- Joined
- May 8, 2002
- Posts
- 410,809
- Reaction score
- 43
PONTE VEDRA BEACH, Fla. — The art of political posturing is having both the dexterity and audacity to oppose what one is actually responsible for creating. Thus every generation of business leaders adopts as an article of faith that the status quo is, to quote Ronald Reagan, Latin for “the mess we’re in.” Calls for changing the status quo are presented as ambitious, progressive, essential. A business must move forward or die. Now that sentiment has been introduced to golf, a tumultuous few years lie ahead and one flashpoint will likely be the majors.
The debate about what constitutes a major is dusted off annually at The Players Championship as the PGA Tour’s propagandists and antagonists tussle over nomenclature with an enthusiasm that grown men once devoted to real front lines. Lee Trevino added some fuel Thursday when asked if he thinks The Players ought to be considered a major. “Yes, and there’s no question in my mind about it,” said the man who has six majors, but whose new accounting would see him credited with a seventh as the 1980 Players winner.
To anyone outside of golf, it must seem an argument so esoteric as to be obtuse. But now that private equity is in the game, a debate that was once a tedious mix of politics and peevishness has real commercial meaning.
For a sport that prides itself on historical continuums, its biggest events have developed in a way that has been part-organic, part-opportunistic. Four has been the accepted number of majors for almost a century, since O.B. Keeler coined “the impregnable quadrilateral” in reference to his pal Bobby Jones’ Grand Slam in 1930. Which four was not fixed though. Two legs of Jones’ Slam were amateur championships, both long since discarded from any reckoning. Golf writer Bob Drum is credited with the parameters of the modern slam when he eagerly wanted to frame the historical importance of Arnold Palmer’s ’60 season after he won the Masters and U.S. Open.
Fortunately, golf media no longer has the influence to determine majors, otherwise the PGA Championship might be displaced by the Creator Classic.
Arguments for The Players as a major include having the strongest field, an iconic venue, a stout list of Hall of Famers as winners and sufficient history. Counter claims against are a desire not to dilute majors as the LPGA Tour has by granting status based on the size of the sponsor’s check, a refusal to shape the game according to business goals, and basic begrudgery after too many years of hamfisted marketing. The most interesting angle is one least discussed: political.
Five families run men’s professional golf: the PGA Tour, Augusta National, the R&A, the USGA and the PGA of America. Only one doesn’t own a major championship — the entity with the biggest market presence and consumer impact. In fact, if you include the Ryder Cup, it doesn’t own any of the sport’s five biggest events. That’s a problem for private equity chaps focused on financial returns.
The lack of major ownership is tangentially related to the entitlement players have about their worth and what percentage of league revenue ought to be coming their way. For example, the NFL disburses about half of its proceeds to athletes. But then the NFL owns the Super Bowl.
That leaves the whiz kids of Greater Fenway with three scenarios: the Tour gets its own major (an honorific no single body can actually confer); the Tour can acquire one of the big five (the Ryder Cup seems most likely, but good luck dislodging generations of past PGA of America officers from the trough of all-expenses paid trips every two years); or the Tour can figure out how to enjoy the financial rewards of major ownership without actual ownership.
A time will come when private equity seeks a percentage of revenue from the majors because those tournaments are dependent upon assets they own: PGA Tour members. The next few years will show how much the Tour’s investors (current and future) understand the sport they’ve bought into and whether they respect the broader obligations other bodies have to the game beyond simply paying players and delivering a return. If LIV proves anything, it’s that using marquee players as quasi-hostages for negotiating purposes works. It requires a generous dollop of optimism to think that tactic won’t be used again, and this game is about out of optimism.
This article originally appeared on Golfweek: Eamon Lynch: PGA Tour doesn’t own a major and that’s a big problem
Continue reading...
The debate about what constitutes a major is dusted off annually at The Players Championship as the PGA Tour’s propagandists and antagonists tussle over nomenclature with an enthusiasm that grown men once devoted to real front lines. Lee Trevino added some fuel Thursday when asked if he thinks The Players ought to be considered a major. “Yes, and there’s no question in my mind about it,” said the man who has six majors, but whose new accounting would see him credited with a seventh as the 1980 Players winner.
To anyone outside of golf, it must seem an argument so esoteric as to be obtuse. But now that private equity is in the game, a debate that was once a tedious mix of politics and peevishness has real commercial meaning.
For a sport that prides itself on historical continuums, its biggest events have developed in a way that has been part-organic, part-opportunistic. Four has been the accepted number of majors for almost a century, since O.B. Keeler coined “the impregnable quadrilateral” in reference to his pal Bobby Jones’ Grand Slam in 1930. Which four was not fixed though. Two legs of Jones’ Slam were amateur championships, both long since discarded from any reckoning. Golf writer Bob Drum is credited with the parameters of the modern slam when he eagerly wanted to frame the historical importance of Arnold Palmer’s ’60 season after he won the Masters and U.S. Open.
You must be registered for see images
Fortunately, golf media no longer has the influence to determine majors, otherwise the PGA Championship might be displaced by the Creator Classic.
Arguments for The Players as a major include having the strongest field, an iconic venue, a stout list of Hall of Famers as winners and sufficient history. Counter claims against are a desire not to dilute majors as the LPGA Tour has by granting status based on the size of the sponsor’s check, a refusal to shape the game according to business goals, and basic begrudgery after too many years of hamfisted marketing. The most interesting angle is one least discussed: political.
Five families run men’s professional golf: the PGA Tour, Augusta National, the R&A, the USGA and the PGA of America. Only one doesn’t own a major championship — the entity with the biggest market presence and consumer impact. In fact, if you include the Ryder Cup, it doesn’t own any of the sport’s five biggest events. That’s a problem for private equity chaps focused on financial returns.
The lack of major ownership is tangentially related to the entitlement players have about their worth and what percentage of league revenue ought to be coming their way. For example, the NFL disburses about half of its proceeds to athletes. But then the NFL owns the Super Bowl.
That leaves the whiz kids of Greater Fenway with three scenarios: the Tour gets its own major (an honorific no single body can actually confer); the Tour can acquire one of the big five (the Ryder Cup seems most likely, but good luck dislodging generations of past PGA of America officers from the trough of all-expenses paid trips every two years); or the Tour can figure out how to enjoy the financial rewards of major ownership without actual ownership.
A time will come when private equity seeks a percentage of revenue from the majors because those tournaments are dependent upon assets they own: PGA Tour members. The next few years will show how much the Tour’s investors (current and future) understand the sport they’ve bought into and whether they respect the broader obligations other bodies have to the game beyond simply paying players and delivering a return. If LIV proves anything, it’s that using marquee players as quasi-hostages for negotiating purposes works. It requires a generous dollop of optimism to think that tactic won’t be used again, and this game is about out of optimism.
This article originally appeared on Golfweek: Eamon Lynch: PGA Tour doesn’t own a major and that’s a big problem
Continue reading...
