Midweek Musings

Somebody shut a valve off and the torrent of snow has slowed to a trickle.  I was gonna give myself a day off from blogging, but lots of sound bites coming out of Northeast Florida.....

Meeting The Plebes - With everyone who's anyone in PVB, those driving the train deigned to present the fait accompli to those no longer invited to the big-money events:

To hear Rory McIlroy tell it, the PGA Tour player meeting held at TPC Sawgrass, the home of the Players Championship, bright and early on Tuesday at 7:30 a.m. served its purpose of informing the

membership on the changes approved by the Tour Policy Board last week.

“When more information and data was presented to them, the people that maybe had reservations about it I think came around, or at least were more informed on their opinions,” McIlroy said.

He noted that Tour executives walked the players through a scaled-down slideshow of what was presented to the board during its meeting, which lasted nearly seven hours.

Translated into English, when told what had already been decided, nobody pulled a shiv....

I've been watching some of the Golf Channel Live From coverage, which has been in overdrive to support these changes.  One very curious bit was listening to Paul McGinley describe how the players used the LIV threat to wrest control from the Tour administration, which is true as far as it goes.  But he then described the ongoing friction as a battle of the players vs. the administrators, whish is missing the reality by a substantial degree.  What we have, instead, is a nascent civil war between a small group of elite players and the great unwashed masses of PGA cardholders, with the former certainly having their way.

But Rory seems to feel that this should make those disgruntled rabbits happier, although I suspect it will do just the opposite:

McIlroy conceded that the presentation in Delaware at the BMW Championship in August when the top players gathered on their own to create a unified front against LIV Golf was “very self-serving for the 20 players in that room.” He said that the approved plan beginning in 2024 is vastly different from what he and Tiger originally pitched.

“We were looking at fields of 50 to 60. We were looking at only 10 players dropping out of that top 50 every year, so a retention rate of 80 percent,” he said. “The Tour were like, look, the typical retention rate for the top 50 has historically been around 60 percent, so let’s try to get back to that number.”

 So you want the shop even more closed....Why 50?  Why not just Tiger and you?  

“I think if we had have went down that road, it doesn’t serve the membership anywhere near as well as what this structure does,” he said. “You look at the entire schedule, there’s eight designated events outside of those tournaments that I just mentioned. But then there’s 29 full-field events during the rest of the calendar year.”

That's great, but do those full-field events carry comparable purses and FedEx Cup points?  That's the scam, you've limited who has a shot at the crown jewels.  

Obviously cooler heads prevailed and they maintained at least a semblance of openness, leaving them able to tell their disaffected peers that all they have to do is play better.  That's cute, but those pathways are a trickle, whereas they've retained the goodies for a select number of cool kids.  The fact that Rory and Tiger wanted those fields to be even smaller tells me all I need to know.  These guys want to be LIV, just without the baggage.

But our precious Rory seems a little touchy here, no?

Rory says player meeting turnout was good—but noted James Hahn's absence.

"Like, you say all this s--- and you’re not even in the meeting? If you want to get informed and be a part of the process—the fact that he wasn't even in the room was a slap in the face to everyone there."

— Dylan Dethier (@dylan_dethier) March 7, 2023

To get informed?  The decisions have all been made, but Hahn has to show up to kiss Rory's ring?  I get that there needs to be an organizational leadership structure and that not all 200 members can participate, but it's unclear whether these initiatives could survive a vote of the membership.  But that's the whole point, isn't it?

There's little new ground in this piece, but I'm guessing this header doesn't mean exactly what was intended:

Jay Monahan defends criticism of PGA Tour’s no-cut designated events

 Pretty much the opposite, but they do have those layers and layers of fact-checkers, no?

The PGA Tour’s most influential figures came armed with talking points. Not long after Rory

McIlroy rattled off no-cut win totals by Tiger Woods, Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer, PGA Tour commissioner Jay Monahan did the same for the aforementioned trio of stars.

Now, there was a slight discrepancy in their totals for Nicklaus and Palmer, but the point remains: there was some controversy regarding the Tour’s new designated events model it plans to roll out in 2024, and McIlroy, essentially the player-CEO of the PGA Tour, and the actual boss of the PGA Tour, were ready.

It's an obvious and somewhat effective talking point, which you and I would make were we defending that ground.  The problem is that, take those WGCs that Tiger won, they kinda sucked as golf events, which is kind of indisputable given that they've been torched.  So sure, Jay, let's go back to that failed model...

There are pathways for players not already qualified to play their way into the no-cut designated events, but some critics have still said this creates two different tiers of the PGA Tour.

“There was and there still is a lot of discussion and debate on whether or not there should be no cuts. But for us to be able to have our stars assured to play for four days is a really important element to this model going forward,” Monahan said. “We think that’s what fans want, particularly given the players have earned their right and their ability to play in those events.”

They're now trying to tell us that the process of qualifying is the "cut", but what they've "earned" is the right to play for huge sums without any of those pesky middle-tier players stealing their milkshake.  Guys like Kurt Kitayama...

It's the elite vs. the masses, and the former have seized the day.  This header seems as inaccurate as the one above:

'This is what fans want': Commissioner Jay Monahan looking forward to future of PGA Tour scheduling

More it's what twenty guys want, errr demand, to not cash a LIV check.  

I Saw It On TV - As I moaned about yesterday, my taping of the final round went up in smoke, but I did watch Saturday's broadcast on tape.  Even fast-forwarding through the commercials and Play-Through segments, I was staggered by the commercial load, which I thought rendered the broadcast unwatchable.

Geoff agreed, though thinks that Sunday might have been better:

Saturday’s massive commercial load/Playing Through interruptions lit up Twitter and made for a genuinely unwatchable show. Sunday seemed better until late in the proceedings when some key tee shots were not shown.

Yeah, that showing actual golf shots seems be a challenge for our networks....Yanno, like critical tee shots:

Kitayama and Hovland both striped tee shots from the final group on the 70th hole while in break btw. https://t.co/s5ExQzYKjP

— No Laying Up (@NoLayingUp) March 5, 2023

Geoff also thinks they went cheapo on production values:

The API highlighted issues that arise when key production elements are not part of the weekly lineup. Even though NBC kicked off the Florida swing with the Honda Classic, it was a minimalist production minus the extras expected at Designated Event Model (DEM’s) tournaments (and employed weekly by CBS).

While it’s admirable that NBC is trying to keep up with CBS’s depth-of-field cameras, live drones and AirPod player interview, the moments came off as clunky. By not using these technologies on a weekly basis—shareholder value delivery being the likely culprit—it makes for noticeably less sharp coverage on a network where the producers pride themselves on putting out a polish product.

There is also the matter of sharpness: NBC’s live drone and depth-of-field cameras just seem less sharp than those used by CBS.

