'Dis And 'Dat

I did manage to get out yesterday and enjoy the wonderful, late-Spring weather.  The leg is healing, but unfortunately no quicker than Il Duce is reopening N.Y. State... At least it held together until carts were available, otherwise I'd be a retired golfer.

Match Leftovers - I don't often blog gold TV ratings, as the ebb and flow of a niche audience seems of limited interest.  Shack has a giddy post on how strong the ratings were in the coverted 18-49 demo:

According to Showbuzzdaily.com, almost 1/3 of The Match 2’s audience was in the coveted 18-49 demo and the number was even better on on TruTV, also meaning there are people of any age group who know how to find TruTV:

About 30% of The Match’s audience landed in the 18-49 demo despite the 44.5 average age of the participants.

Veddy interesting..... 

Though his comparison to the prior week seems.... well, a stretch:

The numbers for TaylorMade Driving Relief with a foursome averaging 29.5 years:

That’s 25% of the almighty buyers for a younger, supposedly more millennial-friendly group of golfers. And a grand total of (at least) 860,000 fewer viewers 18-49. While not a huge difference in the percentage department, The Match did rout Driving Relief in overall audience and even took chipped away at NASCAR’s ratings. 

Given the sometimes blatant ageism in golf and view that young participants translate to a young audience, The Match’s overall dominating win should be noted. But probably won’t.

What?  You don't think millennials watch football?  

But the bigger issue is the event's appearance at a time when there was no live sports to watch...  and should we ever be surprised that people will tune in to see Tiger?

Sally Jenkins at the WaPo found much of interest in the chit-chat among the players:

Still, it was tremendously entertaining — and informative — to listen to the one-upping

asides and to watch the interplay among four men who have been famously buttoned-up competitors. And who normally show their personalities only in marketing campaigns.

Interestingly, you learned that even in a goofy golf situation and unshaven, Woods remains a fairly laconic and methodical sort. Whereas Mickelson, on the other hand, was a real surprise. You never knew he had quite this much effusiveness in him, with his almost epicurean love of a “tasty” contest on every hole. Mickelson’s willingness to explain and instruct the game — and his clear enthusiasm for doing so — was the highlight of the event. And it was something the PGA and networks should consider giving the audience a lot more of.

I don't think either of those guys were a surprise, at least not to actual golf fans.  We all understand the dramatic improvements in audio capture on golf telecasts, a major enhancement to the viewer's experience.  Despite how uncomfortable it looked, Phil told Dan Patrick that he's prepared to be mic'd up in regular Tour events:

"I would be open to the idea because of how it's being received, and some of the insight and so forth," Mickelson said. "But you don't have the play between individuals. I had a partner, and Tom and I could talk back and forth. And maybe you could get some of that with the caddie, but having a partner is much more intimate and you have much better conversation."

But even Phil gets that the key here is the format, which can't really be replicated on Tour.  It's the team concept and the addition of the amateurs...  Phil would never have schooled an actual professional the way he did Brady, nor would he have engaged in the chipping tutorial that was such good fun.

Although I think Geoff way over-interprets this:

I remain bullish on the idea of the Ryder Cup going forward this year as a tonic of sorts

without huge galleries and instead focusing on a stripped-down competition. After The Match and those record-setting ratings, I’m even more confident that a fan-free (or very limited gathering) would be the right thing this year for the biennial matches. 

The Match 2, Champions For Charity, confirmed that people will watch something with no fans. In record-setting numbers, actually.

Big caveat: this is as long as the lack of cheering is made up for with production values and other differentiating elements that take us inside the ropes. A day later, it’s clear this sense of tagging along with the group was why The Match worked despite the dreary day at a largely forgettable course free of fans: it felt like we were there, glitches and all.

I just don't see how you get from one to the other.... The boffo ratings and general praise for the event reflect a sports-deprived audience, and I'd suggest far more skepticism looking forward.  At the very least, you'd want to see how Colonial feels, which is a mere two weeks from today.

But I think we can all agree with this Sally Jenkins conclusion:

The rain shorted out the microphones at times, which made for some very dead silences given that there were no crowds. And let’s face it: Cart Cam is not exactly as thrilling as a Daytona 500 in-car camera. And, I’m sorry, men look like little boys in shorts, no matter who they are or how much Mickelson “activates” the shapely calves he so enjoys flexing.

And she gives Tiger a pass on his grandpa shorts...

Since someone mentioned the Ryder Cup, Rory is not on the same page with the Euro Tour hierarchy, which could make things delightfully awkward.  He continues to argue for a one-year delay, and makes the case that history is on his side:

"I think the majority of players would like to see it pushed back until 2021 so that they can play in front of crowds and have the atmosphere that makes the Ryder Cup so special.

"The players are the ones that make the Ryder Cup. If they are not on board with it and don't want to play then there is no Ryder Cup.

"I see it being pushed back until 2021 and, honestly, I think that will be the right call."

I've been arguing that for different reasons, as you guys are no doubt tired of hearing.  But Rory going his own way serves as a reminder to top-up my strategic popcorn reserve.

But pencil in the Friday after Thanksgiving for The Match III, and this guy just put up his hand:

The Usual Suspects are being bandied about.... 

“I think you could showcase guys like Steph Curry and Michael Jordan or Tony Romo and Patrick Mahomes, who are all good golfers, elite talents and have great personalities. Those personalities are going to come out with this event. Or you could have someone who loves the game and is competitive but is really entertaining like Larry David and Bill Murray. I think that could shine.”

If it keeps them from clogging up the KF and alternate field events, I guess we can do it for the kids.  But I'm thinking those last two names would be a level of pain I'm not prepared to endure....

One last bit, amazingly not from the N.Y. Times.  Tiger was there, so I guess we can't included minorities, but the usually reasonable Beth Ann Nichols reads from the intersectional style guide:

'The Match II' and TaylorMade Driving Relief were great, but where were the women?

Ummmm...in the kitchen where they belong? 

This player went to the same hymnal:

Let's let Beth Ann make her best case:

The TaylorMade event could’ve been a mixed-team format. Maria Fassi and Paula Creamer are both in Florida. Some of TaylorMade’s female stars could’ve also called in during the broadcast as Jon Rahm did. Staffers who could’ve called in include Natalie Gulbis, Muni He and Charley Hull. Sung Hyun Park, who speaks limited English, was involved in a charity exhibition in South Korea with current No. 1 Jin Young Ko. Women’s golf frequently takes center stage in that part of the world.

Look at those bold letter names!  What were they thinking?

There's actually going to be a time for this, but now is most certainly not it.  but let me express it in a rhetorical question for Beth Ann?  Should Tiger have paired with J.Y. Ko is the event would only have raised $5 million, in lieu of that $20 million?

I'll also remind that in a prior version of such matches Tiger included Anika and Karrie, which bombed terribly.  And those are actual bold print names, unlike the current women's game.  Tiger and Phil will, I believe, ultimately include women players, at least to the extent this makes it past No. III.  But the constant whining is becoming quite tiresome....Nobody owes you anything, you have to go out and earn the opportunity.

Acknowledging Greatness - OK, not exactly greatness, but this from Andy Pope is far more promising than you'd expect:

Why I deserve a special exemption into the 2020 U.S. Open

A guy you've never heard of exempted into the U.S. Open?  I don't think so...But....

Over the last five years, I’ve done something no other golfer can claim. 

Not Rory, not Brooks, not even Tiger Woods. 

In 2015, ’16, ’17 and again last year, I advanced through both local and sectional qualifying to earn a spot in the U.S. Open; I was in the fields at Chambers Bay, Oakmont, Erin Hills and Pebble Beach. Decent foursome, right? 

I won’t be making it five out of six this year, but not because I’ve lost my game, or my nerve. No, the run will end in 2020 because the USGA has cancelled qualifying for the U.S. Open at Winged Foot, on account of Covid-19 concerns.

Of course not, but still... That's quite the accomplishment, and I just wonder whether it's been done previously.

Dahmen v. Kang -  As we've discussed previously, Joel Dahmen is one of my favorite guys out there, especially after the famous incident with Sung Kang.  he recently sat for the Subpar podcats with Colt Knost and recounts the most famous drop of recent years:

On the newest episode of GOLF’s Subpar, Dahmen told his side of the incident with hosts Colt Knost and Drew Stoltz. It all began on the 10th hole during the final round of the 2018 Quicken Loans National. Kang’s approach into the 566-yard par-5 flew left of the green and into the hazard.

