Michaux: "Finchem is a corporate drone"

In introducing this web site's week in review, I wondered why Tim Finchem has received little criticism for so many questionable initiatives, most notably the recently announced FedEx Cup.

Well, the Augusta Chronicle's Scott Michaux not only criticizes Finchem, but undoubtedly will have some Vice Presidents running around tomorrow working to make sure no one ever utters the words "FedEx Cup Evaluation System."

It is difficult to swallow, much less stomach.

What I'm talking about is PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem's undigestible contrivance coming in 2007 dubbed - depending on your threshold for corporate jargon - the FedEx Cup or Finchem's Folly.

A couple of weeks ago, Finchem unveiled the hardly anticipated FedEx Cup Evaluation system, which heretofore will be referred to by its acronym, FECES.

Whoa Nellie!

Without boring you in excruciating Finchemesque fashion with any of the details you already don't care about, it is just another list attempting to quantify the relative values of professional golfers in a cluttered landscape that already includes an official world ranking, money winnings, orders of merit, various international team standings, etc.

The only thing that makes the FECES curiously different is the PGA Tour's transparent attempt to mathematically equate its Players Championship with the universally acclaimed four major championships.

Uh Scott, it's now THE PLAYERS. Please, get your facts straight!

Finchem's goal with this whole FECES thing is to create a "playoff-like" finish to his laudably truncated PGA Tour season. Through the first 36 events of the season, the roughly 240 players who start the year with some semblance of official status will be whittled all the way down to 144 lucky few who qualify for a four-week, no-tee-times-barred, battle royale culminating at the Tour Championship at East Lake. For getting hot at just the right time, Finchem will reward $10 million to the man who, in essence, turns out to be the glorified player of the month.

When the FECES hits the fans, will anyone care other than the individual who'll get to fortify his already lucrative retirement portfolio?

No.

Finchem believes he created some kind of excitement that will compare to NASCAR's season-ending chase for its championship or the NFL's compelling buildup to the Super Bowl. Instead he's done nothing but give birth to another flawed BCS concept that ultimately won't resolve anything. He's tried to rationale his baby with another postseason analogy about a 105-win Yankees team having to start over in October, but those Yankees wouldn't have to start over against the last-place Royals.

And he's just warming up.

If this were the only thing that Finchem had overdone in his tenure as commissioner of the PGA Tour, it would be almost excusable. But seeing as he's callously dismantled or neutered some golfing traditions that have been around for more than a century in the process, shackled the tour to the ultra-fringe Golf Channel for an astonishing 15 years and stepped on the toes of every other worldwide golfing entity with his avarice, Finchem's Folly loses any benefit of the doubt.

Finchem is a corporate drone who believes everything is better based upon money. If the Players pays more money than the Masters Tournament, it must be better. If The Golf Channel is willing to pay you more money over the course of 15 years than ESPN would have for the next four, it must be better.

That's why Finchem believes he's doing a good job, because the players he (with one whopper of an assist by Tiger Woods) made rich and spoiled gave him a $27 million contract extension.

More money, however, hasn't made the PGA Tour better. It's made it worse. Extra zeroes only add to the numbing. If you really want to see the best players on the PGA Tour going head-to-head more often, start paying them what they were making back in the '80s and early '90s - when making a million dollars was a season's work for the hardest workers who performed the best instead of a week's salary for a tournament winner or the median annual income for finishing in the top 150.

Just how much of Finchem's decision-making is based upon money? Consider that the only way the nearly 70-year-old event in Greensboro, N.C., was spared the cutting block was because it ponied up $500,000 to agent Mark Steinberg - just to be granted an audience with Finchem in order to make its case.

Ah, there's a story that no one really has explored enough.

That was not a benefit granted to, say, the 102-year-old Canadian Open, which was rendered all but obsolete with an untenable date between the British Open and PGA. Or the Western Open, which will be stripped of its venerable title and relegated to semi-annual visits to the Chicago area. Or the tournament outside Washington D.C., which was shut out of the regular season because FedEx attracted favoritism to its Memphis, Tenn., event. Or the Disney Classic and 84-year-old Texas Open, which were all but dismissed without any more dialogue than a curt "thanks for coming."

