Late-Week Laments - End Times Edition

Just when you think things can't get any more bizarre.... 

Phil, Revealed - An excerpt from the forthcoming Billy Walters autobiography has dropped, and take a wild guess who's featured.  Yup, quite the flattering profile:

It’s not news that Phil Mickelson liked to gamble. It’s also not news that his betting led to staggering losses. Those losses had been previously reported in the neighborhood of $40 million.

But a former Mickelson associate alleges that was a lowball number.

Like, really low.

According to a new account by a former gambling partner of Mickelson’s, the golfer’s losses amounted to closer to $100 million, the nine-figure downside to a destructive habit that saw Mickelson wager more than $1 billion over the past 30 years.

I have to question that lead premise though.... Certainly Phil likes to place and win bets, but it's not actually "gambling" if you don't pay off those losing bets, is it now?

There's an incendiary allegation that we'll get to in a sec, but first some background on that Walters-Mickelson partnership:

The next time they crossed paths, in a pro-am at the 2008 Wachovia Championship, in Charlotte, N.C., Walters says that Mickelson was blunter about his interests and broached the topic of a gambling partnership.

Walters was no stranger to such arrangements, but he says he told Mickelson that he only entered them if they allowed him to place wagers with accounts that he didn’t already have access to, and at sums greater than the limits most bookmakers placed on him.

Mickelson checked both those boxes.

“In all the decades I’ve worked with partners and beards, Phil had accounts as large as anyone I’d seen,” Walters writes. “You don’t get those types of accounts without betting millions of dollars.”

Walters says their deal was verbal, and that it called for them to “split everything, fifty-fifty.” During their five-year run, Walters says that he and Mickelson also played “a few dozen rounds together,” always with money on the line but never at big stakes by their standards. The bets were “usually $10,000.”

They saved the big wagers for offshore accounts.

But just a reminder, that this is just the piece of the iceberg that Walters saw.  It doesn't included the huge gambling debt that Callaway paid off in 2004, nor the amounts bet with the Detroit mob.  That last story was broken by a local paper when Phil played in Detroit, leading him to threaten the event and the city over their failure to control the....checking notes, independent media.

There's more:

According to Walters, Mickelson had account limits of $400,000 on both college sports and the NFL, caps that allowed Walters to double his own limits. Walters says that Mickelson also had a “$100,000 limit on college over/under bets with each book, twenty times my maximum.”

Over the first six months, Walters says their partnership “ran like Secretariat.” Having studied Mickelson’s betting patterns, Walters says he learned to emulate them, the better to disguise his own involvement in the wagers. It wasn’t long, though, before the bookies caught on.

“They told Phil the best were far more disciplined than usual, so they knew they weren’t solely his,” Walters writes. “He could resume his betting, they said, but only if it was on his own.”

Are you done laughing yet?  They could tell the bets weren't actually Phil's because they weren't idiotic, but his business was only welcome if he went back to pissing his money away.  

For those keeping detailed scorecard at home:

Walters comes to a far larger tally, based on what he says are his own “detailed betting records” and two other “very reliable sources.”

Between 2010 and 2014, Walters says that a partial picture of Mickelson’s gambling ledger shows that he bet $110,000 to win $100,000 a total of 1,115 times; $220,000 to win $200,000 more than 800 times; and, in a single day in 2011, placed 43 bets on baseball alone that led to $143,500 in losses.

“In all, he wagered a total of more than $1 billion during the past three decades,” Walters writes.

That's billion with a "B"?  Sure sounds under control to me....

As I've noted frequently, this specific of the story doesn't seem to intrigue folks quite like it does me:

In “Gambler,” Walters ranges beyond betting to discuss the 2017 insider-trading case that led to his being sentenced to a five-year-prison term. In the case brought by federal prosecutors, Mickelson was named as a relief defendant, meaning he was not accused of wrongdoing. According to the suit, Mickelson was in gambling debt to Walters and received a stock tip from him that that earned Mickelson nearly $1 million.

Mickelson, who was ordered to pay back that money, did not testify in the trial, a development that Walters says hurt his own legal cause.

Gee, Billy, why was the debt unpaid?  It seems that this is something of a pattern for our hero...

I promised that headline item:

Exorbitant numbers aside, perhaps the most eye-popping of Walters’ claims stems from a call that he says he received in September 2012 from Medinah Country Club, outside Chicago, host of that year’s Ryder Cup. Walters says that Mickelson was on the other line, keen to place a $400,000 bet on the U.S. team to win.

Walters writes:

“Have you lost your f—ing mind,” I told him. “Don’t you remember what happened to Pete Rose?” The former Cincinnati Reds manager was banned from baseball for betting on his own team. “You’re seen as a modern-day Arnold Palmer,” I added. “You’d risk all that for this? I want to part of it.”

Whether Mickelson wound up placing the bet elsewhere, Walters says he doesn’t know. But it would have been a loser, as the Europeans mounted an epic Sunday singles comeback that included a crucial point won by Justin Rose in his match against none other than Mickelson himself.

Gee, if he were betting the other side that could explain that Sunday at Medinah.... Amusingly, this might only be the third most egregious Ryder Cup offense from Phil, as I'd place it behind 2014 and 2004, though the order of those two is arguable.  But, kids, this is the man we put in charge of our Ryder Cup Task Force.  

But perhaps the best part of this story is that it's triggered a classic-of-the-genre non-rebuttal rebuttal:

I never bet on the Ryder Cup. While it is well known that I always enjoy a friendly wager on the course, I would never undermine the integrity of the game.

I have also been very open about my gambling addiction. I have previously conveyed my remorse, took responsibility, have…

— Phil Mickelson (@PhilMickelson) August 10, 2023

Heaven forfend!  How would betting with the Detroit mob undermine the integrity of the game?

But, riddle me this, Batman, given that others have always paid off his gambling debts, in what sense has be taken responsibility?

Return of the Jay - Pretty amazing how under wraps this was kept:

7. What happened during Monahan’s medical leave?

Monahan’s departure in mid-June due to a then-undisclosed medical concern was sudden and

mysterious, which was not unlike the Saudi deal he had just hatched. The Tour’s statement at the time was brief. Speculation came. Was it because of the deal? Something else? In announcing via a memo his return, he noted how the past two years have been “grueling for us all,” presumably a nod to the Tour’s fight with LIV.

Health, of course, is a private matter, but Monahan is a public figure. On Wednesday, he was asked what happened.

“I think the reality for me was that I was dealing with anxiety, which created physical and mental health issues and challenges for me. I realized that, as I said earlier, I needed to step away and to deal with that and understand how to develop the skills to deal with that going forward. I knew that we have a great team in place, and I knew that I had — ultimately, you can’t wait when you’re in a situation like that, and I needed to deal with it, and I needed to deal with it for my family, as I said, for myself, and ultimately to be as strong as I can possibly be for the players.

“That was a very hard thing for me, and for the reasons I said earlier, but I’m really proud of the fact and I’m grateful for the fact that I was able to do that, and for me, it’s very personal, and I think it is for anybody, and in being personal, I recognize that people deal with far worse problems and challenges in their lives, and I realize that — I’m not looking for — all I was trying to do was get myself back to a place where I was ready to do exactly what I’m doing right now. But I’m proud of myself for doing that.”

Your humble blogger isn't always the most sensitive guy on the planet, but I certainly hope that he can meet this challenge successfully.

That said, what are we to make of this?  Jay Monahan is a hired hand, and we typically expect a level of dispassionate objectivity from such outsiders.   I understand that it was a pressure-packed year, but it's just a deal, right?  He's been doing deals his entire professional career, or is that his conscience speaking?

