Waugh Games

Once again a post goes sufficiently long that it warrants a room of its own....  In this case, musings about the new kid in town.

Shack gets our musefest off to a ripping start with this prime example of the genre:

The rumblings in recent weeks have been met with an understandable: "Yes, that's a nice rumor but Seth doesn't need that job or want it," the power players would say when Seth Waugh was suggested as the leading candidate to become PGA of America CEO.

Now that the former Deutsche Bank CEO and current PGA of America advisory board member has been officially announced as Pete Bevacqua's replacement, the question will still be asked: why is an executive of his prowess, reputation, bank account and career arc taking on this position? 

Or, to put it less-tactfully, why would a 60-year-old with ten club memberships, a net worth of $80 million, expensive homes in nice places and golf's most glorious tan/hair combo want to hear from 29,000 members about their excessive dues? Or, more alarmingly, report to a Grand Jury-sized board that forcefully condemns social media dust-ups but supports drunk drivers in leadership positions?

Lots of good bits there, all faithfully linked so they must be true (or at least too good to check).  Though in our little bubble that tan/hair combo is an extremely competitive category....

But of greater importance, it seems that overnight the PGA went from 28,000 to 29,000 members.  Is there nothing that Seth Waugh can't do?

 OK, I'll bite, why would he take the gig?

A) His love of golf is well established. Deutsche Bank built an incredible tour event in Boston in short time under his watch, one that sadly (and ironically) dies this week under the Dell Technologies banner due to changes in the PGA Tour schedule and post-2008 priority changes for his former employer.

The irony is rich, but perhaps the best gloss on this one is that he got Deutsche Bank out before the music stopped?  What else ya got, Geoff?

B) Waugh was tight with former CEO Bevacqua, has been/continues to be a mentor to current PGA Tour Commissioner Jay Monahan, and at 60 can only play so much golf. Also, this is an organization in the sport he loves, based (at least for now) near his winter home, seems like a wise way to stay in the game of dealmaking and keeps in him in the golf and business game.

And this differs from A) how?  And trust me, a man in his early sixties can still play an obscene amount of golf....  It just may not be, you know, good golf.

C) He's well versed in the PGA's current issues and may see an opportunity to make a major deal. So, what is that megadeal?

Let me just say that were I the owner of a certain tract of land in Frisco, TX, I'd be accepting any reasonable offer.... I've tried Googling it to no avail, but where do we go to get a listing of those ten clubs to which Waugh belongs?  I demand transparency, so I can bring the hate with cause.

Though you know where we're headed, and Shack does at least drop some names:

How about a stronger partnership with the PGA Tour? Or, more intriguingly, a merger? 

Consider what currently sits before the PGA of America: an expiring television contract for the PGA Championship and a possible headquarters move to Frisco, Texas. Those are big ticket items that will shape the organization for decades to come and left by Pete Bevacqua for the next CEO when he moved to NBC Sports. Does Seth Waugh really take the PGA job to quibble with a Mark Lazarus or Sean McManus over commercial breaks-per-hour and then have a celebratory dinner when the deal is done? When he could be playing Cypress Point or Seminole or National Golf Links? 

Probably not. But stranger things have happened.

 OK, so let's see if Geoff can pierce my well-reasoned pessimism.....

What would incentivize these two to get hitched? 

Money, of course.

Let's start with the easy issue: office space. 

If the two organizations joined forces, here's betting the PGA Tour could find room in their new Foster-designed headquarters. It's not Palm Beach, but it's also not Frisco for the PGA of America staff who would still like to serve the members and keep their jobs in a place where palm trees don't wilt. There would undoubtedly be consolidation on some fronts, though the PGA of America is a pretty lean operation.

Really?  he references the ugly late 60's divorce, but thinks that can be forgiven and forgotten over some excess cubicles?  

But here's where a merger makes sense: power, money and branding. 

Rights to PGA of America's PGA Championship expire for CBS in 2019. The PGA Tour's rights expire in 2021 with the networks and Golf Channel. It is no secret that the PGA Tour would like its own channel or an ownership stake in NBC's Golf Channel. They passed up that opportunity when the current deal was negotiated but these two entities begin a new streaming partnership in 2019 for PGA Tour Live.

