Read the side bar of this article. Pay particular attention to the last 2 paragraphs. I don't blame them one bit. Why would they single out these players and not say a word to Tiger?
You don't know for sure whether they have said anything to Tiger yet or not, but regardless, you know why they wouldn't. I realize you do not like Tiger and that is fine, but you cannot disregard the fact that he is the only player on the PGA Tour today who can influence TV ratings, crowd sizes, etc. by simply showing up at an event (like a Buick Open or Funai Classic for example) and/or contending (in the majors and other big events). The PGA Tour would still survive without Tiger for sure, but if they pestered him to the point that he decided to take his clubs and leave the tour, they would take a big hit. If Tiger's game and popularity slide too much farther, he'll be treated like the rest of these guys. But for right now, whether it's fair or not, Tiger is treated differently by the tour than other guys.
The USPGA tour is digging a large hole for itself.They require all players to play a minimum of 15 events, thereafter they gvie players a release if they want to play a non USA event. So Els and Goosen have to ASK PERMISSION to play in the South African Open ,their home event, from the USPGA. In return USPGA say that they must play two extra events on the USPGA events if they want permission. That is why they end up having to play more events than Tiger. At a time when more of the world's top ten are non USA , this will get worse.
Bring on the World tour, with 4 majors, 4 World events and 6 USA , 4 European 2 Japanese events and the South Arican and Australian Opens. 22 events around the year, open to the top 120 in the World.Money list has bottom thirty replaced by top twenty in USA and top 10 in European Tour lists . Only egos will stop it, Greg Norman was right.
Actuall DrBill, knowing the way a lot of the casual golf audience is, the ratings would not be too bad if all they had was a live feed of Tiger hitting balls at the range or playing a practice round at his home course. But in seriousness, don't you think your example is a wee bit extreme? All I mentioned is that he is a bigger driving force for the PGA Tour's success than anyone right now and if he left, it would have a bigger impact than even Ernie leaving, so that might be the reason they aren't pestering him.
Personally, I would applaud Ernie or Retief or anyone who steps up to the system and says, "You know what, I don't need your incessant pestering, I'm leaving your tour and will play where I'd like from now on." My bet is the PGA Tour tries make some concessions toward them pronto.
And folks, the PGA has nothing to do with this. It's the PGA TOUR. Not flaming anyone, just trying to get the proper wording used.
Welcome oscc426! Click on the link in the post that refers to it. It will open a second window. The side bar in the refered to in the article is on the right hand side. Look at DrBills post, first one in the thread.
If you play the minimum 15 PGA Tour events, you are allowed to play a certain number of events away from the PGA Tour, right? Does Tiger exceed this amount? I know Tiger plays that event in Dubai but I can't think of many events Tiger plays overseas. The WGC and silly season events don't count. If Tiger isn't playing more than the maximum overseas events and doesn't want to, why would the PGA Tour say anything to him?
I do feel for Goosen, though. He's declared the European Tour as his home Tour and gets treated differently from European born players. I don't think this is a fair rule. As for the PGA Tour wanting players to play more in the United States, this is certainly understandable. They're merely looking out for their own Tour. I do think they should do away with the discrimination between European born European Tour players and non-European born Euro Tour players.
Oh, thanks ForgedRBest, I found the sidebar and now understand what this is all about. Fairness.
On this issue, as much as the PGA is definitely not on my favorite list, I have to side with them, almost. If they were doing this fairly I would not have a problem for a couple of reasons. One I do want to see more of the better players. Not being real knowledgeable on entrance rules, can't ELS and Goosen and Scott just tell the PGA to take a flying leap and rely on sponsors exemptions to get in?
Also, it certainly looks to me like they are not doing this fairly. I resorted my data in two layers and found that to date there are 45 players in the top 100 money list that have not played 20 events . Granted I do not know how to distinguish between 15 and 20 event players, but there appears to be something wrong with this picture, if they are just picking on a few players. These players are less than 10 events. There are better ways to encourage them to play.
OSCC426
I'm big on the rights of independant contractors. These guys have marketable skills that they're willing to trade for sponsorships, appearance fees, and chances at winning tournaments and their prizes. If the PGA really wants to play hardball, some of their wallet fatteners might just take their toys and go home. I've done it in my field, and I'm not nearly as good at what I do as Ernie and company.
Let's face it. The PGA Tour is where the big money is and where these guys earn the majority of their prize money. Sure, Els and Goosen and whoever else can posture all they want. They need the Tour as bad as the Tour needs them. Realistically, how many foreign tournaments do you watch?
The system needs tweaking and Els has started the ball rolling. There's a compromise in there somewhere. There's too much money at stake for the Tour and for the players for this to become an issue that players would leave the PGA Tour for. Don't you love it when rich guys fight over money
Yeah, kinda like when baseball and hockey go on strike, and then the only people who suffer are the ones who want to watch it. But your right. We can expect a fairly large political firestorm over this issue. However, there is too much money at stake for Els for him to leave permanently. But I have a feeling he'll get a nice chunk by the time its all said and done.
The bottom line.
While I, like the PGA would like to see Ernie play more, it is stupid in this day and age to try to force anyone to do anything they do not want to. He has every moral right to play where he wants to under the original rules he signed for or to take the sponsor exemption route and pick and choose. If he does that, I doubt they can stop appearance fees and he will just make more money. Ernie and the dozen others: Go for it!
Instead the PGA should be looking for a way to get Ernie, Tiger and company to play more voluntary because it is worth their while.
If the PGA does not look out the same thing is going to happen in golf that happened in football and basketball. Those upstarts were laughed at originally, but look what happened.
There already is a better system out there to encourage more play in the US. Big money is going to latch onto that system or it will get them started thinking and they will create something else. In the long run, unless the PGA wakes up, we will end up with 2 legally separate Tours battling for the players. As in football and basketball after 10 years, they will eventually merge by giving up some control.
Thanks OSCC426
October 21st, 2004, 12:28 PM
But in seriousness, don't you think your example is a wee bit extreme? All I mentioned is that he is a bigger driving force for the PGA Tour's success than anyone right now and if he left, it would have a bigger impact than even Ernie leaving, so that might be the reason they aren't pestering him. 
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