Did Judas go for therapy after the crucifixion?  I'm far more sympathetic than it may seem from the above, but it presents an obvious issue that no one else seems to want to put into voice.  To wit, is this the guy the Tour should have at the controls?  Psychological fragility is nothing to be ashamed of, but the usual course of treatment would be to reduce the stress level of the afflicted.

The above came out of a press availability, so shall we sample some of what else Jay shared?  Regrets, he's had a few:

8. How did Monahan feel when he heard that players felt he betrayed them?

The question drew maybe Wednesday’s longest pause.

Following the deal, players were angry. The proposal would now not only partner them with the group they fought against, but in some cases, rejected. They felt betrayed. A quote from pro Xander Schauffele, during the Scottish Open, is notable here.

“If you want to call it one of the rockier times on Tour, the guy was supposed to be there for us, wasn’t. Obviously he had some health issues. I’m glad that he said he’s feeling much better. But yeah, I’d say he has a lot of tough questions to answer in his return, and yeah, I don’t trust people easily. He had my trust and he has a lot less of it now. So I don’t stand alone when I say that.”

To be clear, he betrayed his constituents, but apparently all that matter is how he felt about their reaction....

When you heard the comments that you had lost players’ trust and that the players said that they felt that you betrayed them, how did that make you feel personally?

“How did that make me feel personally? Determined to regain it. And for those that I lost it with, determined to regain it. I see a clear path to doing that, as difficult as that may seem right now for some.

And what is he doing to regain that trust?

1. The specifics of the deal remain ongoing — and largely unclear

Since the deal’s announcement — where the Tour and PIF entered into an arrangement to create a new, for-profit enterprise and end pending litigation between the Tour and PIF-funded LIV Golf — there have been vague details on what that may actually look like. Notably, that lack of clarity has also led to player unease. (More on that in a minute.)

Wednesday, though, Monahan provided little new insight, saying at one point: “Ultimately what we did is we had an agreement to explore an agreement. That process is well underway.”

Later, he added: “I think it’s the right move, and obviously being in a position with the establishment of NewCo [the for-profit enterprise] provides us with the opportunity to have productive conversations and to move PIF into the position where they become a minority investor in the PGA Tour, and … we have economic operational board control, and the strength of the PGA Tour model stays intact under our governance, and we’re moving forward in a way that unifies our sport.

“Ultimately, when we’re sitting down at some point at the end of this year and these conversations have been completed, I fully expect that that’s where we’ll be. But I understand that we’re a long way between where we are today and that point, but I’m determined and inspired to get there on behalf and for our players and for our fans.”

Basically doing the same thing that created that sense of betrayal.... Cutting deals behind the scenes and then presenting a fait accompli to the rubes.

In the larger sense, I don't feel I have any clue as to what's going on:

2. The PGA Tour can survive without the deal

Of course, the deal could fall through. Could it be voted down by the player directors? Could it run into legal concern? Could it run into issues with the government? (Two Tour officials sat before Congress last month.) Could the PIF have second thoughts? All are, of course, possibilities.

Which led to this exchange on Wednesday, where, in short, Monahan said that the Tour could live without the deal.

Is there a chance with the deadline that there is no agreement, and if so, what would be the path forward?

“Again, for us to reach an agreement … we’ve got to have approval and buy‑in from our board.

I assume Peter Malnati has received some valuable offer, but this is the head-scratcher:

Is there a contingency plan? How imperative is it that you actually strike a deal? Is the Tour going to be sustainable if you don’t figure something out with the PIF?

“Yeah, the Tour will be sustainable. But again, we have identified a framework to a future that has the PIF as a minority investor in the PGA Tour where we have the proper safeguards in place to protect our model from a governance standpoint and from a control standpoint. There are a lot of conversations that led to the framework. Admittedly, there’s a lot more conversations that need to happen to complete the definitive.

“You always — the expectation is that we’ll complete an agreement, but there are always contingencies.”

OK, let me see if I have this straight.  We had to do the deal to protect the Tour's viability, but if no deal is struck they're still viable?

Does this make anyone feel better?

5. What does the PIF involvement look like — and what is the potential end game?

Let’s set this up. You may have been thinking it yourself, if you’ve been following along.

The Al-Rumayyan-led PIF funded LIV. It funded its players and its staff. LIV grew. It grew a format and a schedule and a TV deal — all the way down to T-shirts and caps. It competed for prestige.

And now the Al-Rumayyan-led PIF is all of a sudden on Team PGA Tour, regardless of whether LIV sticks around? At the least, it’s a leap. On Wednesday, there was this exchange:

What’s your sense of what Yasir wants out of this? Do you get the sense he wants to be collaborative and wants to be part of the general golf landscape, or are you getting any sense at all that he does not want to be disruptive, like it’s sort of been the past year?

“I think the framework agreement speaks for what he wants. I’m not going to put words in anybody else’s mouth, but we obviously spent a lot of time with him getting to that, and that’s something that the PGA Tour, the DP World Tour and PIF have agreed to is the framework for these discussions, and I think he wants to see a successful outcome, and we want to see that with him.”

There were exactly two binding terms in that framework agreement, the discontinuance of that antitrust lawsuit and the non-disparagement clause.  So, Jay wants us to believe that Yasir will p[ump in billions, but those two things are all he'll want.... That's a good one.

I'm not even sure at this point that anyone expects this deal to be consummated, but I also can't imagine what the breakdown in those negotiations might look like.

And the desertions start accumulating:

6. What happened to Andy Pazder?

The resignation of Andy Pazder, the Tour’s chief tournaments and competitions officer, on Tuesday was curious.

As was Monahan’s short reaction to the abrupt departure of a 30-plus-year Tour employee.

“I don’t have anything to add beyond the statement that was issued yesterday, other than I had the opportunity to thank Andy … for 34 years of contributions to the PGA Tour, which were significant and meaningful.”

Added to Randall Stephenson, rats and ships, it seems.

That'll be it for today, kids, and I'll look forward to seeing you on Monday.  

Tuesday Tidbits - Playoff Fever Edition

Not gonna be here for too long, so let's dive in, shall we?

Not So Fast, Mike - The latest incoming as relates to the proposed USGA/R&A Model Local Rules, which seems to indicate that the two PGAs have, well, gotten a room:

In a move that could have significant implications for the USGA and R&A proposal to roll back golf ball distance at the elite level, the World Alliance of PGAs has asked the governing bodies to indefinitely halt its march toward the changes.

In a memo obtained by Golf Channel and signed by PGA of America CEO Seth Waugh, the alliance—which includes nine PGAs from around the world—wrote, “We strongly believe in the need to completely scope out all unintended consequences before the introduction of any significant change. Whilst many aspects have been considered we are worried that the proposed changes will have far reaching implications for our game.”

In their memo, the PGAs, which represent thousands of teaching professionals, say they are “firmly opposed” to bifurcation of the golf ball: “It is something that we feel would lead to division and cause us to lose a very precious characteristic of golf; the fact that we all play on the same course with the same clubs and balls. In our view, this dynamic should be preserved as a fundamental tenet.”

Because the first thing that jumps into mind is that the governing bodies have moved precipitously....  Are you done laughing yet?

Well, don't stop laughing just yet, as it turns out that it's all about the "equity":

The PGAs cited operational issues, including policing players; retailers and driving ranges having to stock two different kinds of balls; and golfers playing different balls for different events, as reasons it opposes the proposal. The PGAs cited the effect on golf courses and handicap systems and said the governing bodies’ suggestion that elite women players could still play a “recreational” ball could be viewed "very negatively at a time when we are all trying to promote and champion women’s golf and participation.”

Got that?  It's apparently OK that they play a substantially shorter golf course, but we wouldn't want to make them play a ball that's different than the men, because....well, reasons.

