LIV Golf Now Closed?

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

Your post above doesn’t specifically say it, but it strongly suggests that these changes could have been achieved without LIV influence.

No, sir.

I’m simply saying Phil is full of shit and did nothing to “leverage” the Tour to make changes.

[Hardluckster]

Just now, iacas said:

No, sir.

Yes, sir. How else is this statement to be interpreted?

“He could have done this without being paid by Saudi Arabia.”

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

Yes, sir. How else is this statement to be interpreted?

“He could have done this without being paid by Saudi Arabia.”

Exactly as it is written. Instead he did nothing to effect change.

Also the fact that the Tour has had to make these changes hurts LIV’s anti-competitive claims.

If the Tour had a monopoly and didn’t need to compete they wouldn’t have had to make changes.

[Hardluckster]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

Exactly as it is written. Instead he did nothing to effect change.

Without big name players (like Phil) signing with LIV, I highly doubt that any of these changes occur. I would say absolitely these players have affected changes to the PGAT by signing with the Saudi backed league  

Forcing change in the PGAT most likely wasn’t the reason they signed with LIV. That was most likely money, plain and simple. I would say that it’s possible (maybe even likely) that most of these defectors had issues with some tour policies. 

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

Also the fact that the Tour has had to make these changes hurts LIV’s anti-competitive claims.

If the Tour had a monopoly and didn’t need to compete they wouldn’t have had to make changes.

I don’t disagree with this at all. I don’t think I’ve ever suggested otherwise. 

[Shindig]

The commissioner's letter explains everything clearly to me except I have no idea what the Play 15 program is (I can guess, I guess).  

Is the $500,000 guarantee for exempt players a front of their prize money, or is it in addition to their prize money?  Do they get it up front (with a forfeit of it if they don't play 15) or when they play their 15th event?

I think I'm going to like this even better, and I am going to try to watch more of the elevated events in the upcoming year.  

[iacas]

9 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

Without big name players (like Phil) signing with LIV, I highly doubt that any of these changes occur.

Cool strawman.

10 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

I don’t disagree with this at all. I don’t think I’ve ever suggested otherwise. 

I wasn’t replying to you on this.

[Hardluckster]

10 minutes ago, iacas said:

Cool strawman.

I expected better than this. 

[iacas]

Ummmm, you put up a strawman argument. Nobody is saying the PGA Tour would have made these changes without LIV.

If you take offense to a basic term like that, then I don’t know what to tell you.

[Hardluckster]

I wasn’t offended at all.

 You were the one that said that Phil did nothing to bring about changes. 

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

I wasn’t offended at all.

 You were the one that said that Phil did nothing to bring about changes. 

He didn’t.

Go back to #1838 man. You brought Phil into it, and I said he could have made changes without involving Saudi money.

That said, the posts are there and this is now getting meta-discussion, so we are done.

And if you expected better, stop trying to knock down straw men. Why would I respond to an argument nobody has made?

/meta

[boogielicious]

10 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

I wasn’t offended at all.

 You were the one that said that Phil did nothing to bring about changes. 

Phil did nothing before LIV to try and influence change in the PGAT. He just whined. He offered no ideas at all. That is what is being said. You are misinterpreting posts.

[Hardluckster]

5 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Phil did nothing before LIV to try and influence change in the PGAT. He just whined. He offered no ideas at all. That is what is being said. You are misinterpreting posts.

That is likely true, although I have no actual knowledge of whether he approached committee members or PGAT administration with concerns.  

Had this been the message posted, I would have had no issues with it. 

[iacas]

7 minutes ago, Hardluckster said:

Had this been the message posted, I would have had no issues with it. 

It was. Then you started in on “the Tour wouldn’t have made these changes without LIV.”

Move on from the meta.

[iacas]

I'm not saying that anyone said this, either, but I have seen (elsewhere) the argument that because these changes were made, that means LIV is a good thing. LIV forced the PGA Tour to make changes, the changes are good, ergo LIV is good.

But, no, I don't agree with that, either. Positive changes may have come about (whether they're positive or not is yet to be seen, too), but that doesn't mean the ends justified the means, particularly since the DJs and so on are still going to be on an entirely separate "tour."

[StuM]

I've been stalking this thread for a while and wanted to offer just a few of my thoughts & opinions.

