Weekend Wrap - See You In Albany Edition

Shockingly, attention must be paid to the actual golf this weekend.... Didn't see that one coming.

Sea Island Breakthrough - How does one know that a young phenom is the real deal?  Well, and you heard it here first, winning early and often is our first clue:

A month before this year's Ryder Cup, the name "Ludvig Aberg" was like the faint howl of a distant wind in the golf world—if you noticed it at all, you barely paid attention, and there were only a few

people warning us that the whisper might turn into a roar...and much sooner than anyone thought. The 23-year-old Swede, winner of the Ben Hogan Award at Texas Tech, had turned down a massive LIV deal last year, turned pro this summer, finished top five at the John Deere, and strung together a few solid results in Europe. Then, a day before Luke Donald had to make some tough choices for his captain's picks, Aberg won his first professional event at the Omega European Masters. Donald's decision became a lot easier, Aberg made the team, and posted a 2-2 record as Europe slaughtered the Americans in Rome. He was no longer anonymous, and his career as he turned 24 on Halloween began to resemble a person bounding up a set of stairs with startling speed.

Sunday, at the RSM Classic, Aberg climbed to the next step: He is now a PGA Tour winner. With a final round 61 to match the same score on Saturday, Aberg finished at 28 under, three clear of Mackenzie Hughes, who kept it interesting with a 63 of his own. The most notable vanquished foe, however, wasn't Hughes, but Eric Cole—the 35-year-old who came into the week as the apparent frontrunner in the Rookie of the Year race. With a deeper resume than Aberg's, nothing but a win from the Swedish phenom could have changed the outcome, but win is exactly what he did, and it now appears overwhelmingly likely that Aberg—the only rookie to score a win this PGA Tour season, not counting opposite field events—will take home the Arnold Palmer Award.

I caught the last 4-5 holes, and the kid seemed preternaturally calm, as if he was in complete control of all aspects of his game.  The funny aspect to me is that because of this aura of serenity, he kept taking me by surprise with how quickly he pulled the trigger.  

It reminds very much of a certain Cablinasian player that burst onto the scene in 1996, also with two quick wins in a cameo appearance (I'm including Ludvig's win on the Euro Tour that got him his passage to Rome).  For what it's worth, he also had a better first Ryder Cup than that other guy...

Props to Golfweek for tackling the obvious issue Aberg's rise brings to the fore:

Ludvig Aberg answers the question what language does he curse in on the course — Swedish or English — among 5 things to know after Round 3 at the RSM Classic

Sanskrit?  This is obviously one of those where the fun is in the question:

Not long after Aberg watched his highlight reel hole-out at 14, he settled the debate by saying that he curses his rare misfired shots in Swedish. Did he drop any explicit words during Saturday’s scintillating 61, which lifted him to a 54-hole total of 20-under 192?

Of course, silly question to pose when the guy's throwing up a 61....

The Tour Confidential panel has become quite the laughingstock, and you'll have guessed their opening question for this week's installment, almost justified this time.  But here's the only question they allocate to this event, half-cocked at best:

3. The RSM Classic, won by Ludvig Aberg, capped the PGA Tour’s inaugural seven-event Fall series. So, did the new format work? Or did the drama of finishing inside or outside the top 125 fall flat compared to previous years?

Bastable: No doubt the new framework injects some drama, though 126-150 still maintain conditional status for 2024, so it’s not like the guys who just missed the mark are totally kicked to the curb. I’m more excited about the reintroduction of Q-School this year, by which five Tour cards will be doled out next month. There may be no more democratic — or cutthroat — system in all of sports.

Wall: I spent the early part of the week in Sea Island and can confirm the new format certainly did the trick. There was a ton of nervous energy on the range that was non-existent last year when RSM wassimply the last event before the end of the year. Drama late in the year is never a bad thing, even if everyone still had their eyes fixed on the football.

I think the issue of what the Tour should do with the Fall is quite worthy, the more so since they don't have a clue themselves.  Getting a TV-worthy audience to follow the gyrations around a random three-digit number is a big ask, though, espe3cially when the guys involved may have already finished their rounds when the coverage window begins.

But you wouldn't want to ask your staff writers for their impressions or career projections after the breakthrough Tour win of a young stud, would you?  That risks actually being interesting and, Lord knows, we can't have that.

