LIV Golf (Saudi PIF), "Mergers," and More

[iacas]

June 6, 2023: With today's announcement, you may just want to click right here to this post:

---

Golf: Proposed Premier Golf League to feature 48 players and 18 tournaments - Reuters

---

The British-based World Golf Group (WGG) has finally publicly unveiled its plan for a new global tour that would comprise 18 yearly tournaments featuring 48 of the game's top players.

Quote

Each tournament would have prize money of $10 million. 

Quote

Its statement said the tour would be “an individual and team league” with 12 teams of four players vying for a world championship. 

Ten of the 18 events would be in the United States. All would be three rounds with no cut. 

Also, the league would have "teams" where players could be kicked off teams. I'd love to hear some of those meetings… "Uhhh, Jordan, come in, have a seat. So, we've decided to go another direction…". Especially if that player has renounced his PGA Tour status or something.

I don't see this gaining much traction. I do see it, potentially, doing as Rory suggested when he said this:
 

Quote

Q. Rory, can you say what you know about that World Tour? Have you been approached or where 

RORY McILROY: Those guys have been talking to a few of us for six years. They approached me at the end of 2014.

You know, it's a hard one. I think it's…like I love the PGA TOUR, but they definitely, these guys have exploited a couple of holes in the system the way that  the way golf at the highest level is nowadays and how it's sort of transitioned from, you know, a competition tour to entertainment, right? It's on TV, it's people coming out to watch. It's definitely a different time than what it was before.

But I love the PGA TOUR, I love the way golf is set up right now, so it might be that  it might be the catalyst for something a little bit different out here as well, who knows.

But I certainly wouldn't want to lose what's been built in the last 40 or 50 years, tournaments like this, tournaments like Riviera in a couple weeks' time, everything that we have gotten to know and love over the years. I'm still quite a traditionalist, so to have that much of an upheaval in the game I don't think is the right step forward. But I think, as I said, it might be a catalyst for some changes on this tour that can help it grow and move forward and, you know, reward the top players the way they should be, I guess.

Emphasis added (by me). I think he's right about that part.

Edited June 6, 2023 by iacas
Merger

[cutchemist42]

If they went to better courses or altered some stuff to make the golf more interesting to watch I might tune in.

Week after week of strokeplay concourses that are too similar gets boring to me.

I've heard on Fried Egg before that the World Golf tournies were originally envisioned to be more events globetrotting around the world. If this group did something like F1 with big rounds at interesting course I might tune in. I think only the Mexican and Austin WGC events are must see.

Edited January 26, 2020 by cutchemist42

[snapfade]

Didn't Greg Norman purpose something like this back in the 80's? I think  what would make good TV, or even a series of events,  is having a bunch of 20 plus handicapper's play for 10 million in prize money.  

[Double Mocha Man]

29 minutes ago, snapfade said:

Didn't Greg Norman purpose something like this back in the 80's? I think  what would make good TV, or even a series of events,  is having a bunch of 20 plus handicapper's play for 10 million in prize money.  

But 95% of them would be sandbaggers...

Edited January 28, 2020 by Double Mocha Man

[Buckeyebowman]

1 hour ago, snapfade said:

Didn't Greg Norman purpose something like this back in the 80's? I think  what would make good TV, or even a series of events,  is having a bunch of 20 plus handicapper's play for 10 million in prize money.  

Yes, he did. It's basically what the WGC tournaments are. I remember the idea being roundly criticized at the time as nothing but a scheme for the rich to get richer! 

39 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

But 95% of them would be sandbaggers...

Heh, heh, heh! There was a local tournament in the area, basically for individual golfers but also had a scramble associated with it. There was a series of 20 some "qualifier" scrambles, and a team had to win one to get into the big scramble. My buddy has a thing for scrambles and would want to get in some of them. I would always check the paper to see if it was one of the qualifiers. If it was I knew that some "loaded for bear" teams would be in the field and we would have no chance for anything. 

A couple years ago, the winning team at the big scramble shot 21 UNDER for 18 holes! In the newspaper account it was noted that 2 of the players would be going back to play major college golf, and 2 were heading to Q school or something! I know that, technically, this is not "sandbagging", but there were guys who would put together teams and play every big money scramble going as money making opportunities! 

[cutchemist42]

Not my original thoughts, just saying what I've heard......

 

So I've been listening to a few podcasts go back and forth on this. I still dont feel I have a solid answer on how a player leaving the PGA would have his pension handled. Some are saying you cant take away a pension while others seemed to think the PGA could void the pension to stop players playing in this.

Some did say that yeah, PGA golf lately has been a boring a TV product but does this address it? 