These innovations have given golf broadcasts a fresh and attractive look, yet NBC’s drone shots seem extra cautious and not particularly useful in attempting to bringing viewers to the proceedings. And on a dead flat course like Bay Hill and without blimp coverage, the drone could give us a perspective of the scarier tee shots or oddball green complex shapes that traditional rear-green views fail to deliver. A pre-taped drone fly-through of an empty corporate chalet on 14 did about as much as the Mastercard executive interview to advance the story.

I can't say that I picked up on those deficiencies, mostly because I was too preoccupied find the fast forward button seemingly every 30 seconds.

 James Colgan takes on this issue of excessive interruptions:

As most people who have watched the Tour on television will tell you, golf TV has a commercial problem. There are too many of them, they run far too often and they distract too frequently from the viewing experience. In many ways, this development is a monster of the Tour’s own carefully orchestrated creation.

It usually is...

Largely, these agreements have worked in harmony. The broadcast partners got loads of pre-sold advertisements, the sponsors got a chunk of commercial time and the PGA Tour got a boatload of

money. But then came the Tour’s latest round of rights agreements in 2020, which sent the cost of the Tour’s domestic media rights soaring to nearly $700 million annually.

As the value of golf’s TV rights increased precipitously, so too did the number of advertisements the networks needed to sell to pay for those rights increases. Suddenly, those CEO chats and pre-sold spots weren’t going as far as they once did. The networks had to sell more ads just to break even.

Enter our current predicament. Since the Tour signed the latest round of rights agreements, cracks have formed in the bedrock of its media rights strategy. Fans have grown wise to the growing number of advertisements, and they aren’t happy about them. Each weekend, those watching the events on TV bemoan the commercial load, the number of pre-produced packages and the lack of live golf shots shown.

Which is compounded by the creation of the designated events, which has required sponsors to write ever larger checks...

The problem, it seems, is that it might not be possible to improve golf’s broadcast product to the degree golf viewers wish. The Tour is too deeply entrenched financially in its current structure for wholesale changes like the ones seen in the tournament product, and those wholesale changes have weakened the Tour’s standing with its network partners (smaller, bigger events don’t necessarily equate to larger audiences). Even if any different media structure were possible, it would have to ensure a complete return on investment to CBS, NBC and ESPN, who paid billions for 10 years of a TV product that has changed dramatically in the last six months.

And, unlike with the schedule, a strong enough incentive to change might not yet exist. The ratings tell us that viewers are still enthusiastically participating in watching the Tour’s product, even when it’s diluted with ads — and the commercial breaks tell us that there are no shortage of willing advertisers. For all the frustration it generates, the Tour on TV is still very good for the bottomline.

“I mean, we’re running a business,” Monahan allowed. “We’re fortunate to have the great corporate support that we have, and we’re doing the best we can to balance that with making certain that we’re showing as many live golf shots as possible.”

Sigh!  I take James' downbeat prognosis to mean that the only way out of this mess is to find a sovereign country that needs to wash it's horrible human rights record by funding golf.  Anyone have any candidates?

Alan, Asked - I do need to get on with things, so some anaerobic blogging is called for.  Shall we sample some of Alan's Q&A?

Given the item above, this seems a logical starting point:

Why are golf broadcasts significantly worse than in any other sport? @KYECHSPORTS

Because in every other sport all the action occurs in a confined space while golf tournaments sprawl across 150 or so acres and tons of things are happening simultaneously in different places. The logistical challenges are immense, requiring an army of staffers and a mountain of equipment. And this moveable feast has to barnstorm to a new town every week, whereas stadiums and arenas are built out with fixed infrastructure. So the cost of producing golf telecasts is high, and one way for the networks to get their money back is a heavy commercial load and the dreaded CEO interviews to keep the underwriters happy. Then there is the fact that golf has tended to lag behind other sports in innovation, whether it’s advanced statistics or upgrades to the viewing experience. I guess we can blame the older demographic, which is perceived maybe not to care about such bells or whistles, or just the general, longstanding gentility of golf viewing, which has always been Muzak in the background of our lives. Clearly newer, younger fans have different expectations, but the telecasts have evolved slowly, if at all.

I might have started with the fact that golf is excruciatingly boring....

That's mostly right, although Alan values that younger demographic far more highly than I think is justified, as I don't they'll ever watch much of our game.  but so much of the frustration comes from their simple inability to show the actual golf...

One other quasi-related bits:

So many of today’s top players have massive support teams. Would it be good for TV to have interviews with these members during a round? Heck, I’d love to hear from Cam McCormick on Spieth’s swing, Jon Rahm’s chef or whatever… @EduCrawford

Yes, this would be solid journalism. It’s what I’ve always tried to do during tournament rounds. The players are busy and harried; you’re only going to get them briefly, if at all. But if you walk the golf course, all of their people are just hanging out for four or five hours, and they are often happy to have expansive chats. A lot of good golf reporting comes from the stressed-out wives, parents, friends, swing coaches and others in the gallery.

Can we exclude the WAGs?  So many of those interviews are cringe-worthy....  The difference is that Alan is a print journalist, but any such interviews would be time spent not showing golf shots, which is our biggest criticism.

One more on TV:

You’re a TV exec for a day. How do you fix the golf broadcast? My answer is simple… just show golf shots! @Scott_Semaya

Yes, that is clearly the starting point. Every player and caddie should be mic’d up at all times. We also need a running feed of advanced metrics and Mark Broadie and Scott Fawcett in a booth to break down strategy and course management. ShotTracer on every swing. Cameras on every group so fans can pick a bespoke feed to follow their favorite players. A talented essayist to tell the players’ stories in richer, more nuanced ways. The range and practice putting green should be blanketed with microphones so we can capture all the stolen moments. Watching guys play golf is kind of fun, but the telecasts are two-dimensional. We need to bring to life the inner game that makes golf so compelling.

This deserves more thought, but how about we first ban anything related to gambling?  I'd be more excited about Alan's list of enhancements were CBS and NBC already meeting the basic needs of following the tournament.

But enough TV stuff, I hear they're playing an event this week:

Alan, can we please put this treacherous idea of “fifth major” to bed? It is jarring to hear the notes every time the suggestion is made about this agenda to produce a non-existent major. Would love your views. @SportASmile

For starters, excellent use of treacherous. I think it’s harmless filler for early in the Players week and then no one thinks about it again for the next 51 weeks. Anyway, the whole notion has taken a big hit now that the defending champ and various other LIV golfers won’t be at Sawgrass. A major selling point for the Players Championship was that it annually had the strongest field in golf, but that is clearly no longer the case. Hey, at least it still has a 36-hole cut! This may be the enduring the legacy of LIV: It will spare us future talk about a fifth major.

 Yeah, as compared to the majors, it's missing about three guys that might matter.

But to me, what's far more interesting is that this will now be the only full-field PGA Tour event at which we can logically expect to see the bold-faced names.  Isn't that kind of effed-up?  

But will the big names still show up?  Probably, but many of them don't love the course and they have eight other big-money events at which they only have to beat a small number of guys, so why go to Sawgrass?

