Weekend Wrap

Let's see...The Dodgers are back in the Series, Ohio State got trounced....and....What?  Not what you came here for?

Brooksie's The One - The 30-second summary seems ideally suited to my attention span:

Winner: Brooks Koepka by four shots over Gary Woodland 

Why it matters: With his victory at the CJ Cup, the PGA Tour Player of the Year is set

to ascend to the No. 1 ranking in the world on Monday when the new rankings are released. 

How it played out: Koepka entered the final round up four strokes and firmly in command of the lead. However, that lead was all but eliminated after Koepka bogeyed two of his first four holes. Taking advantage of the three-time major champion’s slip-up, Gary Woodland closed in on the lead with four consecutive birdies. But after a three-putt par on 9 to close out the front half of his final round, Koepka turned on the jets and finished strong. He would birdie five of his next seven holes before delivering the death blow with an eagle on 18 to close out the win.

The Tour Confidential panel debates whether Brooks is our new alpha dog:

1. Brooks Koepka picked up his third win of 2018 at the CJ Cup — and his sixth top-10 finish in his last 13 starts — to ascend to No. 1 in the World Ranking. After a year in which the golf world (and Koepka himself) has spent much time debating Koepka’s place in the game, what does this latest achievement mean for his status? 

Jeff Ritter: It’s another notch in the ol’ career achievement belt, and it’s a big one. No. 1 in the world is one of golf’s most exclusive clubs — he’s the 23rd player to reach the summit since the rankings were unveiled in 1986. Koepka already powered his way to golf’s top tier with his two major wins this year. This is further validation.

To paraphrase Groucho, are you sure you want to belong to a club that's had Lee Westwood and Luke Donald as members?  Not all No. 1's are the same....

Alan Shipnuck: It codifies what we’ve known for a while: Koepka is the best player in golf, full stop. More than any other top player, he is a cold-blooded closer, and we saw that again in Korea with his final-round 64 and walk-off eagle.

That's a very supportable position, and I'd hate to argue against a guy that's won three of the last six majors in which he's pegged it.  But the entire body of work has been a little short, not that there isn't time for him to fill in the gaps.

And this, which seems a tad repetitive:

2. What did you learn about Koepka in 2018 that you didn’t know a year ago? 

Ritter: I was one of the misguided souls who underplayed Koepka’s win at the 2017 U.S. Open at Erin Hills, because I thought he benefited from a bomb-and-gouge setup. And when he missed time earlier this year with a wrist injury, I thought he might not be a factor this season. Wrong, and wrong again. His power game travels, and he posses a bigger clutch gene than I ever realized, as evidenced by the way he held off Tiger on Sunday at the PGA.

Like all of us, Jeff, so don't be so hard on yourself.  

Shipnuck: How hot he burns. I’ve seen it up close in the gym, and in the media center. The too-cool-for-school vibe he likes to project isn’t reflective of how much he cares.

Yeah, I figured that from all the whining about the lack of media coverage...

This is a more interesting question:

3. Koepka is the fourth player to hold the No. 1 ranking this year, joining Justin Thomas, Dustin Johnson and Justin Rose. Over the next several years which player (in that group or not) will bank the most time in the top spot?

Ritter: After all this gushing about Brooks, I’m probably going to regret selling him

short again, but I think Justin Thomas currently has the best combo of skill, health and desire. He’s my pick by a nose over Brooks, DJ and Spieth. 

Zak: I’ll go with Brooks. He plays all over the world. He’s obviously silly-talented, and is just 28 years old. More Tour wins are bound to come which will just buoy him up atop the ranking for a long while. 

Shipnuck: Man, this is tough. They’re all consistently playing at such a high level. Rose has shown some Sunday vulnerabilities, and Johnson can’t get it done in the majors, where the most points are up for grabs. So it’s a toss-up between Koepka and JT, and right now it’s hard to pick against Brooks in anything. 

Dethier: Koepka wants to be No. 1 and he’ll continue to be. I have plenty more ink to spill on the subject, but this feels like the beginning of Koepka’s reign atop the golf world, just as Rory, Spieth, DJ and (briefly) JT rose to the top in recent years. Term limits tend to be short, and nothing’s guaranteed. But I see Koepka up top for a while.