Of course, there's this niggling issue that the PGA of America's members (you do remember that you represent members, right Seth?) manage golf programs for folks completely unaffected by the proposed actions, but whatev... Their actual interest in the matter is limited to their two or three championships, and it might only be the one that's actually in play.

Geoff is shocked to discover gambling in Casablanca:

Delay, delay, delay. This is the way. As the Mandalorians like to say.

The PGA of America came out against the proposed distance solution and put out a memo sounding suspiciously similar to the PGA Tour’s position revealed last week to help Jay Monahan fend off the Titleist wolves. (The PGA of America memo was reported exclusively by GolfChannel.com’s Rex Hoggard).

For added punch, the organization of club professionals known for rarely taking a stance on much of anything since the anchoring ban, billed their position as coming from the “World Alliance” of PGA’s.

I wonder what the World Alliance would think of moving the PGA Championship to international sites every four year? I digress. s

Notably, the American organization hosting of the PGA and KPMG Women’s PGA seem very focused on protecting the synergy between selling every day golfers what a few hundred male professionals play. The memo suggests the PGA is also disinterested in how their two biggest championships are played or whether time-honored skills still matter in deciding a winner. This hardly comes at a shock after the PGA of America, contradicting the findings of their lockstep partners at the PGA Tour, allowed rangefinders in the PGA Championship and KPMG Women’s PGA. You know, expensive devices that allow a severe mishit to be rewarded by allowing players to dial in an easy yardage from the wrong fairway.

They're all over the place and slinging BS against the wall, hoping that something might stick.  Geoff has the laundry list of their "concerns":

• The PGA of America believes the change to a Model Local Rule ball in elite events could “seriously interrupt the current momentum in the game and be fundamentally damaging and detrimental in the long run.” (The pandemic-fueled change in work and lifestyle patterns or a healthier-than-expected economy apparently pales compared to the pleasure of buying high-priced equipment all because a tour pro endorses it.)
• They claim to have seen “sets of data that conflict with the R&A and USGA materials” and call the data used “confusing”. The PGA of America does not say what data troubles them even though a vast majority of the Distance Insights data comes from the PGA Tour’s uber-reliable ShotLink.
• The PGA of America “firmly oppose” bifurcation, saying it will lead to division and “lose a very precious characteristic of golf.” Which is, in theory, golfers buying and playing what the pros play, even if most of that business is no longer handled by club pros and is instead sold online or in non-green grass shops helmed by a mix of PGA and non-PGA members.
• “We all play on the same course with the same club and balls.” Except most people pay for the stuff that pros get for free and play from about 1000 yards shorter tees if they can get on the “same course” pros play.
• “Need to scope out all unintended consequences before the introduction of any significant change.” The study started in 2018 and the elite ball would not be an option until 2026.
• They cite operational issues including policing players, the horror of “retailers” stocking two different spec balls (don’t they already do this on a grander scale?), and ranges having to provide different balls for different golfers (a very country club problem not likely to happen).
• The PGA cites handicap course ratings needing revision in a rare show of concern for the course rating and handicap system handled entirely by the USGA and R&A. It’s a fair point that the two organizations should address.
• The PGA of America has concerns about the image of elite women playing the recreational ball “at a time when we are all trying to promote and champion women’s golf and participation.” This is the lone time the memo cites a topic of note related to the conducting of a major championship.
• The PGA requests to extend the consultation period to review the conflicting data. Also known as just buying time and hoping this whole thing goes away.
• The PGA proposes to create a “white paper” using alternative data and pitching possible solutions other than what has been proposed. They also could have already done this if they weren’t just waiting to do what the PGA Tour asks them to support.
• The PGA offered to set up a phone call to discuss their position. How, uh, white of them.
• The PGA of America believes any altering of golf ball testing for elite players will lead “to changes to virtually all golf clubs which are built to perform best around the characteristics of the golf ball.” First, that’s total horse pucky. And even if true, this is something a launch monitor-proficient PGA of America instructor can help an elite player figure out in about fifteen minutes, maybe thirty if they stop for a breakfast burrito at the driving range comfort station.

Some obvious implementation issues, but that's pretty much how we justified the inactivity that puts us where we are today, and it only gets harder the further we delay.

But this is interesting, given that one man might actually be the difference:

In a 2023 interview with high school students, former U.S. Amateur champion and Masters Tournament Chairman Fred Ridley said he would lose around six yards off his drives if he played the new ball. He made clear this is not a big deal to him.

Did I mention he governs one of the four majors, of which two already plan to adopt this Model Local Rule? The math still isn’t on the PGA’s side.

Well, it's certainly a big deal to the rest of us....

Assuming the two governing organizations don't run back to Mommy, this all appears to hang on Fred.  If the Masters is on board with the change, it's a bit hard to see how that fourth major and the world's dominant tour don't go along.  That said, it's also clearly a high-stakes poker game, and perhaps best thought of as an opening negotiation position.

The other aspect that's clear is that Jay isn't jamming this down his players throats in the current moment.  He's got bigger issues, still presumably sleeping with one eye open...

Per Churchill, perhaps this represents the end of the begiining:

The notice and comment period for the proposed MLR is set to end next Monday, and the PGAs are asking that the governing bodies push back their implementation of the rollback and keep the status quo as the industry further contemplates “the thorny challenges of bifurcation.”

The PGAs offered to discuss the matter with the USGA and R&A. The USGA responded to the memo, as it did with the PGA Tour, by saying, “We remain in a Notice & Comment period, accepting feedback from voices from across the game. The PGA is an important stakeholder and we appreciate the feedback they have contributed to this conversation.”

Developing, as the kids like to say....

Ryder Cup Projections -  Still quite murky on both sides, but shall we see how Brian Harman's surprise win at Hoylake has moved the needle?

First, current U.S. standings from 

That's via Geoff and might be a week or two old, it's just an easy graphic to grab, though Sam Burns and Rickie seem to have swapped spots in the current update.

There's obviously the playoffs yet to come, but only for some of those guys, due to a chip shot not falling.  here's a screenshot of that updated list for those below No. 14:

Anybody on that list rock your world?  Denny McCarthy can putt, at least on Thursday through Saturday) and I've no clue what's up with Finau, but happy hunting.

Geoff had this which I think is on point:

Zach Johnson received a gift with Brian Harman’s win and lock status for the 2023 Ryder Cup squad. Harman is just the kind of player who would never be pick-worthy in the task force “task force” Task Force world and it’s addiction to analytics.

Assuming he brings his straight driving and putting to Rome this September, Harman is just the type of player who will annoy an opponent in any format and even if his iron shots in foursomes are not crisp, will be there to make the par putt. And given how the Europeans have set up courses in recent years to annoy America’s bomb-and-gougers, Harman’s style of play should fit that setup style.

But, gotta ask, where is that American juggernaut I was promised?  I'm pretty lukewarm about the guys at the top of the list, even before we get to Zach tough decisions....Scottie is clueless with the putter and Cantlay and Schauffele appear to be sleepwalking through their seasons, although perhaps the terrific penis has been distracted by trying to lead the next revolution?

Here's a longish take from Geoff, most of which seems about right:

Good play at The Open by Max Homa and Cameron Young also should please Captain Johnson, as confirmed on Sirius radio by assistant captain Fred Couples speaking to The Fred Couples Show. He labeled the duo along with Jordan Spieth as locks.

The rest of USA’s situation is a tad messy.

