, in particular, were completely caught off guard and they've been scrambling ever since to get ahead of the story.
The PGA Tour acted like they were blindsided by LIV and all subsequent actions appear to have been reactionary. Monahan has for years known about the development of the PGL and the concept of an elevated tournament series that became LIV, but simply ignored the potential for change. When it came, Monahan was ill prepared to control the golf world like the PGA Tour has for decades, creating the current fractured future.
If the PGA Tour had been preparing for a potential disruption by developing a series of elevated events before the start of LIV, where is the documentation of this? Are there any press releases or article discussing the development prior to the spring of this year? Or are all accounts of what the tour was doing behind the scenes simply revisionist history trying to smooth over their ineptitude?
As someone who doesn't play for any golf tour circuit, I really have nothing firsthand to offer, except my thoughts as a fan.
All I care about are majors. I don't care if someone plays in the Antartica league or the Ponte Vedra Beach league-it's how they step up to the plate at the majors that matters to me.
And, 72 holes no cut is way easier than the US AM, which I consider the fifth major. I'm just too stupid, I suppose, to understand the logic of why 72 holes and a cut determines who the best golfer is. No wonder I was rejected to Harvard for thinking that it's just an attempt for different golf tournaments to sell advertising.
One can talk about how OWGR dictates the field for big tournaments, an argument that I find circular and myopic.
I guess I'm confused why the Ponte Vedra Beach tour has such an outsized influence. No I'm not. It's just money.
show me where Jay has been "an egotistical jerk," let alone on the scale of Third Leg Greg.Like Greg, he's turned this into a personal vendetta and has no interest in working out a settlement with LIV. In fact, he would prefer to crush them at this point and have them disappear entirely. That's rooted in ego and has little to nothing to do with what's in the best interest of professional golf.
Even knowing what's coming down the pipe, how do you compete with or respond to an entity who's willing to give someone like Phil $300 Million, or for that matter someone like Pat Perez $10 million....all upfront. Its just absurd on several levels and sure as hell doesn't make sense from an ROI perspective.I applaud all the changes Tiger and Rory formulated with the Tour from the meetings held ahead of the BMW Championship. I think it's going to equate to a better viewing product and provide a lot of opportunities for guys that don't initially qualify for the elevated events. I like the restructured tournament calendar and going back to a calendar year format, in addition to the new guaranteed payment structure and purse increases. I think where they are still missing the boat is with international events and building a broader audience for the PGA Tour brand.
What would you have done differently if you were in Jay's shoes to counter that? And be as specific as possible.
show me where Jay has been "an egotistical jerk," let alone on the scale of Third Leg Greg.Like Greg, he's turned this into a personal vendetta and has no interest in working out a settlement with LIV. In fact, he would prefer to crush them at this point and have them disappear entirely. That's rooted in ego and has little to nothing to do with what's in the best interest of professional golf.
I'm far from alone in expressing this sentiment. Butch Harmon said much the same in an interview he did with Eurosport last Sept.
https://www.eurosport.com/golf/leave-your-egos-at-the-door-butch-harmon-urges-liv-golf-chief-greg-norman-and-jay-monahan-to-find-so_sto9115973/story.shtml (https://www.eurosport.com/golf/leave-your-egos-at-the-door-butch-harmon-urges-liv-golf-chief-greg-norman-and-jay-monahan-to-find-so_sto9115973/story.shtml)
To further entrench its hardline stance against LIV and preserve what's left of the PGA Tour, they officially appointed business power-broker, Jimmy Dunne, to the PGA Tour policy board as an independent director with voting privileges (https://www.golfdigest.com/story/jimmy-dunne-pga-tour-new-power-broker-liv-golf-battle (https://www.golfdigest.com/story/jimmy-dunne-pga-tour-new-power-broker-liv-golf-battle)). He's essentially been hired as a "fixer" and has no qualms of using heavy-handed tactics to get his way. As the article I linked to from Golf Digest points out,
His appointment to the board, Dunne said, “is a war-time deal.” He did not use the famous line from "The Godfather," about “going to the mattresses” as the Corleone family goes to war with the other New York mob families.
Again, this has become a personal matter between warring factions and will not end well if cooler heads don't prevail and are brought to the negotiating table sooner rather than later. If not, there will be blood and the real losers in all this will be the fans.
Don't let Erik hear you saying that. He's still denying reality.I've never said that.
