Shark: PGA Tour Considering Money “Pot” To Compensate Elite Eight Players

Golf.com’s Michael Bamberger has been talking to Greg Norman about a variety of subjects and in part 4, Norman says he’s hearing how the PGA Tour is trying to sweeten the pot to retain players who might be swayed by the Premier Golf League.

The original dreamer behind a world golf tour says he’s not been in touch with the league founders since February, but hears the PGA Tour is eyeing select European Tour events to expand the current World Golf Championships.

And, this what-could-go-wrong idea:

“What I’m hearing is that the PGA Tour, against all their bylaws and governances, is talking about putting aside a $40 million pot for eight players, with $8 million for the top player,” Norman said in a recent interview. “The PGA Tour is re-tweaking their model with the PGL out there. If you’re player nine, 10, 11 or 12, I think you’d be pretty pissed off.”

Norman said he didn’t know how the PGA Tour would rank the eight players. This pot would be beyond the FedEx Cup playoff money.

As with the PGL’s concept, this idea does face the troublesome issue of who is a top player, who is a draw and how is that determined. The modern game sees more turnover than ever—thanks to those Pilates classes and plant-based diets!—and trying to pin down who qualifies as elite talent, seems like no easy task.

While the Premier Golf League founders and funders have been quiet during the pandemic, it should be noted that Saudi Arabia, of the primary financial backers, has recently put another $40 billion into their sovereign wealth fund that is one of the PGL’s confirmed sources of funding. Vivian Nereim reports for Bloomberg.

Will The PGA Tour Ban Premier Golf League Early Adopters?

Jay Monahan’s fourth press conference as Commissioner featured five COVD-19 questions, four Premier Golf League questions, three on the new TV deal, and one combo TV/PGL question.

It was a surprising focus on the proposed league at the PGA Tour’s signature event, especially after the powerful statement made by a new TV deal that locks in PGA Tour golf with three enormous media companies through 2030 (and four if you include Discovery’s previously announced GOLFTV for international streaming rights).

You have to sympathize a bit with Monahan and friends after signing such a massive deal, only to have the PGL get so much attention. However, AP’s Doug Ferguson question early on, and Monahan’s open-ended answer, that might have prompted a few of the follow-ups.

The question:

 Q. So much chatter the first few months of the year have been on this Premier Golf League. I'm just curious how many of the top players have you spoken to, can you characterize the feedback you've gotten, and can you say one way or another if a player verbally pledges support of this new league, would they be no longer TOUR members immediately?

An immediate ban seems harsh, but also perfectly logical if the PGL is a legitimate threat to luring PGA Tour players away. Here was Monahan’s reply to that component:

If a player pledged -- you and I have a long history of hypotheticals and me not answering hypotheticals, but I would just tell you that we're encouraged by the response that our players have had in our discussions. I think that the value that we provide to our players, to our tournaments, to our fans, the news that we've just talked about, securing $12 billion in revenue through 2030, the strength and security and foundation of this TOUR has never been stronger, so that's what we're focused on. We're focused on the excellence that we want to continue to achieve with our players, and our commitment is always one to listen and to respond. That's a bridge we would cross when we get there, but going back to my earlier comments, this is a player-led organization, 51 years running. Our governance system has been driven by our players and our board, and we have regulations in place that allow us to protect the interests of our media partners, our sponsors and all of our constituents, and if we got to that point in time, we would take measures to vigilantly protect this business model.

That all seems sensible given the existential threat posed by the Premier Golf League. The league could siphon top players and expose PGA Tour schedule bloat that so many top players have acknowledged in recent weeks. Furthermore, the PGL’s “team concept” goes against PGA Tour regulations preventing players from having a financial interest in other players. Therefore, taking decisive action against early adopters seems warranted on Monahan and the Policy Board’s part.

Yet, the reluctance to go public with a ban policy prompts questions about the possible reasoning:

A) Gives the PGL legitimacy. Coming out with an unprecedented ban focused on one particular Tour certainly validates the PGL. Monahan’s stance of just waiting for a player to leave is probably the wise strategy. Unless a large group of players joins forces at once.

(B) Contradicts Rory. Rory McIlroy’s recent praise of independent contractor life, as opposed to a league requiring full participation, would suddenly sound less realistic under such a PGL ban. Particularly if a precedent is set that could be applied to other existing tours. Restraint of trade could be claimed.

C) Bad optics. Protecting the PGA Tour and its beneficiaries should not create a bad look, but the world is a funny place when it comes to perception. If a few top players or legends are threatened, they might get in a public war that benefits no one. Cutting off a long time star for good, while protecting the Tour, could also upset fans of that player.

Circling back to point A, why should Monahan take a tough public stance when no player has publicly committed? After all, the Tour’s board has been working to button up existing regulations related to competing tours.