Koepka's been out there for a shorter time, and yet has a 3:1 lead in majors over all three.....  Pretty strong argument.....  Though to me the biggest surprise is that Justin Rose could improve his putting to such an extent, and yet get so little out of it.....  And no, I'm not forgetting the FedEx Cup, though I'm still a little scarred from watching his play in that final round.

Shack goes a silly place with this change at the top:

Is "World No. 1" Status Enhanced Or Diminished By Recent Revolving Door?

I'm going to go with "yes", final answer.

It's an algorithm that's most useful for qualification purposes to things like WGC's.  When there's a clear best player in the world, we don't need no stinkin' algorithm to confirm what we see with the naked eye.  When there's no clearly dominant player, it's gonna look silly at times, as with the aforementioned Lee Westwood.

As for the future, perhaps the guys should be very afraid:

He has five PGA Tour wins, seven more internationally, and now he’s dethroned Johnson to become the undisputed top player in the world. He’s halfway to the career Grand Slam and, realistically, that’s the next plateau for Koepka as he continues to force his way into the discussion. 

Koepka can knock off the third leg in April at Augusta National, and there’s still time to find a new slight – Woods, Johnson, Thomas, Jordan Spieth and Rory McIlroy all were favored over Koepka by Las Vegas oddsmakers to win the 2019 Masters as of Sunday morning. 

“I haven’t figured out Augusta yet,” said Koepka, who missed the Masters last spring due to injury. “I’m looking forward to finally going back and trying to figure out how to really take advantage of that golf course, because I feel with my game I definitely can.”

 Rory certainly should be, as he's the guy that needs that one.  But who do we think gets the career slam first, Brooks or Phil, Rory or Jordan?  And yes, that's a trick question of sorts, since those others guys already have three locked down.

Johnny B. Goode - This is quite late, but that TC panel took on the issue of Johnny's legacy:

4. After 29 years as the game’s most candid and polarizing commentator, Johnny Miller of NBC Sports is hanging up his mic. How would you characterize Miller’s impact on golf commentating?

Ritter: He’s an original voice in a sport with, let’s face it, an abundance of pretty vanilla analysis. His fearlessness also helped pave the way for other big and bold personalities — like Chamblee and Feherty, to name two — to find their own place in the game. 

Zak: Alarming (in a good way). He had a way of catching your ears with a couple quick criticisms or observations. Golf broadcasts constantly never “go there,” but Johnny was never afraid to. (He was also a bit of a flip-flopper, can’t forget that, but I suppose we all are.)

Shipnuck: Massive. He was in many ways the voice of the entire sport.

Does anyone remember how bad Ken Venturi was?  The bar was set pretty low, admittedly, but at least he wasn't Dave Marr.

5. Stepping in for Miller is 12-time PGA Tour winner Paul Azinger. Did NBC hire the right guy? If not, who would you have tapped for the job? 

Ritter: I’ve enjoyed Azinger’s work on Fox and, previously, ESPN. He’s honest, quick-witted and unafraid to call it like he sees it. If it was my job to make the hire at NBC, Azinger would’ve been my first call. For my second call, I’d ring ‘Zinger again and leave another message. 

Zak: We’ll see. He’s been pretty great for FOX, so as long as we keep getting that guy many more weeks a year, I’m in. 

Shipnuck: I’m a big Azinger fan, too. All these years he’s had basically a part-time gig, and it felt like he was being a little careful, perhaps angling for something bigger. Now that’s he’s landed such a plumb position I hope he lets it rip, because a wise-cracking, sardonic Azinger will great TV.

Dethier: Zinger’s been great. But it’s tough to keep the edge sharp when you’re out there every week, which is where Johnny has succeeded. Other calls? I’d pursue Tony Romo, but he’s locked in with CBS so he’d be a tough get. (That’s a joke. I think.)

Let me first say that I think they picked the right guy, mostly because I can't come up with another viable alternative.  But I do think Dylan Dethier's caveat is worth keeping in mind.

That said, let me leave you with an amusing if imponderable thought.  How would our evaluation of Zinger differ is we hadn't endured that one year of The Shark?  It's easier to look good behind the mic (I know, but Joe Buck does invite us into the booth) when you succeed Mumbles....