In Dahmen’s eyes, Kang’s ball flight meant his shot had to have entered the hazard a considerable distance from the green. In other words, Kang would have to drop from the fairway, then hit a lengthy approach into the green. 

“He wanted to drop up by the green and I said, ‘no, I don’t think it crossed [the hazard],'” Dahmen said. “I went very political about the whole thing, you’ve got to protect the field. I don’t want to do this, you know. That was the first five minutes.”

But Dahmen did something that I fear almost no other player would do, he actually took it upon himself to protect the field.  

“I got him to agree his ball didn’t draw. I go, ‘if you hit from back there and your ball didn’t draw, it couldn’t have crossed,'” Dahmen recalled. “We had a rules official come over 15 minutes later, and he was like ‘what do you think?’ and I go ‘I know that it didn’t cross here, I don’t feel comfortable with it, he’s got to go back.”

As I recall, Kang also admitted to the rules official that his ball did not draw, pretty much confirming Dahmen's fact base.  Yet, this is the adjudication:

Dahmen and Kang were then forced to let the groups behind them play through while PGA Tour rules officials attempted to figure out the situation. Nearly 25 minutes later, the pair got a decision: since no rules official had witnessed the shot, they were forced to defer to Kang’s argument. Kang hit his approach from 40 yards out in the fairway, made the putt, and went on to finish T-3.

Think about the message this sends to other players...  Don't bother trying to enforce the rules, because you're on your own.

How are Joel and Sung getting on these days?  Well, Kang obviously didn't like this:

 We all lost, Joel.

Then later, this bit of hubris:

A few weeks after the event, Kang confronted Dahmen at the Canadian Open. 

“He goes, ‘Joel, I want you to apologize to me,'” Dahmen said. “I said, ‘apologize to me? Look around, you should apologize to everybody else in that field. You took money from them, you did all this stuff.'” 

“I just said, ‘You did this to yourself, I didn’t do this,” Dahmen said. “Either way this was getting out. I just accelerated it.” 

Neither player wound up receiving an apology, and unsurprisingly, Dahmen and Kang don’t exactly have a jocular relationship. 

“It was back and forth for five minutes,” Dahmen said. “We have not spoken since.

I know which one I'll be rooting for... But what I'd really like is the name of that feckless rules official.

Golf in the Kingdom -  Have you noticed that a certain ilk of public official seems to like the feel of their boot on our throat?  But it's not just the Cuomos and Whitmers of the world, Scotland's own Nicola Sturgeon seems to like her population docile and obedient.  

Anyone who isn't beholden to the legacy media has long since realized that the chances of catching this virus outdoors is borderline nonexistent.  Also known is the fact that our elites refuse to be subject to those very same rules, whether it's Whitmers husband or Neal Ferguson's essential booty calls, but our elites appear immune to embarrassment.... 

Scotland, the ancestral home of our game, is finally prepared to allow its citizens to experience golf, but only under the most draconian of regulations:

The St. Andrews Links Trust announced it is re-opening four of its links on May 29. All courses in Scotland have been closed due to the coronavirus pandemic since March 23.

The Old Course, New Course, Eden and Balgove will be in the first wave of openings, with the Eden turned into two separate nine-hole layouts to encourage nine-hole rounds. The Jubilee, Strathtyrum and Castle will not open at this stage but “will re-open in a phased manner in the future. The St Andrews Links will advise 2 days before these courses open,” according to Ford Horsfield, head of golf services.

It will not be business as usual. The letter states that “at this time all courses are available for Yearly Ticket holders only.” Tee times will be made in 12-minute intervals with two golfers per tee time.

There will also be no walk-ups, so if necessary there is a track and trace record of who is on the links.

Last week Scottish Golf confirmed that May 29 would be the earliest return date for Scottish courses. However, a number of courses, especially those in Edinburgh, are targeting June 8 for re-opening.

Omitted from that article is perhaps the most draconian regulation of all, to wit, that during this Phase I process golfers should not travel more than five miles to their golf clubs....   But they're not control freaks.... no, not at all.

There is not any science that supports such measures, so we can eliminate public safety as a consideration.  If their actual objective was to inflict maximum pain and economic hardship on their people, what would they have done differently?

The Sheep Ranch - It's happening, not that any of us can imagine traveling there.  But the bar is set pretty damn high:

Is the newly opened Sheep Ranch *already* the best course at Bandon Dunes? Here’s how we see it

Let’s start with that first one: What’s it like? 

At a destination known for its minimalist aesthetic, the Sheep Ranch is, in some ways, the most stripped-bare of the courses, with just a smattering of trees and without a single bunker, on the smallest plot of Bandon’s five 18-holers, and by far the rawest looking swatch of land. 

In other ways, though, it’s a maxed-out design, claiming more oceanfront than any of its siblings, with a mile-plus of coastline, nine greens on the bluffs and water views from every hole. The wind can whip anywhere, anytime at Bandon, but nowhere harder than it does here.

This as close as Josh comes to answering the question:

And anyway, it’s all good. Grillroom course-ranking debates are a central part of any trip to Bandon. You play a bunch of rounds; you bat around opinions. There’s no objective truth, no right or wrong. In my view, Bandon Trails is the best course at the resort, but I’d place Sheep Ranch not too far behind, creeping up on Pacific Dunes for second. 

Disagree?

Very much, though that's where he hides behind that flimsy "no objective truth" bit.  Trails was my least favorite, though it is objectively an awfully good golf course, one that suffers the indignity of little ocean frontage.  Yanno, stuff like this:

If you like that sort of thing...

A similar take from Jason Lusk at Golfweek:

The design team led by Bill Coore and Ben Crenshaw had to dig deep into its bag of tricks to make this highly anticipated course work on a deceptively small piece of land that is roughly 600 yards across at its widest. With only about 140 acres for the course before the land climbs into trees to the east, Coore and Crenshaw fashioned a genius routing that plays as wide open as the views.

The most immediately noticed difference is that the Sheep Ranch’s cliffs are not as linear, with promontories jutting 100 feet above the beach that afforded somewhat surreal opportunities to build several greens and tees almost entirely surrounded by open sky. And second is the ground itself, with little natural foliage to hide the sweeping internal contours. 

“For the most part we did what we always try to do,” Coore said. “If you find a site that has a lot of inherent qualities, natural qualities for golf, you just let that guide the process. Certainly at the Sheep Ranch, the site was inherently different than any of the courses there. It definitely had different contours than most of the other courses. It wasn’t sand, wasn’t dunes. It just had such interesting natural contours for golf, amazingly interesting contours. We tried to let those contours and the coastline dictate the type of course.”

You'll want to give this one a read if you have any interest in the dark art of routing a golf course, because the thought process is quite interesting.  Just this small taste:

“Ben and I both agree, if we did anything that was maybe a bit unusual but was actually key to unlocking the routing there, it was combining those tee complexes,” Coore said. “By pulling tee complexes very close together where they almost become common teeing grounds for two different holes, it allowed us to really make it compact in the teeing areas. Then as the holes go away from the tees to the landing areas, they can get wider and wider. That was one of the absolute keys to the routing of the golf course.”

Combine smart guys with interesting land, and the results should be compelling.... here's the finished product:

Now I just need to get my butt back there, no easy task in ordinary times.  Of course, with five full 18's, plus the Par-3 that I've never played, one needs to block out more than a full week to play them all, plus a few replays on the favored tracks.

I'll probably skip tomorrow and see you again on Monday.  Unless, of course, something inspires me....

Long Weekend Wrap

So, what do you kids want to talk about?  Lots to talk about, perhaps even better with that day's delay to allow folks to dive deeper.  For instance, it allows me to lede with those boffo ratings:

And this:

Since the majority of sporting events were called off on March 11-12, it ranks at best seventh among sportscasts — behind the first two nights of the NFL Draft, at least three episodes of the ESPN docuseries “The Last Dance” and the previous weekend’s NASCAR race at Darlington (6.32M). 

Viewership more-than-doubled the previous weekend’s “Driving Relief” charity event on the NBC family of networks, which saw Rory McIlroy compete against Dustin Johnson, Rickie Fowler and Matthew Wolff (2.35M). 

“The Match” ranks as easily the most-watched golf telecast on any network this year, with the caveat that the season’s first two majors — the Masters and PGA Championship — were postponed. Notably, it averaged more viewers than the final rounds of last year’s PGA Championship (5.0M) and British Open (3.7M).