• Brooks Koepka will keep sliding down the list and may require a pick. During his Open press chat, Koepka went out of his way to make clear he’s a family-first man at this point, which I took to mean the arrival of a new child in Cup’s vicinity may complicate his participation.
• Vintners Schauffele and Cantlay remain steady but unspectacular, an underrated trait for most captain’s who will take that over hot and cold types (which America has plenty of). While neither had the 2023 major breakthrough they long for, Schauffele finished T10-T18-T10-T17 this year while Cantlay went T14-T9-T14-T33
• The Spieth-Thomas duo is hardly firing on all cylinders, but Spieth should get a pick while Thomas should not barring a turnaround the next two weeks.
• Keegan Bradley and Collin Morikawa would have helped their causes with better Open Championship weeks. They have the next few to make their cases for picks.
• At 12th Rickie Fowler feels like more of a lock than some of the above names given his resurgent putting. A good showing in the coming weeks would make Captain Zach’s job easier.

The names from 13th to 20th hardly jump out as exciting alternatives based on current form.

He's  probably correct that Homa and Young are safe, especially given Fred shooting his mouth off, but don't expect much excitement from me on that score....  Koepka might well slide out of that top six, but one assumes he will be picked, just to keep the Tour-LIV negotiations polite....

But everybody is conceding Morikawa his slot, notwithstanding that he seems clueless out there.  he and Keegan Bradley actually bring the same skill-set to the table, good ball strikers with suspect putters.  You need those guys the first two days, but how many is the question?

As I said yesterday, it's a binary choice of JT or some other palooka, Keegan or Denny or Tony.  As such it's completely arguable, and Eamon Lynch offered his thoughts here:

“He should book his plane ticket to Rome… In match play, form doesn’t matter as much as fire, and you just don’t leave heart & soul sitting at home when you’re getting on a plane to go somewhere where you haven’t won a Ryder Cup - foreign soil - for 30 years,” Lynch said.

He can get fire from Keegan, just not from Finau or Denny McCarthy....

I don't necessarily think that he should be on the team, but my Spidey sense is tingling that he will be, just because the options aren't so great.

That's all for today kids.  I'll do Europe later in the week.

Weekend Wrap - Dog Days Edition

I guess by law I'm required to blog Greensborough, but it'll just be to check off the box...

Wyndham Winddown - In a perfect world, a former U.S. Open champion revitalizing his career would be compelling stuff, but might have noticed life isn't all the Edenic.... or even a little.

I did catch the last couple of holes due only to that rain delay, and it does seem that Russell Henley got a bit unfortunate with a couple of lies at the end.  Still, not exactly Appointment TV, so the most I'll commit to is this tangential comment from the winner about Tour protocols from the Tour Confidential panel:

4. 2009 U.S. Open champion Lucas Glover, who ended up just sneaking into the Playoffs by winning this week, opened up Friday on the reduced field for the first playoff event this season (down from 125). “I think if you finish in the top 125, I don’t know why you don’t get to play next week. That’s my opinion. Been pretty outspoken in that. I think it’s silly that it’s only 70.” What do you make of his comments and the smaller playoff field?

Sens: 125. 70. 82. When you boil it down, any number you choose is pretty arbitrary. But the tighter the cutoff, the better. As they say in “The Incredibles”, If everyone’s super, then no one is.

Ever since their birth, the playoffs have felt like manufactured excitement; to really care, you have to care about already rich golfers getting even richer. Remember what Glover said toward the end of that same interview? If he didn’t make it, no big deal to him. He’d get to hang with his family. Good on him. But it points to a problem with the playoffs to begin with. If the players themselves aren’t all excited, why should fans be? Maybe that should be another of the cutoff criteria. If it’s not a big deal to you, stay home.

Zak: I think like a lot of disgruntled Tour pros this year, the comments come across as pretty flimsy when they aren’t paired with any solutions. The PGA Tour has been pressured into understanding all its assets better than ever before, and Lucas Glover — or the kind of players who are 90th-best in the world — just aren’t as important of assets as the guys who are top 30. Finally, it’s being said out loud in major ways, and to some folks that’s unsurprisingly a bit of a gut punch.

Hirsh: When I heard these comments, I honestly thought back to 2009 when Heath Slocum won the first playoff event after being the No. 124 player in the FedEx Cup during the regular season. He ended up finishing 8th in the FedEx Cup that year and had a chance to win the entire thing with a win at the Tour Championship. No system is perfect and volatility is what makes playoffs in all sports great, but you can’t give the 124th-best player in a season the chance to win it all. No one will ever agree on a number, but I agree with Sean here, the smaller, the better.

Who doesn't love a Heath Slocum call-out, but what is Sean Zak smoking to suggest Glover ails to provide a solution?  Ummm, gee, normal field sizes?  Just spitballin' here....

Glover also called out the miniscule fields in nest years designated/elevate/signature events, but repeat after me, everyone, "Just play better, Lucas"!  See, didn't that feel good to be dismissive?

Meanwhile, this was about the only reason to tune in (which, to be clear, I didn't), but it's quite the wasted question:

3. The PGA Tour’s regular season wrapped up this week at the Wyndham Championship with the top 70 in the standings heading on to the start of the three-week FedEx Cup Playoffs. Who was the most surprising player to miss the top 70?

Sens: Given that he started the week outside the bubble, it’s not a shock that Thomas failed to

make it in. But no matter how you slice it, Thomas’s season has been a stunner. Missed cuts in three of four majors. A couple of 80s on the scorecard along the way. Crazy what golf can do to even the best players. At times this year, Thomas has looked like he’s been body-snatched.

Zak: Yeah, it’s definitely J.T. He’s the two-time major winner. The 15-time Tour winner. He just turned 30. Absolute center of his prime. No one else comes close.

Hirsh: Sure, J.T. is shocking given he just won a major last year, but how about Adam Scott? Sure he’s not at the same No. 1 player in the world level he reached when he won the Masters a decade ago, but he had been a model of consistency for longer than that. Scott had made every edition of the FedEx Cup Playoffs until this year. Now Matt Kuchar is the last player remaining to hold that distinction.

Kooch is still on tour?  Who knew?

Of course, this is the question you were waiting for:

5. Justin Thomas shot a final-round 68 to just barely miss the top 70 after his chip on the final hole bounced out of the cup. If you’re Zach Johnson, are you picking him for Rome?

Zak: J.T. has unfortunately not done enough to make it to Rome. That doesn’t mean he’ll be on the outside looking in. Many captain’s picks have been made for people who didn’t necessarily deserve it more than others. Who does Zach Johnson want to send out 12th on Sunday in Italy to try and win a final point? It still might be Thomas.

Sens: If I’m Zach Johnson, that’s strange, because I hit a block-slice and can’t putt. But I’ll play along. If I’m Johnson, I do not pick Thomas because his play does not merit the pick. At the same time, in my strange new existence as the Ryder Cup captain, I also hope that Thomas approaches me first and says, As much as I’d love to be on the team, you should go with someone else. There are a lot of other guys playing better right now. I don’t deserve it this year. But I’ll have plenty of other chances down the line.

Hirsh: Sens is spot on here. I hope Thomas removes the temptation altogether and admits he’s not the best player for the team right now. If I’m Johnson I say no, but in reality, I still think it’s going to be tough for Johnson not to pick him. The fact of the matter is, there are 12 more deserving U.S. players than Justin Thomas right now, but I’m not sure yet if there are 12 better players. Z.J. is certainly in a pickle.

Did JT do enough to earn a spot?  That's a pretty easy "No", methinks.  You're not in the top 70?  There's not much of an argument to be made.