In a January 24, 2020 memo to the PGA Tour Policy Board, Monahan explained his concerns to the board saying, “our current Regulations prevent players from taking actions that would cause TOUR harm (reputational or otherwise), as the Private Equity Golf structure would undoubtedly do.”

He went on to explain two more proposed regulation changes to ensure players “give their best efforts and to prevent free riding on the goodwill amassed in the PGA Tour brand.”

 The board was expected to ratify an action last week that “further crystallizes such intention and corresponding prohibitions.” However, a PGA Tour spokesperson would not confirm whether that vote was taken at last week’s Policy Board meeting.

There may also be more legal and financial ramifications not visible on the surface. Or, this tug-of-war could be a simple conundrum that has Monahan erring on the side of caution: there are big egos, massive dollars and too many sensitivities to take a tougher public stance that may already have been addressed in PGA Tour regulations.

The full press conference:

Monahan: FedExCup Payments Could Multiply Three To Four Times Of 2018's $35 Million Payout

FedExC[i[sogm.jpg

There are a few things to consider in Commissioner Jay Monahan’s extended CNBC interview off camera and written up by Jessica Golden at CNBC.com. This one went better that the on-camera chat.

The primary focus was of Golden’s story was on Monahan’s rebuttal to the Premier Golf League: more FedExCup money!

In terms of bonus money, FedExCup and Wyndham’s rewards for the Top-10 golfers goes from $70 million this year to $100 million in 2022.

Wyndam’s rewards.

“Every single person on our tour is going to see an increase,” Monahan said.

Monahan said over course of the new deal, PGA Tour golfers could see FedExCup payouts three to four times that of the $35 million paid out in 2018 and increased prize money for some of the biggest events.

 A) It’s intriguing the Commish used 2018’s $35 million as the number the pot will jump three to four times from. In 2019 the FedExCup jumped to $60 million, with a $15 million first prize.

B) The focus on “every single person on our tour” seeing an increase won’t inspire fans and seemed tone deaf on a day the markets were cratering and news of a new media deal really shouldn’t be about the cold hard cash. Yes, the Commissioner reports to the players, but he should have saved that talk for the player meetings and instead focus in this rollout on how the rights deal will improve the “product”.

Phil Could Go "On And On" About How To Improve The PGA Tour

Expecting to delay his opinion of the proposed Premier Golf League after projecting to do so Players week, Phil Mickelson did question why the PGL’s primary opponent, Rory McIlroy, would give up leverage.

From Bob Harig’s ESPN.com report following Mickelson’s missed API cut:

Asked whether he believes the Premier Golf League could possibly influence the PGA Tour to make some improvements, as Rory McIlroy has suggested, Mickelson said: "Well, I wouldn't come out and say I'm not going to do it right away. .. and lose all your leverage.''

But more intriguing: add Mickelson to the list of players suggesting the current PGA Tour model needs work.

Asked for his ideas on enhancements to the PGA Tour, Mickelson said: "I could go on and on. And I really don't want to talk about that right now.''

McIlroy Suggests Pro Golf Needs Streamlining, Might Be Oversaturated

The question came at the end of Rory McIlroy’s press conference in advance of the 2020 Arnold Palmer Invitational Presented By Mastercard. If the Premier Golf League does not happen, what changes might it inspire for the PGA Tour?

What McIlroy presented sounded a lot like…the Premier Golf League!

Ewan Murray reports for The Guardian.

“I don’t want to come across as sort of elitist but I think some smaller fields [would help], maybe a few more events with no cuts,” said the world No 1 when considering how the game can be modified. “There’s so many tournaments and there might be an over-saturation in a way. You look at the NFL and they play 18 games a year, 20 games a year max, and people want it all the time.

“I know football’s different than golf and all that, but I think being a golf fan these days can get quite exhausting following so many different tournaments, different tours, all that stuff. So maybe streamlining it a bit might be a good place to start a conversation.”

McIlroy, as you may recall, announced his opposition to the league’s plans barring a mass exodus of players citing history and the lack of independence.

Also in Murray’s story from Bay Hill was this from Adam Scott, who is still “very positive” about the concept though doesn’t think “it’s going to happen necessarily.”

And this:

“Everyone sees it from somewhat of their own agenda. Being an international player, the thought of a world tour sounds really great. Maybe less so for someone based in Florida who doesn’t have to necessarily travel as much. I don’t think my sentiment has changed at all. I still think it’s fantastic.”

Players Acknowledging Need For Change Validate The Premier Golf League's Ideas

Since the Premier Golf League ideas were first revealed here and the vision was expanded upon either in blog posts here, and now in founder Andy Gardiner’s interviews (here and here),

Randall Mell from the Honda on Brooks Koepka’s remarks, another classic example of Koepka’s shrewd way of playing his hand.