It's of course apples and oranges, with occasional kumquat as well.  It's that middle 'graph that might matter most to the folks involved, but it's quite the turnaround from Shadow Creek.

 This was Alan Shipnuck's takeaway:

Why Tiger Woods’ dazzling play was the biggest story in a Match full of intrigue

The Match II was glorious anarchy, a beautiful train wreck that offered the mindless entertainment a wary nation desperately needs. But amid all the televised yukking and

wilding-out on Twitter there was one very momentous development: Tiger Woods is back, baby.

When professional golf came to a grinding halt in mid-March due to the coronavirus, Woods was battling both his swing and his body. With the Masters bearing down on him Tiger was serially avoiding tournament golf, trying to buy time. The halting of the season couldn’t have come at a better moment for a 44-year-old warrior with a fused spine. The Match, then, was the first glimpse of Woods in 98 days and midway through the front nine Phil Mickelson blurted out the verdict: “He’s striping it.”

With his driver, most notably...  This reminded me of the ZoZo, in that we had no clue if the guy could even take it back, especially since the last time we saw him he was obviously impaired.

Tiger’s swing was rhythmic and graceful, the telltale transition at the top as languid as a humid afternoon in South Florida. Over the first eight holes — by which time Woods had staked himself and his partner Peyton Manning to a 3-up lead — the only shot Tiger missed was when he had to putt with his 4-iron, part of a gimmicky one-club challenge.

Gimmicky?  I would argue that if he had Old Trusty in his hands that putt would have had far less drama... Of course, we all wanted to see Tiger in a greenside bunker with that aforementioned 4-iron.

Shall we check in with the Tour Confidential arbiters?

1. Two of the biggest names in golf joined two of the biggest names in football for The Match: Champions for Charity. We got Tiger and Phil. We got Peyton and Tom. We got Tiger’s home course, Medalist Golf Club. We got Sir Charles in the booth, and JT pacing the fairways. We got live golf. Who or what was the star of The Match II?

Sean Zak: Phil Mickelson was the most entertaining aspect of the match, from the moment he missed the fairway with an iron on the 1st. He helped guide Brady back into

form and smack-talked a quiet Tiger Woods. Unlike The Match I, Phil actually hit some great shots here, too.

Alan Bastable: Phil, Phil, a thousand times Phil. That drive he parachuted over the trees and onto (and then just off) the green at the par-4 11th was an all-timer, made all the better by Brady holing the eagle putt — maybe a top-5 shot for Mickelson’s televised career, and yes, I realize this was only an exhibition. Mickelson was like a carnival barker out there, pepping up his partner, conducting short-game clinics and no doubt driving Tiger nuts. Justin Thomas was also surprisingly good. His Tiger story from the Presidents Cup was a winner, and he dropped the zinger of the day on Barkley when he called out Sir Charles’, um … less-than-svelte physique.

Alan Shipnuck: Phil was indeed great fun, and Tiger entertained merely with his wizardly ballstriking, but I thought Peyton was the MVP, with his down-home charm, ace storytelling and rock-solid play that helped his team build a big lead on the front nine that ultimately proved insurmountable. 

Michael Bamberger: Golf. Absolutely the game. The game can be played so many different ways, for so many different reasons.

Zak: It did feel like 1 v 2 for a while there on the front, and that wasn’t all because of Brady. Peyton was impressive. 

Josh Sens: I dunno. I think Brady was the most interesting. Watching him slap it around and struggle, going from brooding to upbeat, silent to smack-talking, he seemed so … human. 

Dylan Dethier: Peyton’s play and commentary each exceeded expectations. He’s on the winning side, so he gets the MVP. Tiger looked really good too, though.

What were the chances of that question not yielding a single vote for the Striped One?   Fact is, and this governs future installments, but Tiger is quite a boring guy.  I know that's heresy and I anticipate a flood of hate mail, but it needs to be said.

Folks are assigning letter grades, so shall we see how they assess the local boy?  First, Dylan Dethier on this one facet:

TIGER WOODS’ HEALTH 

GRADE: A+. Remember, the last time we were playing a PGA Tour event Tiger Woods wasn’t there. He was injured. Today, he wasn’t! Amanda Balionis asked how Woods was feeling as he warmed up on the range in the rain and he reminded her that his ’10’ (on a scale of 1-10) is lower than it used to be, but still — he looked plenty loose and limber on the holes that followed. An efficient, encouraging showing.

For that one I'd have suggested Pass-Fail, as we can't be sure it'll last past today.

Now Dylan gets to the important stuff:

TIGER WOODS’ SHORTS 

GRADE: E. That’s E for Enormous. I just don’t get it, guys.

We've seen the Dad-jeans before, so why not Grandpa Faux-Cargo shorts?

 He does give Tiger's golf an "A", but here he gets to a long-term issue for the franchise:

TIGER WOODS MIC’D UP 

GRADE: C-. Everyone was having so much fun that nobody seemed to mind, but the star of the show sort of disappeared. There’s a legitimate possibility that Woods’ microphone stopped working coming down the stretch; that’s a sign of how much we heard from the headliner even as he and his partner closed out the match. Mic problems or not, Woods seemed perfectly content to keep striping it and leave the entertaining to the rest of the crew. That’s fundamentally interesting. 

That to me is why the decision to include the QBs was so inspired.  Mostly because they need it so badly...

Fortunately, Tim Schmitt does:

Tiger Woods: B+ 

We’re weighting Tiger’s grade a little because this is his home course. He looked strong

— a great sign for golf fans — and put himself in great position most of the afternoon. In fact, while the others were fighting to find fairways through a heavy rain on the front nine, Tiger routinely placed his ball exactly where a knowledgeable club member would. 

He did miss a few shots we might expect him to hit (although not many) and the one thing that jumped out was Tiger’s poor speeds on the greens. Sure, they were wet. But Tiger plays these greens all the time; you’d think he’d know which putts needed a few extra rolls considering the soggy conditions.

He aced the golf portion of his exam, it's the entertainment aspect in which he's lacking.  

As an aside, this seemed to your humble blogger to be exceedingly lame:

Tiger Woods hit Phil Mickelson with the best jab of The Match

As both golf legends have said numerous times in the past couple years, all Tiger has to do is say "Big picture"—a reference to his three times as many majors and nearly twice as many PGA Tour wins—to get a leg up on Mr. Calves. But during The Match Part II, Woods was able to focus on one major in particular to deliver the dagger of the day.

After Mickelson asked Woods to mark his golf ball before hitting his approach shot on the fifth hole, Tiger gave the perfect response:

"Do you want me to use one of my U.S. Open medals?"

Boom. Roasted.

Or something.  I mean, if you're a fan of stale, pre-scripted banter, sure...  Otherwise, it's a bout as spontaneous as Gary McCord's bikini wax musings...

Back to Dylan's grades, and apparently he'll come up with a letter grade for just about anything:

THE FORMAT 

GRADE: B+. This was mostly fantastic. The front nine allowed us to see each guy play his own ball (for better and for worse) and just as that was running out of steam, we switched to the more-dramatic alternate shot format. That allowed for strategy and extra intrigue down the stretch.

I'm far more skeptical about that best ball portion than Dylan is, as is Shack:

Best-ball – It just takes forever. And rarely is the format that good. Granted, the front nine best-ball format of Champions For Charity was better than two-man Skins (!?), but that’s not a high bar. Remember, the Scots have it right even if they may grovel at the “modified” notion. More alternate shot please.

It does take forever, even in the Ryder and Prez Cups...  I do, however, see an issue in sending the amateurs out to play alternate shot all day.  The best ball does, I think, allow them to find some game...  But those early holes took forever, especially hard on folks given the delay in the start.

The other problem is that the QBs didn't get nearly enough strokes.  Folks forget that Tiger and Phil are not scratch players, but +6-7's...  

Back to Dylan, and I'm a convert on this one:

GOLF IN CARTS 

GRADE: A. This dynamic was WAY better than I thought it would be. Carts seemed lame on the surface — walking is undeniably cooler. But the cart rides helped with pacing, big-time. They also allowed for in-cart interviews, call-ins and strange shots of Mickelson bumping along like he was navigating Koopa Troopa Beach in Mario Kart. Exceeded expectations.

I thought I would hate it, then realized it allowed for far better pacing.  So now, I merely hate myself for liking it...