Not that the overly fattened PGA Tour season couldn't use a little trimming, but Finchem handled the whole process badly.

This next statement is precisely why Finchem can't be relied upon to deal with equipment.

Finchem constantly displays an arrogant disregard for everything in golf outside of his own tunnel vision. Who cares if the new tour schedule will gut the European Tour's prime events during the spring and late summer? Who cares if its big announcements distract the attention from the LPGA Tour's most important event? Who cares if none of the so-called World Golf Championship events are played in front of audiences outside the United States?

Finchem has unilaterally constructed the PGA Tour to fit his vision. Thank goodness he has no control over any of the major championships, meaning the most important historical results of the year will never be sullied by an inadequate TPC venue or distasteful title sponsorship.

At least that knowledge can settle the uneasiness in the stomachs of the constituents who really matter - the golf fans.

The "Playoffs" Teleconference

Tim Finchem and a bunch of other suits convened in New York to plug the Fed Ex Cup. And as is usually the case, the Tour shows little imagination in creating their "playoffs." Dan Hicks emceed.

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM:   Thank you, Dan.   Good afternoon, everyone and welcome to an announcement that we hope embarks us on what we hope will be a new era in golf.

This morning in Washington, D.C., we had an annual breakfast, our fifth annual breakfast with 16 or 17 members of Congress to talk about the progress of the First Tee Program. 

I wonder if anyone asked about the demise of the Booz Allen?

As I was coming up here today focusing on this announcement, it occurred to me that here we are again announcing a new initiative in New York, and one that I think with great enthusiasm we will be able to look back on a few years from now and recognize the same kind of progress in what the FedEx Cup is trying to do with what we've seen in First Tee.   The difference is, of course, that today we're not starting from scratch the way we were with First Tee.   We started with a tremendously successful platform that communicates the game of golf.

And if you nodded in understanding at that last sentence, you need help.

When we concluded the elements of what we wanted to do in basic form, we thought that we needed a sponsor company and a partner that had two major qualifications.   First of all, we needed a company with a brand that could integrate easily across the entire PGA TOUR platform, because each week we did not want to take away from the importance of our title sponsors.

Because Lord knows, the fans tune in looking for brand platform integration.

So let's hear from the suckers ponying up $35 million a year for these exciting playoffs.

MIKE GLENN:   Thank you, Commissioner.   It's a pleasure for us to be here today, especially given our long-standing relationship with the PGA TOUR.   It's been wonderful being the title sponsor of the FedEx St. Jude Classic for so many years, and I have to tell you it's a bit bittersweet to give that up, but clearly we are moving to a new level and we are very excited about that.

It would be an understatement to say that this is a significant day for sport of golf and the PGA TOUR, and I can tell you that I speak on behalf of hundreds of thousands of employees and contractors of FedEx to say that we are very happy to extend our relationship with the PGA TOUR and to be the sponsor of the FedEx Cup.

Sports marketing has been a very important part of the way that we've built our brand and supports our brand for many, many years, and we truly believe that the FedEx Cup will be a very unique and special addition to our portfolio.   The Cup is very consistent with our brand values and reliability, excellence, precision and leadership and we're looking forward to 2007 when we begin the FedEx Cup.

And we're looking forward to hearing you and the Commissioner mentioning reliability 450,000 times over the life of the contract.

Here's where it gets just plain sad.

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM:   Let me turn to focus on the second part, which is our version of the playoffs.   As we looked at it, we had a number of questions to be answered.   How can we structure playoff that is created big events?   We wanted each week to stand on its own and be a huge event in the market it's played and for all of our fan base of 110, 112 million Americans to really focus on it.   When I say "Americans," I should go beyond, because so many of our players today are international; it's really a world fan base.

Good salvage job there Commish.

But that challenge and the additional questions of creating a series that every player felt the need, the want and the enthusiasm to play in each and every week to create a series of weeks that is unheard of where all of the players would play head-to-head in four straight weeks created a number of questions.   I want to try to answer those questions, but before I do, let me introduce a little piece of video.   NBC was kind enough to ask Jimmy Roberts to take a few minutes and try to put the notion of playoffs for golf in perspective.