Are we in a golden age of golf? Tournaments feel awesome week after week. @connoreclay

I think we have discovered Jay Monahan’s burner account. But you’re right, this year’s PGA Tour schedule has been a barn-burner, with a thrilling run of elevated events: Kapalua, Phoenix, Riviera and Bay Hill, each with tons of starpower on the leaderboards. The other weeks have produced blue-chip winners in Jon Rahm, Max Homa and Justin Rose and some unlikely, likable characters like Chris Kirk and Kurt Kitayama. I equate this to a 75-degree day in February: Global warming is great in the short term! But what is coming? The Tour has undoubtedly injected new life into the schedule, and the elevated events are doing what they were designed to do, which is get the stars in the same place at the same time (and pay them tons of money). The underlying question is what will this mean for the other 30-plus tournaments on the schedule as the lesser events try to scrounge together decent fields with discontented player for the wary sponsors? A reckoning may or may not be coming. But for now, enjoy the show!

Is it Jay's burner?  because the questioner includes the Honda and Kurt, but the business plan is to minimize any chance of such surprise winners at big events.  And Justin Rose as blue chip?  Ummm, watch much golf lately, Alan?

What is the expectation for Jordan Spieth going forward? @WayneOW66L67

There is none. Life as a Spieth fan is not week to week, it’s shot to shot. The guy’s iron play at Bay Hill could easily carry him to a green jacket…but you have to make 4-footers at Augusta National. With Spieth it is always two steps forward, two steps back. I let go of expectations a long time ago.

I predict lost of chatter with Greller..... I know, going way out on a limb.

To me, Jordan is still interesting.  He seems to have tightened up his ball-striking significantly, but is now clueless with the putter.... Kinda crazy, but interesting, no?

Is it too soon to start thinking about the Ryder Cup? Let’s pretend you’re the Team USA captain and you’re required to use all six captain’s picks on Ryder Cup rookies. Who are your 6 picks? @luke_peacock

It is never too soon. I’ve been thinking about this Ryder Cup ever since Paris! The U.S. appears on the verge of long-term dominance but it will take a win in Europe to cement that dominion. Anyway, to your question: Homa, Will Zalatoris, Cam Young, Sahith Theegala (below), Keith Mitchell, Joel Dahmen. Strong crew.

When is that European arbitrator to issue his ruling?  At this point I'm just hoping there's a Ryder Cup...

I think this deserved a longer answer:

API is a sneaky terrible tournament, right? @jasongrant19

It’s the quintessence of Florida golf: flat, entirely man-made, suffocated with houses, and almost every hole looks the same. The brutal setup has turned Bay Hill into sadistic fun, more penal than most modern U.S. Opens! But it does lead to defensive, unimaginative golf, which I think it was informs your question.

I do like that it was firm and fast, but it is a dreadful golf course.   

Does Rory’s retreat in the final round at Bay Hill shake his confidence even more heading into major championship season? I don’t want to exaggerate and say today had a “major feel,” but it was a stacked, incredibly tight leaderboard in tough conditions. @ScottFergs

McIlroy is and always will be enigmatic. Going back to the start of last year he is playing at an insanely high level: 18 worldwide top 10s with a level of consistency only a handful of all-time greats have attained. But he has converted that into “only” four wins and obviously no major championships. (We’re coming up on nine years since he won his last, at the 2014 PGA Championship!) That’s a good career for a lot of dudes, but Rory always leaves us wanting more. I would consider Bay Hill a minor setback—we know he can now top-five in his sleep, but it would have been a statement to get a gritty win with the Masters only a few weeks away.

I don't get the surprise.  Rory has never played well when it's firm and fast, he's a target shooter.  We'll all start assessing his chances at Augusta, but I suggest waiting until we see how fast it's running and how much wind is in the forecast.  Rory's four majors all came in the softest of conditions....

#AskAlan Golf used to be considered a niche sport. One with a small albeit affluent audience. Do you think the PGA Tour is trying to be something it isn’t? Tennis knows it’s a niche sport and is happy to own 8 weeks of the calendar year; does golf want to own 30 weeks? @david_troyan

Blame Tiger Woods and, more to the point, Tim Finchem. The former PGA Tour commissioner had the blessed luck to take the reins at the dawn of the Tiger era, and Finchem had grandiose designs on making golf a mainstream sport. Woods’s transcendence made that a reality for a solid decade, but once Tiger started fading there was always going to be a correction. But as in most businesses, there is always pressure to grow, and LIV Golf has finally brought competition to the highest level of professional golf. So Jay Monahan is forced to try to supersize the Tour even though it’s natural state of being is, as you say, a nice little niche sport.

I think you have to differentiate between the professional and amateur game.  Golf viewership is tiny, but it's not like the NFL has 25 million fans that actually play football (or, more to the point, buy helmets, shoulder pads and balls that go missing).

There's little doubt that the PGA Tour has over-expanded and diluted its product, though it's quite complicated to think through how to rationalize it all.  Then again, how do we criticize the expansion of purses given the threat from LIV with unlimited resources available to it?

I haven't actually followed it, but Alan has moved to a start-up called the Fire Pit Collective, and there was a bit of a blood-letting recently:

Sooooo, how’s it going over there at FPC? #AskAlan @fakePOULTER

Just look at the recent output and I think that question answers itself. I dropped a long story from LIV Mayakoba. Bamberger was writing live from Bay Hill and is now doing the same from the Players. We podcasted on Sunday night, per usual, and I nabbed PGA Tour board member Peter Malnati for a needed primer on the new world order. On Wednesday, Matt Ginella is dropping an incredible feature about the golf course architect/Pete Dye wingman Bobby Weed and his non-verbal autistic daughter; there is a written piece, podcast and nine-minute video, and it is powerful and life-affirming stuff. Now you’re reading this column! The Masters has always been slow to recognize new media companies, but this year the green jackets have credentialed both Michael and me, which says something. We’ll both be at Augusta National pumping out stories and podcasts. As a company we had to get a little leaner and do some restructuring, but the Fire Pit remains a content machine. For you, the golf fan, it shall remain business as usual.

The traditional golf publications are so compromised that one has to root for the upstarts, but obviously it's quite the hostile media environment.

 I will catch y'all down the road.

Tuesday Topics

Sorry about missing you yesterday, but it remains steep and deep out here.  I just need to find a set of replacement quads....

Bay Hill - One of my favorite things about Utah is the magic of time zones.  For instance, I like being out here for the Super Bowl (didn't happen this year because they moved it back a week), because it provides a chance for me to see the finish.  That said, the one televised sport that doesn't work so well out here is golf, because it simply airs too early.

Sunday was an exception, because the mountain reported 20" and your humble blogger was on line an hour before the open.  Because of that early start, I was back here in time to watch the final round, I just decided to crash for an afternoon nap, secure in the knowledge that the event was taping (which I had confirmed before heading out).  You know how this story ends, it turns out that Xfinity is no better than Optimum, although it did tape the Puerto Rico Open.  Hey, a golf tournament is a golf tournament, right?

