"Because some of the comments that were made, they were isolated on a very narrow part of the value equation."

Looks like National Golf Day was a success since there seems to be a pretty consistent use in reporting (here and here) of the economic and charity numbers tied to golf, which are staggering. Even if you cut them in half.

Tim Finchem sat down with good buddy Greg Norman and Fred Couples for a President's Cup press conference. But there was this question about the lobbying effort.

The morning was a breakfast about the First Tee primarily, but it kicked off us going out and talking to members and the basic message is reminding members that golf is an industry of $75 billion, $76 billion. You put it in these terms: It's the equivalent of the motion picture and publishing industry combined, and that goes for revenue, jobs and overall economic impact. That's part one.

And part two is the professional side of the game, the significance, which includes sponsor tournaments has a $3.6 billion impact and raised $124 million for charity. We are integrated into communities to raise money for charity.

Warning, new v-word usage coming:

Most of the reaction I get from members of Congress is they recognize the value of corporate sponsorship in sports marketing generally, and particularly, with the PGA TOUR which is 100 percent organized for charitable purposes, and we have always got a good response from members on that subject and we certainly are getting a good response now.

But what happened a couple of months ago taught us a lesson that this is something that needs to be reaffirmed on a regular basis with members so they have that as a backdrop before public commentary is made. Because some of the comments that were made, they were isolated on a very narrow part of the value equation. Whether you're going have a dinner and have some musical entertainment, I think it's a very subjective thing. Whether you or I might go to a dinner that has Sheryl Crow playing, you might think it's lavish; I probably wouldn't, but then that's my opinion.

Poor Sheryl. But Commish, she opened for the Stones. Your band!

Report: Poppy Hills To Be Replaced By MPCC Shore Course

It was reported back in March here that Poppy Hills was on its way out as a AT&T National Pro-Am venue, a victim of a Tiger Woods edict. Naturally, I was told by many that this would never be the case but yet here we are, and voila!

Say goodbye to Poppy Hills, say hello to the Shore Course in a major architectural upgrade, so says KSBW in Monterey.

On Friday, MPCC contacted its 750 members, recommending that they accept the request to use their course for the 2010 Pro Am which could mean drawing up to 10,000 spectators to the private club every day during the tournament.

MPCC rejected a similar proposal back in 2005.

So what has changed? Supporters said they need the attention to attract new membership since the economy has tanked.

Proponents believe the Monterey Peninsula Foundation would benefit the most. The foundation raised more than $8 million last year for local charities. Organizers said a long-term relationship with the exclusive country club would help the foundation secure its goal in increasing grants 25 percent to $10 million by 2014.

And make Tiger more likely to play.

The general manager at Poppy Hills said one reason behind the potential venue change is AT&T wants a more prestigious location for the 25th anniversary of the Pro Am this next year.

"The prestige is more the celebrities that are there and pros and great charity work that's done. I don't know if it's the golf course so much though it's Pebble Beach. That's where they end up and that's the big ticket in the draw," Todd Butler said.

And make Tiger more likely to play.

Take That Brand Lady: PGA Tour Scoops Up Rejected LPGA Television Partner

Thanks to reader Gene who noticed that the PGA Tour's new partner for the season opening event in Maui has been overtaken by the same folks who were rejected by the LPGA Tour not too long ago.

The press conference today included Tim Finchem and SBS's Sang Chun. Here's what Ron Sirak wrote about SBS ending its sponsorship of the LPGA's Maui event.

While the matter of Korean television rights for LPGA events might seem like a minor issue, it is not. The income from those rights is the tour's largest single revenue stream. And it is safe to assume the value of the LPGA in the Korean market will only grow in direct proportion to the success of Korean players on tour. Last year, both the U.S. Women's Open (Inbee Park) and the Ricoh Women's British Open (Jiyai Shin) were won by Koreans, who now number nearly 50 on tour. That Park was only 19 years old and Shin 20 when they grabbed their titles certainly bodes well for more major victories by Koreans—and better ratings.

The contract with J Golf, which has yet to be announced by the tour or the network, but details of which were obtained by Golf World, is a multiyear deal likely worth in excess of $4 million annually, according to sources familiar with the negotiations. That is up significantly from the $2.25 million SBS says it paid to broadcast 30 events in Korea this year. Asked if his company would continue to sponsor the SBS Open when coverage moves to J Golf next year, Sang Y. Chun, president and CEO of SBS International, said: "Absolutely not."

Chun, who said he was "disappointed, upset really" at losing the contract, said his feelings were "not about the money [but] about the way we were treated."

Tim Finchem says thanks!

Writers Infiltrates PGA Tour Headquarters; Finds No Sign Of Duplicitous Behavior

Thomas Bonk gained entry into the west wing of PGA Tour headquarters where Tim Finchem and most of the vice presidential army pushes paper crafts arfully worded memos and religiously reads GeoffShackelford.com (#1 in city in Florida, four months running!) PGATOUR.com.

Inside the West Building is where you find Finchem's office, down a carpeted hallway, past a flotilla of dark brown wooden office furniture and rows of metal cabinets. Photographs of smiling players cover the beige walls.

The green-carpeted Executive Suite is the biggest office in the building, as it probably should be. At the end near the window, two sofas and two chairs surround a coffee table. And at the other end of the office, Finchem's horseshoe-shaped wooden desk fronts a phalanx of six chairs that face him.