That said, it's the wrong question, because it always will be a binary choice between JT and some other hacker, and that gets way more convoluted.  Amusingly, the writers don't give a thought to the voices that will be in Zach's ear, as those Ryder Cup Task Force cool kids tend to take care of each other.  Zach may not take JT, but he'll likely have to stare down you-know-who to leave him off...  before moving on, Alan Shipnuck answered the same question before the Wyndham:

Alan, you are Zach Johnson when it’s time to make captain’s picks. Justin Thomas has produced so-so finishes at his last two tournaments (two made cuts, finishes middle of the pack) before picks are made. Are you selecting him? Let’s hear it! @SamHick60072515

Well, if I, a renegade and fiercely independent contrarian who speak truth to power (insert eyeroll emoji) were given the authority I would not pick Thomas. But Johnson will face different pressures as a card-carrying member of the establishment. What happens when Tiger Woods calls and makes a strong sales pitch for his little buddy? What if Jordan Spieth begs to have his wingman in Rome? It’s going to be hard for Johnson to say no to those two alphas. There is also the unspoken pressure to reward a high-profile player who has remained loyal to the Tour throughout the LIV era. The hard truth is that JT looks utterly lost. At Hoylake he blamed his desultory play in part on feeling the pressure of trying to play his way onto the Ryder Cup team, but guess what? If Thomas is gifted a captain’s pick that he doesn’t deserve, the pressure will only become more intense, and that is a nightmare scenario for a dude with battered confidence trying to scrape together some form. I can’t speak for Johnson, but this would be my Ryder Cup team, with the obvious caveat that things can still change with so many points available in the two FedEx Cup events: Scheffler, Clark, Harman, Koepka, Schauffele, Cantlay, Homa, Spieth, Bradley, Fowler. That’s 10. Having eliminated JT, the final two picks come down to Cam Young, Collin Morikawa, Sam Burns and Tony Finau. I’m taking Morikawa for alternate shot and Finau for fourballs.

In any event, I've promised a Ryder Cup update and in that we'll look at the JT vs. alternative issues as best we can.  Alan, as well as the Tc panelists think not, but they don't have to actually call JT with the news.

That Buried Lead - Just in case those references above escaped you, the TC panel's lede was quite predictable:

1. Tiger Woods made his way back into the golf news cycle this week with the bombshell announcement that he will be joining the PGA Tour’s Policy Board as a sixth player director. What does this actually mean for the future of the PGA Tour with the pending merger with the Saudi Public Investment Fund and how could it influence future decisions?

Sean Zak: It means nothing goes without Tiger’s say. Which is very important. For a while, we thought nothing would go without Rory’s say. His interests and that of Tour HQ seemed to

\

overlap perfectly. And then on June 6, they diverged in a seemingly major way. Now, it seems, there would be fewer surprises. Fewer things that pros just have to deal with. Less listening to demands and more making demands. It feels like a sort of serious unionization that the Tour membership has had but never really realized.

Josh Sens: That’s an interesting way to think of it: unionization. But there’s still the question of who gets best represented in that union, and it speaks to a lingering issue in the men’s pro game: a small number of players move the needle. How should they be compensated? What should be asked of them in return? And what about the rank and file and the up-and-comers, who are part of the lifeblood of the circuit but don’t draw the eyeballs or attract big-time sponsors? What rewards and opportunities do they get? Over this past year, while it was fighting to retain talent, we saw the Tour make all kinds of concessions to its biggest names. If we’re trying to read the tea leaves, Tiger’s appointment looks like an attempt to tilt things increasingly in that direction.

Jack Hirsh: This has to be insanely popular amongst the pros. All of these guys look up to Tiger and more importantly, owe him for everything this Tour has become over the past 30 years. Not being able to hear from Tiger regularly during much of the PGA Tour-LIV war was one of the most frustrating things about it because his voice carried so much weight. With him now in the fold of PGA Tour decision-makers, I expect the players to have much more of a say going forward. I do wonder what his appointment means for Jay Monahan, as we haven’t really heard Tiger talk much about his opinions of the commish.

Sean, let me see if I follow you....  We've just seen the Tour's commissioner go rogue without informing the five player members of the Tour's Policy Board, and you think Tiger somehow has veto rights?  Maybe, but I'd be hesitant to think we have any clue of future Tour governance... 

Josh Sens is the only one of the three writers to even hint at the chasm among the Tour's elite players and the community of rabbit-Americans.  I haven't been able to find the full list of players who petitioned Monahan to add Tiger, but the names released are all in that elite category, and they seem comfortable that Tiger will get with the program and ensure that they get theirs.

 

2. Woods had been deafeningly quiet on the PGA Tour-PIF merger since the announcement in early June up until this week. What do you think took him so long?

Sens: Since when has he ever been the first to weigh in on controversial matters? Woods has never been one to rush into the role of political leadership. The more cautious approach he took was right on brand. I would have been surprised if he had played it any other way.

Zak: When the first week passed without a statement from Woods, I was surprised. I figured he had to weigh in. What was he thinking? We knew what he was thinking. But as time wore on, he said a lot by saying nothing. I think the nine weeks of silence were a big way of saying “I don’t really approve of what has all gone down.” And the last week or so has been a big way of saying “I’m going to have a big voice now.” Why did he wait? Who knows, but it allowed him to make a bigger splash.

Hirsh: Woods may have been quiet publicly, but there’s no way the wheels for him to get more involved in the process weren’t set in motion as soon as he learned of the framework agreement. There’s a good chance this appointment was probably held up by Monahan’s medical leave.

I don't know what these guys have seen since 1996, but Tiger takes care f Tiger.....

This ensures that he's at the top of the list for that Saudi-funded loyalty program, so whatever he thought of the Framework Agreement is speculative and irrelevant.  he will now accommodate himself to the new reality.

One Last Bit - Easy answer, no?

How long should the jail sentence be for this clown who sledgehammered his putter into a green three times?

The video is pretty disturbing:

Jail. Immediately. pic.twitter.com/JgyzG0BCR7

— Tour Golf (@PGATUOR) August 3, 2023

All well and good, but now do Sergio.  

As you'll have discerned, I'm evolving into a lazy blogger.  But hope to see you tomorrow....

Late-Week Lamentations - Tiger's New Gig Edition

Kind of a low profile since June 6th, no?  Almost like he was waiting to see which way the wind was blowing... 

The Jay Monahan Survival Tour - I actually think we all should have seen this one coming:

Following the PGA Tour’s controversial merger with the Saudi Public Investment Fund, players demanded more transparency from Tour leadership. On Tuesday, the players got their wish, in a move that involves the biggest name in the sport — Tiger Woods.

The PGA Tour announced it has agreed with its players on new governance and transparency measures while also announcing Woods as its newest policy board member. This comes after the Washington Post reported that 41 players — including Woods, Rory McIlroy, Jordan Spieth, Rickie Fowler and several other stars — sent a letter to PGA Tour commissioner Jay Monahan on Monday and demanded to have more say in the future of the PGA Tour and for Woods to have a seat at the table.

Woods has now been added as a sixth player director, joining McIlroy, Patrick Cantlay, Charley Hoffman, Peter Malnati and Webb Simpson. The board also consists of five independent directors (chairman Ed Herlihy, Jimmy Dunne, Mark Flaherty, Mary Meeker and a to-be-announced replacement for Randall Stephenson) and PGA of America director John Lindert.

Can you say astroturfing?  I thought you could....See if this fits?

the deceptive practice of presenting an orchestrated marketing or public relations campaign in the guise of unsolicited comments from members of the public.

I can only guess that the 51 foreign policy officials that asserted the Hunter Biden laptop to be Russian disinformation were unavailable at this time....  though this letter seems likely to be just as spontaneous.  The original reporting seems to be from WaPo, though they only go this far with the list of names:

Monday’s letter was signed by many of the tour’s top players, including Jordan Spieth, Hideki Matsuyama, Jason Day, Rickie Fowler, Adam Scott, Collin Morikawa, Tony Finau and Justin Thomas. It also was signed by the five player directors on the policy board: McIlroy, Patrick Cantlay, Webb Simpson, Charley Hoffman and Peter Malnati.