 Shall we get to those QBs?

PEYTON MANNING’S GOLF GAME 

GRADE: A-. Manning’s game WAY exceeded expectations. He stuffed it on three of the par-3s, kept it (mostly) in play and nearly holed out on No. 16, with the opponent looming.

This guy, however, is tougher on Peyton:

Peyton Manning: B 

Everything you need to know about Manning’s competitive fire shined through on the

212-yard 16th hole. The team of Phil and Tom was clearly gaining momentum, and Brady stuck a beauty to eight feet. At this point, Manning was starting to show signs of collapse after messing up a bunker shot on No. 13 and missing an easy par putt on No. 14. 

But that’s when Peyton came back with one of the best shots of the day, a perfectly placed bullet that dropped inside two feet from the cup. 

It was part of a recurring theme — Manning’s iron shots coming out crisp. Although he insisted after the match that he was a lot more nervous than Mickelson, he certainly didn’t play that way.

Manning hit any number of horrible golf shots, including quite a few tee balls on the back side.  Those seemed important n the moment, because clearly the pros wanted to be hitting the approach shots.  But Peyton repeatedly redeemed himself by striping his irons, perhaps none more important than the one to the final green (though No. 16 as well).

Everyone has something to say about TB12:

TOM BRADY’S FRONT NINE 

GRADE: D? The question mark is because this was impossible to grade. Brady was an absolute trainwreck for six-and-a-half holes. He was getting roasted all over social media, and with good reason. Everyone knows the feeling of being the worst player in a group and being painfully, acutely aware of your every miscue. But golf has a funny way of flipping around all at once, and Brady went from hopeless disaster to hitting the most memorable shot of the day:

Whattsamatta with you?  Everyone loves golf porn:

And that was far from his worst shot...

Tom Brady: C+ 

He really is the master of second-half comebacks, isn’t he? Tom Brady was awful through the first six holes. To the point where buddies across the country were texting each other and suggesting there was something they can finally do better than the GOAT.

Brady was coming off everything early, and spraying shots left and right. 

But on No. 7, you could just sense that he had been picked on enough. He caught his iron so clean off the fairway, it pulled his microphone off and ripped his pants. The holed-out birdie was one of many highlights in the round, not to mention the one that made it feel like it might become a match. 

And while we thought Brady might be able to recover from his early failing grade to manage a B, he had a few big fails down the stretch — including a missed putt on No. 17 and then essentially becoming a non-factor on 18. 

Still, finishing with this grade after where we stood six holes in was pretty impressive.

Easily my favorite part of the day, and I'm hardly a TB12/Patriots hater.  It's merely something we all go through from time to time on the course (take this most recent weekend, for instance), and watching a world-class athlete cope and try to fix it is must-see TV.

I thought this the funniest Twitter take on Brady's travails:

Also this:

Shack does call out a certain apparel manufacturer, adding the telling detail:

Losers 

Tom Brady’s Under Armour pants – They split in the fabric—not the seam— and the big reveal came as he went to pick up his hole-out. They’ll be shipping those to UA headquarters for forensic analysis. **Brady later Tweets a suggestion they were NOT UA pants.

The fabric?  

I'm obviously holding Phil for last, so some other observations from Dylan:

THE WITTY BANTER 

GRADE: A. This was the biggest upset of all. The witty banter is always bad. Even last week, when I felt like it was better than usual, it was still bad. But in the Match, it was a revelation. It quickly became clear that Mickelson and Manning were going to carry the day from a personality perspective, while Brady brooded and Woods grinded. It became clear that there were no sacred cows, not even Mickelson’s missing U.S. Open medal or Brady’s relationship with former coach Bill Belichick. The broadcast was much better because of it, especially as Brady came out of his shell on the back nine.

Everything Dylan cites I perceived as scripted and forced, so you'll have to draw your own conclusions.  But I agree that Peyton Manning is a uniquely appealing personality, and combined with Brady's disastrous play early, are my favorite aspects of the day.

More Dylan:

MEDALIST 

GRADE: B. Medalist was — fine? There are extenuating circumstances here, namely inches and inches of rain plus limited resources when it came to cameras. But I don’t think we saw Medalist at its finest. It felt like a cool version of Florida golf, but without the spectacular aerials from last week at Seminole. Medalist is a very nice, very difficult golf course, and it was fun seeing Tiger Woods at his home club, but I didn’t really get an itch to play there. I’d still love to see it again minus the saturation.

It was just a tough place for the QBs, undoubtedly made even harder by the rain.  They would have benefited by being at Seminole, with its far more generous playing corridors.

Back to that TC gang:

2. If social media was any indication, the Match was well received by viewers. But is there any element of the event/format/telecast that could have been improved upon, or done differently (note: please save your Brady takes for the next question!)? 

Zak: Either Tiger’s mic wasn’t working well or Tiger wasn’t talking. Regardless, the broadcast felt lacking in the Woods department, though he made up for it with some impressive play. Would have loved to hear what he’s been up to, how much he’s been playing, etc.

Bastable: Agreed. It was almost as if Tiger didn’t want to be there (the same cannot be said for his game). We called this one pre-Match, but Brady and Manning didn’t get nearly enough strokes. Three shots was a joke. One blow per hole would have made things way more interesting on the front nine.

Shipnuck: I’m sure Tiger’s mic was fine, that’s just who he is in a competitive situation: enigmatic, brooding and totally focused. I would have liked to see a long-drive purse on every hole, which would have created a lot of tension between wanting to hit bombs and playing smarter to win the hole. 

Bamberger: I would have liked to see the QBs play all the way into the hole just ONCE, on a long tough one. They’re good athletes, but golf into the hole is hard. 

Sens: I would’ve liked to see more alternate shot. The recovery shot is the most exciting shot in golf, and that format gives you plenty of them. 

Dethier: Good points, all! The format was a home run. Faster pacing out of the gate is the only other slight improvement I’d offer; those first six holes took nearly two hours.

Mostly sensible, though I think Shipnuck is off the reservation with his long-drive suggestion.  If you do it every hole, it quickly loses any significance.  

So, obviously we're headed for their thoughts on TB12:

3. Tom Brady was a wreck for most of the match (his hole-out on the 7th hole not withstanding) before finding his groove on the last few holes. Was his underwhelming play the biggest surprise of the day? 

Zak: TB12 was shockingly bad early on, but as a mid-handicapper who has definitely been there, I started to feel bad for the guy. To me, the biggest surprise is how he couldn’t reset until he had holed out on 7. I would have figured he’d be able to scrape a bogey together before then.

Bastable: Amazing to me that a guy with six Super Bowl rings, who’s accustomed to playing in front of millions of eyeballs, could be that rattled. I mean, nerves can be the ONLY way to explain it, right? No way he would have broken 50 on his own ball on the front nine, even with the hole out. Even Brady-haters had to feel for the guy. We’ve all been there — only not with half of America watching.

Shipnuck: Nah, I’m an 8, too, and perfectly capable of hitting it sideways on any given day, and that’s without all the pressure and distractions built into this event. Brady had some great moments to balance the disastrous first seven holes. 

Bamberger: He stands up well to the ball and he’s a good athlete and he’s strong, but that weak grip makes you so wristy and unreliable. Or so I’ve heard.

Sens: Not surprising. Given his handicap and the setting. Also when he said before the match that he’d played 18 holes that same day, I figured he was in trouble. Clearly, he was searching. 

Dethier: I think the hole-out was a bigger surprise than the poor play. Brady shot over 100 at this same course last year, so some struggles were to be expected. But the hole-out? That was electric.

Well, nerves and the fact that he doesn't appear to have played much, at least he hadn't posted a single score in 2020.  But admit it, that was the best part of the front nine...  

So, how did we enjoy Phil?  Dylan has only this bit:

PHIL MICKELSON MIC’D UP 

GRADE: A-. He started slow but it didn’t take Mickelson much time at all to get into his element — and then he was fantastic. That putter was impressive, too.

And from that Schmitt guy:

Phil Mickelson: A- 

While we’re weighting Tiger’s grade a bit because it’s his home track and we expected better putting, we’d be lying if we said Phil’s grade wasn’t slightly influenced by his amazing dialogue. Phil talked. And talked. And talked. As only Phil can. But of course, without the mics, we rarely get to know exactly what he keeps rambling about. 