Tiger In Winter - No doubt you've heard that Tiger was able to convince the sponsor of the Hero World to allocate a precious sponsor's exemption on, checking notes, Tiger Woods.  It's a surprise to me just because of the calendar, but obviously the Tour Confidential panel couldn't resist:

1. Tiger Woods announced he’ll play his Hero World Challenge in two weeks in the Bahamas, which will be his first start since he withdrew from the 2023 Masters and had a procedure on his ankle. We already know a ‘win’ for Woods would be four healthy rounds. But what’s a ‘win’ for him in 2024? More good health? Contending? What’s your 2024 Tiger forecast?

Alan Bastable: Tiger’s Hero commitment was a pleasant surprise — I assumed we wouldn’t see

him until the cart-friendly PNC — and an indicator that his ailing body is back to a place where he feels confident that he can walk 7,200 yards for at least four consecutive days. How Woods actually feels, looks and sounds come Friday (or Sunday!) evening in the Bahamas should give us more insight into his 2024 prospects. A “win” for ’24? Staying off the operating-room table, playing at least half the majors and delighting TGL fans with his short-game wizardry. Whether or not Woods is competitive next year, merely having him in and around the game, in any capacity, is a “win” for all.

Zephyr Melton: More good health. There’s no doubt Tiger still has the ability to compete, but the wear and tear of four rounds — let alone a full season — is what will hold him back. It would be a massive victory if he can make it through 2024 without any major health setbacks.

Jonathan Wall: Health. It’s the realistic win at the moment until we see he can handle four rounds of competitive golf — walking. I still don’t believe we’ll see him more than a few times next year, outside of the TGL dome. Tiger’s enjoying his time watching Charlie flourish on the course; I just can’t see him grinding away at regular Tour events. He doesn’t have anything left to prove. After all he’s been through, the simple fact Tiger is teeing it up again is a miracle.

We'll know quite a bit more when we see how he's able to walk, but anyone curious as to who will have the bag?  Less so here than, say, in LA, where one assumes the hatless wonder will be pegging it as well....

But, while everyone is understandably focused on Tiger playing, this bit seems to be far under the radar:

Along with Woods, it was also announced that Justin Rose and Lucas Glover had been given tournament exemptions, with the Englishman and American joining Woods in completing the 20-

man field.

The two players in question that Rose and Glover replaced turned out to be Patrick Cantlay and Xander Schauffele, with the American duo now not listed in the Hero World Challenge field.

Currently, it is unclear as to why Cantlay has withdrawn from the event, but Schauffele did reveal a week or so ago that he had withdrawn from the tournament at Albany Golf Club, stating that he wanted some time off from golf to allow him to unwind for the first time since the pandemic.

Color me cynical, but if either of them drops out citing that they want to spend more time with their family, fine.  But for those two to drop out simultaneously?  The reader is free to draw his or her own conclusions, but those seem like they'll be some delightfully awkward PAC meetings, even without Rory involved.

The Tour In Winter -  Just a few loose ends worth musing upon, first the TC take on Rory's stage-left exit:

4. Rory McIlroy abruptly resigned from the PGA Tour board, leaving a vacant spot and raising questions about why McIlroy left before his three-year term was over. McIlroy said simply “something had to give” with everything he had going on in his life. Does his resignation have any significant meaning to Tour pros? Or to fans?

Bastable: Yes, the move has much meaning! In the LIV era, McIlroy established himself as the most ardent supporter of the PGA Tour and the voice of his peers. He could have quietly ridden out the remainder of his term and began curtailing the time and energy he invested into PAC matters, but instead he pulled the plug entirely. If you take McIlroy at his word, his decision was driven by his overtaxed schedule. No doubt that was a factor, but surely so too was his rightful disgruntlement over the Tour’s secret dealings with the Saudis. That degree of betrayal can’t be easy to get over. Curious minds might also wonder if McIlroy’s deteriorating relationship with fellow board member Patrick Cantlay played a role. In a recent interview, McIlroy described his relationship with Cantlay as “average at best,” adding, “We don’t have a ton in common and see the world quite differently.” It’s useful to have a variety of opinions in the board room but only if the sources of those opinions respect one another.

Melton: It absolutely has meaning. Rory has been the voice of the establishment in the LIV-PGA Tour war, and to see him abruptly step down is not a great sign. As AB notes above, the secret dealing with LIV likely left Rory with a sour taste in his mouth. Once you lose someone’s trust, it’s hard to get it back. Jay Monahan and Co. almost certainly lost Rory’s trust this summer, and it doesn’t appear they’ve done much to earn it back.

