It’s funny everyone has a PGA Tour bias according to you, and yet you’ve got the biggest LIV bias imaginable.
1 Like
I think I am just a golf fan so call it evenly. PGA has done a great job basically paying or cajoling or bullying lots of media to create a warped environment where pro golf=PGA to many.
I don’t think anyone could read our full thread here and think you call it evenly, you have a massive LIV bias.
The PGA Tour is the biggest tour in golf. The fact that people pay more attention to it than the Challenge Tour doesn’t require some big conspiracy.
For example, Golf.com if anything has a bias towards covering LIV. Whenever they do their repeating shows (like range sessions, or calling shot trajectory/shape) they have all the big LIV guys on (Cam, BK, Niemann, etc.). They don’t cover LIV as much in general because it’s a minor tour that hasn’t caught on with a meaningful audience.
right, I think the PGA did pretty good business work in essentially blocking LIV from catching on. LIV wasn’t perfect in business/marketing but being blocked out of OWGR by PGA bullying/collusion was a huge blow.
but I don’t really care about ratings or whatever, I just like good golf and leagues trying to make their product better. the PGA never really did until LIV appeared, for the good of the game they have been competing since
Again, alleging conspiracy with no evidence. The majors control the OWGR board. Also, if Norman hadn’t rage quit the OWGR application they would have been approved a while ago.
I think the PGA Tour’s product peaked in 2019. Hoping we get back there soon with more full fields. Coverage hasn’t meaningfully changed since LIV, I actually find CBS’s current cast to be a very tough listen.
PGA Tour now has events with all the good players playing against each other: table stakes for having a true league IMO. they have a clearer process to get into meaningful events (which has nice knockoff effects for the sort of sub or second tier PGA events we see: Sony, Puerto Rico, Butterfield, etc).
Coverage has added lots of graphics and maybe it’s just a gut call that they show more shots but maybe not true. LIV’s model of doing everything they can to make the fan who wants to see golf happy was a revelation compared to PGA’s sponsor and “personality” first approach. they still have some silly stuff like Smylie Happy Hour where they just goof around while LIV simply shows golf shots over and over and over + innovative leaderboard/graphics/etc that PGA have learned from. they would be just as lazy without the competition
I don’t want all the good players playing against each other every week. It’s repetitive and boring (see LIV). We have all this talk about scarcity now, but we are forgetting that having the top 50 players in an elite field every week is the opposite of scarcity.
Anyways it’s comical that we just disagree about everything.
why wouldn’t you want the best players to play each other 20x a year? can generate rivalries and a clear league standing
We already have a clear league standing.
Same reason I don’t want to watch Barcelona play Real Madrid 20x a year.
Golf is a unique sport. There is way too much randomness for rivalries to form or matter that much. Golf’s biggest rivalries are mostly battled on paper, trading wins that add to their resumes.
I do think Bryson US Open win with a magical bunker shot and Rory McIlroy missing a four footer might pip AK in LIV Adelaide hogtrough I’m sorry.
right, but if they were playing against each other there would be more chances to battle. if golfers just make their own schedules randomly there are less chances of seeing the best play against each other or be able to make standings.
when there are 50 or 80 golfers playing against each other it’s nothing like Barcelona-Real Madrid, that comparison makes no sense. There will be different players in contention every week. what kind of reasoning is that: you don’t want to see good golf or the best vs best
I am open to that one, as I said
Awesome moment on a human level. Pretty happy for AK. I think everybody will agree that this is a very cool moment and everybody is happy for him. It’s just one of those things that make you feel good. The moment with his daughter was awesome.
However …on a golf level, I’m not sure it’s anywhere close to the top. Rory at Sawgrass in monday morning OT easily tops this too, IMO. I mean, there are a lot of nice stories that we forget quickly. Grayson Murrays first win in many years is one comparably significant to AK’s (although he didn’t beat Rahm and Bryson). Brian Campbell and Peter Malnati also both won after grinding and grinding for years (again, weaker fields if I remember correctly). This supports Matt’s point that golf’s DNA is not to play only the Top 50 guys every week and F the rest. It’s nice to see these lower ranked guys with life changing performances.
Anyway we don’t have to always argue as to what’s better than what. We can all agree that PGA tour events broadcasts should be better and we can all agree that it was awesome to see AK win without trying to compare it to moments that will define golf’s history. Not everything has to be ranked.
Just a fun exercise. Campbell and malnati imo don’t have quite the pull AK did or the backstory. And beating 2 all time great at one of best crowds in golf takes it way above these kind of off brand events with Ben An or whoever on the other end
I don’t disagree but you might be putting a little bit too much emphasis on this ‘‘greatest crowd in golf against 2 of the world’s best players’’ thing.
I’m not saying it’s false …but my reaction to AK winning didn’t have much to do with the golfing setup and part of it. Like yeah sure he was paired with Rahm and Bryson and yeah it’s a bit better to win LIV Adelaide than to win LIV Riyadh (I guess? Is it?) but in the end I don’t think it makes much of a difference. Nobody will remember if it was against Paul Casey and Bubba Watson or Bryson and Rahm, or if it was in Adelaide or Greenbrier or London. It’s all close to irrelevant. We don’t have to pretend that LIV Adelaide is this glorious golf tournament. It’s not and it’s perfectly fine. I’m not throwing shade at LIV, it’s just what it is. Elvis Smylie also beat Rahm and Bryson last week. In fact, there are probably a shit ton of golfers who beat bot Rahm and DeChambeau in the same week on LIV in the last 2 years and nobody remembers.
The story, and what makes it special, is that this guy quit golf, hit rock bottom, turned his life around, came back to golf, grinded and grinded through poor results and adversity, and all his efforts were rewarded with his first professionnal golf win in more than 15 years and a decade away from the sport.
All the golf stuff is just the theater for an awesome human story. I’m pretty sure his win resonates way more with grown men that know his backstory and struggles but don’t care that much about golf, than it does with young golf fans that only can understand the sporting side of it.
2 Likes
Fair points and I agree. But I do think fact it was huge fist pumps, crowd roaring, Bryson and rahm on green who he is passing that made it a lot more special
In my opinion, the great thing about the PGA Tour schedule (or, what used to be great about it) is its diversity. The fact that we have basically the same field competing at the Genesis next week that we had at Pebble takes some juice out of the event for me. We already have all the best players competing at the 4 majors; I don’t need to see them 10 other times throughout the year.
Golf is not a rivalry-based sport. Rory had a ~20% chance of finishing in the top 5 last week, so the odds of two “Rorys” both finishing in the top 5 is only 4% (1 in 25 events). So two Rory-calibre players will only be contending together like once per year even if they are playing together 25x.
1 Like
Right and they will face off a lot less if they don’t play together. There are plenty of events with the worse players in them; why would you rather see a player ranked 188 instead of 18? Are you bored watching scottie and Fleetwood? I don’t quite get it
The point is it doesn’t matter, head-to-head rivalries don’t drive golf so I’m not in favour of changing the schedule solely to promote them.
It’s just what I said earlier about scarcity. In isolation, do you want the best golfers to play against each other every week? Sure. But in practice I think this gets stale quickly and takes away some of the juice from the big events (again, see LIV).
I think that’s the beauty of having two big leagues though. It’s not really best on best until the majors when we get Bryson, Niemann, Rahm, Hatton, Reed, etc all alongside the good PGA players also.
I get what you are saying but it’s also almost always different people contending at the end, you don’t have to watch same golfers each week.