“I am just going to play where the best players play,” Koepka said Wednesday after his Honda Classic pro-am round. “I want to play against the best. I think everyone wants to play against the best. Whatever comes of it, comes of it.”

He’s available, will just go where the best players are, and he doesn’t need the money. Future agent, Brooks Koepka.

He also gratitude expressed toward the PGA Tour and its longevity as a venture.

“A lot of good things have come from it,” he said. “The Tour has been incredible to us, the way things have developed over the years. We have to see where things go. It’s all very new and it’s all very fast.”

But what if the PGL makes him an astronomical offer to be one of its new team owners?

“I know you’re going to write this the wrong way, but it doesn’t matter if somebody gave me $200 million tomorrow,” Koepka said. “It’s not going to change my life. What am I going to get out of it? I already have so much that I could retire right now, but I don’t want to. I just want to play golf. It’s not going to change anything. Maybe the only thing I do is buy a plane. That would be it. I don’t see anything that would change my life.”

True, a plane would be nice.

GolfDigest.com’s Brian Wacker covered Koepka’s remarks as well as those of Gary Woodland, current U.S. Open champion. He says he PGL has been good for the PGA.

“I think competition is good,” said Gary Woodland, who is represented by the same agent as Woods, Mark Steinberg. “I think the tour will be better for it. I think it will force the tour to make some changes.

Force. Not inspire. Or encourage. Or cause. Force.

“It’ll be interesting. There’s still a long way to go and a lot to do in a short period of time, but I think the [PGA] Tour has realized it has to make some changes.”

It would be interesting to know when that realization occurred.

For those who think the current model of constant growth and playing opportunities for retirees has damaged the “product,” there is good news. For accountants.

“I think the top players are getting together and trying to get things done. There’s a lot of things that could be done better out here to take care of the top players but also the bottom guys. I think there’s a lot more money for everybody. Hopefully that pushes the envelope.”

Players, players, players. Money, money, money. Not much about the fans or sponsors, something the PGL has highlighted in their mixed-results social media rollout and last week’s interviews.

A similar view was shared by Billy Horschel, who, as usual, said more than he should.

GolfChannel.com’s Rex Hoggard paints a largely rosy picture of the PGL’s impact and included this from Horschel.

“I have no desire [to play on the PGL]. What [Tour commissioner Jay Monahan] has done is great. He understands that the Tour in its current form isn’t viable in the future,” Horschel said.

I’m sorry, what was that again? Not viable in its current form. Again, when did this realization happen?

“Changes are going to have to be made. What changes? I don’t know. The business model is great, it’s what we do with the players and the product. We may have to make some tweaks to the product to continue to be able to garner the money that we want.”

So to recap Horschel’s quote: the Commissioner understands the current model is not viable, yet the business model is “great”, and the PGL-inspired changes will help keep the money flowing.

Something tells me fans and sponsors who have not agreed that the PGA Tour is “growing and thriving” and never more exciting want to hear ideas that will make the sport more fun. Enriching players for helping the cause is a nice byproduct of those efforts, but if pocket lining is the sole focus of this change, then the PGA Tour’s finest will have missed the point in a major way.

So It Seems Greg Norman Still Hasn't Worked Through All Of His 1994 Issues

Greg Norman is a bit miffed at Rory McIlroy’s “out” declaration related to the Premier Golf League. And naturally, because it’s the Shark, it really has little to do with the positives and negatives of the proposed tour.

Josh Sens caught up with Norman in Mexico and taking time away from finding his biggest fan—hit the link if you thought April 1 had arrived early this year—and Norman seemed to take McIlroy’s invocation of Arnold Palmer personally.

With a TV deal in place and the support, Norman believed, of many players, the concept seemed to have legs. But it foundered in the face of savvy PGA Tour maneuvering and vocal opposition from the King. Shortly after Norman announced his plan for the global series, Palmer came out publicly against it. Norman, who had what he describes as a close relationship with Palmer, was devastated.

“I was blindsided, I felt backstabbed,” Norman said. “I’m listening to Arnold, with [then-PGA Tour commissioner] Tim Finchem standing beside him, chest puffed out for a 5-foot-4 guy, and I’m thinking, ‘Are you kidding? Why are you saying this?’”

Well, he could be an intimidating 5’4”…

Anyway, he goes on to say IMG planted the negative thoughts with Palmer to go against the Tour and accuses McIlroy of taking his stance against the PGL as part of his Golfpass/Golf Channel relationship ala the King back in 1994.

But other than that, he’s really worked through any lingering issues over the World Tour effort…of 25 years ago.

Tiger, Rory, JT Passing Up Honda Suggests The Model Isn't Working

Screen Shot 2020-02-21 at 8.34.05 PM.png

Friday’s news offered a fascinating juxtaposition of stories unless you live in the 32082.

