Is the PGA Tour Good for Golf?

[iacas]

The poll is up above.

Really consider your choice. And, if you re-consider later on, change your vote.

[Keep It Simple]

I voted yes.  Watching live PGA tour events inspired me to play more golf, work on my game, take lessons, get fitted, get coached...  

[Vinsk]

No, not really. Maybe I’m more saying it’s not necessary. I don’t know much about the inside business dealings of the PGA TOUR. But what I do know is they don’t seem to be ‘independent contractors’ as is so often stated. Maybe the PGA TOUR has made itself appear necessary similar to how Don King did in boxing. Which of course was an absolutely unnecessary figure. 
 

 

[David in FL]

Absolutely.  Why wouldn’t something that provides entertainment and drives new players to the game not be “good” for the game.

Consider this.  Without the PGA Tour, you would never have heard of Tiger Woods.  Is a Tiger Woods good for golf?
 

Nuff said.

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by David in FL

[Shindig]

I don't think I'd have been interested in golf if it weren't for the Tiger Woods Xbox game (that's how I got into it;  dad never played, mom gave it up before I was born until a few years ago).  So it was good for me.

 

Good for golf in general?  Certainly not good for pace of play.  People are more likely to try to emulate Bryson's legendary 8 foot putt routine.

[leftybutnotPM]

  On 2/20/2020 at 3:43 AM, Vinsk said:

 But what I do know is they don’t seem to be ‘independent contractors’ as is so often stated. 

 

Expand  

Care to explain how and why this is relevant?

The so called "independent contractors" play against each other within the framework of the PGATour.

And that framework (PGATour) showcases the game. Imagine playing golf and not realising that players like Rory and Tiger exist.

Perhaps we'd have more nostalgic posts about "Bobby" and "Gene"  and "Sam". How thrilling.

 

Edited February 20, 2020 by leftybutnotPM

[boogielicious]

The PGA Tour was founded in 1929, so all of us have grown up with it as the entity for professional golf in the USA. I feel the tour itself is good for golf because it gives the average player a chance to see the very best of the sport. I certainly inspires me to learn to play better and I enjoy it. I think others feel this way too.

[DaveP043]

To me, the opportunity to see how well the game can actually be played is inspirational, or is it aspirational.  Popular professional players have at times brought new players to the game.  The visuals of some of the golf courses can help encourage travel and tourism.  There's no question that there are also issues within the PGA Tour, the pace of play stuff, and the very occasional rules (and cheating) problems.  But overall, I'd say the PGA Tour is a positive thing for golf in general.

[GolfLug]

I think PGA is the showcase of the sport. Drives the entire industry. Without it the exposure of the sport would retract to the very few and dedicated. I am sure we loose thousands of fringe golfers each year like any other sport/activity but at the same time thousands of newcomers flock to it seeing the best stripe it on TV on gorgeous properties around the globe.

The PGA, like any other prof sport fuels so many secondary industries and as discussed on another thread the charity activity pound for pound is at least at par with the best. 

I am sure the PGA not addressing pace of play, etc is not a good model  for less than aware amateurs, but I think something to be addressed as one aspect of PGA. There maybe others. 

Overall golf is richer for having the PGA.

Edited February 20, 2020 by GolfLug

[Sandy Divot]

I voted yes. As a golf consumer, I really enjoy watching. The players are great, the courses look great, and the coverage is enjoyable to me. I don't know what goes on behind the scenes, but that's between the Tour and it's members. I enjoy watching the KF tour, and the European Tour, The Champion's Tour, and some LPGA, but I like the PGA Tour the most.

[IowaGreg]

You could ask the same of the NFL, NBA, MLB, PBA, PBR,  NASCAR, and all the top tier of sports...…...

People like to see the top tier of sports they are interested in.

[iacas]

  On 2/20/2020 at 12:30 PM, DaveP043 said:

To me, the opportunity to see how well the game can actually be played is inspirational, or is it aspirational.

Expand  

This seems to assume that something else wouldn't exist if the PGA Tour itself didn't exist, no?

But, taking it the other way. Imagine a world in which there was no PGA Tour? Would we even have a Distance Insights report, because some clubs may not have chosen to chase distance and build 7500 yard courses? Would we have slow play? Would we have our weekends free for the six hours or more that some of us watch golf? Would we be paying less to play golf, with lower equipment costs, green fees, etc.?