I'd have thought the biggest thing in any sport business is surely securing your players on contract. He failed to do thatUmmmmmm… contracts? For guys who view themselves as free agents? (Who then promptly signed contracts with LIV…) You can't have contracts in a meritocracy-type situation like the PGA Tour.
That's rooted in ego and has little to nothing to do with what's in the best interest of professional golf.A) He's not the commissioner of "professional golf." He's the commissioner of the PGA Tour. So… no, you've failed to show how this is about ego.B) What makes him a jerk? Still waiting.Does appointing Jimmy Dunne to the board somehow make Jay a jerk?
Problem is this all could and should have been done last fall when the SGL rumors were intensifying and picking up steam as a pre-emptive strike.Hind sight is 20/20. If he does that, and nothing comes about, you (or others) would be in here talking about how Jay didn't need to make those changes, blah blah blah.
While I would certainly agree there is no way Monahan didn't know about the Saudi league...
Even knowing what's coming down the pipe, how do you compete with or respond to an entity who's willing to give someone like Phil $300 Million, or for that matter someone like Pat Perez $10 million....all upfront. Its just absurd on several levels and sure as hell doesn't make sense from an ROI perspective.
What would you have done differently if you were in Jay's shoes to counter that? And be as specific as possible.
P.S. Dont' forget you would then have to engage a guy who's had a 3 decade long grudge against your org, and nothing would pleasure him more than putting your balls in a vice and watching you squirm.
If you are going to bad mouth Jimmy Dunne you are going down the wrong road. The guy is a fucking hero to a lot of people who's lives were shattered on 9/11.I never bad-mouthed Jimmy Dunne or said he was a bad guy. I simply said what his new "official" role is with the PGA Tour and extracted a comment he himself made in the Golf Digest article. That said, he has a reputation for being schrewed business person and was brought in primarily to keep existing PGA Tour players in lock-step with the organization. From reading the article, he comes across as the type of guy who will give the shirt off his back for a friend, but whose bad side you don't want to be on if you know what's best for you.
A) So… no, you've failed to show how this is about ego.B) What makes him a jerk? Still waiting.Does appointing Jimmy Dunne to the board somehow make Jay a jerk?I disagree with your first point and to your second, the fact that Jay Monahan had multiple opportunities the past five years to explore working and collaborating with the PGL and later, SGL and simply brushed them off and dismissed them as though they were more of a nuisance than a help, tells me all I need to know about the arrogant jerk he is.
A) So… no, you've failed to show how this is about ego.B) What makes him a jerk? Still waiting.Does appointing Jimmy Dunne to the board somehow make Jay a jerk?I disagree with your first point and to your second, the fact that Jay Monahan had multiple opportunities the past five years to explore working and collaborating with the PGL and later, SGL and simply brushed them off and dismissed them as if they were more of a nuisance than a help, tells me all I need to know about the arrogant jerk he is.
I suspect there's 40+ guys on the LIV tour currently that would agree with me.
Well you left one part off.LOL! Thanks for injecting some humor in the conversation. It needed it. I hate the place we're at in professional men's golf and just want the daily soap opera and one up's-manship crap to end. To quote Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"
"I suspect there's 40+ guys with hundreds of millions of reasons on the LIV tour currently that would agree with me. ;D
I disagree with your first pointYou're seeing what you want to see. If it was about ego, it'd be about protecting JAY and promoting JAY, not doing his work as commissioner of the PGA Tour. He didn't build it. It's not him. And he's not much to say that he's "egotistical." I think you're confusing that he's in a position of power as commissioner with having an "ego."
and to your second, the fact that Jay Monahan had multiple opportunities the past five years to explore working and collaborating with the PGL and later, SGL and simply brushed them off and dismissed them as though they were more of a nuisance than a help, tells me all I need to know about the arrogant jerk he is.Do you think you know more about what it takes to run the PGA Tour than the commissioner, to the point that you can call him an "egotistical jerk?" Seems so. Have you had a conversation with him to ask him why he didn't meet with the PGL? Do you understand how much (not 100% of course, but not 0%) he works for the players, not the owners group like in most other sports?
I suspect there's 40+ guys on the LIV tour currently that would agree with me.Well there are only about 48 of them, and many of them weren't even on the PGA Tour, so…
To quote Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"And yet, seemingly, rather than place any blame on the disruptor with the blood money, you want to lay all the blame at the inability to "get along" at the feet of Jay Monahan.