Is that one chair for every VP making over $1 million?

There are two computers on the credenza. A huge, flat screen television hugs on the wall. An armoire rests against the opposite wall, a striped dress shirt hanging on the outside.

Besides dozens of golf clubs leaning against the wall, other mementos are all around, most prominent among them a couple of dozen photographs of Finchem with presidents and golf's elite. There are also golf bags from four past Presidents Cup events -- a Finchem invention, just like the three-year-old FedEx Cup.

From the looks of things, Finchem runs a buttoned-down ship, at least judging from the buttoned-down dress shirts that are part of the dress code. Ties are required, except this week, because it's tournament time. But even on casual Fridays, golf shirts aren't allowed. Finchem walked in at a brisk pace. He was wearing a red golf shirt (Dress codes aren't for commissioners).

In all seriousness, I finally figured out how to look like an important tour staffer: Carry leather "padfolio" under arm, light blue oxford, dark slacks, designer shades. You can gain entry anywhere on the property with that look. Anywhere!

Donegan On John Daly And The PGA Tour

Lawrence Donegan makes a case for forgiveness in light of the news that the tour is considering alcohol-related sponsorships.

What is worse for the image of professional golf: the sights and sounds of leading players cursing aloud on live TV on a regular basis, or a two-paragraph report on Daly being huckled off to the cells after another hard night on the town? This is one for the photo-finish equipment, perhaps, although not in the eyes of golf's etiquette police, who have decided that Daly's pariah status is now irreversible.

HSBC Follow Up...

Sean Martin reports on the Golfweek blog that the new WGC-HSBC event is unofficial in every respect, except for the winner getting into the Mercedes Championship. Go figure.

"11. Four Chinese players"

They finally got around to satisfying IMG's deal points to announcing the WGC-HSBC event in China and the field qualifications offer what I think may be a couple of buried ledes:

3. Winners from 23 PGA TOUR cosponsored events in 2009, which shall be identified as those 23 PGA TOUR events from 2008 with the highest Official World Golf Ranking Strength of Field Rating, having a rating of 40 points or more.

Bear with me. First this:

11. Four Chinese players

And? Nothing else? Just "Four Chinese Players" as a category?

So stringent!

Alright here's what I found interesting:

13. If necessary to fill the field to 78 players, additional Tournament Winners from the 2008 HSBC Champions through the event preceding the 2009 WGC-HSBC Champions, which shall be identified as those winners of events from the 2007 HSBC Champions to the 2008 HSBC Champions with the highest Official World Golf Ranking Strength of Field Rating, having a rating of 40 points or more, not listed in an above category:

2008/2009 Events    Winner
Bob Hope Chrysler Classic     Perez, Pat
Buick Open
Justin Timberlake Classic
John Deere Classic
Wyndham Championship
RBC Canadian Open
Fry's.com Open
Valero Texas Open
Turning Stone Resort Champ.
Casio World Open           Oda, Koumei
Viking Classic
BMW Italian Open
Madrid Masters
Estoril Open de Portugal           Hoey, Michael
Mitsubishi Diamond
US Bank Championship
Munsingwwear Open
Japan Tour Championship

World Ranking gurus out there, I'm wondering if this is the first time that the line has been so publicly drawn with event winners needing to come from events "having a rating of 40 points or more?"

If so, seems it could set an interesting precedent for other world events or majors?

"I don't know if it's ever going to become a rule or not. It might."

Stewart Cink's Traveler's Championship media day press conference was crashed by Chris Berman, U.S. Open lead announcer on ESPN and legendary flip out artist.  With such extenuating circumstances, it was tough for the normally wise Cink to do anything but dumb down his comments. After all, isn't that a natural reaction when Berman is in the room?

Anyway, this was interesting:

STEWART CINK: There's a pretty popular proposal right now that's circulating around the players and staff to play one in four, sort of called the one in four thing, where everyone would be required to play every tournament on TOUR at least once out of four years. It's gotten some traction. I don't know if it's ever going to become a rule or not. It might.

There's positives and negatives to it. Obviously the positives are Tiger Woods is going to come to every tournament eventually. That's a great thing for all tournaments. The negatives are, when you start imposing rules on that like independent contractors, they can also choose to not play at all. There would be nothing stopping Tiger Woods from playing the European Tour for a few years or the rest of his career. He's got that kind of power. Unfortunately he could do that. That would be a serious mistake if we did that. Got to look at things from both sides.

Later on, sensing the media questions were making too much sense, Berman chimed in with this dazzler:

CHRIS BERMAN: Being a defending champ, once you tee it up, that and $4.95 will get you a latte at Starbucks. You did it before. You've won other events. Is it important to defend well? I don't know if that's the right question.

No, no Chris, that was wonderful. Keep going.

Then again, as defending champ, you have more obligations. Finally getting to the first tee, you exhale a little bit. Having done it here and a few other places, do you think you'll be better prepared?

“I don’t think there is any money missing"

Good news for the PGA Tour and LPGA Tour!

A feisty Allan Stanford, looking eerily like John Cleese, tells the New York Times Clifford Krauss that this is just an SEC witchhunt and all of this Stanford Financial business stuff will be cleared up.

“I don’t think there is any money missing,” Mr. Stanford said. “There never was a Ponzi scheme, and there never was an attempt to defraud anybody.”