There is this AP story by Doug Ferguson on Tiger Woods, Rory McIlroy and Justin Thomas all passing up next week’s Honda Classic, even though they could play and sleep at home sweet home.

And despite a pretty compelling second round down at the WGC Mexico City, where Bryson DeChambeau fired 63 and a good leaderboard should make the weekend interesting, look at Golfweek’s homepage:

Screen Shot 2020-02-21 at 8.32.13 PM.png

This was all set against the Premier Golf League’s Andy Gardiner making the rounds: talking to me exclusively here, to Golf Digest’s Max Adler, and most compelling of all, on Rick Shiel’s podcast where you can finally put a voice to the concept.

While I think you’ll get more specific details from the interview I posted, anyone listening to Gardiner talking to Shiels can hear an earnest view about how professional golf’s current schedule and excess of “product” is not working. Gardiner is able to lay out a vision that is strong, refined and ably rebuts some of the more compelling criticisms of the concept.

After the nearly 90 minute chat I was still left with questions about the proposed league’s details, but my ultimate conclusion was unexpected: the Premier Golf League lays out a smart future for professional golf after Tiger.

There has been much focus on whether Woods will commit and a curious glee at the prospect of Rory McIlroy invoking Arnold Palmer to reject the PGL—a curious example given Palmer’s flirtations with disruption in the early 1960s and 1980s.

Yes, both players could make the league take off and Woods could certainly torpedo the PGL’s chances of starting in 2022 by declining. But the vision laid out by Gardiner, and surprising no-shows at events like the Honda, also explains why Woods said last week that he expects regular runs at the PGA Tour model going forward.

He said that because whether it was Gardiner, his agent or just Woods’ overall vision telling him what is becoming increasingly clear: the professional golf model is broken. And when Woods retires, it may recede into a very small corner of the sports universe.

The PGL’s revision of the “tour” model would prevent something like we saw Friday: next week’s non-commitments overshadowing this week’s tournament. Their guarantee of top fields, a January-August schedule and a very intriguing team component bring new life to the pro game, presenting a refreshed vision for the sport long after Tiger has hung up his Nike’s. For that alone, the Premier Golf League is worthy of everyone’s attention.

Q&A With Andy Gardiner, CEO Of The Premier Golf League

After conducting their efforts in secrecy for several years, the Premier Golf League’s CEO is speaking publicly about his dream and the various constituencies working to make it happen.

Andy Gardiner spoke to me for 20 minutes while making various media rounds. Among the topics covered: why go public now, Rory McIlroy’s verdict on the league, media rights, timing and financing.

GS: So you’ve recorded a podcast today and are going more public with the Premier Golf League concept? Why now?

Andy Gardiner: The plan was to—and we've been going about our business quite quietly and discreetly—and that was probably the plan to present the opportunity as well as it can be presented.
I'm sure you've been following the sentiment as much as we have, and--delighted is too strong a word-- but very encouraged. It's nice to know that what you've been doing for six years hasn't been a complete waste of time. And I think the debate has been entirely balanced. It's obviously changed a level in the last 48 hours, but in terms of our reading, a sentiment is that it's been as good as we could possibly have hoped for really.

GS: You're referring to Rory's comments? Were his comments surprising to you or problematic to what you're trying to do?

AG: They weren't actually surprising because everyone's going to have a view. I just saw them as part of the process that we're going through. I've been thinking about them a lot and this is what Rory does, of course. He's an exceptional individual. He's an exceptional golfer, he's compelling in so many respects. When he's playing, I find it hard not to watch him. You can't take your eyes off him because he's capable of truly exceptional things on a golf course, and he's also compelling when he's not on the course because he's a very interesting individual. And I must confess, yes, he caused me to think quite hard about what he said, and there are two bits that stood out to me. One was the thing on the right side of history, and my reaction to that just as a human being is, absolutely.

We all want to be on the right side of history. There have been a few folks that haven't been of course. So that's everybody's desire. I guess that people have different views of history. One thing that crossed my mind was his reference to Arnold Palmer. I thought to myself, different people could have different views on individuals who've been significant in the past. And the first thought when you think about Arnold Palmer for me is obviously, he’s the King, but I actually went straight to my understanding of how the PGA Tour was established. Which was in itself a breakaway from the PGA of America. So on the one hand, you can position him as a stalwart of the establishment. But actually I always thought of Arnold as somebody who took responsibility and led to a significant change in the structure of the sport. Obviously, along with others including Jack Nicklaus. I also read with great interest years ago Deane Beman's book. The chapters that relate to what happened in 1983 and 1984, with those guys where they nearly did it again and that they nearly walked away from that which they had created.

