Midweek Musings - PGA Of Saudi Edition

Apparently you can't do the strikethrough thing in the Blogger header block, leading to that mangled post title.  I was going for something that would capture how the background noise has overwhelmed the marque event but, like with jokes, if you have to explain...

As I type, I am exactly one-third through this:

And rip-roaring it is.  It's quite fun and not at all the hatchet job that many folks will expect, given recent news cycles.  Folks tend not to realize that this was in the works long before things went thermonuclear, and the author has expressed some appropriate discomfort at finding himself at the center of the controversy.

In fact, this just hit my Twitter feed:

That’s beyond my control. But this critique amuses me - I spent nearly 2 years on this book, of course I want people to read it. If a chef prepares a tasty meal, nobody yells at him, “You’re just trying to sell food!” Yeah, no shit. https://t.co/wffW59twLm

— Alan Shipnuck (@AlanShipnuck) May 17, 2022

An author desiring an audience for the product of two years of effort?  Geez, we can't have that....

I'll offer more thoughts on completion, but let me just share one story that I think encapsulates the conundrum that is Phil.  The scene is the 1990 U.S. Amateur at Cherry Hills in which Phil, a heavy favorite, got a tough draw in the second round, a hardscrabble kid named Jeff Thomas whose chances against the cocky, entitled kid with the up-turned color many fancied.  Then this happens on the first hole:

It wasn't a shot that he first recalled when asked in 2012 to remember his winning week at Cherry Hills, though. He told a story from the first hole of his second match, when he conceded a 40-foot par putt to his opponent, Jeff Thomas.

"I'll never forget the look that he gave me. It was just funny. I ended up making a 3‑ or 4‑foot birdie putt to win the hole," Mickelson said.

Why did he give his opponent such a long putt?

"He took like two minutes to hit the chip shot and he hit it 40 feet by the hole," Mickelson said. "Then he started the process again, and I just thought, just pick it up. So he did, and I made it, and we went on. I won the first five holes. So it got to him, I think. And I ended up winning the match."

One source in the book described Thomas as emasculated, remarkable considering his reputation for toughness and doing anything necessary to win.  But this anecdote strikes me as perfectly on brand for the young phenom.  Was it the cocky strutting of a generational talent demonstrating his belief in his own abilities?  Sure.  Was it simultaneously a complete dick move?  Completely.  

I'm at year-end 2003 in the bio, which has covered the early years of the Tiger-Phil relationship, which starts frosty and disintegrates from there.  I've been a consistent skeptic of their more recent bromance, which has struck this observer as, well, transactional at best, but we'll see what Alan can add.  I mention this because Tiger went in front of the media yesterday, and wont be emerging from a London cab anytime soon.

First, I think they call these crocodile tears:

It's always disappointing when the defending champion not here. Phil has said some things that I think a lot of us who are committed to the Tour and committed to the legacy of the TOUR have pushed back against, and he's taken some personal time, and we all understand that. But I think that some of his views on how the Tour could be run, should be run, been a lot of disagreement there. But as we all know, as a professional, we miss him being out here. I mean, he's a big draw for the game of golf. He's just taking his time and we all wish him the best when he comes back. Obviously we're going to have difference of opinions, how he sees the Tour, and we'll go from there.

Disappointing, you say....But he was far from finished:

“I don't know if he has to resolve it or not. You know, he has his opinion on where he sees the

game of golf going. You know, I have my viewpoint how I see the game of golf, and I've supported the TOUR and my foundation has run events on the TOUR for a number of years.

“I just think that what Jack and Arnold have done in starting the TOUR and breaking away from the PGA of America and creating our tour in '68 or '69, somewhere in there, I just think there's a legacy to that. I've been playing out here for a couple of years over decades, and I think there's a legacy do it. I still think that the TOUR has so much to offer, so much opportunity.

“I believe in legacies. I believe in major championships. I believe in big events, comparisons to historical figures of the past. There's plenty of money out here. The Tour is growing. But it's just like any other sport. It's like tennis. You have to go out there and earn it. You've got to go out there and play for it. We have opportunity to go ahead and do it. It's just not guaranteed up front.”