And Phil was, well, Phil, as he sprayed the ball a bit, but then made some memories. His tee shot on No. 11, for example, made it look like he was the member, and was the kind of shot you brag about for weeks to come. On 14 he added a stiff shot and then he buried a huge 12-foot par putt on No. 15 to keep his squad in the match.

He didn't play especially well, though as noted above he did have some memorable moments.

Shack as well:

Phil Mickelson – When he’s on and invested, he’s a master entertainer. He dropped only one early groaner followed by high energy and fun. The 11th hole drive and commentary falls into the first team all-legendary TV category. It should be a Callaway commercial.

But I quite  agree that Phil's energy carried the event, supported only by Peyton.  He seemed to me an Eddie Haskell-on-steroids, but since most of it was coaching and prodding Brady, it worked.

As regular readers know all too well, I've had my issues with the many over these many years.  But it's always seemed a Jekyll-Hyde thing to me.  I've always liked the good side of Phil, he gives some of the best pressers in the game and is always approachable.

But he has an Achilles heel, and it's usually when he's trying way to hard to show us how clever he can be.  He was quite clearly born for this kind of event, but the storm cloud on the horizon is that his partner-in-crime is equally ill-suited to the entertainment aspect of these matches.

I'll also share Geoff's take on the brodcast:

Justin Thomas, Charles Barkley, Brian Anderson—Three guys who either never or rarely do golf were the stars mostly because they knew when to chime in and when to let the players shine. Thomas’s knowledge of the course and quick adoption of the medium was impressive, particularly confidently and succinctly he delivered his points.

Turner – They clearly learned from The Match 1 and improved under brutal working conditions. Pile on awful weather, physical distancing requirements, an untested format and losing the Goodyear blimp to rain, and Champions for Charity should have been an unmitigated television disaster. Early on, things appeared headed that way but the energy and pace issues were a result of a 45-minute rain delay and the dreaded energy sapping format known as best ball golf. Strong graphics and tracer work was also turned in by producer Jeff Neubarth and director Steve Beim’s crew.

Sound – Of course there were a ton of issues, but even those turned slightly comical when players were zooming off the tee and unable to hear questions posed to them. The unintentional icing-out effect was cute. But given the crappy conditions and difficulties posed by trying to have players wear both a microphone and IFB for sound, the overall performance was beyond admirable. A nod to the announcers for laying out well for player dialogue after maybe overdoing the silence early on.

JT had me a bit worried in the lead-up to the event, when he talked about bringing da' noise.  But he seemed to have an instinctual sense of when to jump in (and, more importantly, when not to), and is good company.

But I agree with Geoff, well done in a minimalists, enjoyable kind of way.  More on JT, from Daniel Rappaport's six highlights:

Justin Thomas rocks the mic

Justin Thomas, the fourth-ranked golfer in the world and himself a member at Medalist, had quite a successful broadcast debut. He’s proved to be a natural—insightful and informative, funny and self-deprecating, all while remembering the golden rule of

announcing: less is more. He gave local knowledge, and he told some great stories from partnering with “Mr. Eldrick” at the Presidents Cup.

Thomas also facilitated the best exchange of the broadcast when he asked Mickelson to walk us through his thought process on a chip on the second hole. Mickelson, true to form, relished the opportunity to talk and then nipped a spinner to tap-in range. It was a fascinating peek into the mind of an all-time short-game artist, and it’s also the type of thing the first Tiger-Phil (and last week’s match at Seminole) was missing. Give golf fans the choice of corny trash-talk or legends walking you through their shots, and they’ll choose the tutorials every time.

Thomas wasn’t the only bright spot on the broadcast—Turner struck the right balance all afternoon. They didn’t force betting statistics down our throats as was the case at Shadow Creek. They let Charles Barkley be Charles Barkley (“JT, you can’t call me fat on TV” and “Tiger’s tee shot was like me, in that we are both black”). And their decision to have the four participants plugged in to the broadcast paid off, with the in-studio hosts able to seamlessly communicate with the players, and vice versa, giving the broadcast an interactive feel.

Yeah, that Phil bit was awfully good, especially since he hit his spot perfectly...   

So, Golf Digest might be over-interpreting with this:

With The Match in mind, five key innovations to improve future TV golf coverage

1. Mid-round interviews

There's no really good reason beyond mild annoyance to the players that this couldn't work, even in the currect COVID-19 environment, provided that safe social distancing is practiced. In the major team sports, coaches are obliged to give interviews, and players will occasionally speak at halftime or between periods. There are no "coaches" in that same sense in golf, but the game happens at a slower pace, and a 60-second walking interview between holes is not too much to ask. I don't think there's a reasonable argument that it's overly disruptive, especially if planned in advance.

The real problem becomes whether the interview is actually GOOD or not. It's a format that's prone to flat cliches, but as Sunday proved, this could be a great addition to a broadcast. You just need the right personnel, and that wouldn't even necessarily mean an on-course reporter—just an earpiece and a connection to the tower. (It also would be wonderful if a player could interact on a longer basis with the announcers via earpieces, as we saw at The Match, but that's probably asking too much of competitive athletes.)

I have no problem with the concept, though you'll need to leave it at the discretion of the player.  I just think they inevitably fall flat in practice....  But the better stuff comes from the player-caddie discussions, and the networks have gotten so much better at grabbing that audio.  Even then, live is a killer because most if it pretty boring...

I'm not finding much here to get my juices going, so let's head elsewhere:

As we start to work our way towards the exit, we can all agree it was a fun day of live golf.  The TC panel exited on this question:

6. We always learn something new about players’ personalities when they’re mic’ed up for 18 holes. What did the Match II teach you about Tiger and/or Phil? 

Zak: It reminded me that Phil should go into acting in retirement and Tiger’s best selling point — his ball-striking — hasn’t changed. At this point in his life, Tiger isn’t going to be a flamboyant player in any match. But he’s still one of golf’s greatest competitors, so he’ll make for a great Ryder Cup player-captain despite being quite boring in these made-for-TV matches. 

Bastable: Tiger’s reservedness spoke volumes. He was on his home course, 20 minutes from his Jupe home, and striping the ball. He should have been an ambassador, full of chirp and good cheer, but he didn’t embrace that role. Weird, just didn’t seem himself — by which I mean his 2018-20 self.

Shipnuck: It’s like Tiger knows he can’t out-chirp Phil so he just shuts down. Especially with no fans in the beginning, the Tour is going to have to try harder to deliver for fans. This exhibition showed it would be crazy not to mic up Phil and JT and others … but don’t waste the Duracells on Tiger. 

Bamberger: Agree, Alan. Tiger plays golf to beat people. He’s not there to entertain you. Phil is. 

Sens: Well said above. I don’t think we really learned anything new. What we already knew was reinforced. 

Dethier: Phil seemed to genuinely be having fun, which was telling, because I wasn’t sure the last time around. That twinkle in his eyes is reserved for a strange few entertainers in the sports world.

Josh nailed it, pretty much stuff we already knew.  Despite these thoughts (which are pretty much the usual suspects),  I'm left with a gaping void for ideas of where they take this next.  Phil is made for the entertainment industry, though with a strong predilection towards chewing the scenery....  It can work, as it did Sunday, but it's far from foolproof.  

The issue is Tiger, and the need for others to carry the entertainment load.  That link above posits names like Michael Jordan, Steph Curry and Larry David for the next installment, which comes dangerously close to reeking of desperation, no?  My suggestion would be to wait for next global pandemic, when our need for live television sports next reaches its apex.

But perhaps we should remind ourselves of the whole point of this:

But I think we can all agree that seeing them play for something or someone else was the far better look than them playing for a s***load of other people's money...

Of course there's still the best option of all.... seeing them play for their own money.  Yeah, alas, that's not gonna happen....

Bonus Saturday Content

Am I your favorite blogger, or what?  Of course, since you don't know to look for a post today, so it may well go unread.  Such is the fate of an artiste..

Medalist Musings - Shall we dice a bit deeper on that venue?  Brian Wacker posts this profile, leading with a comparison to last week's venue:

So what exactly are the differences between the two venues?

“I don’t wanna say [Medalist] is tailored for PGA Tour players, but they embrace having us there and are used to having tour players around,” said Patrick Cantlay, who recently traded his native Southern California for Jupe Life and is a member at Medalist as well 

The 18th green and clubhouse.

as nearby Bear’s Club. “It’s got a great feel to it, and it’s laid back.”