And yet, seemingly, rather than place any blame on the disruptor with the blood money, you want to lay all the blame at the inability to "get along" at the feet of Jay Monahan.You need to go back and read an earlier comment where I chastised Greg equally for bringing us to the place we're at. He's as much to blame for the morass the sport finds itself in as anyone. He doesn't get a free pass from me as you seem all too willing to give to Jay.
I disagree with your first pointYou're seeing what you want to see. If it was about ego, it'd be about protecting JAY and promoting JAY, not doing his work as commissioner of the PGA Tour. He didn't build it. It's not him. And he's not much to say that he's "egotistical." I think you're confusing that he's in a position of power as commissioner with having an "ego."and to your second, the fact that Jay Monahan had multiple opportunities the past five years to explore working and collaborating with the PGL and later, SGL and simply brushed them off and dismissed them as though they were more of a nuisance than a help, tells me all I need to know about the arrogant jerk he is.Do you think you know more about what it takes to run the PGA Tour than the commissioner, to the point that you can call him an "egotistical jerk?" Seems so. Have you had a conversation with him to ask him why he didn't meet with the PGL? Do you understand how much (not 100% of course, but not 0%) he works for the players, not the owners group like in most other sports?I suspect there's 40+ guys on the LIV tour currently that would agree with me.Well there are only about 48 of them, and many of them weren't even on the PGA Tour, so…To quote Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"And yet, seemingly, rather than place any blame on the disruptor with the blood money, you want to lay all the blame at the inability to "get along" at the feet of Jay Monahan.
You need to go back and read an earlier comment where I chastised Greg equally for bringing us to the place we're at.No I don't. Greg and LIV were the disruptors here. They were the ones who "did" things to "professional golf."
He's as much to blameMore to blame. Greg + LIV.
He doesn't get a free pass from me as you seem all too willing to give to Jay.Nope. I'm not giving Jay a free pass, I'm saying only that you don't understand things to the level needed to form a decent opinion. I haven't said Jay's done a great job. I haven't said Jay definitely shouldn't have taken the meeting. You're the one saying the opposite of those types of things. I'm only pointing out that you haven't really got a clue what you're talking about, and that the situation is far more complex than you're making it out to be from your armchair, and that some of your opinions have little or no basis in fact.
Again, as Jon Rahm suggested two days ago at a presser (and I pointed out in this thread yesterday) perhaps Greg and Jay should both step down to lower the tone and temperature of the conversaion and see if some type of agreement or resolution between the two groups can be made. Given the recent moves made by both sides, I don't see that happening anytime soon.He didn't say "Greg and Jay should step down." He said:
[Greg Norman] “His intentions might not be as pure as they could, which is a problem,” Rahm said. “So he might not be the best person for the job, even if he has done great things for the tour. I do believe that, for conversations to take place, Greg might need to be gone. Right now, it doesn’t seem like he and [PGA Tour commissioner] Jay [Monahan] will want to be in the same room together.That's pretty different than "both should step down." He's suggesting that it MIGHT be required, while laying almost all of the blame on Greg and saying that Jay has done "a great job for the PGA Tour."
“Even if they disagreed, it would have been good to talk. So to get a resolution we might need one or both of them gone. I hope not. Jay has done a great job for the PGA Tour.”
I can't comment about Monahan being an egotistical jerk, but its fair to question his leadership recently.+1
The PGA Tour acted like they were blindsided by LIV and all subsequent actions appear to have been reactionary. Monahan has for years known about the development of the PGL and the concept of an elevated tournament series that became LIV, but simply ignored the potential for change. When it came, Monahan was ill prepared to control the golf world like the PGA Tour has for decades, creating the current fractured future.
Ben
I agree. He appears to have been either complacent or a bit naive. He's only now trying to lock in the players with a guaranteed payment which is like bolting the stable door when half the herd have already legged it. I'd have thought the biggest thing in any sport business is surely securing your players on contract. He failed to do that.
He's now pulling out all the stops to compete but I sincerely wish the one stop he hadn't pulled was the one where he wound up the players and it started getting all personal, which I don't think was necessary.
Niall
The LIV players made it personal when they started bashing the PGA tour to justify leaving. Instead of saying "I did it for the money" like Varner they lied about things like less travel, more time off, growing the game, blah blah blah. It's only about the money.
It's also ONLY personal for Greg Norman.