Now, I'd say I've got a slightly different view perhaps than others of Arnold Palmer. I think he's not only been a brilliant golfer and a brilliant individual, but he has moved the sport on. I also think something Greg Norman said in the last couple of weeks, which was when the players were gathered to have the conversation in '94, I understand that Arnold Palmer was in the room and once he realized what the topic of discussion was, he decided to absent himself. But he said, "Guys, I understand that you want to do this", but if I'm right, he was probably 65 at the time. And his view was if you want to do this, by all means, but I'm probably not going to be a part of it.

So he'd done it once. He'd nearly done it twice, and I think what he was probably more focused on at the time was when he created the Golf Channel, which was certainly part of the process in '94, and launched in '95. So it's just, as I say, it caused us to think quite a lot. And the second part of the statement that made me think most was about the autonomy that the players have, their ability to pick and choose. And I know that that is prized amongst the best golfers in the world.

That actually is why we started to do this: as fans of the game and just having a slight flight of fancy thinking, well if you could start again, what would you create? And that's all this began as. I was thinking to myself, the flip side of autonomy is that as a fan, I'm desperate to know where Rory's going to play next week, and I'm desperate to see him play as often as possible. And quite frankly, if you gave me a wish list of who I'd like to watch in the next few weeks, I'd like to see Rory going head to head with Brooks every week right now just because I think it would be incredible entertainment.

So those are the thoughts that I had. You asked, is it damaging or problematic? Time will tell because this isn't about an individual, it's about a collective. And our attitude all the way through this has only been, we will build and we will persevere and we will offer the opportunity for people to make a choice. What we've been doing won't amount to anything unless there is a collective wealth, and that's on behalf of fans. It's on behalf of those who financially support the sport such as sponsors and broadcasters. But fundamentally it's about the best players in the world. And if any one of those three segments were to turn around and say, "We think you're wasting your time", we'd say "Fair enough” and move on. So, as I say, we are simply providing a choice and if the right parties don't want to take the choice then we will do something else.

GS: Where are in terms of timing and on being able to say you are ready to go with a schedule and do players have to commit publicly to the league?

AG: So our attitude has always been any conversation that we have with a third party, I don't feel it's my place to disclose the nature of that conversation because it's really theirs. We haven't asked a single player to make any commitment to us thus far. In terms of Rory, I’ve barely spent any time with him, which probably tells you as much as you need to know. The timing of this is down to the players, and part of the conversation that we've been having over the last several months, in fact, really for the last 12 months, is about how we could best collaborate with other tours, the PGA Tour in particular. That's a conversation that continues because our first press release following your piece was actually that it is our strong desire. I believe that the value that we're creating should flow throughout the whole of golf.

And there is a lot of value to go around, and all we're looking to do is to ideally bring golf together under a stronger structure in the best interest of the game. And that ultimately comes down to: will more people watch our content. The greater number of people who watch it, there should be a correlation with the number of people who will take up the sport. So that's the 30, 50-year view that we take, and I can't see any reason why there shouldn't be a conversation about how we can ensure that the other elements of the game remain entirely robust. That's something that I hope we can achieve. And that's part of the conversation that we're having with those who matter to us.

GS: How would you describe conversations you’ve had with the various tours?

AG: So if you forgive me, Geoff, I won't talk about those conversations. I will say that, and in fact, I think the first paragraph of the letter of the PGA Tour put out to its members in relation to us, they said that we hadn't sought to engage with them directly. And that is true, but it's a timing thing. And there have been several guys who have sought to make an introduction over the last 12 months. The conversation hasn't happened because there was a time and a place, and I believe that we're very close to that time, and we should be able to find a place. I would travel anywhere in the world to have that conversation at any time. What I do want to do is make sure that if it ever comes to pass, then we have a good understanding of how other elements of the game would like that to happen so that we're best placed to make it a successful conversation. But yes, it is our strong desire, and I think that it's achievable.

GS: So what should we as media or fans watching this unfold look for in terms of signs that you're close to launching this?

AG: We are progressed, and I can't be specific on timetable because it's down to, as I say, individuals coming to certain decisions. We are patient but we spent six years building an extraordinarily solid platform which, as I say, gives us the opportunity to facilitate whatever decision is made by third parties. There will be quite possibly more said by individuals. In this case, it will happen in the same time we are ready to make it happen if the right elements of the game want it to happen.

GS: You have a lot of people listed as part of a team because obviously trying to start a new tour from scratch requires a lot of different departments and elements. How do you feel about where you are in that regard?

AG: For two and a half years we've been working with the Raine Group, and in order to maintain a relationship with a group of that quality, obviously, you need to have everything planned down to the finest detail. So in terms of the execution, should we be given the opportunity by the pilots to move this forward, everything that needs to be done in time to ensure a world class product is produced in January 2022, is planned down to the finest detail. We do have an extraordinarily competent, experienced and expert group that have been working together on this for the last four years. We will utilize as far as our plan is concerned, the best of the best in terms of third party service providers, and they will be required to ensure that our product is as good as possible.