Currently, two major media corporations have shown a love of golf and content: Comcast and AT&T, headed by two CEO's--Brian Roberts of Comcast and Randal Stephenson of AT&T--are both Augusta National members who sign big checks in golf and are lodged in megadeal madness to expand their companies.

I'm guessing that ANGC is not one of Waugh's ten memberships, but that perhaps solves the prior query as to why he'd consider the PGA of America CEOship.  Yes, there are expiring contracts for rights fees, but I'm still awaiting something that passes for logic.

How does a stronger partnership serve the PGA Tour and PGA of America members? 

The deal would give the PGA Tour ownership of a major championship and partial ownership of the Ryder Cup. A deal would put an end to the meaningless but vanity-destroying confusion over PGA Tour vs. PGA of America. And most of all, such a partnership would further convince one of those two media companies to respect their position in the form of dollars in some way. The PGA of America's members will have to get something out of all of this, but what that would be, remains unclear.

OK, the PGA of America has something that the Tour covets, two things actually.  And while I get that they'd like a mulligan for those 1968 negotiations, that underwhelms as a rationale for merging organizations that serve disparate constituencies.  Yanno, the logic for the divorce in the first place...

How does a possible merger serve the fans? 

I haven't a clue. But none of the above-mentioned power players hopes to be in golf for the next few decades only to get on the bad side of consumers and to scare off subscribers. They want to make money, make deals and extend their reach. They like golf.

Still, mergers of non-profits (haruumph!) should deliver something tangible and exciting. And that's why Seth Waugh's decision to take the CEO job could lead to some big and compelling moves.

Don't feel bad, Geoff, you're not the only one that hasn't a clue.... though you might be the only one admitting such.

Rex Hoggard scored a Q&A with the man, and I'm shocked that Shack left this howler unexcerpted:

SW: I’ve always had that golden rule and we all know what that means. To be self-enforcing cures a lot of ills and makes for cultures that are self-fulfilling. 

My son played every sport, but none of the basketball or baseball kids would take off their hat when they shook your hand, the golf kids did. All those things are enormously valuable in a society that’s moving so quickly. Being a gentleman or gentlewoman really matters.

That hat-and-sunglasses-doffing on the 18th green is a nice little tradition, but in and of itself its pretty meaningless....  It doesn't make our game better than others, Seth.

These quotes will get much wider play:

GC.com: What are your thoughts on the current move by golf’s rule-makers to examine

how technology is impacting the game, particularly distance gains in recent years at the highest levels?

SW: I have an opinion as a golfer, but not as a CEO yet. I pride myself on coming in without preconceived notions and hearing all the sides and I haven’t done that yet. I don’t think you can do this without the sign-on of these 29,000 [members]. I think golf should be more fun instead of less fun. I don’t think we need to make the game harder.

I look forward to getting in the middle of the conversation, but it’s premature to give an opinion because it’s not informed without hearing all the sides of the argument.

And what might that opinion "as a golfer" be?  

I don't blame him for ducking this right now, given that the ink on his contract is not yet dry...  But doesn't this highlight why the organizations don't belong under the same roof?  Technology affects golf differently at the elite versus the club level, and Waugh's new organization should be the advocate for those 28,000 29,000 members. 

That said, I'll go out with this Dave Shedloski profile of the man, in which I find this bit a little rich:

But what motivates him most, beyond helping the membership, is what the PGA of America can do for the game. 

“I’ll have a really interesting seat at the table as far as how golf evolves,” he said. “The PGA, in my mind, is the organization in the best position to be solely of the game and for the game. We have a pure mission through our membership to grow the game, and that puts us in a position of neutrality, to some degree, if you will. We can bring people to the table to enhance the game as a whole as opposed to a particular slice of the pie. 

“I believe the game is worthy and hugely important in all its values. Societally, I think it’s important," Waugh added. "We all talk about growing it, but how do we make it into our kids’ game as opposed to our parents’ game or our game? I don’t pretend to know what the answers are. But I look forward to being a collaborator and partner with the other leaders in our game to work in the best interest of the game.”

Yet every item on this subject leads with that PGA Championship TV contract and relocation to Frisco.... I agree that he deserves a seat at the table, I just worry that their ownership of those two lucrative elite events provides an obvious conflict, and has led to the membership being disenchanted with their leadership.  I'm most interested in how he views that conflict, and in how he proposes to address it.