It seems I missed a wild day.  I won't belabor the rehash, just a couple of quick excerpts, first from the Tour Confidential gang:

3. Kurt Kitayama made a clutch par on the 72nd hole of the Arnold Palmer Invitational to win by one over Rory McIlroy and Harris English, but the leaderboard was loaded with big-time talent threatening all day on Sunday. Are you more surprised that Kitayama

picked up his first career PGA Tour victory, or more surprised by a certain pro who didn’t finish the job?

Berhow: I thought Scheffler would have played a little better. I would say I’m shocked by Jordan Spieth’s rollercoaster round, but we should be used to that by now. You have to give Kitayama a ton of credit. He’s no slouch — this was the third time he’s grabbed a 36-hole lead on the PGA Tour this season, and it’s barely March — but with a 54-hole lead and in an elevated event at a difficult course, it was hard to predict what he’d do today. Yet he got an unbelievably unlucky break on 9, made triple bogey and somehow still won a golf tournament over a bunch of proven thoroughbreds. I don’t think many people would have been surprised to see him bogey 18 and go into a three-way playoff after we saw where his drive landed, yet he almost birdied and took all the stress out of that winning putt. Who wins when they make a triple bogey on Sunday?! Nuts. Another really good elevated event that delivered.

Sens: The course was playing so tough that it wasn’t a shock to see some hiccups on Sunday though I wouldn’t have bet on Scheffler’s bogey from the fairway on 18, or Hovland’s water ball from position A on the 16th. A bigger surprise was Rahm’s tumble after an opening 65. That man has been making things look almost unfair of late. And, as Josh said, the biggest surprise of all was Kitayama. A triple and then a title? After that hole, I figured he’d take a quick exit, stage left.

Zak: Definitely more surprised that Kitayama got it done. I think he might sneaky be a baller but he woke up Sunday morning as a non-Tour-winner staring down a leaderboard of thoroughbreds. When he made that mistake on 9, that was a moment where non-winners crumble. We’ve seen it time after time. And then he pulled his tee shot on 18, and that was a moment where non-winners freak out. He didn’t freak out in either moment. Instead, he hit a fantastic shot on 18 and cruised to win. Stones!

Isn't that just so....well, golfy.  The thing about our game is that on any given Sunday....

With an extra 24 hours to contemplate, Dylan Dethier had this summary in his Monday Finish column:

Jordan Spieth was hottest off the blocks on Sunday morning, making every putt he looked at

including four birdies in his first five holes to draw within a shot of the lead. McIlroy’s bogeys at 1 and 2 seemed to doom his chances, but a stellar run of six birdies in 10 holes super-charged his Sunday. World No. 2 Scottie Scheffler lurked all the while, going backward and then forward, refusing to disappear. The Tour’s name-brand competitors hung around all day trying to assert themselves over 54-hole leader Kurt Kitayama, who was chasing his first PGA Tour victory. There was a moment that he seemed doomed, too, when his tee shot at No. 9 finished O.B. by three inches and he went on to make triple. But that would prove to be the last blemish on his card; Kitayama closed hard and wound up the deserving winner by one.

The new-look elite level of the PGA Tour is designed to pit the best players against each other all while mixing in the hottest players, ensuring the fields would reflect the Tour’s meritocratic ideals. Kitayama leapt to World No. 19 with the victory, by far the highest of his career. If the first three designated events highlighted thoroughbreds in form — Jon Rahm at Kapalua and Riviera, Scheffler at the WM Phoenix Open — this week’s winner highlighted the accessibility of these big-time events. There can still be life-changing wins at this level. Those are the stories that give the Tour character and texture and depth, after all. Kitayama’s win was a happy reminder that isn’t going away.

I watched a bit of the Live From The Players last night on Golf Channel, and caught a whiff of the same triumphalism about the Designated Events to date.  It seems to this observer that they're ignoring the fact that this year's events are being played with far larger fields than they will be next year.  

This is apparently the qualification metrics for 2024:

• The top 50 players from the previous year’s FedEx Cup points list
• The top 10 players not otherwise eligible using the current FedEx Cup standings
• The top 5 players not otherwise eligible earning the most FedEx Cup points between designated events
• Current year PGA Tour winners not otherwise eligible
• PGA Tour members in the top 30 Official World Golf Ranking

The point that I'd hope would get through is that this week's winner, Kurt Kitayama would have qualified, but only barely, by being No. 42 on the prior year's FedEx Cup points list.  I know this might be a little subtle for folks in PVB, but isn't that a little too close for comfort?

To me, this is another manner in which the elites have taken care of themselves.  We'll likely at some see a bold-faced name fail to qualify, perhaps due to injury.  They'll be taken care of, either by their OWGR being slower to react, or by sponsor's exemptions (yeah, not on that list, but my understanding is that they'll continue to be on offer).

What will be hard to discern is the less notable talent that falls just beyond where the line is drawn.  here you can see those just outside the top 50, which as of last August included names like Keegan Bradley, Si Woo Kim, Mackenzie Hughes and Tommy Fleetwood.  We could discuss each of these and their relative worthiness, but as Kitayama shows, any one of these guys can find something and end up holding off Jordan, Scottie and Rory.  

I think that's the irresistible allure of our game, what Alan Shipnuck referred to as utter chaos recently.  But one can see why Jordan, Scottie and Rory want to exclude that body of talent from the big money events, it leads inevitably to more money for them.  Perhaps the money is the least of it, as it will insulate their world ranking and position in the game from the riff-raff, hence our concerns about it becoming more of a closed shop.

I've inadvertently segued from our Bay Hill game story into the new Tour protocols, so let's cover an interesting thought from Dylan:

A pre-tournament announcement confirmed that in 2024, eight of the Tour’s “designated events” will feature limited fields and no cuts. This was the logical extension of the Tour’s trajectory over the last year; its changes have sought to award more money to the Tour’s top performers and ensure its stars go head to head more often, too. Eliminating a cut for these 70-80 player fields felt, to me, like a miss — a Friday cut to 50 players plus ties would trim the fat and bring some urgency to the first two rounds — but the businesspeople involved in its planning believe guaranteeing weekend appearances from top stars is a game-changer for sponsors.

Have we learned nothing?

It so happens we have today a formal announcement of the demise of the last WGC, the Dell Match Play.  Some history on those WGCs:

The WGCs were created in 1999 by the International Federation of PGA Tours as official money events on both the PGA and European (now DP World) Tours. The events were also sanctioned by the Asian Tour, Japan Golf Tour, Sunshine Tour, and PGA Tour of Australasia.

The WGC-Championship was last played in 2021 as the WGC-Workday Championship while the WGC-Invitational morphed into the first FedEx Cup Playoff event starting in 2022. Meanwhile, the WGC-Match Play was given Designated status for 2023 when the PGA Tour first announced the new $20 million mega events last summer.