The full build out of our entire team will come probably quarter three, 2021, and would be 435 permanent staff. Going back to any form of collaboration with any other tour, you can immediately probably start to look forward and think, well, what's the sensible structure? I guess the answer to your question is we feel as though everything is in place to whichever path is chosen, we're ready to execute.

GS: It seems from the structure that you do not necessarily need to have a media partner locked in as part of your model at the moment. Obviously, that's something that will come if the right individuals commit, is that correct?

AG: I can tell you when we started this process, it started with, as I say, we are fans of the game and we gave ourselves the opportunity to think how good it could be. The next group that we went to were the sponsors of the sport, and we listened to them and their views are reflected in what we're doing. And we appreciate how valuable the sponsors are as do the broadcasters. We then began conversations with the broadcasters in the US and elsewhere, and we listened to them, and we got to the point where we had a fork in the road, we had the opportunity to partner with broadcast, and we decided that it was probably in everyone's best interest to have that conversation only in a meaningful way once the players were secure. So what we did instead was, we went to the top three media buyers in the US sports market, and we partnered with the number one, and that is a group called Omnicom sport, which is a division of Omnicom.

We went to Omnicom because as I say, two and a half billion dollars a year is spent by Omnicom on behalf of some of the biggest brands in the world. And certainly the brands that you in the US would recognize when you watch live sports. Now, we went with those guys because they are ultimately the ones who are spending the cash, the cash that obviously gives the broadcasters the ability to buy the rights. They've been alongside us for the last 18 months, and every material conversation we've had about media. So the other thing that we then did was to look to provide the players with the comfort that they might require in terms of our ability to generate the purse. And we've also done that by securing a purse guarantee from a very well known insurance group. So I think we have everything that we should have in place. And quite frankly, the answer to the broadcast is I would much rather be in a position of offering the product to that market and allowing the market to then decide its value.

GS: In terms of financing and reports regarding involvement from the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, is that something you can address?

AG: Yes, I can. So we have a diverse shareholder base, and when I say diverse, there are a large number of shareholders. We've been very careful in our selection of our partners. As I mentioned, a two-and-a-half year relationship with the Raine Group, which is one of the most impressive and powerful investors in sports and media around the world. And I'm sure you've been able to go onto their website and see the deals that they've done, and part of our group is yes, probably the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world. And I can say that is the public investment fund of Saudi Arabia. Their passion for the sport is what enabled us to form the relationship because they are truly passionate, and I think that will become clear in due course.

Will Rory's Stance Torpedo The Premier Golf League?

Rory McIlroy’s strong stance against the proposed Premier Golf League looks like a blow to what has been a steady upward trajectory for the upstart rival tour.

However, given that it took nearly a month for a player to definitively declare against it since the league became public knowledge, and coupled Tiger Woods’ assertion last week that proposals like this will keep happening, I’m not sure the folks behind the PGL are hitting delete on their decks just yet.

Here are all of Rory’s comments, as reported by ESPN.com’s Bob Harig, starting with his assertion that he would lose independence going to the structure proposed.

"The more I've thought about it, the more I don't like it,'' McIlroy said at Chapultepec Golf Club, site of this week's WGC-Mexico Championship.

"The one thing as a professional golfer in my position that I value is the fact that I have autonomy and freedom over everything I do," he said. "I pick and choose -- this is a perfect example.

"Some guys this week made the choice not to come to Mexico. If you go and play this other golf league, you're not going to have that choice. I read a thing the other day where it said if you take the money they can tell you what to do. And I think that's my thing, I've never been one for being told what to do, and I like to have that autonomy and freedom over my career, and I feel like I would give that up by going to play this other league.”

Ironic that McIlroy cites a World Golf Championships week, with notable player defections, as an example of the freedom he cherishes. Particularly given that these weeks were designed to prevent an upstart world tour by bringing top players together more often and assuring sponsors of stars convening.

Anyway…

"For me, I'm out. My position is I'm against it until there may come a day that I can't be against it. If everyone else goes, I might not have a choice, but at this point, I don't like what they're proposing.''

And McIlroy didn't see that happening.

"I think it is very split at the moment,'' he said.

Given the strength of the professional game in so many ways, it’s fairly stunning that there is even a split in the first place. And that split seems bound to force significant changes, regardless of the PGL’s fate.

In looking at McIlroy’s comments more closely, it’s no coincidence his stance comes after a wonderful week at a historic tournament and venue, with the revitalized Florida swing looming. So it’s nice to see a sentimental player still exists.

However, that McIlroy also opened the door to joining a mass exodus, hardly makes his stance fatal.

Now, if Tiger reiterated what McIlroy said about the Premier Golf League? That’s a different story.

Kuchar: "“If you could design a better version of the PGA Tour, it wouldn’t look like the current version."