Saw a few forum posts compare this to another individual contractor sport, the ATP. People think think the ATP sets up rivalries better but I think that's a function of how un-random the sport of tennis is. Saw people say limiting the field to 56 players over 10 events addresses the rivalry aspect that the PGA doesn't provide right now.

Some hoped more interesting courses than what the PGA goes to would be addressed. I think that's a big part of how I feel too.

I personally like watching foursomes/fourball/matchplay and would be interested if these events gave us more of that.

 

[Nagah]

I too listened to a podcast from No Laying Up and basically they said it had merit but who would leave the PGA?
Apperantly  Phil’s got one foot out the door.

Think of golfers who are between the ages of 45 to 50 , this would be great for those guys.

Then would they be welcomed back to play the Champions Tour ?
Any thoughts.

[leftybutnotPM]

20 hours ago, Nagah said:

I too listened to a podcast from No Laying Up and basically they said it had merit but who would leave the PGA?
Apperantly  Phil’s got one foot out the door.

Think of golfers who are between the ages of 45 to 50 , this would be great for those guys.

Then would they be welcomed back to play the Champions Tour ?
Any thoughts.

They don't want marginal players who are too old  and/or are not competitive on the PGATour who are twiddling their thumbs before going onto The Champions Tour. Who would the audience be?

The want to present it as the best of the best.

Edited January 31, 2020 by leftybutnotPM

[Nagah]

3 hours ago, leftybutnotPM said:

They don't want marginal players who are too old  and/or are not competitive on the PGATour who are twiddling their thumbs before going onto The Champions Tour. Who would the audience be?

The want to present it as the best of the best.

Maybe they could roll the WGC and Rolex events into it but change the format a little.

72 holes of stroke play over 4 days does seem to drag a bit.

[70sSanO]

I found this statement by Rory a little bit puzzling:

”... you know, reward the top players the way they should be, I guess.”

Then again, $15M just does not go as far as it used to.

John

 

[Vinsk]

13 hours ago, 70sSanO said:

I found this statement by Rory a little bit puzzling:

”... you know, reward the top players the way they should be, I guess.”

Then again, $15M just does not go as far as it used to.

John

 

People who gain wealth at that level simply lose touch with reality. It’s almost unavoidable. They totally forget what life is like for the vast majority of the world.

[snapfade]

38 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

People who gain wealth at that level simply lose touch with reality. It’s almost unavoidable. They totally forget what life is like for the vast majority of the world.

Another thing too along with that statement is they forget that they are getting paid to play a game. Not curing cancer, stopping crime, terror, or anything, just a game.

[TRUCKER]

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, snapfade said:

Another thing too along with that statement is they forget that they are getting paid to play a game. Not curing cancer, stopping crime, terror, or anything, just a game.

Yes. And as hard as some of them try to be active in ‘charitable’ activity...they really just don’t get it. It’s why having celebrities tell us to conserve water is quite maddening.

[70sSanO]

At the risk of prolonging this, but I can’t resist, a few years from now I can almost hear the commercial.

...with all I have achieved in the game, I would be missing something if I wasn’t able to call myself a Premier League champion.

John

[iacas]

23 hours ago, 70sSanO said:

I found this statement by Rory a little bit puzzling:

”... you know, reward the top players the way they should be, I guess.”

Then again, $15M just does not go as far as it used to.

I see his point.

Compare what the top 5 earn in a year playing golf compared to what the bottom 5 earn (even if you keep it to numbers 121-125).

Then compare that ratio to the ratio of MLB, NBA, and NFL players.

The ratio is incredibly small. The top players subsidize the bottom players.

[70sSanO]

55 minutes ago, iacas said:

I see his point.

Compare what the top 5 earn in a year playing golf compared to what the bottom 5 earn (even if you keep it to numbers 121-125).

Then compare that ratio to the ratio of MLB, NBA, and NFL players.

The ratio is incredibly small. The top players subsidize the bottom players.

I understand the comparison, but it really comes down to viewers and TV money.  MLB, NBA and NFL are each getting billions per year to broadcast their games

You also have team owners that typically are not dependent on a team’s success for their livelihood.

A case can be made for NHL contracts especially in the 40 point players.  If a player has a breakout year there is no $20m-$30m/year contract waiting.

It is unfortunate, but while we watch $5m 30 second Super Bowl commercials tomorrow, the winner of the Waste Mgmt will only get about 8 seconds worth.

John

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, 70sSanO said:

I understand the comparison, but it really comes down to viewers and TV money.  MLB, NBA and NFL are each getting billions per year to broadcast their games

You didn't read what I wrote.

It's not about how much the top guys are paid. It's about how much the top guys are paid relative to the bottom guys. The top guys on the PGA Tour are subsidizing the bottom guys. That the bottom guys make 25% as much as the top guys isn't seen in any other major sport. The top guys in those sports earn 20x what some of the bottom guys make.