Still waiting for Phil to meet up with his employer to explain the evil MFer comment. I've sure they haven't forgotten about it. Thinking Phil isn't taking any meetings unless they are in the middle of a crowd of people.Agree 100%! Although he's conveniently trying to re-write history and now says he never made that remark in the phone conversation he had with Alan Shipnuck. As if anyone but the most ardent Phil fans are buying that.
Agree 100%! Although he's conveniently trying to re-write history and now says he never made that remark in the phone conversation he had with Alan Shipnuck. As if anyone but the most ardent Phil fans are buying that.In other words, cary buys it. ;)
Nope. I'm not giving Jay a free pass, I'm saying only that you don't understand things to the level needed to form a decent opinion. I haven't said Jay's done a great job. I haven't said Jay definitely shouldn't have taken the meeting. You're the one saying the opposite of those types of things. I'm only pointing out that you haven't really got a clue what you're talking about, and that the situation is far more complex than you're making it out to be from your armchair, and that some of your opinions have little or no basis in fact.My comments are based on what's available in the media for public consumption on the subject, same as you or most anyone else here commenting on it. What makes what you have to say any more credible than anyone else who holds an opinion different from yours? Do you work for the PGA Tour or have inside sources that only speak off the record to make you an authority? If so, please enlighten us.
I ageed with Rahm's suggestion that it may take both men stepping down in order to strike some sort of resolution. That is all.Quote[Greg Norman] “His intentions might not be as pure as they could, which is a problem,” Rahm said. “So he might not be the best person for the job, even if he has done great things for the tour. I do believe that, for conversations to take place, Greg might need to be gone. Right now, it doesn’t seem like he and [PGA Tour commissioner] Jay [Monahan] will want to be in the same room together.That's pretty different than "both should step down." He's suggesting that it MIGHT be required, while laying almost all of the blame on Greg and saying that Jay has done "a great job for the PGA Tour."
“Even if they disagreed, it would have been good to talk. So to get a resolution we might need one or both of them gone. I hope not. Jay has done a great job for the PGA Tour.”
My comments are based on what's available in the media for public consumption on the subject, same as you or most anyone else here commenting on it. What makes what you have to say any more credible than anyone else who holds an opinion different from yours?Here's what you're missing: I'm not out here making big proclamations about what someone SHOULD have done or shouldn't have done or whatever. You are. I'm commenting on some matters of fact — like that LIV doesn't deserve all of the credit for the increases in purses (etc.) on the PGA Tour (the new TV deal deserves a lot of credit there), that the LIV business isn't a rational one constrained by normal business practices, etc. You're commenting on all kinds of stuff, about most of which you haven't got the faintest clue.
I ageed with Rahm's suggestion that it may take both men stepping down in order to strike some sort of resolution. That is all.That's an entirely different thing than what you said (he said).
Whatever, dude.My comments are based on what's available in the media for public consumption on the subject, same as you or most anyone else here commenting on it. What makes what you have to say any more credible than anyone else who holds an opinion different from yours?Here's what you're missing: I'm not out here making big proclamations about what someone SHOULD have done or shouldn't have done or whatever. You are. I'm commenting on some matters of fact — like that LIV doesn't deserve all of the credit for the increases in purses (etc.) on the PGA Tour (the new TV deal deserves a lot of credit there), that the LIV business isn't a rational one constrained by normal business practices, etc. You're commenting on all kinds of stuff, about most of which you haven't got the faintest clue.I ageed with Rahm's suggestion that it may take both men stepping down in order to strike some sort of resolution. That is all.That's an entirely different thing than what you said (he said).
Whatever, dude.Exaaaactly.
Pat, I can only imagine what it was like dealing with tour politics and policies when you were playing. But that was under Beman wasn't it? And he was a player.
Re. the new elevated events, I can't understand why anyone thought that was a good idea, much less Tiger and Rory who apparently ramrodded it through.
The math is impossible. Twelve required appearances plus four majors leaves no room for DP events, or much of anything.
The top players are not going to be out there 25-plus weeks a year.
Pat, I can only imagine what it was like dealing with tour politics and policies when you were playing. But that was under Beman wasn't it? And he was a player.
Re. the new elevated events, I can't understand why anyone thought that was a good idea, much less Tiger and Rory who apparently ramrodded it through.
The math is impossible. Twelve required appearances plus four majors leaves no room for DP events, or much of anything.
The top players are not going to be out there 25-plus weeks a year.
It was Finchem
Never dealt with a person I disliked more.
Very good for the business and political maneuvering for the tour.