Wall: Of course! Rory was the voice of his peers — or at least a large majority of them — when LIV was trying to poach the Tour’s top talent. You can’t go from being right in the middle of the action to tapping out and not have people question the motive behind the decision. Sure, Rory was spreading himself too thin, but if the Tour wasn’t seriously considering a framework with PIF, I’m pretty sure he would’ve stayed on board in some capacity — even if he throttled back in ‘24. Simply put, the very thing he fought to protect burned him. Many would’ve done the exact same thing if they were in his position.

Jay must have confused Rory with a sponsor to have treated him in that manner, no?

It continues to amaze me that a guy like Jonathan Wall continues to speak of the players as some unified mass with identical objectives.  What Wall seems to have missed is that Rory took the leadership roll in advocating for a huge money grab on the part of the elite players, justifying it by the need to battle LIV.  When the Tour pulled the rug out from under him that left him exposed, because he'd sold out the interests of most of those guys.  Hence the Grayson Murray confrontation in Canada, but he's unwelcome among those he screwed.

Of course, this guy's frustration communicates clearly, although his arguments could be far more cogent:

One man who believes these changes have only benefitted the circuit's elite group of players is Griffin. The American is currently battling for his 2024 playing rights in the PGA Tour's FedEx Cup fall standings, and opened up on his grievances that he had taken to McIlroy prior to his resignation.

"If he wants $20 million purses and $100 million PIP money, take it. We don’t give a s***. I told Rory this. I said, ‘Beginning of the year, what’s your goal? Win the FedEx Cup, win majors, win three, four times? Do you know what 70 percent of the guys out here, their main goal is? To keep their job.’ He said, ‘Fair enough.’ We care about money – that comes with good play – but we’re more worried about keeping our job."

Yes, Lanto is right to worry about keeping his job, but he seems strangely willing for Rory & Co. to keep that $20 million for themselves, which you'd think he'd prefer be spread around.   He does have some faint praise for Rory and, even better, names names as a contrast:

While he questioned the the circuit's policy during McIlroy's tenure on the board, Griffin did praise the four-time major champion for his approachability, but hit out two of the Tour's biggest names in Justin Thomas and Collin Morikawa. There are certain guys out here among the top players who won’t give you the time of day and then there are guys like Rory who will," Griffin commented.

"I talked to him for about 30 minutes at [The] Players and then again in Canada, which is really nice of him, and he listens. There are some guys out here who wouldn’t do it. Justin Thomas wouldn’t do it. Collin Morikawa wouldn’t. I feel like there is an elitist group. Rory feels like he can listen in and understand where we’re coming from, too."

Errr, Lanto, have you had any reason to meet Patrick?  I think you'll perhaps reassess your view of JT and Collin after meeting that penis....

My working theory is that Rory's likeability made him a particularly useful idiot to Jay, and perhaps to Tiger as well.  That's perhaps why I was surprised by the Cantlay-X-Man withdrawal from the Hero, because it sure seems that Cantlay and Tiger are reading from the same hymnal, no?

Not sure I'm completely on board, but we always give Eamon a hearing on these subjects:

Lynch: The PGA Tour’s winter of discontent is upon us, and a thaw isn’t coming soon

As the most tumultuous year in the Tour’s history draws to a close (if not a resolution), the

portico principles that supported decades of the organization’s marketing are quickly crumbling. Like the ideals of comity and charity, for so long neatly packaged in a mantra — ‘These Guys Are Good’ — that was repeated with a fervor worthy of the Beijing politburo. Comity has been undermined by griping — about fellow players, about executives at HQ, about the media — while the unrelenting chatter about money encourages a perception that too many Tour members think charity ends where it should begin: at home.

The most enduring and ruinous narrative peddled by the Tour was that every event mattered equally, as did every man in a member-led organization. It was a sustainable storyline only as long as everyone on the boat was aligned to row in the same direction. To the extent that they ever were, they are no longer. A clear caste system now exists on the tournament schedule and the voices carrying most weight belong to a distinct minority of the membership.

But I had been reliably informed by Jonathan Wall that a majority of the players were behind Rory....