While that comment is not exactly what the doctor ordered when you are about to (allegedly) announce an $8 billion, 10-year deal at the Players, Matt Kuchar raises an interesting question.

As quoted in this story by GolfDigest.com’s Brian Wacker looking at player views of the proposed Premier Golf League:

“It’s intriguing,” Kuchar said of the PGL. “If you could design a better version of the PGA Tour, it wouldn’t look like the current version. What we have is awesome, [but] I think there’s a lot of hope that the tour moves in a direction that is slightly different moving forward, and guys like Rory have an influence on that direction.”

McIlroy certainly will be listened to after announcing he’s “out” on the league unless there is a mass exodus of top players.

But it does raise an interesting question: if you started from scratch, how would you design a golf tour that takes the sport to different places, shows off the skills of these talented players, and keeps them happy?

Premier Golf League Latest: Players And Agents Convene At Riviera; Phil Predicts He’ll Have Decision By The Players

Brooks Koepka and Phil Mickelson walk by the 13th hole home where a PGL meet-and-greet was held.

Brooks Koepka and Phil Mickelson walk by the 13th hole home where a PGL meet-and-greet was held.

Buzz on and off the Riviera Country Club grounds included continued discussion about the proposed Premier Golf League.

As Eamon Lynch reported for Golfweek, a Tuesday gathering was attended by most player agents and seven prominent players, allowing for potential PGL targets to hear the group’s pitch.

I can report that among the seven attendees were Phil Mickelson, Brooks Koepka, Justin Rose, Dustin Johnson, Bryson DeChambeau and Patrick Reed. They heard a presentation from Premier League backers inside the 13th hole-adjacent home of asset manager Ahmed Tayeb and his wife, art collector Cherine Magrabi-Tayeb.

On site rumors were flying that Mickelson was ready to reach a decision on the proposed league last week. Since he’d almost assuredly be a founding team captain and a major draw even as he nears 50, Mickelson’s verdict could make or break the proposed Tour.

When asked at Torrey Pines he was “intrigued,” before playing in Saudi Arabia with league officials in that week’s pro-am. Asked after missing the Genesis Invitational cut where he stood, Mickelson told those of us assembled he was “not really ready to talk about” his position.

 “I’m going to play Bay Hill and Players, I’m going to guess by the Players I’m going to have a pretty good opinion. I would guess. I’m not going to promise that. I’ll probably have an opinion by then.”

Besides Tiger Woods, who reported his team was looking into the proposed league and could have financial incentives to join it, other players interviewed would not rule out the league and two likely candidates for founding captain status in the proposed team portion were expansive with their thoughts.

“The concept is very good,” said the eventual Genesis winner Adam Scott when I discussed it with him Tuesday of tournament week. “Professional golf on the PGA Tour is in a very good place. There are a lot of opportunities for professionals to play. However, I feel like having some sort of premier tour, would be better for the game of golf almost as a whole and a way to follow the top players and it could have a positive impact on the game.”

Scott said he had not engaged in direct conversations with the league but wanted to learn more.

Justin Rose confirmed that his agent, Mark Steinberg, has been running interference for him with the league founders. The 2013 U.S. Open champion attended last week’s private gathering and discussed his largely positive views on the league concept while reiterating multiple times that he needs questions answered.  As for joining the league, Rose is “hedging for sure with this thing right now” and hopes a resolution comes soon.

“I think it needs to come to a head shortly, otherwise it becomes too much noise for noise sake,” he said Friday. “There’s obviously a lot of incentives for guys to want to be interested in it. And it’s a redistribution of all the economics that are involved in golf.”

Rose was referring to an increasingly problematic notion facing the PGA Tour. Namely, that top players see tournaments continually added where purses are funded by the same media rights pool that also funds lesser events.  Meanwhile, the people who do sell tickets, aren’t paid for the attention and tournament income they deliver.

“Format wise it’s about seeing the top players playing against each other more regularly. I think we’d all like to see that but it’s often not as simple as that. There’s 100’s of questions that need to be answered, which don’t seem to be getting answered very quickly.”

One of Rose’s primary questions involves venues. The group’s documents pledge to take events to the best courses in the world and list several ambitious sites, including last week’s Genesis host, Riviera Country Club. But the combination of modern day tournament needs and a reduced number of classic courses capable of testing the world’s best, could be a limiting factor.

“Venue quality is one of the most important things,” Rose said. “Whether the purse is $8 million or $9 million, that’s not how I’m choosing my schedule.

“When I hosted the British Masters, golf course was everything for me so I think that’s a huge thing. Now we’re talking about 18 brand new events, the talk is the best golf courses around the world. I’d like to see a list.”

Rose is, however, bullish on many elements of the proposed schedule as an “international player” who is torn with the “loyalty question” of wanting to support both the PGA Tour and European Tour.