There is some serious golf, of course, although often with a twist. On any given morning, there’s a rush for early tee times at Medalist—the afternoon is for boating, fishing and drinking, after all—but there is a gregarious tone to it, with groups lined up, heckling and applauding one another as they go out.

“The halfway house is next to the first tee and is a hit before, during and after rounds,” says one former caddie. “There’s always a band of loud, degenerate gamblers roaming the clubhouse, and the members love when the caddies get in on the action, too.

“Most tour pros there are young and have a camaraderie among each other, but it’s a place for fun, so many of them have a hard time using it to focus.”

 And, needless to say, a golf course and practice facilities sufficient for their needs....

But this may be the key bit:

In other words, Medalist is a hangout. Michael Jordan is a member and used to be a more regular REGULAR before he created his course, The Grove XXIII, though he still comes by often enough. So does Dan Marino, who is also a member. Medalist’s affable and longtime head pro, Buddy Antonopoulos, retired three years ago but is so beloved that he was made an honorary member and sometimes still gives lessons. (The club’s annual member-guest now called the Buddy Cup.)

The guys do seem to dig it, but perhaps there are more temporal reasons as well:

Not surprisingly, there’s a financial element as well. In short, tour players get a break. A membership for regular folk costs $110,000; most tour pros pay only yearly dues of $14,000, with some not being required to pay anything at all. Not all clubs in the area are as forgiving—McArthur Golf Club, just two miles up the street, offers no tour-player discount.

Members at Medalist don’t seem to mind. They’re happy to have the pros among their ranks.

“They accept them,” said former tour player and past Medalist member Marc Turnesa of the membership’s attitude toward the tour pros. “They’re welcomed with open arms.”

Well, the rich always do seem to get richer...  As has been widely reported, they don't come any cheaper than Tiger, but the club certainly got its money's worth.

Mike Bamberger does a deep dive on Greg Norman's complicated relationship with Medalist, and teases us with more reflections on the emotional travails of the Great White Shark for next week.  He omits the juiciest story, that of Norman ripping down an actual shark from the clubhouse wall in a fit of pique.

You can read it or scroll down at your own discretion, but I'll just offer up this excerpted answer to Mike question of his thoughts as Medalist gets a moment in the spotlight:

“First of all, it’s a great thing, what they’re doing, raising this money for Covid 

The sad man with Pete and Alice Dye in happier times.

charities,” Norman said. “I used to do a lot of these kinds of fundraisers. With Formula One drivers. With other golfers. With actors and actresses. 

“I think about my kids, when they were young here. I think about Pete and I building just one hole, what’s now the 10th, to show the Audubon Society that we could build the course in a way that was environmentally sensitive. Pete was always aware of the environment. I think about the blood and guts and toil we put into building this course.”

At least a perfunctory acknowledgement, before it's all Me, Me, Me....

This on Tom Brady's golf game is well worth your time, if only for the Spieth and Bradley stories.  It just so happens that the many is incredibly competitive... who coulda seen that coming?

 1. He’s a single-digit handicap.

Brady, who carries an 8.1 handicap, says his game is “somewhere between poor and pitiful” entering The Match II, and if you’re looking to bet against Brady, you’ve got 

Anyone know who the guy in the background is?

some ammo. Last year, Brady said he was playing golf in Florida when he threw down a 95 at MacArthur. After that, he said, he didn’t think things could get any worse — until he headed over to Medalist, the site of this week’s match. Then he shot 106. 

But if you’re looking for optimism, there’s space for that, too. In a recent interview with Boston-based radio station WEEI, James Driscoll recalled playing the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am alongside Brady. After a slow start to the week, Driscoll said he suddenly caught fire on day three, firing a three-under 33 on the front nine at Pebble Beach. 

“He basically played nine holes like a tour pro — hitting his drives 300 yards, hitting his seven iron like 180 (yards) and making putts. He literally played those nine holes like a tour pro. I was like, ‘Oh my God. This guy is incredible,’” Driscoll said.

He seems like the wild card in this match... The fun may well be in how Peyton and he hold up in the spotlight.  

Golf.com convened a Tour Confidential panel on the august occasion.  Actually, that and a Shipnuck mailbag compelled me to the keyboard, as they won't be worth much next week:

What are you most looking forward to with this match? 

Sean Zak: Tom Brady losing. Seriously, the guy wins at everything in life. Looking for Peyton to finally show him who’s boss. 

Zephyr Melton: The tweets. Even after two months without the game, Golf Twitter was in mid-season form last weekend. The online banter is almost as good as the on-course product and I can’t wait to read all the hot takes for the second weekend in a row. 

Josh Sens: I look forward to Brady winning and then listening to haters like Zak complain that the golf balls were improperly deflated. The on-course banter should be fun, too. 

James Colgan: Zak makes a compelling argument, but has there ever been a more psychologically dominant tandem than Peyton Manning and Tiger Woods? I can’t wait to hear those two talk through the round and at a course that’s likely to give all four golfers fits. 

Alan Shipnuck: I can’t wait to see Tiger swing the club! Don’t forget how much he was struggling physically before the season was put on hold. The outcome of this match doesn’t matter but it will be significant to give us an update on Tiger’s progress.

Meh!  This isn't the forum to relitigate Deflategate, but Peyton Manning psychologically dominant?  Can we relegate Colgan to the Korn Ferry Tour Confidential?

Speaking of Seminole, give us one reason why THIS match will be better than that one. And one reason why it won’t be as good. 

Zak: It’ll be goofy and in that, hopefully, unpredictable. We knew we were gonna get long-drive competitions last weekend. This weekend, we’re apparently getting some Charles Barkley action, with Justin Thomas commentary? Watching a broadcast where you really don’t know what’s coming is a lot of fun. 

Melton: I’d imagine there will be far less dead time to fill with players riding in carts around the course. That in itself will make it better than last weekend’s broadcast, which got flat at times. Plus having JT and Charles Barkley providing insight will be fun to see. 

Sens: The modified alternate shot should be especially good fun. Here’s hoping that the amateurs leave the pros in some awful spots, and the other way around. The most exciting shot in golf is the recovery shot, after all. Even better if there is smack talk and taunting going on in the backdrop. On the downside, we won’t get to watch Matt Wolff’s wildly eccentric swing. It’s always nice to be reminded of how many ways there are to get it done in golf. 

Colgan: From a viewing standpoint, this match knows what it is. Last week’s did not. I’m not expecting we see TNT offer analysis like it’s any other week on Tour. That won’t work given the format, and it’s something NBC’s broadcast fell into repeatedly last weekend. Turner won’t be afraid to make it about entertainment. If this match is worse than last week’s, it’s because the golf isn’t on-par with the conditions. Still, I’m optimistic. 

Shipnuck: The Seminole match had a serious personality-deficit, but not so with this one. Tiger and Phil were both pretty awkward at Shadow Creek but now they know what to expect and what is needed from them so I expect them to be a lot chattier. And Tom and Peyton are exceedingly comfortable in front of the camera.

Sean Zak does make a good point about the time suck of the guys walking last week, still I can't bring myself to enjoy the guys zipping around in buggies.

Alan is brutally correct about the dynamics of last week's events.  I for one am shocked to learn that DJ isn't a laugh a minute.... But I also agree with Josh Sens about that alternate shot format, though I think the more interesting aspect might be the discussion of which drive to play.  

Which of the four players is the most important to making this event really flourish? 

Zak: It’s Tiger, because we’ve seen Phil be a teacher and we’ve seen Brady play before in pro-ams. Tiger being jovial, interested in his partner’s success, playing good golf (for a change from The Match I) and not saying cliched lines would be entertaining like we haven’t seen in a while. 

Melton: Tiger. The other names are a big deal, but as the saying goes, Tiger IS the needle in golf. If he’s fully engaged and playing well, people will go berserk. 

Sens: Can’t argue with Tiger as the single biggest draw. But the important fifth man here is the chemistry that does or doesn’t develop among them. I’m thinking it will be good. At least, the early signs have been promising. Like Tiger, Brady isn’t exactly known for giving good press conferences. But in this relaxed context, with entertaining off-the-cuff talkers like Manning and Mickelson in the mix, we should get to eavesdrop on some refreshingly un-canned chatter. 

Shipnuck: Peyton! The dude has hosted SNL multiple times and is the gold standard for creating funny jock TV commercials. He might carry this whole thing. 