We have more than twenty years of WGCs, which we can agree sucked.  has anyone asked themselves why those events were so forgettable?   I've bene reliably informed that the definition of insanity is to do the same old thing expecting different results.  Yet these designated events are mirror images of the WGCs, and we expect them to be great?  

As for Dylan's specific point, sponsors can be as stupid as anyone it seems.  One of the reasons the WGCs were so uniformly dreadful was the absence of a cut, which brings urgency to those weekday rounds.  I would argue that watching a bold-faced name struggle to make the cut is great drama, and well worth the risk that they sometimes slam their trunk.  These top guys don't miss too many cuts, and with a reduced field they'll miss even fewer cuts, but what is the value to a sponsor of Rory being in the first group out on the weekend? 

Eddie Pepperell had some thoughts:

The PGA Tour’s newest changes, one pro says, could instead change LIV Golf.

“Have been thinking a bit about these latest PGAT changes and what it could mean for LIV,” Eddie Pepperell tweeted Saturday. “And I’ve concluded that I think it might embolden them.”

“Next year, effectively 98 players across both LIV and the PGAT are guaranteed to be playing for a LOT of money!” Pepperell tweeted. “And a lot more than everyone else. We know the 48 on LIV will be fixed (which is just one reason why it sucks). The PGAT will have some access in as we know..

“If however, and I’m going to use him as an example because of his current PGAT ranking and profile, Tyrell Hatton finishes where he is currently ranked on FedEx, do you think he is now more or less likely to consider an offer from LIV? Given he won’t be in next years PGAT top 50.

“There will be some very good players with high profiles who won’t finish this season in the top 50 on the FedEx. So if they want to *ensure* they are playing for the top dollars, they will likely give LIV more consideration, IMO.”

This is exactly the point I was making above using Kitayama.  That said, I'm guessing that the guys on the outside looking in will mostly not move the needle, and there's a serious limiting factor as per this from Alan Shipnuck's mailbag:

Your mention of a LIV Q school and relegation seems to imply that LIV is more or less satisfied with its current roster. Does that mean they no longer plan to aggressively court PGA Tour players? Not sure if they have room for both at this point. @baldeag06487004

The rosters are set in stone for 2023. I recently asked a LIV executive what would happen if Rory McIlroy demanded a contract, and the dead-serious answer was that there is simply no mechanism to sign him now that the season has begun. (A handful of extra players are already on-call to fill out the field in case of injury, which is why Laurie Canter teed it up in Mayakoba as Martin Kaymer continues to rehab a surgically repaired wrist.) At year’s end, LIV folks and the various captains will try to recruit new talent to fill the spots of the four relegated players and a handful of expired contracts; there are not as many multiple-year deals as widely believed. Expect a push for some higher-profile PGA Tour players. After LIV’s chaotic, beta-test season in 2022, it’s understandable why no top Tour players wanted to make the jump. LIV is counting on becoming a more attractive destination after this season plays out, with a full international schedule and a TV deal in place and a much more defined and promoted team component. We shall see.

But to me the failure is more profound.

While everyone has been decrying the Saudi blood money, I've been a lonely voice trying to reinforce how bad LIV's vision is for the game of golf.  They are holding exhibitions, albeit big money exhibitions, with golfers chosen for their Q-ratings or moral indifference, but there's no sense that they can attract a world-class field.

The Tour should be touting the integrity of the elite competitions.  Instead, they've decided to focus on their "product", ceding their most conspicuous advantage to the bonecutters.  Very strange, and just to placate (and, quite obviously, to retain) their pampered elites.  They're risking taking a binary choice of us vs. them into one that includes the increasingly attractive, None of the Above.

And did you hear the news about Pebble?  Not my favorite event of the year, but again we see the Tour spit on their own history (anyone but me remember the Western Open).  This event started as the Crosby Clambake, and you'd think the Tour would treasure that connective tissue.  But you'd be wrong when the paramount issue is to put more money in Jordan and Justin's pocket:

Bill Murray may have made his final appearance on the weekend at the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am.

Golfweek has learned that the PGA Tour is expected to make the annual stop at Pebble Beach Golf Links in Pebble Beach, California, one of the eight designated events, beginning in 2024. As a result, the Tour is considering shortening the amateur portion to 36 holes played on Thursday and Friday only over two courses, rather than all 72 holes over three courses with a 54-hole cut to the top 30 teams. So long, celebrity Saturday.

Think about the dilemma the Tour put upon AT&T.  You can either play your historic event without any of the top players, or you can destroy a tradition 75 years in the making.  Well played!

The good news is that we have an actually elite golf tournament this week, one who it seems will feature a full field in the foreseeable future.  I'm sure they'll come up with a way to ruin it, but I'll be hoping for a tour rabbit winner, just to stick it to those elites.

Udder Stuff - Just a couple of tweets for you.  First, who's copying whom, LIV?

🚨 LIV Golf Adelaide will have a party hole set up on the 12th, similar to the 16th at WMPO #LIVGolf @7NewsAdelaide pic.twitter.com/gQ2v70QnQc

— LIV Golf Latest (@LIVGolfLatest) March 6, 2023

Welcome to the past, LIV!

Color me skeptical about this:

LIV says that two-thirds of its viewership is under 45. That’s a monumental development given the Tour’s geriatric audience and golf’s long-standing obsession with somehow attracting younger fans. The big question now is if LIV can expand its modest audience. https://t.co/ZR7Ygltp4o

— Alan Shipnuck (@AlanShipnuck) February 26, 2023

So you're saying that a bunch of kids tuned in to watch a gaggle of geriatric players well past their prime?  I'm sorry, I'm just not buying it...

 If so inclined, you can read this on your own:

LIV Golf executive explains delay in reporting Mayakoba viewership, why early reports were ‘incomplete’

OK, so what's next for LIV?

LIV will return to the U.S. for its second event, Marc 17-19 at the Gallery Golf Club in Marana, Arizona.

And how are they getting on?

Arizona course set to host LIV Golf event under fire after cutting cactus down to make way for hospitality tents

 Does the equipment used to cut human bones also work on cacti?

Catch you later in the week.

Catch-Up Blogging

Bot, a fellow takes a couple of days off to ski with his bro, and everything changes... even the ratings?

When last we spoke, your humble blogger was explaining whining about driving away from the snow for a brothers retreat.  Well, the first day seemed to confirm that state of affairs, as Park City reported 16" as compared to Sun Valley's 4".  But when we got to the mountain that 4" seemed quite the understatement, as there was no shortage of soft stuff in which to play (although it was a little firm underneath it).

But it was the next day when prayers were answered by this gift from the gods:

Nothing had been forecast and it was all mountain effect snow, with only an inch or two in town.  Which is fine, because we rarely ski in town.  A fun few days for the brothers, who have not skied together much in recent years.

I'll throw in a couple of photos, but they don't quite do the place justice.