But personally, I’ve only dealt with one person in my life I dislike more
You need to go back and read an earlier comment where I chastised Greg equally for bringing us to the place we're at.No I don't. Greg and LIV were the disruptors here. They were the ones who "did" things to "professional golf."He's as much to blameMore to blame. Greg + LIV.He doesn't get a free pass from me as you seem all too willing to give to Jay.Nope. I'm not giving Jay a free pass, I'm saying only that you don't understand things to the level needed to form a decent opinion. I haven't said Jay's done a great job. I haven't said Jay definitely shouldn't have taken the meeting. You're the one saying the opposite of those types of things. I'm only pointing out that you haven't really got a clue what you're talking about, and that the situation is far more complex than you're making it out to be from your armchair, and that some of your opinions have little or no basis in fact.Again, as Jon Rahm suggested two days ago at a presser (and I pointed out in this thread yesterday) perhaps Greg and Jay should both step down to lower the tone and temperature of the conversaion and see if some type of agreement or resolution between the two groups can be made. Given the recent moves made by both sides, I don't see that happening anytime soon.He didn't say "Greg and Jay should step down." He said:Quote[Greg Norman] “His intentions might not be as pure as they could, which is a problem,” Rahm said. “So he might not be the best person for the job, even if he has done great things for the tour. I do believe that, for conversations to take place, Greg might need to be gone. Right now, it doesn’t seem like he and [PGA Tour commissioner] Jay [Monahan] will want to be in the same room together.That's pretty different than "both should step down." He's suggesting that it MIGHT be required, while laying almost all of the blame on Greg and saying that Jay has done "a great job for the PGA Tour."
“Even if they disagreed, it would have been good to talk. So to get a resolution we might need one or both of them gone. I hope not. Jay has done a great job for the PGA Tour.”
Blah blah blah. Point me to the ignore button, please.Great argument. Way to put some thought into it.
Blah blah blah. Point me to the ignore button, please.Great argument. Way to put some thought into it.
The ignore button here doesn't work, much like your brain. ;D
Pat, I can only imagine what it was like dealing with tour politics and policies when you were playing. But that was under Beman wasn't it? And he was a player.
Re. the new elevated events, I can't understand why anyone thought that was a good idea, much less Tiger and Rory who apparently ramrodded it through.
The math is impossible. Twelve required appearances plus four majors leaves no room for DP events, or much of anything.
The top players are not going to be out there 25-plus weeks a year.
It was Finchem
Never dealt with a person I disliked more.
Very good for the business and political maneuvering for the tour.
But personally, I’ve only dealt with one person in my life I dislike more
Can you elaborate Pat?
Thank you for pointing out my mental deficiencies. Real valuable GCA commentary.It contributed as much as your previous comment. Actually, a tiny bit more, since it informed that the "Ignore" functionality doesn't really do anything here. If it did, I wouldn't have to see your posts. It's on you to ignore… so, give it a try.
As someone who doesn't play for any golf tour circuit, I really have nothing firsthand to offer, except my thoughts as a fan.
All I care about are majors. I don't care if someone plays in the Antartica league or the Ponte Vedra Beach league-it's how they step up to the plate at the majors that matters to me.
And, 72 holes no cut is way easier than the US AM, which I consider the fifth major. I'm just too stupid, I suppose, to understand the logic of why 72 holes and a cut determines who the best golfer is. No wonder I was rejected to Harvard for thinking that it's just an attempt for different golf tournaments to sell advertising.
One can talk about how OWGR dictates the field for big tournaments, an argument that I find circular and myopic.
I guess I'm confused why the Ponte Vedra Beach tour has such an outsized influence. No I'm not. It's just money.
I agree completely. The majors are all that I care about. I want to see the best players in the world, regardless of where they play for the rest of the season. Trying to keep top players out, via whatever ranking system, only weakens the significance of the majors.
As for the rest of the season, i find network golf unwatchable without a DVR, and even then lacking in golf shot coverage. LIV coverage is much more appealing as the ratio of actual golf shots to wasted time is way better.
I don't understand the hate/fear expressed by PGAT proponents. Resistance to change, I guess. The 54 hole argument is hard to understand. Would 90 hole tournaments be even better?
I hope that both sides act a bit more mature. Stop negative campaigns and name calling and find a way to coexist. Competition is good and can only serve to improve the quality and popularity of the entertainment product.