Eamon takes on the more personal of Lanto's comments as well:

As the Tour moves to fundamentally reshape how it does business, the divide has never been more glaring. Consider Lanto Griffin’s comments earlier this week when Rory McIlroy resigned from the Policy Board. “Rory was great because he was approachable by everybody, but at the same time he was bought by the Tour,” Griffin said. “The head of the board has the same sponsors as the Tour and the Players, there’s influence there — I’m talking Workday, I can’t remember all of them, Golfpass. The guy who’s running the board is being paid by all the title sponsors, it’s a little sketchy to me.”

The errors of fact in Griffin’s statement rival the frequency of bogeys on his scorecards, but what’s noteworthy here is that McIlroy’s success and marketability has been weaponized against him as cause for suspicion, as evidence that he’s compromised. It won’t be the last time we hear this specious claim leveled against a prominent star. A consequence of players taking control of board decisions is that they are now deemed blameworthy by any of the Tour’s steerage passengers who think those on the upper deck are leaning on the tiller for selfish reasons. That divisiveness is likely to increase since the time is nearing for decisions that will upset many who feel their concerns are being ignored, their grievances not redressed, their future employment not assured.

I don't think Lanto helps himself here, because I've never felt that Rory specifically was motivated by personal wealth, though I won't say the same about Tiger and the others.  But the reality is therefore more depressing, because of how easily Rory allowed himself to be duped.

But Eamon to speak of Rory's success being weaponized is equally disingenuous to this observer.  It's not the existence of $20 million events that's so repugnant, it's the existence of $20 million exhibition matches, because of the ridiculously small field sizes.  Patrick and Rory simply don't want Lanto and the others to have a shot at these massive purses, and it's quite the obvious money grab.  Your best events should have the strongest fields, but look at the bill of goods being sold... In the name of saving the Tour.

here's Eamon's inconclusive coda:

About the only thing uniting locker room factions is a mutual distrust of Tour leadership. Much of that owes to June 6, when Jay Monahan squandered every atom of trust and goodwill he had accumulated over six years as commissioner. It is exacerbated by the slow pace of progress with the Framework Agreement negotiations — “deliberate,” to use Monahan’s word in a memo to players — and the absence of concrete detail. There may be progress soon on the private equity component — to the inevitable disgruntlement of some — but any Saudi involvement faces potential regulatory scrutiny, a time-consuming process. And whatever the future landscape of the Tour and the broader men’s professional game, the steps to get there will be painstaking. The Tour has roughly $6 billion in media rights revenue guaranteed through 2030, and any substantive alterations to the product it delivers before then could imperil that cash. Which leaves plenty of time for grievances to fester.

This painful reckoning for the PGA Tour has been a long time coming, a winter of discontent with many seasons yet to run. It’s all enough to make one give thanks to Woods (perè et fils) for the promise of a few days in which to appreciate things on the other side of the ropes.

So, Eamon. Tiger is gonna save us?  Yowzwer, where do I place a bet on Tiger selling us further down the river?

Zing! Went The Strings of My Heart - Yup, that Ryder Cup weekend being the final nail in the coffin, methinks:

Paul Azinger’s time as the lead analyst for NBC Golf is over.

NBC has elected not to re-sign Azinger, ending a four-year stint as the lead voice of the network’s professional golf coverage. The Associated Press‘ Doug Ferguson first reported the news, which was subsequently confirmed by Azinger himself.

He joined NBC as the successor to legendary golf analyst Johnny Miller, who retired upon the completion of the 2018 season after 29 years in the lead chair. At the time, Azinger’s hiring was largely lauded in the sport, and he was viewed as a safe bet to carry the torch forward for the network.

Zinger struck me as a guy that believed his early press clippings, but his reactions became increasingly disjointed and untethered to the action on the screen, never more so than in Rome:

At the time, it seemed Azinger was on a path to becoming the preeminent analyst in golf, succeeding Miller’s legacy. But as it would turn out, those good feelings were short-lived. As time wore on, public opinion turned against Azinger’s folksy, often instinct-driven analysis. On more than a handful of occasions, sharp viewers pointed out that his analysis was, in fact, at odds with easily accessible statistics or information. In critical moments, audiences grew frustrated with his tendency to overgeneralize using quips and aphorisms rather than information.

As the criticism mounted, Azinger appeared to go on the defensive, frequently deriding and dismissing the “media” during NBC’s coverage — a curious decision considering his role as arguably golf media’s preeminent voice. The situation came to a head at the Ryder Cup, where Azinger entered himself into the story surrounding Patrick Cantlay’s purported hatless protest by ripping the report as “clickbait garbage,” an allegation that subsequent reporting proved untrue.