          (Video played).

(Commissioner gives two claps, The Clapper turns lights back on)

Oh sorry, it was that or poking fun at Jimmy Roberts.

But let me show you for a second how the playoffs set up and how they work.   First of all, the players play again through the regular season and they get to a seeding point.   So when they are seeded, the points they have earned to date go away, and they now are awarded a certain number of points that they will carry into the playoffs, and they will earn points each of the four playoff weeks.   The screen you see is the reset point distribution.

So if Stuart, who is in fifth or sixth place right now this year, and we were doing the Cup this year were to progress and end up in first place, he would have 100,000 points.   He'd have a 1,000-point lead over the No. 2 player, and you can see the distribution right on down the list.   The philosophy here is that Stuart should be awarded some benefit for the play that he has had all year long.   He's won tournaments, he's worked hard, he's played a well and he's got himself into that No. 1 seed position.   But it is not an award that precludes him from significant competition.   Therefore, the intervals between players are fairly slim.   And it creates on one hand more or less a home-field advantage, if you will; in some sports you can argue whether there is real a home-field advantage, versus a very volatile system where a lot of players go into the playoffs with an opportunity to win.

If you have any idea what the home-field advantage thing is about, please let me know, because I have no idea what he's talking about.

When you consider that each of our four events is going to have a prize money each week of $7 million, it means that if Stuart is in that first position or in the fifth position at the end of the seeding process, the regular season, he's looking at the next four weeks being worth $63 million in total payout.   And it is that amount of money, coupled with everything else going into the Cup, which we think sets it apart and makes it very, very special.

Yes, to the players. But for the fans?

Here's the Barclay's dude, Bob Diamond, who puts Finchem to shame with some of this MBAspeak.

Let me give you a sense, just a couple of things about why this is important to an organization like Barclays.   You know, first and foremost, it's who do we think we are and how do we think of ourselves.   And you heard Jimmy Roberts talk on the video just a few minutes ago about golf being a game of tradition, it's really one of the world's oldest, most traditional games.   Well, in Barclays, we first took to posit in the City of London in 1689.   We have been in the banking business over 300 years, over 100 years here in the United States.

When we think about ourselves, we think about tradition, we think about strength and we think about excellence.   But we also think about the importance of being around the globe of our global footprinting business.   Another thing that's important to us is our U.S. build.  

(Finchem scribbles "footprinting" on yellow tablet, circles it twice.)

Time for questions and where the bad news arrives. It seems the playoffs aren't really playoffs.

Q.   Most playoffs that I know don't include every member of a league, but in yours, everybody plays in the first three tournaments.   Have you thought of reducing the field after all the points were accumulated leading up to the first playoff tournament?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM:   We have, and we thought about it a great deal.   We've concluded that with the first playoff event, the Barclays Classic, we assume that every player in the field will have a mathematical chance to win.   We could reduce it the next two weeks, but we don't feel the need to do.

So now, we may change our mind and probably will change our mind on some things as we go forward as we analyze it each year, and right now, we're of the view that the players are really focused all season long on getting into the playoffs and if they played hard enough to get there, they should have the opportunity to participate.

Yes, but you see in real playoffs, eventually we send people home.

Also, we recognize that winning is what is most important in the playoffs, and it's harder to win a tournament when you have more competition; I think virtually any PGA TOUR player will tell you that.   So at this juncture for those reasons, we are going to stay the course, and we'll see as we evaluate it in the out year.

So I don't think it's unusual that we should have a system that's different from every other sport in this respect.   The key question is:   Does it work for us and does it work with the culture of our sport.

Culture, nice, but it's no footprinting.    

Q.   I'd just like a clarification, as I understand it, you won't be eliminating any players until you get to the TOUR Championship; is that correct?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM:   There will be players, Jerry, who fall below a line of mathematically that are able to win the Cup.   Each week that line will descend.   But the field sizes, if you make it to the playoffs, you can play all three of the first three events in 2007, that's correct.

What that's going to create, obviously, is a player who no longer has a mathematical chance to win might play lights-out for two weeks and move well up into the points list from a distribution standpoint.   Now, that doesn't bother us, and it's another something for people watching to pay attention to.