Sean
Agreed, no good reason why a system can't be devised other than some of the stakeholders in the OWGR don't want to award LIV players points for their own commercial reasons.
In terms of your suggestion that they should get fewer points because of the tournament format, it brought to mind Rahm's comments in the last few days where he suggested it was ridiculous that the DP Tour event was getting less points compared to the PGA Tour event being played at the same time simply because the the PGA Tour event had more players. Rahm's point was that the DP event had 7 out of the world top 20 playing while the PGA event had none so was it not ridiculous that the DP event had fewer points.
Rahm's logic could be applied to awarding ranking points to the LIV Tour.
Niall
I see no valid reason why, when it knows there are several very high quality LIV players, that it can't devise a new system which includes different tour set ups. It should be no skin off their nose if they are trying to rank players objectively. I can easily see a new system where LIV events are worth 25% (as an example) the points of a good US Tour event and worth maybe 50% of the poor events. Yes, it would make it difficult for LIV players to qualify for majors on points, but not impossible as is now the case and unreasonably so.The simple answer here is that they don't meet the criteria, and even if they had, it has not been a year.
Rules/criteria are there to be followed but they are also open to change and adaption which happens on a regular basis.So what's the timeframe for such a change? Because in the grand scheme of things, this hasn't been that long. The first LIV golf event was not even half a year ago. How quickly do you want them to rush something through?
Witness Rahm's comments on the latest changes.Witness the DataGolf explanation of why the points worked out the way they worked out. And… the points are a result of a years-long process that resulted in a change not too long ago.
The reason for any changes are fairly obvious for anyone with an open mindThat's where you lose people, right there. You may as well just say "If you don't agree with me you're a moron."
For the best part of a yearTheir first event was June 9-11. June 11 was… quick math… 160 days ago.
To not therefore change the rules to take that into account would not only be inconsistent with previous changes but would also make their rankings less relevant.How do you correlate that with the HERO or Target World Challenge and the changes it had to make to award OWGR points? Why didn't they just whine about it and make a similar argument as you've done here: "But, but, we're a no-cut 54-hole event with some of the best players, we should get points too!" No, they made changes to comply, including qualifying rather than invitations, and were awarded points.
I'm not sure the organisers of the majors will put up with that for too long.Guess we'll see.
Rules/criteria are there to be followed but they are also open to change and adaption which happens on a regular basis. Witness Rahm's comments on the latest changes. The reason for any changes are fairly obviousfor anyone with an open mindand that is so that the Rankings can as accurately as they can reflect the order of the best players in the world.
Having taken out the words that offend you, would you disagree with my comments above?So you're asking if I disagree with:
With regards my best part of a year commentI didn't contest that. I only pointed out that your statement was misleading as their first event was less than a year ago.
However given LIV signed-up a chunk of the best players early onI think you and I would disagree on who the "best" players are, or how many of the "best" players they have. LIV fields get pretty thin after a small number of players, and since they're busy playing these exhibition events… we have no way of really judging well they're playing right now. The more they play their insular events, the more we lack a valid frame of reference.
However given LIV signed-up a chunk of the best players early on, and continued to sign-up more, and that they have already announced big plans for next year, would you not think that would lead the OWGR people to look at redrafting the rules for next year ?There's little incentive for the OWGR to take action on this while they're being sued by LIV in the state of FL over this issue (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/) (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/)).
Niall
Had they wished to avoid being dragged into court they could have sat down with the powers that be at LIV and hammered out some type of points system, but they chose not to"Had LIV wished to award OWGR points readily, they could have hammered out some sort of agreement with the OWGR prior to launching their Tour, or at least complied with the criteria and waited a year for the certification."
You can see what the LIV/Saudi strategy is and that's to tie-up the PGA Tour in as many lawsuits as possible and bleed the organization dry.Uhhhhhh… okay? You are aware that the PGA Tour counter-sued LIV, right? So if (as it seems) in your mind, the party who is suing is right, this puts you in a real pickle.
It's all the more reason the parties involved - including the OWGR - need to sit down at the negotiating table and work out a mutual operating agreement that all sides can live with and honor.Maybe the OWGR doesn't negotiate with terrorists.
Unlke the PGA Tour, the Saudi's have deeper pockets and will bankrupt the PGA TourOh boy.
If anyone thinks politics doesn't play a role in this you're fooling yourself.But, wait, I thought the Saudis were aligned with Trump? I'm only poking here, as I couldn't care much less about politics (which is not to say there's not a political component here).