I love that last line, though unfortunately Tiger's fealty (yup, that word again) to that concept isn't consistent.

Shack sees some score-settling here:

”I can't speak for him not knowing and understanding that. I'm sure he probably does have an understanding of that because he was the host of the old Bob Hope. So since he was the host of the event, I'm sure he probably understands it, and plus, he hosts the event up there in Napa Valley. He understands it, and there is -- there is a rights fee to having events and understanding it. And we negotiate with the Tour and whether it's one-off day events like we have with matches under the lights like I used to do back in the old days, or it's regular Tour events, each tournament is different. Obviously there is right fees that have to be paid, and we understand that. Obviously we go in there as events and try and negotiate that down as low as possible, and try and make as much money as we can for the local events.”

Yeah, Tiger got Riviera and Phil got the on-life-support Hope.   Got it...

But surely he's been in touch with his new BFF?

”I have not reached out to him. I have not spoken to him. A lot of it has not to do with I think personal issues. It was our viewpoints of how the Tour should be run and could be run, and what players are playing for and how we are playing for it. I have a completely different stance on, and so no, I have not.”

I'm shocked!  Shocked, I tell ya...They seemed such a perfect couple.

But that "Go out and earn it" bit?  Or not:

Can the Tour improve upon its model?

Yes, to that, too, the 15-time major winner said.

“Well, they are obviously trying to give what the top players have — obviously the top players have carried the Tour for a number of years, whether it’s back with Jack, Arnold and Gary or other eras, you know, the top players have carried the tours,” Woods said.

“The PIP program or however we are ever going to do something like that going forward, what the incentives are, it’s trying to take care of the players that have obviously done a lot for the Tour. I think that programs like that will probably alter it a bit going forward and how — how we are able to promote the Tour.

Which you might say he earned... by playing in the Father-Son with Charley.  Come to think of it, where did Charley end up in those final PIP standings?

But what do we think about this point of Tiger's?

“I mean, the top players are used — that’s one of the things that we have got into arguments, I have, with Jay or Tim over the years is, you know, how we are marketed and used in events that we are not even playing in. So that in itself is an issue right there.

As for Woods’ other suggestion — that if the Tour promotes a player as part of a tournament, they should be compensated — it gets murky, and Woods himself admitted he’s gotten into arguments over it with former Tour commissioner Tim Finchem and current boss Jay Monahan. Rest assured, though, that if Woods raised it, the concern wasn’t just swept away.

A couple of reactions, first to the substance.  I see nothing wrong with the Tour using its top players for promotional purposes, and I'm tempted to ask if he'd like some cheese as a side.  Seems pretty non-controversial that the Tour would promote based upon its most visible assets, and that said promotion should drive increased viewership and revenues, which would then show up in increased purses.  

As for the Tour using players it knows are not in the field to promote an event, that of course seems wrong, though the context makes this a pimple of an issue.  We're talking promos on the prior week's broadcast and the like, and I'm not sure there's much value to be derived therefrom.

But the messenger is highly flawed on this subject.  I called his rival a dick earlier, and here Tiger should take a bow.  For his entire career he has refused to reveal his playing intentions until the last possible moment, typically the Friday of the prior week, notwithstanding that his presence imposes significant logistical demands upon organizers.  So, stick it Tiger, as the Tour should go in front of the jury and say we'd have not used his image, except he's such a dick that he never tells us when he's going to play.

Here was the succinct take of the author of that piece:

That’s 251 words, but essentially he’s saying this: Woods wants the Tour’s stars to be rewarded outside of tournament winnings.

So, he wants basically the same thing that Phil wants, he's just not willing to blow up the Tour over it, not to mention trashing his legacy.   