1) I hate the tie to blood money but I can not say with certainty that I would not accept such a large offer as many have been given.  It is "Generational Wealth"  and even if you have a lot of money $100 or $200 million goes a long way to secure a family's comfort for multiple generations, even after taxes.

2) The arguments have ruined pro golf for me this year.  I have not watched a single PGA Event this year.  I am just sick of the constant comments, if not players then commentators.  I understand it is a debate and needs to be had, but it has ruined it for me this year.  OK, begs the question...Why have I been reading this thread?  Answer is I want to know what it going on, just not during a tournament.

3) Some have likened the PGA Tour to other pro sports but there are differences.  For example, A Pro Football (or many other sports) player gets a contract and is paid regardless if they win or not.  I feel that there should be some compensation to all who show and I like the recent addition of the $500k minimum for playing 15 tournaments.  BUT I also like that winning really means something on the PGA Tour.  To think that a LIV player is getting so much guaranteed and can stink up the course does bother me.

4) I'm not sure I agree with a Non-Profit organization (PGA Tour) telling a player with no guaranteed money that they can't play for pay somewhere else.  I understand the players "agreed" to the rules but if they wanted to play in the US then they really did not have much alternative.  I know, Korn Ferry, European/DP, etc. but all on Korn Ferry want to "Graduate" to the PGA Tour and as a rookie on the PGA Tour they would not be in a place to force a change so they would naturally agree.  Yes, the bigger names that moved to LIV could have used their influence but to say "They agreed to the rules" when initially there was not much of a choice it not a valid argument to me.  Most agreed to the rules early in their career.  Now the newly announced $500 minimum does make me reconsider this  since they are now on a contract with guaranteed dollars.

My hope is that this ends and the PGA Tour reigns supreme and I again enjoy watching.

 

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, StuM said:

3) Some have likened the PGA Tour to other pro sports but there are differences.  For example, A Pro Football (or many other sports) player gets a contract and is paid regardless if they win or not.

They also have a lot more obligations, can't choose when they want to play, or even practice, can be traded (often) to another team without their consent… etc. Those contracts, as the LIV players now realize, come with more ties and bindings and requirements.

The rest… (honestly, though, like the above) have been rehashed a bunch of times.

Players are "obligated" to agree to the rules… because the PGA Tour is (was?) the biggest, best Tour. Why would they want to play the Korn Ferry Tour? And they can play the DP World Tour, as many players on the PGA Tour have done… including many LIV players who played in Saudi Arabia earlier this year (February, maybe?).

[turtleback]

5 hours ago, Hardluckster said:

Without big name players (like Phil) signing with LIV, I highly doubt that any of these changes occur. I would say absolitely these players have affected changes to the PGAT by signing with the Saudi backed league  

Forcing change in the PGAT most likely wasn’t the reason they signed with LIV. That was most likely money, plain and simple. I would say that it’s possible (maybe even likely) that most of these defectors had issues with some tour policies. 

I don’t disagree with this at all. I don’t think I’ve ever suggested otherwise. 

I think the reality is that we have no idea what, if any, changes to the tour might have happened if Phil had tried to rally support among the other top players.  We don't know because he didn't bother to try.  Maybe I was just unaware, because my interest in pro golf plummets when Tiger is sidelined, but I just don't recall Phil talking about these kinds of things, making proposals, trying to gather support for change among the players.  Until it became the rationalization for taking the blood money.

[Dinglegolf]

Hi there, new poster who was looking for some interesting insights into this topic.

I agree with the majority about the obvious intentions of LIV golf and do not have anything to add.  I am interested though about the dynamics/business end of the PGA Tour in a vacuum and the suggested changes being put forth.  

I personally only make an effort to watch the majors and the Ryder Cup while spending a lot of time on many other tournaments when surfing on a Sunday afternoon.  Personally, the WGC events and the Fedex Cup do nothing for me as a viewer as I am an old school "sports" enthusiast who appreciates uncompromised competition.  

I found the comment by Rory that "the top players do not get together enough" interesting as it is basically saying "the top players do have to get together as much given how much money we make".  I have no issue with players wanting more money and leveraging their star power to do so and do not care to see things as "growing the game" or not. 

I am interested on people's thoughts as to whether the proposed changes are really good for the PGA Tour business-wise. 

Cheers