So, anything happen in golf while I was off in Idaho?

LIV Lite? - Did I nail it or what?  You've no doubt heard the highlights:

According to the memo, eight select designated events in 2024 will consist of 70 to 80 players and won’t have a cut. This year, except for the Sentry Tournament of Champion and playoff events, all non-major designated events are full-field tournaments.

With the new change, fields will be comprised of the top 50 players from the previous year’s FedEx Cup Points List and the top 10, not otherwise eligible, from the current year’s list.

There will also be opportunities for golfers not already eligible to play their way into these designated events. For example, the Tour will space out its designated events and full-field events, and the top-five players who earn the most FedEx Cup points in the tournaments between the designated events will earn spots in the next designated event. A win during the 2024 season is also an automatic promotion to the designated events. The final spots in those fields will be made up of PGA Tour members in the top 30 of the Official World Golf Ranking, plus four sponsor exemptions for Tour members.

 They're shrinking the field to 70 players, but a full four of those will be sponsor's exemptions?  As long as John Daly continues to get his fair share, what could go wrong?

I see little good news in this, though I guess this qualifies as a silver lining:

Additionally, players have been required to play in 16 of this season’s 17 designated events, plus three more non-designated events, to receive their full Player Impact Program payouts. Next season, that requirement will be lifted, but the new structure is designed to “incentivize top performers to participate in the designated events.”

I never saw the need for that attendance taking, as the purse differential is of such a magnitude that the guys will mostly show up regardless.

 Any guesses as to the reaction in Riyadh?

Imitation is the greatest form of flattery. Congratulations PGA Tour. Welcome to the future.#LIVGolf

— LIV Golf (@livgolf_league) March 1, 2023

Yeah, you almost can't blame them....

In fact, it's spurred this cottage indistry:

Critics say new PGA Tour events copy LIV. Are they right?

Perhaps not so much an exact copy as a deferential homage... 

But Sean Zak's first point continues to miss the, well, point:

No cut?

Among the critiques lobbed at LIV Golf was the fact that none of its events feature a cut. All 48

competing players take home a check north of $100,000, even if they finish dozens of strokes behind the leader. Where are the stakes in that?

The same critique can sort of be made for the Tour’s recent decision. There will be eight mega-millions no-cut events in 2024. That will only make up about 20-25% of the PGA Tour’s annual schedule load, despite dominating headlines earlier this week. LIV events, on the other hand, feature no cuts across the board, which is a major distinction. The absence of a cut has been a major point in the debate over LIV gaining world ranking points. That will be a slightly tougher argument to make, now. Defenders of the PGA Tour’s system will argue that the cut happens in advance of the tournament; pros will earn their spots in the limited field. But how should points get distributed for the 2024, no-cut AT&T Pebble-Beach pro-am? Any differently? (By then, we may have our answer with LIV’s points anyway.)

Which would lead one to conclude that if those 48-player fields had a cut they'd be fine.... The cut is the second order consideration, the primary issue is field size.  Not only does it render the events less prestigious, but it cedes what should be their strongest argument against LIV in the battle for hearts and minds.  It's hard to tag the LIV events with the "Exhibition" label when your own product is a knock-off.

Sean does trot out some better stuff:

Who’s invited?

There’s been plenty of talk about meritocracy in response to the Tour’s decisions. Pro golf itself is mostly a merit-based endeavor. The PGA Tour is at the top of the pyramid, and now it has chosen to build another tower on top of its pyramid that hadn’t previously existed. But no single player will benefit without actually playing great golf. If Rory McIlroy starts playing three shots worse per round, he’s not going to be in the designated events next year. Every spot in the designated events is earned (with the partial exception of sponsor exemptions, which will be limited).

On the LIV Tour, many players are locked in due to the massive contracts they signed to help launch the league. Their performance doesn’t affect their future playing prospects, and their initial inclusion was determined by an invite from Greg Norman. LIV plans to include a slight promotion and relegation system at the end of 2023, which will allow a few new faces into the league. So it’s not an entirely closed shop, either. But if Bryson DeChambeau starts playing three shots worse per round, he will definitely still be playing in every LIV event in 2024. Is that a big deal? Depends who you ask. But it is distinctly different than the PGA Tour.

Sean is mostly right, and this has been a failing of the LIV model from Day One, as I've noted previously.  Ironically, the biggest albatross they have is the contract of the guy that was indispensable, that Phil guy.  

But I'm struggling with that first 'graph, because they may have created a problem for themselves.  In Sean's example, Rory suddenly starts posting 72s instead of 69s, and finds himself without a tee time, but is that what we want?  Think about how the tour has operated to date, with players getting 5-year exemptions for majors and two years for winning tour events, which to me seems mostly fair.  Obviously a certain percentage of those thus qualified will be off their games for whatever reason, but the award seems commensurate with the achievement.  As I see it, though, you can carry those guys in a full filed of 144 or 156, but you see what happens when you shrink down to 70 guys (and, as an aside, didn't many players win events that came with multi-year exemptions that will now not be honored?).  

This is the exact terminology I've used over the years, first for the WGCs and now for these events:

Closed shop?

The PGA Tour currently has a membership of more than 200 pros. About 150 of them can play in almost every event they desire. This week’s announcement cemented that only 50 players will be able to play every single event on the Tour schedule. Those pros will get to set a juicy schedule, and they’ll be joined in each designated event by a selection of the hottest players not already qualified — some through season-long play, others through a recent hot streak. In other words, the rest of the Tour will still have access. It may not be the kind of access members enjoy this year, but it’s a differentiator against LIV, with as many as 25-30 spots per designated event up for grabs.

On the LIV Tour, on the other hand, there is no weekly option to play your way in. There are 48 players, set in stone, with a couple reserves traveling along in case of injury. I’m not telling you that’s a good or bad thing. It’s just a difference between LIV’s approach and the Tour’s. LIV’s field strength will remain relatively constant, and well behind that of every designated event. Forty-eight players compared to a deeper field of 70-80 presents a completely different challenge.

I guess they're going to replace Live Under Par™ with Not Quite as Dreadful as LIV™, which we all can agree is a killer motto.  Well, maybe "killer" shouldn't be used in the same sentence with LIV....

Although Sean limits his analysis to the events at hand.  To this observer it's more important what happens next.... That is, in allowing these top players to hog the money and FedEx/OWGR points to themselves, they further insulate themselves to challenges to their positions on those all-important lists.  That's what I mean by a closed shop.

They've trotted out all the usual suspects to laud these changes, including good-guy Max Homa, who offers this hot take:

“I love the new changes,” he said, beginning a lengthy, uninterrupted answer on the subject at the

Arnold Palmer Invitational. “The product is important. I think it’s easy to frame these changes as a way to put more money in the top players’ pockets. But it has been made to make it easier and more fun for the fans. I know it’s low-hanging fruit to jump on, Oh, this is just a money grab. This is to make it better for the fans. It is a guarantee on who will be at events and leaning more on the more there.