There's little incentive for the OWGR to take action on this while they're being sued by LIV in the state of FL over this issue (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/) (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/)).
Thanks for clarifying, David.There's little incentive for the OWGR to take action on this while they're being sued by LIV in the state of FL over this issue (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/) (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/15/florida-court-lawsuit-liv-golf-owgr-pga-tour/)).
LIV isn't a plaintiff in the lawsuit you linked; rather, it's a class action lawsuit courtesy of Larry Klayman, who has his own wing in the Batshit Crazy Hall of Fame. Klayman does, in fact, represent Patrick Reed in a couple of lawsuits involving the PGA and LIV (which is the perfect partnership) but to the best of my knowledge, has nothing to do with LIV.
A little insight to the rankings.Yes, this (and Broadie) say what the DataGolf guys said:
https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/18/eamon-lynch-owgr-dp-world-tour-jon-rahm/ (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2022/11/18/eamon-lynch-owgr-dp-world-tour-jon-rahm/)
The system introduced this summer ended institutional bias and endemic false accounting. Every player contributes points to a total that is disbursed by percentage. The winner of the RSM Classic is projected to receive 37 points, or 17.2% of the 215 total points available. The winner in Dubai should get 21.8, or 18.2% of the 121 points on offer.
“The current method recognizes that every player contributes to the strength of a field,” said Mark Broadie, the Columbia Business School professor who devised the algorithm. “The winner of the DP World Tour Championship has to beat 49 players, with 34 of those players ranked in the top 200. The winner of the RSM classic has to beat 155 players, with 68 of those players ranked in the top 200, a considerably tougher challenge.”
People minded to look for eye-opening wrinkles in the ranking system won’t be disappointed. For example, the man who finishes dead last in the no-cut tournament in Dubai is projected to receive more points than the bottom four finishers in Georgia, who will have beaten 90 guys to play the weekend. The line between imperfect and unfair is often a matter of perspective, and legislating against every such scenario is impossible.
Is Cameron Smith the best Australian golfer since Peter Thomsen?Adam Scott and Jason Day would like a word. Cam Smith has been good for like a year at this point, and for a good chunk of 2022, we don't really know how good he was because he was playing against a good chunk of nobodies. Like at the Aussie tournament he just won… who knows? At any rate, Cam's been really good for only a short period of time. Let's slow our roll, eh? We'll see if it continues or if it's a short-term hot streak.
A lot of talk about owgr and the tours getting points
Seems if we’re rating players, which is what they’re supposed to be doing, the event and field
Should matter most, not the tour it’s on.
The big tours want to keep LIV from this. And they’ve already succeeded some. Many of the LIV members rankings have gone down enough to impact the field values already, every month they can fight it impacts its more.
This isn’t about rules of OwGr. This is a battle for control
Exactly. It rather feels like the OWGR is mainly serving selected tours rather than trying to identify the best players.Oh geez. The OWGR's governing board:
GOVERNING BOARD
Chairman - Peter Dawson CBE
Augusta National Golf Club - Will Jones, Executive Director
PGA European Tour - Keith Pelley, Chief Executive
PGA of America - Seth Waugh, Chief Executive Officer
PGA Tour - Jay Monahan, Commissioner
The R&A - Martin Slumbers, Chief Executive
USGA - Mike Whan, Chief Executive Officer
International Federation of PGA Tours - Keith Waters
If the OWGR wants to be the premier ranking systemIt isn't? What is, then? What's the competition? What's the "premier ranking system" ahead of the OWGR?
it must be much quicker in reacting to the changing landscape of pro golf.No, it "mustn't." Clearly.
What is the point of time delays when everyone knows some of the best players play on Tour which is excluded.By their own freaking choice.
Falling back on rules, most of which are questionable in terms of their absolute necessity in identifying the best players, is not serving to identify the best players at this moment in time.Oy.
A lot of talk about owgr and the tours getting points
Seems if we’re rating players, which is what they’re supposed to be doing, the event and field
Should matter most, not the tour it’s on.
The big tours want to keep LIV from this. And they’ve already succeeded some. Many of the LIV members rankings have gone down enough to impact the field values already, every month they can fight it impacts its more.