Or not. Wouldn't this work better if they eliminated players once they had no mathmatical chance to win the Fed Ex Cup?

Q.   Commissioner, the number going into Barclays, is that 144, how many players?   And the 2007 BMW will begin the third day following Labor Day observed; will that be the position of the BMW each year?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM:   That is correct.   There will be 144 players off of the FedEx Cup point list eligible to play at Barclays, and the same 144 players eligible to play at the Deutsche Bank Championship and the BMW Championship.

Yes that's right, players who will be losing their full status get into these playoffs.

If, and let me just further clarify; if a player is ill, he would not be replaced.   If a player cannot play for whatever reason, he would not be replaced.   There are no sponsor exemptions.   There is no open qualifying.   There is no alternate list.   You must make the 144 finishing at Greensboro to be in a position to play one of those three events.

Wow, rigorous standards to get into these playoffs.

What a farce.

Final count from the press conference: 3 platforms, 13 brand(s), 2 brandings and 3 cultures. Oh and 1 footprinting. 

Boswell On Tour; Kite On TPC's

Thomas Boswell on the PGA Tour...

Golf is the game of sportsmanship and proper manners, the sport that exemplifies respect for others. We even use it to teach values to kids, to instill the idea that conscience defines character.

So, this is a week for golf -- at least the crass, ungrateful traveling-circus PGA Tour version -- to hang its head in shame.

t's no accident that all of the world's four major championships are run by organizations other than the PGA Tour. The tour keeps pumping its own Players Championship to join the elite. But it'll never happen -- not as long as the tour humiliates itself, shows its true colors, and drives itself down the scale of social respectability with disasters such as the one it is perpetrating in Washington this week.

Even a golf tournament deserves a decent burial. The funeral for the summer pro golf stop in Washington is being held at TPC Avenel this week. The PGA Tour didn't even have the decency to close the casket.

And this from Tom Kite on TPC's...

"The tour has made the mistake of opening [its] TPCs too early many times," Kite said. "We played Memphis too early. We played this one too early. That's probably nothing more than mismanagement -- just not taking the time to pay attention to the golf courses. . . . They've kind of jumped in, tried to make money.

"Unfortunately, that leaves us with some bad names and reputations for the TPCs."

Finchem On Furrowed Bunkers

I'm fascinated by the part about the it not being interesting for spectators if the guys are getting up and down a lot...

Q. We haven't had a chance to talk to you since what happened with the Memorial with the bunkers. What were your feelings? How do you think the test case worked out? Is there anything that you regret in regards to most specifically maybe not notifying the players beforehand?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I think if you just stand back and look it from a strictly competitive standpoint, it's hard to argue with our team, our officials, who feel strongly on this point, Nicklaus and his people, who feel strongly on this point, which is that bunkers are hazards, and you play the ball as it lies. (Indiscernible) competitively play the hazard. There was a growing sentiment, I guess, that this may be fueled by (indiscernible) over the last 12 years, but there's a growing sentiment that bunker play has become too routine.

I hear it on two levels: one is that it's not competitively challenging enough, and number two, it's not interesting enough to the spectator if guys are getting up and down a lot. The problem with that thinking a little bit is, however, that they'll always get up and down.

If you stand back and look at Memorial, 2005, players got up and down I think 47% of the time on greenside bunkers. This year they got up and down 42% of the time. It's not a huge falloff.

It seems to me it's a different issue in the fairway bunkers. How you want the fairway bunkers to play in my mind is a different issue than the greenside bunkers.

This is all I think healthy, positive for the game, to have this discussion, to have this focus on variety in setting up a golf course, including raking of the bunkers. I think it's fair game. I think a lot of players feel that way.

Now, having said that, I was not comfortable in hindsight about the way we went about it. I think if we're going along with a certain philosophy for a certain number of years, it's only reasonable to inform the players in advance if you're going to make some major shift in that philosophy, allow them to take the steps, whether mentally or physically, in terms of practice or getting their heads together in terms of how to play.