Colgan: It’s got to be Brady. Sunday marks his first time publicly away from the Death Star (New England) in any capacity. Will we see a brand new TB12? Doubtful. But playing alongside the notoriously chatty Phil (and against his greatest rival), there’s a chance we learn something new. Plus, his golf game seems to be in the most questionable shape.

Flourish?  Kind of a high bar for a one-off, no?

For the concept of these challenge matches to be viable, then those two professionals need to show up with some game.  Not only did the golf suck at Shadow Creek, but it was almost as bad at Seminole last week.  

But in the simplistic terms of golf and sports fans enjoying the day, I have a feeling that the QBs are more the key.  But none of this likely matters if the continue to scrape it around...

Is there a ton of pressure on Brady and Manning to play well to make this event a success? 

Zak: Not really, but I think it would be at its best if they both play well and the event becomes akin to everyone’s Saturday foursome, where some players are better than others but who plays best is still a guessing game. 

Melton: Not at all. Having two average golfers playing alongside some of the game’s best — no matter how they play — will provide a valuable barometer for just how good the pros are. Even if the ams play well, they’re still going to look horrendous next to Tiger and Phil. If nothing else, Brady and Manning will give the casual viewer a look at how wide the gap is between pros and weekend hackers. 

Sens: No. But I bet they’re both hoping they don’t top one off the first tee. 

Shipnuck: The worse they play the better! It will be fun to watch them suffer. 

Colgan: They don’t have to play well, they just have to play the same. Good, bad, or otherwise, it doesn’t matter so long as they’re within range of each other.

I think they're under greater pressure to be verbally interesting, than to play great golf.  But they need to show us something with their sticks, and at their handicaps they should be able to do so.

The guys under pressure are Tiger and Phil, because their cottage industry goes down in flames if they don't both play well and amuse us.  I'm not especially optimistic on that last bit, especially since I expect a green jacket to come out of Tigers staff bag at some point.

Lastly, this will be better than Tiger and Phil’s first match in Las Vegas because… 

Zak: Because we’re in the middle of a pandemic and we’ve got not much else. That hopefully sounds optimistic because I’m excited for it. It’s just that The Match I was billed as a big pay-per-view event on the middle of a holiday football weekend. This comes at a time where we are much more starved for Tiger and his buddies. 

Melton: I have to agree with Zak here. Just having some sort of live sports on TV these days is awesome to see. Last weekend’s match might not have been very interesting, but I was still glued to the action for five hours. And for the sake of transparency, I didn’t even watch the first match in Vegas, so maybe I’m not the best one to answer this question… 

Sens: Let’s be honest. Staring at a blank wall would have been more compelling than that cynical snoozefest in Vegas. This time, we’ve got more personalities in the mix, more golf to watch and nothing but good reasons to root for its success.

Colgan: It seems to know what it is. The Match I couldn’t decide if it wanted to be fun or serious, so it was neither. The Match II seems to have struck the right chord — fun, but still worth something. 

Shipnuck: …it can’t be worse.

Shipnuck with the tip-in.

I'll leave you with a question of whether this will prove to be a good thing:

The current world No. 4 has no intention of toning down the decibels when he makes his

debut as an on-course analyst in Sunday’s “The Match: Champions for Charity” at the Medalist Golf Club in Hobe Sound, Florida, where Tiger Woods and Peyton Manning will battle Phil Mickelson and Tom Brady in an 18-hole match that will raise more than $10 million for coronavirus relief efforts. 

Thomas is intent to bring the noise despite the role being historically subdued.

“We’ll have some fun and jaw at each other. I know if they don’t, I will,” Thomas told Golfweek. “I can’t be on a golf course for 18 holes around four competitors like that and not talk trash. 

“I’m obviously not going to say anything bad or controversial, but you can’t put me on a golf course for that long and expect me to keep my mouth shut.”

A golf commentator that won't shut his pie hole?  If I've warned you once, I've warned you a thousand times, never go Full Faldo. 

She's a Good Dancers and Makes Her Own Clothes - All credit to Shack for posting these statements confirming the break-up of golf's newest power couple, Justin Rose and Honma Golf.  First, from the company:

“Honma Golf Limited (“Honma”) announces that, following a successful partnership with the former No. 1 player in the world, Honma and Justin Rose have agreed that Justin will no longer be one of Honma’s brand ambassadors. We are proud to have been a key part of Justin’s journey to regain his position as World Number 1 in early 2019, including a win at the Farmers Insurance Open in his second event with Honma equipment in play.

Just out of curiosity, what would an unsuccessful partnership have looked like?  Not any shorter, I'm guessing...

“For over a year, Justin worked closely with our team to help develop innovative and top­ performing lines of Honma woods and irons. His pursuit of perfection, approach to product testing and feedback has produced great value to Honma. Justin’s expert input and desire for maximum ball speed inspired our team to make the Honma TR20 460 and 440 drivers among the fastest drivers in the game. Consistently, and excitingly, our nationwide team of fitters are seeing the new TR20 460 and TR20 440 drivers produce some of the fastest speeds on the market. We wish him the very best in his pursuit of more majors and career success,” said John Kawaja, president of Honma Golf North America.”

And yet, except for that early win, he was nowhere to be found on leaderboards...I'm not saying it was his equipment, though I suspect that's his underlying message.

From the Englishman:

“I have enjoyed working with the Honma team and collaborating closely with them to design and develop excellent golf equipment. I was able to see firsthand the innovations that the craftsmen at Honma bring to their clubs. I am hopeful that during our time of partnership, we have laid the groundwork for Honma to continue to expand their brand. We both feel it is the right time to pursue our own paths.”

Sad, as they seemed such a lovely couple....Of course, not the best time to be an equipment free agent, especially coming off a sub-par season.

Alan In Full - I've put the blog on auto-pilot, as we dive into Alan's mailbag, which Golf.com has placed on their awkwardly-redesigned website in a cul-de-sac design to preclude pageviews.  Fortunately, I dig deep for my dear readers:

Trousers versus short pants … go! – @JoelSouthall 

OK, let’s just dive into the big issue of the day, shall we? I like to play golf in shorts. I’m happy for others to do so, too … except on the PGA Tour. The leg hair, the asymmetrical calves, the dainty little socks … I’m not a fan. The Tour is an entertainment product, and aesthetics matter. This is not a hill I want to die on, but it is my preference.

You had me at hello, Alan.  I quite agree, and quite perplexed that the Tour allows shorts on Pro-Am days, which is the most important aspect of the week to the sponsors.  It seems to me an unforced error, especially in hindsight as we know that sponsorships will be undergoing a whole lot more scrutiny post-Wuhan. 

There are many changes left on the table for Covid play through the autumn that we got a glimpse of on Sunday (no fans, golfers maybe wearing masks, no caddies). Which golfers do you see losing their edge or buckling under new constraints? Are there any you think will play better? – @zuzanryan

The new reality on Tour is going to be a fascinating sociological experiment. The pros vary in temperament from persnickety to obsessive-compulsive. They are creatures of habit and routine, all of which is going to be torn asunder. Who succeeds and who doesn’t will be about a lot more than golf. Families are much less likely to travel in the short- and medium-term, so that will have a profound interpersonal impact on the competitors. The stars who usually roll with large entourages will have that support system taken away, too. An added layer to this is that coronavirus has become politicized, and we know that as a group professional golfers skew conservative. A few weeks ago, I was interviewing by phone a major championship winner, and he went on a lengthy riff about the nation’s response to the ‘rona and what he feels is an overreaction. He didn’t use the word hoax, but it seemed like it was on the tip of his tongue the whole time. Someone with that worldview is going to have to deal with intense frustrations as they are forced to navigate the many new protocols the Tour has put in place and all the attendant hassles. Every player is going to be affected; the most easy-going of them will probably fare the best.

I think Alan hits on an interesting point about Tour players, hence the Adam Hadwin whining about putting with the pins in.  But that said, I suspect we'll find that not all that much changes inside their bubble, except maybe for size of purses.