This isn’t about rules of OwGr. This is a battle for control
Exactly. It rather feels like the OWGR is mainly serving selected tours rather than trying to identify the best players. If the OWGR wants to be the premier ranking system it must be much quicker in reacting to the changing landscape of pro golf. What is the point of time delays when everyone knows some of the best players play on Tour which is excluded. Falling back on rules, most of which are questionable in terms of their absolute necessity in identifying the best players, is not serving to identify the best players at this moment in time.
Ciao
Is Cameron Smith the best Australian golfer since Peter Thomsen?I don't know, but he spent a good chunk of 2022 beating nobodies at events like the Tournament of Champions, Players, and Open Championship, so its hard to say how good he was this year.
Erik,Is Cameron Smith the best Australian golfer since Peter Thomsen?Adam Scott and Jason Day would like a word. Cam Smith has been good for like a year at this point, and for a good chunk of 2022, we don't really know how good he was because he was playing against a good chunk of nobodies. Like at the Aussie tournament he just won… who knows? At any rate, Cam's been really good for only a short period of time. Let's slow our roll, eh? We'll see if it continues or if it's a short-term hot streak.
And Peter Thomson won one PGA Tour event… and a bunch of weak field British Opens. Adam Scott > Peter Thomson, I reckon.
Is Cameron Smith the best Australian golfer since Peter Thomsen?I don't know, but he spent a good chunk of 2022 beating nobodies at events like the Tournament of Champions, Players, and Open Championship, so its hard to say how good he was this year.
I don't know, but he spent a good chunk of 2022 beating nobodies at events like the Tournament of Champions, Players, and Open Championship, so its hard to say how good he was this year.Do you think Scottie Scheffler will continue to play at his level, or do you think either or both of them (Scottie/Cam) got hot for awhile?Brooks was hot for a few years. Jason Day hasn't done much lately. Etc.They could all come back, too, sure. But…
I was attempting to troll Greg Norman and had to pick an Aussie who preceded him.Okay. Fair enough.
Those weak field The Open fields included Player and Palmer.1954 - No Player, No Palmer
Oh no Greg…
https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2023/01/14/lynch-saudis-dodging-us-court-huge-liv-golf-impact/ (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2023/01/14/lynch-saudis-dodging-us-court-huge-liv-golf-impact/)
Slightly OT, but looks like LIV has a TV Deal....
https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network (https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network)
Slightly OT, but looks like LIV has a TV Deal....
https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network (https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network)
Will it draw more viewers than Gossip Girl and Hart of Dixie reruns? What do the bookmakers say?
Slightly OT, but looks like LIV has a TV Deal....Yes, a rev share (still not confirmed but…):
https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network (https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network)
A source told SI that the initial deal would be a revenue-sharing arrangement –without a rights fee being paid. But for LIV Golf, that is a better outcome than the various reports that it could pay Fox Sports to have its broadcasts on FS1 or FS2.
Given LIVs chances of prevailing in this lawsuit are slim to none...they may as well move along.
At this point they'll probably have better luck just embracing the rogue/bad boy image, as they've basically poached all the villains anyway according to Harry Higgs. https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/liv-golf-took-all-the-villains-pga-tour-pro (https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/liv-golf-took-all-the-villains-pga-tour-pro)
They should make their own majors, encourage players like Brooks and BDC to have public spats, have phil continue to disparage everyone, and basically go full Alpha Betas from Revenge of the Nerds...and their fans will no doubt eat it up.
At least they would be they authentic...
Slightly OT, but looks like LIV has a TV Deal....
https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network (https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network)
Slightly OT, but looks like LIV has a TV Deal....
https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network (https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network)
Will it draw more viewers than Gossip Girl and Hart of Dixie reruns? What do the bookmakers say?
Does it matter? What do you think the viewer numbers will be for the Amex this weekend? Right up there with Gossip Girl, I assume.
Slightly OT, but looks like LIV has a TV Deal....
https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network (https://www.si.com/golf/news/liv-golf-on-verge-of-announcing-tv-deal-with-cw-network)
Literally, reading this article was the first time I had ever even heard of the CW Network. And I have Sling, Netflix, Prime, and Paramount+, among others, so it’s not like I’m living in a cave.
I’m sure there is some way I could watch it, but this strikes me as about as small of a “TV deal” as there could possibly be. Which makes me suspect that ALL other options have been exhausted.
Looks like Patrick Reed's Kraken Attorney is upset....
https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/patrick-reed-lawyers-threaten-cnn-with-dollar450m-lawsuit (https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/patrick-reed-lawyers-threaten-cnn-with-dollar450m-lawsuit)