How much of us being glad that we have the PGA Tour is Tiger credited with, as without the PGA Tour or anything like it, we may have never heard of him - he might be in heavy equipment sales or something

[Bucki1968]

This is a good question....I voted yes but....I agree with with the whole "watching the best players", "showcasing great golf courses" etc. but I think it also has a few negatives. I can't remember how many times I've stood on a tee or in a fairway and saying (about the group I'm waiting on), "these guys need to quit watching golf on T.V. and get moving". I love watching a guy look at his putt for a double bogey from three different angles and then plum-bob it and then miss by two feet. I also come down (against) on the guy who goes out and spends big $ on "new and improved" equipment so he can hit a longer banana ball into the woods instead of dropping that $500.00 on a series of lesson so he can actually learn how to play the game. All of that being said, I love to watch all levels of golf. I am willing to spend $ to attend tournaments and try out some of the new equipment (and purchase it if it improves my game). The tour definitely drives golf at all levels (both good and some bad). I'm pretty sure, however, I would still play the game if there was not PGA tour to watch on television. I'm not 100% yes on my vote but I'm not a 100% no either. 

Edited February 20, 2020 by Bucki1968
spelling

[DaveP043]

  On 2/20/2020 at 1:21 PM, iacas said:

This seems to assume that something else wouldn't exist if the PGA Tour itself didn't exist, no?

But, taking it the other way. Imagine a world in which there was no PGA Tour? Would we even have a Distance Insights report, because some clubs may not have chosen to chase distance and build 7500 yard courses? Would we have slow play? Would we have our weekends free for the six hours or more that some of us watch golf? Would we be paying less to play golf, with lower equipment costs, green fees, etc.?

How much of us being glad that we have the PGA Tour is Tiger credited with, as without the PGA Tour or anything like it, we may have never heard of him - he might be in heavy equipment sales or something

Expand  

I didn't consider what a "replacement TV golf tour" might be, so maybe I should rephrase my opinion a bit.  I think that seeing top-level golf on TV regularly is good for golf.  Whether its the PGA Tour or top level amateurs or women or whatever, I think high-level golf on TV is good for the game of golf.

If there wasn't any televised golf at that level, we probably wouldn't have huge concerns over distance, nobody would be aware of how far the ball CAN be hit.  We almost certainly would have slow play.  Its possible it would be less of a problem, but we'll always have some players who are faster or slower than others, and conflicts between them.  Who knows how our time would be spent, my best guess is that those of us who want to see sports on TV would have found something else to watch.  

For costs of play, and of equipment, perhaps we wouldn't have seen the same level of technological advancements.  Without a big publicity platform, perhaps there wouldn't have been the demand, perhaps we'd have fewer golfers, and fewer golf courses.  I just don't know.

And last, I believe very little of my opinion relates to Tiger.  My addiction to golf, and my enjoyment of watching the PGA Tour on TV both predate tiger by a couple of decades.  As you say, without golf on TV its possible that Tiger would have excelled in a different sport, or in a completely different field.

[Vinsk]

  On 2/20/2020 at 8:41 AM, leftybutnotPM said:

 

Expand  

 

If the players are independent contractors, how come there is a minimum number of tournaments they have to play each year? If they are independent, how come they have to get tour permission to play in conflicting events? If they are independent, how come they have to pay a rights fee to the tour when they appear on TV in a non-tour event? I guess I’m assuming there is going to be some entity to present the players, give them a platform. I just don’t know how much control  the PGA TOUR should have on the talent if they do at all. I probably don’t know enough about the details to be commenting.😗

 

 

[DaveP043]

  On 2/20/2020 at 1:56 PM, Vinsk said:

If the players are independent contractors, how come there is a minimum number of tournaments they have to play each year? If they are independent, how come they have to get tour permission to play in conflicting events? If they are independent, how come they have to pay a rights fee to the tour when they appear on TV in a non-tour event? I guess I’m assuming there is going to be some entity to present the players, give them a platform. I just don’t know how much control  the PGA TOUR should have on the talent if they do at all. I probably don’t know enough about the details to be commenting.😗

Expand  

As I understand it, the PGA Tour is basically the property of the players themselves.  It was set up to differentiate the guys who played golf for a living from the rest of the members of the PGA of America.  It was the considered opinion of the Tour Players that the PGA of America was taking too much of the income from the tournaments..  So now we have a separate organization called the PGA Tour, which is only for players who are Tour Players.  The players, in conjunction with the various managers they have hired, decide on what level of commitment any individual has to demonstrate to be a member of their "club".   

[Bonvivant]

I voted no simply for a PoP concerns. When you can't get around a 6000-6500 yard course in under 4 hours because everyone else is emulating the pros and taking far to long on each stroke, I think it is detrimental to the game. If the tour ends up taking PoP more seriously, I will edit my vote. 

[dagolfer18]

I voted option #3, because there is good evidence on both sides. Part of me says yes, because I personally enjoy watching the Tour, or at least keeping up with the players via an online leaderboard. There have been great duels in majors in the past, for example, the Duel in the Sun at the 1977 Open Championship. However, part of me says no. As several others have mentioned, and what I’ve read online, pace of play is drastically slowing down. Y’all have probably heard about DeChambeau’s slow play. He once took several minutes to hit a shot, when he could’ve done it in 30-40 seconds. So I’m basically on the fence with this situation.