golfrewind.com

I've been reading more and more about the ailments of the Champions Tour, i.e., whether a 'big' name like Norman could help or rather, if he'd even want to play.

How about lowering the age limit to 45 to enter the Champions Tour? Those that are currently in the upper 40's could chose to play either, especially those that aren't as competitive on the PGA anymore, but perhaps could still do well on the younger Champions Tour. I'm saying this as a golf enthusiast who doesn't normally get a PGA event in easy reach, but gets various LPGA and Champions Tour events locally. Ok, don't kill me on this.

-Bulls9999

The Champions Tour--Senior Tour--lost its luster when the big names of the 60's and 70's--Palmer, Nicklaus, Player, Trevino, Watson--stopped playing or stopped winning with any regularity. They also killed themselves with that ill-considered move to CNBC and delayed broadcasts that nobody wanted to watch in prime time over the weekend.

Moving the age down to 45 won't fix their problems either, just as making them all walk won't solve the problem. Many of the "big" names of the 80's just haven't made much noise out there, and there just isn't much "buzz" about the senior circuit at all in the news. People wanted to see the icons of the game play. The icons are gone, replaced by some very nice men and skillful golfers that very few people care much about.

It's obvious that their skills are not equal to those of regular tour players, so they have to offer something else: personality, entertainment, accessibility, etc.--whatever will attract golf fans and sponsors. Younger, more-of-the-same golfers won't fix their problem, especially when many of those younger guys don't really need the money to finance their "retirement" funds and lack the financial motivation to produce their best play.

I agree with Val. I think that dropping the age to 45 may even make matters worse. The popularity of the Champions Tour will always ebb & flow with the popularity of those entering the tour. It's too bad really... one of the best things about it (it gives some of these guys a 2nd chance) is what kills it commercially. Really who wants to watch Dana Quigley & Wayne Levi battling it out on the weekend ? I think that there will always be a market for it, though.... even if it's a reduced one.

I think if the trend of players like Jay Haas and Mark McNulty continues....ie. they are still very fit and competitve on the main tours when they turn 50..... the standard of the Champions tour could increase dramatically over the next 10 years.

It is not the golf that is boring to watch, it's the coverage of the golf I find boring. Changing the age would not make a difference IMO. Hale Irwin is boring. I watch TV because I am bored, not to become bored.

Jay Haas is playing primarily on the PGA and he is 51. I see fred Funk playing mostly on the PGA until he is at least 51. He may want the Champions tour, but his wife wants him to stay on the PGA.

Also, consider that

1. Greg Norman, who would be a big draw probably won't play much.
2. Johnny Miller didn't play on it.
3. Curtis Strange is the biggest draw.
4. Who else but Norman could be a big draw until 2007 (Faldo, Ballesteros)?

So, then should the Champtions Tour (I rather liked the name Senior PGA Tour better) close up shop? Go for smaller venues to reach people that don't regularly get a chance to see PGA tournaments (though that doesn't help TV viewership)?