“The attractive thing is the schedule,” Rose said of the proposed January to September schedule. “I always feel for me, taking time off and trying to play the European Tour as well, I don’t play much on the PGA Tour in October, November, December, January and I wake up 2000 points behind. You’re always playing catch up in the season long race, so to have something that was a bit more easy as an International player, would fit me better.”

Rose plays 24 weeks a year and says the 18-plus-4 majors notion balances out with the likelihood of more international travel.

“You could argue three rounds, trims wear and tear. It’s a bit more international travel, and might be more wear and tear on the body. So for me, it washes out.”

But others? Say, Tiger Woods?

“Tiger for example, that’s a lot. Some guys will have to weigh that up.”

Rose is struggling seeing how things unfold in terms of player commitments

“I don’t see a situation where eight guys go, or four go. It’d be an all or none situation, and I don’t know how it gets to that point and I don’t even know if that point is good.”

As someone potentially targeted to helm a founding player franchise, Rose is intrigued by the league’s vision for franchises.

 “It’s interesting, and lot of pressure with that too,” he said. “You’ve got to pick and choose your team every day. If you’re going to do it, you want to be one of the guys involved in the ownership structure. Again, many questions about how it would operate, what the value would be. I don’t understand the economics behind the franchise model. Yet.”

Couples On Premier League: "You want to win one of these things or you want to win the L.A. Open?"

Screen Shot 2020-02-13 at 9.55.55 PM.png

Greg Hardwig of the Naples News talked to Champions playing this week’s Chubb Classic and asked Fred Couples, Tom Lehman, Bernhard Langer and Jack Nicklaus about the proposed Premier Golf League.

Two-time Genesis Invitational winner—yeah I went there—Fred Couples thinks the PGA Tour essentially has a prestige component that a new tour just does not have. Except that the prestige event he mentions does not exist as he refers to it…

"I saw Jay Monahan's quote. That's how long I follow it," Couples said Thursday, where the two-time Chubb Classic champion was practicing for this week at The Classics at Lely Resort.

"You play there, you don't play on the Tour," he summarized Monahan. "Your choice. You want to win one of these things or you want to win the L.A. Open?

Bernhard Langer said he talked to the World Golf Group or representatives of the tour about the concept and raised the very persistent question: how do players come and go, how does young talent emerge and what happens when great players become a little less great?

"I was talking to them," Langer said Tuesday. "Again, it's in competition with the existing tour. Those guys, so if you take top 50 in the world or whatever, 10 might fall out because they want to have the young talent come up. So where do those 10 go? You're not exempt anywhere, so where do you go? You're done. The tours didn't like it basically, I think. You're dealing in direct competition unless they're involved."

And the Golden Bear just shot it down as only he can.

"I just don't think it's viable," said Jack Nicklaus, whom Jastrow contacted back in 2002. "I just don't think financially they can make it. I don't think they'll ever get the golf courses. I don't think the tour would ever let it happen. I don't think the guys would leave. There's just so many things that have to happen, I just don't think it's possible."

Besides what happens to players on the bubble, Nicklaus hits on what I think is ultimately the proposed tour’s biggest issue: where will they play?

With today’s players cutting out alcohol, deadlifting more weight than any athletes in the history of sports and generally carrying superhuman status, their 340-yard drives severely limit options. The PGA Tour has several of the clear-cut best courses in major markets, while the others possibly able to host something likely have little interest.

Now, with smaller fields and if the ball didn’t fly so far, you might be able to drum up support for some more remote destinations or classics left behind by the modern game.

Tiger On The Premier Golf League: "We're looking into it."

Tiger Woods was asked for thoughts on the proposed Premier Golf League, calling the proposed circuit a natural evolution of the World Golf Championships. He also suggested ideas like this will continue and did not rule out the current proposal as an option:

Q. Tiger, have you personally been approached about the Premier Golf League concept and what do you think of the whole idea?

TIGER WOODS: Have I been personally approached? Yes, and my team's been aware of it and we've delved into the details of it and trying to figure it out just like everyone else. We've been down this road before with World Golf Championships and other events being started, or other tours want to evolve and started. There's a lot of information that we're still looking at and whether it's reality or not, but just like everybody else, we're looking into it.

And this follow-up suggesting such proposals will be a regular thing of the future.

Q. Why do you think something like that would even have a possibility? Is there something not right out here that you would like to see better?

TIGER WOODS: I think that just like all events, you're trying to get the top players to play more collectively. It's one of the reasons why we instituted the World Golf Championships, because we were only getting together five times a year, the four majors and THE PLAYERS, and we wanted to showcase the top players on more than just those occasions. We came up with the World Golf Championships and we're meeting more often. And so this is a natural evolution, whether or not things like this are going to happen, but ideas like this are going to happen going forward, whether it's now or any other time in the future.