Let me guess.... Hammm, would Davis Love be involved?  How about Jim Furyk?  Remind anyone of a certain Task Force....  In any event, Peter Malnati will be at a table for one, it seems.

So, the man who has had nothing to say since that June 6th bombshell, now has platitudes to share, and we're assured that this is SIGNIFICANT:

There are Woods’ quotes in the press release, his first statement of any kind on the planned PGA

Tour/Saudi PIF partnership:

“I am honored to represent the players of the PGA Tour. This is a critical point for the Tour, and the players will do their best to make certain that any changes that are made in Tour operations are in the best interest of all Tour stakeholders, including fans, sponsors and players. The players thank Commissioner Monahan for agreeing to address our concerns, and we look forward to being at the table with him to make the right decisions for the future of the game that we all love. He has my confidence moving forward with these changes.”

Let me see if I follow... Jay has your confidence to see through those changes that he completely sucker-punched you with?  Brave Sir Tiger, standing up for the common man.

Of course, the best part is that accompanying photo with Tiger in his silly hat and Jay looking like he just cut a deal with the devil.... Yeah, the irony, she burns!

That sound you hear is the barn door being locked, after....

Some meaningful bits in there: Players came together and elevated concerns to Monahan. He heard them. As a result, Monahan has a vote of confidence — on paper, anyway — from the biggest voice in the golf ecosystem. That matters.

Finally, there are the stipulations that were agreed to, also covered in the press release:

Players will work with Monahan to amend the governing documents of the policy board so that no major decision can be made without prior involvement and approval from player directors. In other words, no surprise mergers.

I don't mean to be churlish, but has anyone else kept a scorecard.  Tiger steps up and asserts himself with Rory at that famous Derlaware meeting, and Jay pulls the rug out from under him....  Unless, yanno, he was informed all the time, which would only make it worse...

Anyone but your humble blogger wondering what the price was for Tiger to save Jay's bacon?

I do love that last bit above, because they're all joping to join handsm sing Kumbaya then lacquer the lipstick onto that pig, leaving all those that violated the spirit and law of PGA Tour governance, checking notes, lavishly rewarded for their fine work.

Far be it for me to harsh your mellow, but this is evocative of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic:

The plan might just be accepting exactly what Tour players want. Right now, that means a weighty presence for Tiger Woods. The game’s greatest player now owns a designation he has never held before. If Woods is able to commandeer unanimous support from his fellow player directors, they are bound to get more of what they want when they want it. (At this point, those desires are unclear, but one of the main points of the PGA Tour’s negotiations hinge on a Player Benefit Program that will reward Tour members for their loyalty the last 15 months.)

Optically, Woods’ positioning can be viewed as simply as a basic math equation. A balancing of the expressions. The policy board included just nine people in 2016, four player directors, four independent directors and the director of the PGA of America. Then, in 2017, a fifth independent director joined. During more contentious times, in March 2022, Patrick Cantlay came aboard, balancing the equation a bit more. And now Woods. Six players and six non-players. An even split…for now.

Which sounds great until you read this 'graph, which is sandwiched between those two above: 

Jimmy Dunne, one of the independent directors on the board, said during a senate hearing last month that he would not vote in favor of something the player directors did not approve. There is no precedent for the policy board to push forth a decision that player directors were unanimously against. (Just one big one pros knew very little about, bringing us to where we are today.)

Remind me again of the definition of "is"....  If it's such a good deal, why the endless lies....  he wouldn't vote in favor of anything the players didn't approve, though he's sure comfortable pulling a fait accompli that technically didn't involve a vote... and then, he'll only concede to not pushing something that the players are "unanimously" against, notice the movement of the goalposts.

And Dunne's tieless work for the 9-11 survivors?  Nothing means anything when there's a deal to be done.  Because, yanno, nothing grows the game quite like those kooky Wahabis.

What's most egregious in the press accounts is that this is presented as a response to the "players' or as a means pf the amorphous "players" retaking control of Tour governance, as if all players have the same interests.  This is par of a coup be the elite players, and this will cement their control, necessary to ensure a maximum payout from the loyalty fund.  Which we can all agree is the most pressing issue in our game today....

But you'll notice that those initial howls of protest of been rather easily silenced, as the source of the money and ultimate control of professional golf are considerations understandably subordinate to ensuring that Patrick Cantlay feels respected.  We were reliably informed that Tiger and Rory were the conscience of our game, though they seem to have accommodated themselves to Saudi involvement quite easily, just making sure that they get theirs....  

Oh, as to that game of musical chairs?  Well, guess who will be sharing those cozy Board meetings with Tiger?

One stipulation of the Framework Agreement stated that the PIF would have representation on the policy board. In the event that a definitive agreement is established, the 50-50 split will be disrupted by a new seat, to be owned initially by Yasir Al-Rumayyan, the governor of the sport-shifting body that Woods has adamantly spoken out against. Whose voice will be the loudest? We will have to wait and see.

Wow, are you always that clueless?  Because it ain't about the volume of their voice, it's about the number of commas on the checks, and that's already been decided.

But the rousing coda for this bit has to be this rather curious tweet from the outspoken Brandel Chamblee, who seems not to understand where are on the time-space continuum:

Tiger becoming the 6th player vote on the board is a reckoning to the fact that there are some things that money should not be able to buy and an absolute to the fact that we’re dangerously close to going from Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand” to MBS’s invisible bone saw.

— Brandel Chamblee (@chambleebrandel) August 2, 2023

That's a good one, Brandel.  Tiger's services have been retained for the purposes of ensuring that this deal gets completed, and everyone seems to understand that except you.  There is no more resistance except, perhaps, for the Cantlay efforts, based on the premise that even the sums on offer from the bonecutters are insufficient to their desires. What could go wrong? 

The Coup In Action - As noted above, the significance of Tiger's involvement is not that it empowers generic players, but that it cements control by those handful of elites.  What do the elite players want?  They don't want to have to share the locker room with the likes of Peter Malnati, as per the details just revealed about that 2024 schedule:

he PGA Tour has reversed course on its plan to alter the makeup of its three invitational tournaments in 2024, sources told Golf Digest who furthermore added that much of that is the doing of Tiger Woods—who only on Tuesday was given a seat on the tour’s policy board.

The tour announced in March that the Genesis Invitational, Arnold Palmer Invitational and the Memorial Tournament would be among eight no-cut designated events next year, but pushback from Woods—as well as from Jack Nicklaus and officials of the Arnold Palmer Invitational—has led to a compromise in which the three events will have a field of 80-90 players and a cut to the low 50 and ties and players within 10 shots of the lead. Woods is the host of the Genesis Invitational near Los Angeles. Nicklaus is founder and host of the Memorial in suburban Columbus, Ohio. The invitationals in recent years have had 120 players.

Sources not affiliated with the invitationals said the three events, with purses of $20 million (or possibly higher), could still pay a stipend to players who do not make the cut, similar to the Masters, which also has a cut to low 50 and ties, but no longer has a 10-shot rule. The Players also will have a cut with a full field of 144 players.

“The Masters was definitely the model for what eventually was decided,” said one tour player who has followed the discussions.:

Brave Sir Tiger actually gets the cut maintained at his event, obscuring that the field will be some thirty soils less than the prior year.  terrific peni are rejoicing....

As for those other designated events  Well, while we were sleeping, those fields shrunk even further:

Other designated events, which will have smaller fields in the range of 60 players and no cut, will be the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am, RBC Heritage, Wells Fargo Championship and Traveler Championship.

And that's distinguishable from a LIV event how?  Might as well go to 54-holes and shotgun starts, that's how beclowned these events have become...