Here's the thing I've always been told, Max.... If a money grab looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, well, you can fill in the rest.

This is his silver lining:

Homa says he recognizes that golf’s much-bandied “meritocracy” will suffer under these changes. The best players will inherently have an advantage in earning the largest sums. But Homa wonders if the new schedule could have the unintended benefit of helping those in the PGA Tour’s middle class.

“The non-designated events are the same purses with, on paper, weaker fields,” Homa says. “There’s a lot of room for growth throughout that. You can play your way into the designated events.”

 Same purses as the Designated Events?  I don't think so, isn't that the whole point?

I've heard this argument bandied about as well:

How the PGA Tour has become more fun and competitive by overhauling its designated events

If by competitive you mean easier, sure?

I'm guessing James Hahn will be changing shoes in the parking lot, as he won't be very popular among the cool kids:

“I mean, I hate them,” Hahn said during a phone interview with Golfweek that interrupted his

gym workout. “I’m gonna say exactly what 99.99 percent of fans said about players leaving for the LIV Tour. If our players just said, ‘We’re doing this for the money,’ I would have a lot more respect for them. But how they’re covering up what they’re doing and trying to make it a thing about sponsors and fans and saving opposite-field events. I think that’s all BS.

“All the big names that are talking about this ‘new product,’ if you just came out and said, ‘Hey, we’re doing this for the money,’ they want more guaranteed money and this is another way to funnel more money to the top players in the world, I’d have a lot more respect for them.

“Right now, they’re just covering their ass and saying everything that the PGA Tour basically has trained them to say, have taught them to say and try to make it not about money when everyone knows 100 percent it’s about more guaranteed money being funneled to the top players in the world. We’ve been talking about money for the last two years and for them not to say that that’s not the No. 1 reason why they’re making these changes —it’s very, very hypocritical.”

I thought they just did it so they could spend more time with their families.... or was it digital rights?  I'm so very confused...

And don't invite James and Peter Malnati to the same party:

“We’ve lost our power, the majority of the membership has lost their power to the elite running the show.” —James Hahn

Hahn served as a player director on the PGA Tour until the end of the year and was replaced by Peter Malnati to represent the Tour’s rank-and-file:

“When I see Peter I’m going to tell him exactly what Lanto Griffin told me when I was put in that position and my mind was swayed by the executives on the board. He said, ‘You were put there for a reason to voice the opinion of the majority of the players on the PGA Tour.’ If he doesn’t have enough balls to sack up and vote no against it then I don’t want him on the board. We picked the wrong guy. He was put there to argue our side of the discussion.

“It’s gonna pass regardless but if he doesn’t have enough balls to vote against it and take the stance that I did and stand up for what he believes in then he shouldn’t be on the board. We don’t need another person like that on the board, if you can’t stick up for us. Let’s be honest, it would have passed, they had enough votes to pass. It’s just a cop out to prevent the media, yourself, Alan Shipnucks of the world asking him why he voted no. If he doesn’t have the courage to go into the lion’s den then he should get out. We need somebody else in there. I did it, right. And everyone saw how I was treated.”

I'm sure that conversation will go well.

And making even more friends...

On voting against last year's increase $100 million PIP: 'It's just a $50 million mistake'

Buried in the last paragraph of PGA Tour Commissioner Jay Monahan’s memo to players was the announcement of the reduction Player Impact Program (PIP) money from $100 million back to its original level of $50 million. Does Hahn feel vindicated for casting the lone opposing vote against the increase?

“Yes, 100 percent. We never should have gone to $100 million to begin with but that’s $50 million we just threw away on this experiment. And we knew that no one was really gonna go jump ship (to LIV). You’re just funneling money to this small group of people just because they were demanding it. They were literally negotiating with the Tour and they were saying that this is what they want or else. They basically said, not word for word, ‘We want $120 million in the PIP or else’ and we said, ‘OK, what if what if we give you 100?’ ‘OK, we’ll settle for 100.’ That’s not how a business is run. That’s not how an organization is run. That’s not how the PGA Tour should be run.

That sound you hear is Hahn being removed from Tiger's Christmas card list.  Thing is, he's right on just about all of this.

Mike Bamberger has his characteristically interesting take on all this, though there's this one clunker that had me concerned.  I'm with him on this for sure:

It causes me to wince when I hear Jay Monahan refer to golf as a product. Earlier this year, the

commissioner, making a pitch for his PGA Tour over LIV Golf, said, “We’re at a point now where it’s product versus product.”

Blech.

On Wednesday, McIlroy referred to professional golf as a “really compelling product.”

No, please. NO!

“At the end of the day, we’re selling a product to people.”

On Wednesday, Max Homa and Xander Schauffele also referred to the PGA Tour as a product. This cannot be a coincidence.

As Johnny Mac used to say, “You cannot be serious.”

When Jon Rahm was pledging fealty, it told us that the lawyers were in charge.  This?  The brand managers?

More importantly, Jay hit a home run with his "Legacy vs. leverage" bon mot, which I'd guess Mike liked a whole lot more.  But products don't create legacies, so it's more than a little curious.

I do like this bit, though can you imagine baseball ever doing what he describes?

This came to mind on this gorgeous, still Wednesday night here because the PGA Tour, according to a Golfweek report, is making a move to appease the sponsors of some of its elevated events, starting next season. Instead of fields with 125 players or far more with a cut after 36 holes, there will be fields with 70 to 80 players, all of them playing all four rounds.

If you don’t follow golf closely, you may be wondering: What’s the big whoop?

Look at it this way. It’s starting the 10th inning of a baseball game with a runner on second base. It’s a rejection of all that we grew up on and all that we consider holy.

Fortunately I can't stay up late enough to see extra innings....

There are two truly elevated events: the U.S. Open and the British Open. There are a dozen or more ways into the fields of those events, including open qualifying. The greatness of the event comes from the size of the field (156 players) and the road to survival that is the 36-hole cut.

OK, I've occasionally called Mike the conscience of the game, and this is a really good point....or would be, if in playing insufferable purist Mike called that certain event by its correct name.   

Mayakoba Daze - Shipnuck has a really strange take on LIV, none more so than in this review of their first event of the season:

The controversial breakaway league is chock full of rascals, scoundrels, muckrakers and shit-stirrers. It can’t be an accident that LIV has attracted the most polarizing, piquant personalities in

the game; take a bow Phil Mickelson, Brooks Koepka, Patrick Reed, Sergio Garcia, Bryson DeChambeau, Ian Poulter and Pat Perez, to say nothing of Greg Norman. Last year, LIV thrived on controversy, its players fueled by grievance and self-righteousness as they were excoriated for throwing in with a disruptor funded by a Saudi regime that has brutally suppressed dissent among its citizens, including the grisly assassination of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. The launching of LIV was the biggest story in sports, featuring Shakespearean themes such as greed, vengeance and betrayal. But a worldwide professional tour cannot subsist solely on buzz. In the battle for the soul of professional golf, it is now “product against product,” to quote PGA Tour commissioner Jay Monahan.