A Year In Time - It's been a year since Adidas dumped TaylorMade, though it's hard to know which entity has benefited more.  Dylan Dethier scores an interview with the seller's Jeff Lienhart which is notable only for the excess B-school jargon:

GOLF: How has this year been different after Adidas sold TaylorMade? 

Jeff Lienhart: It has been a year of constant change, but also a year of establishing a foundation for Adidas Golf that’s right for our business. We have a mantra within our

four walls: “Born of sport, rooted in golf.” That pulls upon the heritage of our group — tied to the world’s greatest sports brand — but it also keeps everybody firmly planted in the idea that we have roots in the game of golf. We have to live and breathe golf. And we are absolutely a part of Adidas, but within the ecosystem of Adidas we have been able to establish ourselves as sort of an independent business that can support itself and can be more nimble and faster than the mothership can be. 

What is your relationship now with TaylorMade? What does that look like, day-to-day? Is Adidas Golf now functioning as a completely independent entity? 

JL: Yeah. Even when we were together we still basically ran separate operations that were entangled, and where there was opportunity for leverage we would take advantage of it — that would go both ways. Now, standing alone, we have the ability to tap into the relationships with TaylorMade we still have, but we’re also able to reach across the aisle and spend some time with other equipment managers where it makes sense. And now, more than ever before, we’re leaning on the bigger brand, Adidas out of Herzo, Germany.

Eco system...Mothership.... did we parachute into a Star Wars film?   This was interesting as well:

Take me through the process of choosing athletes, because having that connection to the larger sports world sets you guys apart. In getting players, does that come into play in the sales pitch? 

JL: We’ve always thought of the professional golfer as an athlete. For the longest time I don’t know that the consumer necessarily saw it that way. But the fitness level, the athleticism that these guys demonstrate on the biggest stages on a weekly basis on the greatest stages around the world, these guys are athletes. I would argue that Dustin Johnson, the No. 1 player of the world and a great ambassador for us, is probably the best athlete on Tour.

Yes, I can certainly see the synergy.  You guys make clothing and DJ brings lots of baggage to the table.... Or maybe they just want to hang with Paulina....

And while we were distracted speaking of scripting and the like, that company Adidas spun off has made some actual news:

TaylorMade will not take part in the 2019 PGA Merchandise Show, The Forecaddie has

learned. The deadline to commit came and went last week. The news is a blow to the annual January gathering of golf business principals. 

“After conversations with TaylorMade Professional Staff members and key leaders within the golf industry, we will be investing into growth initiatives that we believe will create even greater value for the game of golf,” wrote CEO David Abeles to TaylorMade staff professionals. “As a result of our additional spend, we have decided not to attend the 2019 PGA Merchandise Show.” 

Abeles delivered the news after noting TaylorMade’s nearly 40-year dedication to the PGA of America and its members, insinuating that savings from eliminating the elaborate show effort will be part of a plan to broaden “support of PGA Professionals across the country.” Abeles said details would be announced in the “coming months.”

They seem to be on an upswing after the divestment, but these things can be awfully cyclical.  But the merchandise show, which has been quite a snooze in recent years, will now struggle to maintain relevance.

A Show Film About Nothing -  OK, I'll admit to being intrigued to see one specific scene, but other than that....

Last year, actress Margot Robbie earned broad acclaim — including an Oscar nomination — for her role as figure skater Tonya Harding. She could soon be playing another well-known athlete. 

As an LPGA Tour player in the 1980s, Jan Stephenson won three majors and 16 LPGA events as part of 41 worldwide victories. The Australian star also garnered attention for embracing and championing her appearance in marketing the tour. Stephenson’s imprint on the game went far beyond her on-course performance. She helped found the Women’s Senior Tour, where she played for several years, and dived into the course design business as well. She also produced a series of workout videos. 

The World Golf Hall of Fame announced last week that Stephenson would be among its 2019 class of inductees. She spoke with Golf Australia’s Inside the Ropes podcast about the honor and about her career. 

“We’ve talked about doing a movie,” Stephenson said in the interview. “Margot Robbie wants to play me.”

And how is that Women's Senior Tour doing?  I'm still having trouble understanding the basis for her enshrinement in the World Golf Hall of Fame, though I, Tonya was surprisingly good.  To be fair, that was all about Allison Janney, but still....