 I'm blogging this one sight unseen:

11 winners and losers from the PGA Tour's new schedule

Gee, I wonder which golf fans are considered....

This is what passes for a winner:

Pebble Beach Pro-Am

Beginning in 2024 the Pebble Beach Pro-Am will be part of the tour’s Signature Series, or what the tour called its elevated/designated events this season. As an upshot, the amateur portion of the event will end after 36 holes, but that’s a small price to pay for a guarantee that the sport’s best will return to Carmel.

To save this event you had to destroy it?   So much for MPCC and the amateurs making the cut drama, no we can't fit that kind of week into our schedule, because Patrick needs to make bank.  Nor can we fit a match play event, though we can only hope for some iconic Crosby weather.....

And this would seem to call out of the offsetting entrey:

Top players

The gettin’ was already good for golf’s best performers, and it’s about to get better. The tour’s new signature series will codify that station, turning its designated events into another iteration of the former World Golf Championships with limited fields and (mostly) no-cut formats. And unlike this year, players will not be forced to play in the series or face PIP penalties for not participating.

Funny how those guys losing access to the big-money events don't cross your radar.... Compromised much?

Can they find any losers?  Well, Honda did well to get the hell out of Dodge:

Palm Beach Classic

One of the reasons Honda left as title sponsor was the tournament’s date on the schedule kept many of the stars—some who lived just minutes from PGA National Resort—from competing. Sources with the tour tell Golf Digest that discussions remain ongoing with potential financial backers for the event, but given the Palm Beach tournament is sandwiched between designated events (Pebble Beach, Genesis Invitational on the front; API, Players Championship on the back) field issues will likely remain.

Why would anyone do business with these people?  Honda only sponsored this event for a mere forty-two years, so I'm guessing they never saw the shiv coming.....  

I know, we still need to talk Ryder Cup, but is next week good for you?  Have a great weekend.... 

Tuesday Topics - LIV Catch-Up Edition

A changed schedule means that this morning's blogging won't be quite as leisurely as anticipated, but we'll still do our best to pay off yesterday's commitments.

Does Jay deserve his zone of privacy?  Maybe, but it seems quite the arguable point, and really quite curious.  What emergency could be sufficiently serious to require a formal changing of the guard, yet have him back in full control within 30 days?  

In reasserting himself into the vortex he issued a memo to his rank-and-file, which included a few items of note.  This first bit isn't anything new, it's just the typical reaction to dissention in the ranks:

The biggest developments to come from Wednesday’s memo, which was obtained by GOLF.com, surround negotiation on the framework agreement with the PIF, which Monahan said is “ongoing.”

For the first time, the Tour provided players with a series of new details about the deal, including some of the key elements that could come to determine its eventual ratification by the PGA Tour’s player advisory board.

In the memo, Monahan said the Tour was working to present a “Player Benefit Program” believed to be aimed at providing Tour loyalists with a “financially significant” system of repaying players for not defecting. Such a program has been a topic of particular intrigue among players, some of whom turned down eight-and-nine-figure offers from the PIF-backed LIV Golf last year to remain with the PGA Tour.

“This program, should we reach a Definitive Agreement, will be financially significant in total and incremental to our planned compensation package,” Monahan said in the memo. “More details to come as we … determine how players from across the membership would benefit.”

I have been unable to confirm whether the memo actually used the salutation, "Dear Suckers", or whether that was merely implied....

This is the big honking payoff to those that remained loyal to the PGA Tour, and will now be paid off for that loyalty by those we were assured should never be allowed into the tent.  

The next bit achieves a rare daily double, being simultaneously old news and pathetic:

Another significant piece of negotiations, as written by Monahan, is that the Tour has appointed a “task force” aimed at “developing potential pathways back to the PGA Tour for LIV players who wish to reapply in the future.” It remains to be seen if the task force will impose penalties upon those who do, or how those penalties will look if they are imposed. The task force is being led by PGA Tour’s chief tournaments and competitions officer Andy Pazder alongside newly minted “chief player officer” Jason Gore and EVP/vice counsel Neera Shetty.

Brave Sir Robin hiding behind a task force is so special.... I find that "It remains to be seen" especially rich, given that it could just as easily be applied to the entire term sheet, whose only specific provision was to ban the word "bonecitter".  But here at least the cast does change in an intriguing fashion:

These groups will work in addition to a new “third-party special advisor” to players, Raine Group’s Colin Neville, who has been appointed in the wake of the framework agreement. Neville will help streamline communication between the Tour and players during a “complicated and time intensive” negotiation with the PIF, Monahan said.

Hmmmm....the Raine Group?  Where have I heard that name before?

Sharp golf fans will recognize Neville’s name; he was one of the first people involved in the formation of a new rival golf league way back in 2020. In many ways, LIV is Neville’s brainchild — he helped to conceive of the idea for the “Premier Golf League” that was later coopted by the Saudis and used in the creation of LIV.

If by coopted you mean stolen.... One assumes that Mr. Neville, whose intellectual property was stolen by the Saudis might have a cautionary tale for our boys but, in our current through the looking glass moment, he'll be urging the lads to trust those genteel Wahabis.... Strange bedfellows is the phrase that comes to mind, though that might trigger images of camels or some such...

Obviously the path back to the PGA Tour will be such that Jay is already hiding behind the skirt of a task force, so I'm guessing those penalties will be of the order of magnitude of parking fines...

Even the writer is trotting out the B-word on this potentially most significant bit:

Buried further in the briefing, Monahan announced the PGA Tour would not be supporting the USGA and R&A’s joint golf ball rollback proposal. Monahan said the PGA Tour was “not able to support” the rollback after there was “significant belief” among the Tour membership that the proposed rule was “not warranted and not in the best interest of the game.” That development comes as a major blow to both governing bodies, which have proposed the rule in the hopes of reigning in the professional game’s increasing distance gains.

A major blow?  Court-appointed stenographer James Colgan seems sufficiently credulous that I'd like to interest him in some swampland....  I mean, can you think of any reason to not treat Jay's pronouncements as the law?  Any recent incidents where he's suddenly changed course spring to mind?

One other intriguing bit, mostly because of the involvement of that terrific penis:

Protocol dictates that if a non-player director leaves the Policy Board, the four remaining non-player directors suggest a replacement for approval by all board members. Monahan has instead appointed a four-person committee to source Stephenson’s successor and it includes two player directors: Webb Simpson and Patrick Cantlay. In private, Cantlay has been a vehement critic of the Tour’s leadership since the PIF deal was announced on June 6.

That's Eamon Lynch's voice, and we'll step back for his global taker, though calling Cantlay a vehement critic is both accurate but also somewhat misleading.  This browser tab has been open for almost two months, but Patrick seems to be Patient Zero:

The Disease of More

With the partnership of the PGA Tour and PIF, the Disease of More has officially afflicted all of golf. Is there an antidote?

When Pat Riley was coaching the Los Angeles Lakers in the 1980s, he came up with a term to explain why all dynasties eventually fall. Typically, they aren’t toppled from the outside. Most implode from within. He called it the Disease of More.

Athletes, by nature, are addicted to achievement. It’s part of what separates them from mortals. If they win one championship, they’re briefly satisfied, but the feeling soon fades and they are desperate for more. If they earn a million dollars, they’re ecstatic, but before long, it seems insufficient. They are convinced they need more. More of everything, more commercials, more followers on social media, more houses, more influence, even more romantic partners. The same forces that inspire you to work hard to get everything you ever wanted eventually consume you. Your wants simply mushroom. Millionaires long to be billionaires. Billionaires long to be kings.

Golf is currently afflicted with the Disease of More.