Eamon Lynch has another of his typically soft-toned pieces under this header, and gets off a couple of well-targeted shots:

Lynch: Phil Mickelson, Greg Norman getting a cool reception at a major they’re not even attending

Do tell:

Thirteen years after he last competed in one, major championships are still proving a reliable

source of disappointment for Greg Norman. At last month’s Masters, Augusta National chairman Fred Ridley clearly signaled his support for golf’s existing world order, thereby tacitly rejecting Norman’s Saudi-funded effort to carve off the top of the professional game. On Tuesday at the PGA Championship, the Great White Pilot Fish was served even less nourishment.

In a sport where numbers are decisive, words matter a great deal these days. Norman’s LIV Golf outfit is busy parsing paragraphs for any hint of collusion between golf’s bodies and the PGA Tour, eager to float an anti-trust claim that they’re conspiring to exclude a competitor from the marketplace (never mind that the “competitor” isn’t held to the same profit and loss accountability as other tours). It’s not necessarily collusion if people or organizations reach the same conclusion, of course. Say, for example, agreeing that governments which dismember their critics are suboptimal business partners.

Boy, you dismember one critic, and you never live it down....  But I had been reliably informed that they've "owned" this mistake, and that we're free to move on.

But I am flattered that Eamon has hit on an issue I raised in my blogging of the antitrust issues, to wit, that the logical claim from LIV is for lost profits.  Weird, when the entire enterprise is structured in a manner to ensure no profitability.  Taking this to its logical extreme (and channeling that USFL-NFL lawsuit), the Saudis could in theory prove predatory monopolistic behavior on the part of the PGA Tour, but be awarded no damages because of the absence of any projected profits.  Even more fun would be if they were, in order to support a claim for damages, be required to offer evidence of the economic value of sportswashing.  Good times.

It's not Eamon's best, but think of it as Tiger winning with his B-game.

It does seem that LIV might have identified it's next renegade:

Asked during a media session with reporters at Southern Hills Country Club if he has been

approached by LIV Golf Investments, Fowler admitted that he had.

“To be straightforward with you guys, I haven’t necessarily made a decision one way or the other,’’ Fowler said. “I’ve mentioned in the past, do I currently think the PGA Tour is the best place to play? I do. Do think it can be better? Yes.

“So I think it’s an interesting position. Obviously there’s the LIV and the Premier (Golf League), as well. These tours or leagues, however you want to classify or call them, they wouldn’t really be coming up if they didn’t see that there was more opportunity out there. I’ve always looked at competition being a good thing. It’s the driving force of our game.

“Being with guys at home, that’s how I always grew up is competing. I think competition ultimately makes people better, whether it’s business, sport. So it’s interesting, that’s for sure.’’

But Shack calls this bit from Bob Harig the "understatement of the week":

Rickie Fowler is struggling to regain the form that once tabbed him as one of the game’s up-and-coming players and is only in this week’s PGA Championship because he tied for eighth last year at Kiawah Island, earning an exemption.

But the former Oklahoma State star remains a popular figure in the game, typically signing autographs until nobody is left, with huge demand in pro-ams and a healthy endorsement portfolio.

That is why he would be a great get for the LIV Golf Invitational Series, which launches next month with a tournament outside of London. And Fowler on Monday did not rule it out.

Let me see if I have this straight.  You're pumping $2 billion large into a fledgling golf tour and are about to host your first event with a field topped by a handful of over-the-hill players whose days of competitive relevance are difficult to discern in the rear-view mirror.  In that context, is adding another competitively irrelevant player a "great get"?   

Scottie Scheffler would be a great get... Morikawa as well.  Of course they'd be happy to have the man in orange, but they'd also be happy to have Robert Garrigus.  To this observer, it just reinforces the has-been and never-was nature of the London field, almost making their perception problem worse.

But how's this for an exit question?  As you may have seen, it's a bit of Cowboy heaven in Tulsa, as the bevy of Oklahoma State players are front and center, including Viktor Hovland, Taylor Gooch and, of course, Rickie.  So, what are the odds of Rickie being in orange on Sunday?  Yeah, it's a trick question, since the most likely scenario has him in South Florida with his wife and baby on Sunday.  

I'll leave you here and will try to get to some actual tournament coverage soonest.  Though, really, until balls are in the air, this is way more fun.