If the USGA can run the U.S. Open why the hell can they not have qualifying? – @BurkeStefco 

It’s a matter of scale. Traditionally there are over 100 qualifying sites around the country, across the local and sectional stages, and even in the best of times, it’s a monumental undertaking to pull it off. At this moment in time, it would be overwhelming to try to solve all the logistical and medical issues to do the qualifying the old way, especially given the different rules from state to state. Still, I would have liked to have seen a modified version a few weeks ahead of the Open. Maybe four sites sprinkled across each time zone, where a few hundred players chosen at random from among the 10,000 entrants would play 36 or 54 holes, and the low 10 at each site punch their ticket to Winged Foot. Given the USGA’s resources, that would be manageable while still preserving the openness of our national championship. And it would still provide the USGA way more automatic exemptions than usual to make sure the top 100 or so in the world ranking are all on hand for the Open. Seems like a workable compromise in these unprecedented times.

Alan makes a good argument for Sectional Qualifying, although I just can't bring myself to care much one way or the other.  But one point to consider as an offset, is that the attempt to maintain qualifying could impair their ability to hold the main event.  Picture a sudden hot spot of infections at one of the qualifying sites....  I suspect they feel this gives them the best chance at actually having a 2020 installment, and I'm fully on board with that.

#AskAlan Will there be invisible asterisks next to the winners of this year’s PGA, U.S. Open and Masters? Will people look at the winner and think “Yeah, but he won it in 2020.” – @War_Eagle1991 

Not even close! Whoever wins these events will have overcome all kinds of challenges to get their game to peak at the right time. You can make the argument that winning this year will be much more impressive than in the simpler times, pre-Covid.

Not unless the fields turn out to be significantly diminished.  If you want a wild scenario, think about those Euro players currently unwilling to travel to the U.S.  If that's still the case in early August, it's an issue for sure, though I think in the case the event gets cancelled.

How much blowback will Rory receive from the American fans after his Trump comments? #AskAlan – @Pkeen52

So far, very little. Rory has earned so much goodwill with golf fans that even ardent Trump supporters seem willing to cut him some slack. The comments are also on-brand in that McIlroy has defined himself as one of golf’s truth-tellers so fans have come to expect his honest and sometimes blunt assessments. You don’t have to agree with him, but I think most people in golf appreciate the candor, whatever the topic may be.

I agree with most of it, though I also think Rory was quite weaselly here.  He basically was allowed to criticize Trump's Wuhan performance, but without a hint of what his gripe is.  That's just unbecoming of anyone...  If you want to criticize, have at it, just a few specifics please.

What’s the prospect for more made-for-TV matches at unique golf courses? Seems like something that could be a great product, with the right players and some production improvements. – @JayRevell 

There’s definitely a market there, especially in the next year when many international tournaments are likely to go on hiatus, leaving players available, bored and eager to please their corporate masters. I’ve also detected a larger shift in the golf culture, where very exclusive clubs seem more amenable to showing off their courses. So many have undergone restorations in recent years, and the architecture nerds in the club leadership positions want to show off the handiwork. Also, the members are now collectively more comfortable with social media and when they see other great courses being drooled over – and Tour players broadcasting friendly matches – it activates their FOMO. So hopefully we can keep peeking over the hedges.

Wasn't that the whole pint of Shell's World of Golf?  The venues can be a great reason to tune in, but someone needs to figure out how to make the actual golf more compelling.

After watching the Seminole gig, I’m wondering if we will see a person stationed at every green to manage the flagstick being taken in and out? And why didn’t the PGA Tour use a cup with something below the rim to keep the players from dipping into it on every hole? Same net effect. … – @spyhillbill 

Yes, if you have the resources or volunteers to provide a dedicated flag attendant that is definitely the way to go for tournaments. As for the putting, the Tour wanted the competition to look like “real golf” as much as possible within the various parameters. If you’re careful, it is certainly possible to retrieve a ball from the cup without touching anything else; I think this works for four players, but I’m not sure about 156.

Guys, do you remember the after-effects of 9/11?  The only left is the security theater from TSA that we're forced to endure.

As I noted yesterday, the CDC has already indicated that there's no science to support that the virus is transmitted off of surfaces.  There's also no science to the 6-foot social distancing debate, and the likelihood of outdoor transmission (see this, for example) is roughly comparable to the likelihood of the Yankees drafting me to play shortstop.  No one is picking this virus up from a flagstick or bunker rake... the only remaining question is whether we as a society will push back against these idiots, or fall in line as obedient serfs.

If we someday get to see Pine Valley, will it seem overrated also? #notagolfsnob – @mileredskin 

Definitely not. Seminole is so subtle, and that doesn’t translate to TV, especially when it’s a stripped-down telecast without the analysts, graphics and different camera angles that could have brought to life the course’s charms. Pine Valley is the opposite – big, bold, intensely visual, with one dramatic, risk-reward hole after another. It is the ultimate golf porn and would look glorious in any kind of telecast.

I thought Seminole looked great, though I was somewhat grading on a South Florida curve... Though I'm not sure it meets the definition of golf porn without a large body of water....

Has Colonial been “obsoleted” by 21st century golf equipment? – @WSoxChamps05 

Well, every course on the planet has, so the answer is yes … but less so. Colonial is actually sort of immune to distance gains because so many fairways turn hard in the 240-260 yard range and thus the course can’t really be overpowered unless players take on huge risks by trying to fly the towering oak trees and other horrors on every hole.

 I could go with a one-word answer, Annika.

If you could create a golf-themed 30/30 for ESPN what subject would you choose? – @SonOfAFitch 

Has to be Anthony Kim, right? The War by the Shore would be tasty, too.

I'm pretty sure that the Anthony Kim obsession has reached its sell-by date.

What are your thoughts on letting the players bet on themselves? Extremely hard to regulate, but also why not? #askalan – @RyanPM_ 

It’s a very slippery slope. Would it affect players’ allegiance to the rules? It’s easy to see where the temptation could arise. If they bet on themselves, they’re likely to lose more often than not, and the last thing any tour wants is a bunch of players owing money to bookies, loan sharks and other characters out of a Scorcese film. There are already fabulous rewards available to professional golfers – openly letting them bet on themselves seems to have minimal upside and the potential for serious problems.

Except, apparently, if your name is Phil Mickelson....  You're not seriously concerned about this subject if Billy Walters is a welcome guest at your events.  Jay wants his vig, but seems clueless about the ramifications...

Ship, why didn’t the Seminole match feature the top female players in partnership with the top men? Sure, TaylorMade players made up the list, but I am sure they could’ve put some powerhouse male-female teams together? Would’ve been very interesting to watch. … – @cavedoc 

Of course it would’ve been great. Just as there should be a mixed-team event sanctioned by the PGA Tour and LPGA. There is no reason why women are excluded from these things except for entrenched biases. Hopefully that will change sooner rather than later.

Perhaps because men are so much harder hit than women by the virus?  I agree that a mixed team event would be great, but let's not criticize every little thing we do.  

So, all this raving about Seminole. Is it because it’s so exclusive or because it’s that good of a track? Didn’t look that impressive on TV. – @JoeECervi 

This is an important point that often gets confused when discussing places. Seminole is a really good course but an amazing experience. We’re all human and prone to the giddy, holy-cow-I’m-finally-playing-Seminole emotions, which seem to explain its elevated spot in various Top 100s.

One of the golf magazines once ran a feature on the best clubs, as distinct from the rankings of golf courses.  It was really fun, except for the niggling detail that none of the listed clubs would have me as a member...   

#AskAlan Vijay signs up for KFT event and gets destroyed on social media. Streelman, Dahmen, etc play in Scottsdale Open, and it’s fine. Seems like a bit of a double standard? – @Scottiecons 

They’re different kinds of tournaments. Scottsdale was a classic mini-tour event in that it’s open to anyone, first come, first served, and the purse is derived from the entry fees. Also, it’s a one-off that doesn’t feed into any other tours. The KFT is much more of a closed-shop, and those criticizing Vijay are mostly complaining that he’s potentially taking away from money and the chance at advancement from lesser players. If Streelman, with his $20 million in career earnings, rolled up to a KFT tournament, there would be some squawking, too.

I beg to differ.  Streelmen is only 41 years old, meaning nine long years before he has access to the senior circuit.  There are always going to be these kind of players trying to resuscitate their careers, and with Q-school gone the KF Tour is the only road back.  Vijay is 57, and they have a special Tour devoted to his age-group, so I see no reason he should have any playing rights on the developmental tour.

What happened to Hunter Mahan and Sean O’Hair? – @TheBlackWhip 

Golf is hard.

How great is it that we have these ever-present to cling to in these turbulent times.  Golf has always been and remains hard, and Veej always has been and remains a dick.

 Enjoy the golf and we'll catch up next week.