Upon further review, perhaps Phil is Patient Zero, but Patrick has the long version of this disease, believing apparently that the level of compensation on offer from the Saudis is insufficient for his level of wonderfulness.... Ironically, you'd think a guy out there in a Goldman Sachs hat might have picked up a nugget or two on demand-and-supply, but you'd be wrong...

Eamon puts Jay's memo in the logical context:

Lynch: Jay Monahan's memo aims to buy 2 things he's short on. Time and goodwill

As always, framed imaginatively and amusingly:

The humorist Will Rogers described diplomacy as the art of saying ‘Nice doggie’ until you can find a rock, but not every act of statecraft comes with an option for going on the offensive. So it is with the memorandum Jay Monahan sent to PGA Tour players on July 26, which left an unmistakable impression that the commissioner has a pack of rabid hounds at his heels, and that he’s about all out of rocks.

The reaction to Monahan’s letter focused on its parts rather than the whole. Like the creation of a task force to decide how LIV golfers might rejoin the Tour or his stiff-arming the governing bodies on rolling back the golf ball. The latter isn’t a pressing matter and its inclusion was intended to signal to players that he has their backs on any issue they feel strongly about. That Monahan felt the need to tip his hand on the proposed rollback before the official comment period concludes shows how eager he is to notch something, anything, in the win column. With good reason.

There's some fun pyrotechnics for sure, but I do think there's one major misperception in his rousing coda:

We are witnessing the end of an imperious era in Ponte Vedra, one that reached its apogee under Tim Finchem. There’s been a seismic power shift within the PGA Tour away from the commissioner’s office and toward members. It began with the rise of LIV, but the announcement of the Saudi agreement and the manner in which it was handled has seriously undermined the executive branch. “We have a ton of momentum heading into the final stretch of the season, and my priority is to reconnect with all of you,” Monahan signed off gamely. By reconnect he doesn’t mean catching-up after his absence, but re-establishing trust in his leadership and in the very governance of the Tour. For all of the concessions he has just made to that reality, a rancorous and divisive period lies ahead.

Eamon is correct that the Tour has lost touch with its membership, a phenomenon so common that it forms the underpinning of the third of Robert Conquest's Laws of Politics:

The simplest way to explain the behavior of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies.

But Eamon's misstep is in overlooking the schism within the membership, to wit, power hasn't shifted back to the membership at large.  Rather, power has been usurped by a cabal of elite players to the direct detriment of the vast majority of the rank and file.  

I've seen one commentator describe the Tour's reaction to the USGA/R&A Model Local Rule as an opening of the negotiation, which is perhaps ceding too much credit to Jay, who likely can't see that far down the road.  Geoff has some longer thoughts, but unless Fred Ridley is for turning, it's hard to see the endgame:

But at least the Tour’s comment-period stance is now known ahead of the August deadline. Assuming the USGA and R&A forge ahead with the already watered-down Model Local Rule to make elite players use equipment tested under tighter restrictions, Augusta National is expected to go along. That, combined with the USGA and R&A’s championships, means three majors will make players and whiny manufacturers have to decide if they want to participate. They might pass. Guess what? Without Tiger around and Phil morphing into a weird circus act, no one will miss any of the current players if they stay away over this rule change.

With the PGA Tour unwilling to support the compromise-based Model Local Rule, Wednesday’s Monahan memo offers even more license to do what’s right for the game. This means rule-tightening on elite player equipment to reconsider addressing the driver face testing and, instead of backdoor bifurcation via a local rule, enact an overall change that can be carried out for the entire sport. If crafted to only impact elite clubhead speeds, this would not materially impact those lacking speed. Ultimately such a remedy is the cleaner and saner solution while working with the current rules in place. It’s a true “rollback” minus the local rule stuff and one the softened PGA Tour players would be forced to abide by no matter what the major championship math says.

We've all had our gripes over the years with the organizations that run those three majors, but with Jay's capitulation, who else do we have to rally behind? 

Meanwhile, Phil is waiting for his apology:

“What a colossal waste of time. Not a single player on LIV wants to play PGA Tour,” the 53-year-old wrote in a tweet. “It would require a public apology and restitution to LIV players for paying millions to Clout media to disparage all of us.”

Dylan Dethier uses his Monday Finish columns for a full-frontal Fisking of Phil's comments, and it may be worth your time:

You won’t be surprised to hear that Phil Mickelson has an opinion on a development in the golf world. You might be mildly surprised to hear the specifics of this one, though. Mickelson took to Twitter (Now called X, I guess? Whatever.) in response to returning commissioner Jay Monahan‘s memo to PGA Tour players. Let’s break each of the four sentences in Mickelson’s tweet for proper comprehension.

Hmmm, I was just gonna respond, "Sod off, swampy!, but let's see what Dylan's got:

1. “What a colossal waste of time.”

Yowza! Them’s fighting words. And they’re words that signal a sharp contrast to Mickelson’s feedback on the day the PGA Tour/Saudi PIF agreement was first announced, when he took to the same app to proclaim it an “awesome day” with a smiley face. Something’s changed!

Exactly!  While I hate every single thing happening, Phil suddenly lashing out and dispensing with the smiley-faced emoji has me intrigued and sensing some positive news buried within.  If the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then Phil having a sad has me walking on air...

2. “Not a single player on LIV wants to play PGA Tour.”

Also fighting words! And a fairly significant development. I’m not sure this is 100 percent true — Patrick Reed is among those who has recently expressed interest in playing Tour events — but it’s interesting perspective. Jon Rahm said something similar ahead of the Open, suggesting that LIV pros may not actually want to return. So what happens if a pathway back to the Tour opens up and no LIV guys want to take it?

Win-win, baby!  It does beg the rather obvious question of where these guys will play, though we're pretty sure that Jay was lying about who controls the future of LIV.  How do I know he was lying?  yeah, the moving lips are a dead giveaway...

But do go on, Dylan:

3. “It would require a public apology and restitution to LIV players for paying millions to Clout media to disparage all of us.”

This is where Mickelson loses me. Is he fair to call out the hypocrisy of the Tour condemning LIV’s Saudi funding only to strike a deal with the same funding source a year later? Absolutely! But I’m not sure what the “millions to clout media” refers to, exactly. There’s a sense of persecution from many of LIV’s top stars — they feel like they’ve been criticized too harshly for leaving — and that frustration tends to get redirected towards the media. I’m not sure who Mickelson is referring to here; perhaps his comment is aimed at the most vocal LIV critics in the media, folks like Eamon Lynch and Brandel Chamblee. But there’s nothing conspiratorial going on and those guys aren’t being paid millions to disparage LIV. They’re just saying and writing what they believe. I guess I’d like some more specifics from Mr. Mickelson here because this feels disingenuous.

Like Dylan, I have no clue what Clout media is either, but I see this as nothing short of an unhinged hissy fit.  Again, the only silver lining I can identify is that Phil is spitting mad.... 

I agree that this is intriguing, in that there isn't going to be much time to figure out what 2024 might look like:

4. “A better topic is future sanctions for the many players who now come to LIV”

Now we’re back to an interesting hypothetical. It’s still not clear if the PGA Tour and the PIF will reach the next stage of their agreement. But whether they find resolution or not, it feels increasingly likely with every passing day that LIV will at least continue into 2024. And because some LIV pros’ contracts end at this season’s conclusion, there will be spots available. Will PGA Tour pros be lining up to fill them? If so, who will they be?

The real question would be whether the Saudis are still offering those large contracts, which seems unlikely unless negotiations have broken down....

But the enduring mystery is why Phil has gone from that happy face to lashing out at any and all for his perceived mistreatment.  This should be a moment of peak self-congratulation, no?  I love his unhappiness for sure, I just don't quite understand it yet.

I'm going to leave you here and we'll cover the Ryder Cup implications later in the week.