Media Notes - Just a couple of unrelated notes with which to have a little fun, first from Brendan Porath (this is from July, but for some reason showed up in my Twitter feed):

The subject is Golf Channel analyst Brandel Chamblee, who is setting aside his full-time job this week to take up his former career as a pro and play the Senior Open. Phil’s comments on Chamblee:

“He and I don’t see eye to eye on anything. I just like people who build up the game. I view this as we’re all in the game of golf together. We all want to grow the game. We all want to make it better. And I feel like he’s made his commentating career on denigrating others. And I don’t care for that. I like people who help build the sport up and promote it for what it is, rather than tearing down and ridiculing others.”

OK, I never said there was a high degree of difficulty in this, as Phil is all about building up the game golf...except, you know, when he's putting a ball that's still moving....

But to me this is the howler:

That anyone would view Chamblee as making a career by denigrating others is an indictment on the hackneyed and useless fluff that is the status quo. Fear of backlash

from ruling bodies, sponsors, agents, and players corrupts too much coverage of the game. Chamblee is not Skip Bayless taking uninformed, intractable positions. He stands out because he doesn’t phony his way through it. He works to gather all different types of information and give an opinion based on his experience in the game. He can be wrong and get out over his skis, but the fact that he’s not afraid of that happening is what makes him one of the stronger analysts we have. 

This isn’t a call for coverage to get meaner but rather to stop the backlash against anything that’s a legitimate attempt at critical analysis. Brandel’s not mean and neither is Phil when he speaks out on something. I don’t know Brandel and, while I obviously think he’s good at what he does, I write this less as a defense of him and more as an objection to Phil thinking coverage of the game should operate this certain way.

Hmmm.... Got it, Phil's not mean.  Except you know, that shiv in Watson's back seemed kinda mean at the time....  

Back to that TC panel, in which their exit question was kind of interesting, and yielded some good stories:

6. Ahead of the opening round of the CJ Cup, an ill-informed reporter asked Justin Thomas why he struggled in the first round in 2017. “Actually, I shot 63,” Thomas fired back, before cracking a grin. What’s one question you’ve asked a pro — publicly or privately — that you’d like to have back?

Yanno, a mulligan of sorts....  More questions like this, please.

Dethier: Sometimes it’s the questions I DON’T ask that haunt me. As I was walking inside the ropes in Paris on the first afternoon of the Ryder Cup, I heard Steve Stricker asking Patrick Reed about Tiger and whether he was happy with the pairing. 

“I was just checking in and wondering, y’know, if you have any other feelings or desires,” Stricker said. Reed didn’t say much. Stricker continued, musing about Woods. “How was his energy level?” 

“It was good,” Reed answered. “It really was. It’s just, y’know…” and then he trailed off, suddenly aware of the presence of others, including myself. He and Stricker continued the conversation at a quieter murmur. Knowing what I know now, I’d have loved a follow up…

Great story, but why would Stricker ask him that, when it was a done deal?  I don't know that a follow-up would have been answered, but I'd have liked a lip-reader for the private words.

But this one is priceless:

Shipnuck: In 1994, when I was an intern at SI, I was given a fact-checking assignment on a story about Hal Sutton’s renaissance, which was due in part because the man nicknamed Halimony had recently remarried, to a stunner who was roughly half his age. Sifting through actual clippings in the vast SI library, I found conflicting reports as to whether this was Sutton’s fourth or fifth marriage, and I had a handful of other questions for him. This was pre-cell phones so early that Sunday I left word with Sutton’s agent, and the Tour, and various other folks, to please give Sutton my number and have him call me. I was dozing at my desk very late that night when a ringing phone jolted me awake. I answered it abruptly and it was Sutton. I didn’t really have time to compose myself and so I blurted out my first question: “Uh, Mr. Sutton, what number wife is this?” There was a long silence and then for a good 30 seconds he ripped me a new bunghole for my insensitivity. At the end of his monologue Sutton apologized, saying he was tired of the snickering about his love life. We moved on and I got the story fact-checked. It was his fourth wife….and they’re now divorced.

I had forgotten that moniker, which of course was priceless....  There's also comedy gold to be found in the logic of putting Halimony in charge of Ryder Cup pairings....  I mean, what could go wrong?