With this as the backdrop, Howell was the perfect winner for this week’s season-opening tournament, LIV Golf Mayakoba. On a firm, fast, tight, twisty, windy course that long bedeviled PGA Tour players, Howell played the first 10 holes of the final round in 7 under par, roaring to an insurmountable lead. His bogeyless 63 was indisputably great golf, delivered with clinical professionalism. It’s hard to imagine anyone is mad at Howell, who was gracious and even a little overwhelmed after his first professional victory in five years. In the concurrent team competition, Howell led the Crushers to a lopsided victory, aided by a strong showing from Paul Casey (fourth place) and good-enough play from Capt. DeChambeau (24th). (Anirban Lahiri’s first-round 70 also helped the cause.) Howell, a teetotaler, didn’t exactly look comfortable during the champagne-soaked podium ceremony, but the top three teams were quite spiffy in their matching uniforms. If you looked closely, you might have spotted the identical Rolexes that DeChambeau recently gifted to his players, in Crusher gold and blue.

I don't know on what planet Chucky Three-Sticks would be the perfect winner, but I'm pretty damn sure we can strike Earth from further consideration.

You can read the rest on your own, as Alan seems fascinated by things like the allocation of travel expenses.  He pimps the team competition as if he's on the payroll, whereas it's hard to find anyone that much cares....  The only other piece worth is a modest new contribution to our collection of silly Shark photos:

My favorite scene is when the Wicked Witch grabs Toto out of the cute little basket....

In one of his mailbag features, Alan had this further thought on LIV v. PGA:

Did Chris Kirk and Eric Cole, accompanied by Ryan Gerard, in a tournament abandoned by the sponsor and left for dead…did they ruin LIV’s life? It seems a lower-tier PGA Tour event was still the more compelling product? @ZitiDoggsGolf

I don’t fully understand the need to constantly compare LIV to the Tour and vice versa. Can’t they co-exist as different but complementary entertainment products? I mean, some days I listen to hip-hop, some days the blues, some days alternative rock. It’s all music. The Honda was defined by hunger, with players on the margins desperately trying to advance their careers. In a tournament with basically no recognizable names, Kirk, Cole and Gerard were each compelling in their own way. LIV Mayakoba was a more freewheeling affair, featuring Hall of Famers, major champions, Ryder Cup stars and various big personalities you love to hate. It’s more about entertaining fans than offering hard-core, life-altering competition. During the first round I walked with the group of Dustin Johnson, Cam Smith and Abe Ancer—if you don’t get some enjoyment watching that trio play a tight, tricky, firm course, you must not like golf. Charles Howell III is not a brand name, but he made more than 450 cuts and $42 million on the PGA Tour; winning in Mayakoba was not going to change his life, but you could plainly see how much it meant to him. Some fans were much more interested in watching the Tour event, a smaller number preferred LIV. That’s fine by me—I don’t see it as a binary choice.

So, Alan, riddle me this.  There seems to be a consensus among LIV, Tiger and Rory that the moment demands that we create these series of exhibitions for the purpose of seeing the cream of the crop square off against each other more often (your humble blogger, for the record, dissents).  But that can't happen if those best players are on separate tours, can it?

And by the way, the word "former" should have been added several times by your editor....

One last bit about Mayakoba, though not sure I'm buying this:

On Friday morning, LIV Golf shared some new numbers that tell a different story.

Using iSpot, a TV ad measurement and analytics company, as well as CW and LIV Golf internal data, the upstart circuit financially supported by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund reported an audience of 3.2 million viewers across all linear and digital platforms for its season-opening event in Mexico. With its new TV deal, LIV airs in every U.S. market via CW affiliates and Nexstar stations and reported 1.6 million viewers on Saturday and 1.3 million viewers on Sunday.

LIV’s report also stated an average linear viewership domestically in the United States of more than 537,000, which it claims is more than the current season viewership average of the MLS (343,000), NHL (373,000) and the 2023 Australian Open men’s tennis final (439,000).

OK, now do Honda under the same metrics.

Alan had a couple of other bits worth noting, including this amusing story about Phil:

What’s it like when you and Phil bump into each other? @TyWebb_11

After the messiness of last year’s LIV event at London (where a couple of rogue security goons tossed me out of Mickelson’s press conference before I got the chance to ask a question), I gave Phil a wide berth. I didn’t want to be part of any more sideshows. But last week I wanted to ask him a specific fact-checking question related to my upcoming book about LIV vs. the PGA Tour, and I am always loathe to lob any queries in press conference settings because if a player says something really juicy or interesting, the whole world has it. During one of the practice days I spied Mickelson leaving the driving range so I quick-walked to catch him. When he saw me his face went into a reflexive frown. I explained I wanted to check one thing with him real quick and he expressed a keen lack of interest. “Don’t you want to at least hear the question?” I asked, trying not to sound needy. He did not, never breaking stride while barking a few unpleasantries. So I’d say his vibe remains a little chilly, but I’m going to try to keep doing my job.

Gotta say, having read you're Phil biography, I'm just wondering when you started....

You are such a LIV fanboy, admit it! @arizonaguy71

This makes me laugh because another dude in this same batch of #Ask solicitations called me a “Tour shill.” I don’t think I’m either, but that’s up to the reader to decide. I do try to keep an open mind about LIV and treat it with some level of seriousness. In this hyper-polarized media environment, I s’pose that is grounds for being accused of being a fanboy.

What is going to happen if a LIV guy wins a major? @freedrop31

Total and utter chaos, which is my real rooting interest.

And that helps the game, how?

Twitter Bits -  Just a couple of funny things that crossed my Twitter feed.  Well, funny in the loosest sense possible... Pat Perez used to be modestly amusing, though less so after selling his soul to the devil.  But the LIV bots might want to review his playing record before going too far out on that limb:

Apparently Pat Perez is a Top 10 golfer in the world, according to LIV https://t.co/tgK57GVLOZ

— Tour Golf (@TuorGolf) February 27, 2023

The good news is that he's not even close to being in the top ten asshats on LIV.

Yeah, this guy is biased, but I had exactly the same reaction:

Jordan Spieth gave LIV Golf a watch. His review ⬇️ pic.twitter.com/q1L35LZqUd

— Tour Golf (@TuorGolf) February 27, 2023

That's hardly fair, because he didn't have to listen to Feherty calling it the most recognizable paint on the planet....

And if ever there were a tweet to exit on:

Which head cover would you pick? pic.twitter.com/1IaK6ji11Z

— Paige Spiranac (@PaigeSpiranac) February 27, 2023

What head covers?  I can't see anything because I'm blinded by those headlights.

That's all for now, kids.  Wanted to get this up over the weekend because I have a call scheduled Monday morning that will likely preclude our usual wrappage.