Never trust content from Patrick Cantlay!  The funny thing about interjecting himself into that mess is that the damming quote was made to Steve Sands, Zinger's NBC colleague.....  He didn't need to do much work to know that was quicksand, but I don't think work was a big priority for the man.

2. Paul Azinger is out as NBC golf analyst after his five-year contract was not renewed. Are you surprised NBC is moving in a different direction, and why might it have decided to do so?

I'm gonna go with, because he sucked....

Bastable: My jaw didn’t drop, no, considering NBC has already been moving in a different direction. When late last year the network decided to move on from two of its stalwarts, in Roger Maltbie and Gary Koch, and bring in a relatively unproven talent in Smylie Kaufman (along with Brad Faxon), it was a clear signal that the Peacock was thinking about the future. Zinger generally was unafraid to speak his mind, but ultimately you also got the sense that he too frequently relied on his gut and didn’t do his homework. With so many analytics now available in the pro game — not to mention an army of media-watchers tweeting every misstep — lead analysts need to bring to the chair a combination of fearlessness and statistical acumen. Makes you wonder … is it finally Brandel’s time?

Melton: I’m not necessarily surprised NBC is going in a new direction, but the move did seem to come out of nowhere. There was not much indication a move like this was coming … and then the news dropped and here we are. Azinger wasn’t incompetent in the booth, but in an age when golf is trying to become more young and hip, he didn’t exactly fit the profile.

Wall: Somewhat. I thought Zing did an admirable job filling Johnny Miller’s shoes with his off-the-cuff takes and insights. I’ll agree with Alan that Brandel would be a logical call for NBC’s brass. I’m not sure anyone else out there would bring the juice at the moment.

Golf Digest does a deep dive that I'll leave you to, just these two assessments that most align with my own reactions:

Sorry Dave, but he sounded unprepared to me. There’s a reason he was routinely a punching bag on Golf Twitter. Replacing a legend is never easy, but he didn’t do a good job. And rarely do so many fans agree on something. —Alex Myers

Much like the loveable uncle who trots out the same lines and stories during the Thanksgiving NFL games, I really didn’t mind Azinger and his clichés all that much. The problem? Usually, you only deal with that uncle in small doses. Once or twice a year, tops. Zinger, meanwhile, is on our TV screens every other Sunday, often calling the biggest events. I can see how the 19th retelling of the time Phil Mickelson was scarfing down waffles while sitting on the 54-hole lead at whatever tournament would begin to wear on the viewers. I personally found it hilarious, in addition to the “straighter than train smoke” line and “players choke over two things: prayshure or prestige” line, but again, I get why others had had enough. —Christopher Powers

There were others more favorably disposed, so click through if you're of that mind.

As for a replacement, I'll assume that Brandel is sufficiently intelligent to take a hard pass on that grueling gig.  So, who do these writers like in the chair?

Geoff Ogilvy would be a home-run hire. Knowledgeable on so many fronts yet can distill that knowledge in ways the average fan can digest. I would also like to see Jim “Bones” Mackay given a chance. We already have proof of concept that he can get the job done. —J.B.

Matt Every. Unfiltered as hell and he’s a young voice that might connect with younger viewers. Novel concept. But what the hell do I know. —C.P.

My first thought was Geoff Ogilvy, too. Very well spoken. Opinionated. Knowledgeable as a major winner and competitor as well as a course designer. He has a lot to bring to the table. —D.S.

Ogilvy would be great because he’d be much better at bridging the old school (“Pressure!”) with modern stats. Plus he still plays some so he’s more plugged in. Brandel Chamblee wouldn’t have the same relationships with current players, but at least he would always know what he’s talking about. Unfortunately, Phil Mickelson has probably burned too many bridges, and Tiger Woods isn’t ready to retire or they’d be fantastic. —A.M.

Give all the money to Paul McGinley and let him roll. —S.R.

Give Bones a gracious way to dump JT's disappointing bag?

I like Ogilvy a ton, although his interests might not align all that well with the audience they think they're after ( not that golf broadcasters have ever properly understood their own audiences).

McGinley is an interesting thought, although it's a bit of a thankless job.  I suspect they'll go smaller ball... Smylie, anyone?  Seriously, I don't actually think Comcast will pay what they'd need to for a name brand.

I shall release you sat this juncture and wish you a wonderful holiday week.  The blogging schedule will be mad eup as we progress through said holiday week, so check back early and often.