Now, if there was one isolated thing, it might be one thing. But we have a pattern of setups. I think you need to tell the players. If we were coming to Avenel this week and we put every tee back 50 yards, I think we should tell the players that was happening. I think that's not unreasonable. I don't think there's anything unhealthy about having our players involved in discussions to that point. Not that they make the call, our rules team makes the call in most instances.

I don't have any problem with the application, the process. I think we should be a little bit more careful. Bottom line is, I think it was a reasonable, healthy exercise that stimulates discussion and focus on different parts of setup philosophy that can contribute to challenges that are good for the competition and also interesting to the spectators.

IM'ing With The Commissioners

Now that the NSA has figured out that my calls to Pakistan were all Dell support related, they've been feeding me all sorts of goodies. The latest is this Sunday night instant message exchange between the PGA Tour's Tim Finchem and the LPGA's Carolyn Bivens after the thrilling LPGA Championship finish.

twfPGATOUR©: You there Carolyn?

DaBrandLady: yes tim, just back from the trophy ceremony!

DaBrandLady: does these girls rock or what!?

DaBrandLady: and didn’t I look good next to Ronald McDonald!?!?!?! :)

twfPGATOUR©: Yes, great product today. What a shot by Se Ri.

twfPGATOUR©: Say, did you see any of the telecast?

DaBrandLady:  just a bit when I was doing some brand positioning work in the McDonald’s chalet.

DaBrandLady:  but we’ll be doing a full contextual and brand consistency white paper on the telecast this week to ensure that the brand promise was obtained. why do you ask?

twfPGATOUR©: I was wondering if there was a strike of the graphics personnel or other elements of the production staff?

twfPGATOUR©: Don’t get me wrong, the product was strong, but it just seemed to lack things like a leaderboard more than every 15 minutes or so.

DaBrandLady: that’s just Golf Channel’s effort to not interfere with our product.

DaBrandLady:  the minimalist production values make each player on the screen the real focus of the viewer, adding value for our players and player sponsors.

twfPGATOUR©: I see.

DaBrandLady: well I think they accomplished what was called for within their business model in terms of graphics and production budget, but I’ll check with Deb, wait, no with…well I’m sure someone is left in the office to help out.

twfPGATOUR©: About that, I don’t know how you do it? I have 81 Vice Presidents and I can’t imagine what I’d do if I had mass resignations like you have had.

twfPGATOUR©: Not that there’s anything wrong with spending more time with your family and pursuing other opportunities.

DaBrandLady: no, nothing wrong at all.

DaBrandLady: look, given the LPGA's incredible mix of talent, diversity and personalities, now is the time to take this organization to new heights. While we change the business model in order to better monatize our success, fans can continue to expect the very best in women's professional golf. We're committed to collaborating with all of our key constituents to create a stronger LPGA.

twfPGATOUR©: Did you just copy and paste that from your press release?

DaBrandLady: oh tim, that’s why you are going to make $28.5 million over the next four years. nothing gets by you!

twfPGATOUR©: Well, thanks. Say, anything you can pass along about TGC’s production concepts would really help as we begin a 15-year journey with them.

twfPGATOUR©: Not that I’m concerned or anything, it’s just that well…I’m always looking out for my product.

DaBrandLady: as am i! that’s why you and me are so good at what we do!!!!!

twfPGATOUR©: Congrats again on the strong positioning today.

DaBrandLady: thanks you too…great job with vijay’s win today. he's a little out of the prime demo but a solid brand.

DaBrandLady: that reminds me, do you have a contact at the villages?

twfPGATOUR©: You're not planning to retire?

DaBrandLady: oh no, i'll be in this job for decades. i just wanted to talk to them about buying some time.

twfPGATOUR©: they’ve been good partners for us in this transition year.

DaBrandLady: i know, that’s why i want their number.

twfPGATOUR©: I’ll have someone look into that for you.

DaBrandLady: thanks! gotta run, tgc's replay of the trophy ceremony starts soon and there's a bar down the street that actually carries it!

twfPGATOUR©: Give my best to...

DaBrandLady: he says hi back! bye!

Finchem Hosts Wachovia Gambler's Anonymous Meeting

John Daly's forthcoming book reveals that he has lost between $50 million and $60 million during 12 years of heavy gambling, AP's Doug Ferguson reports.

He told one story of earning $750,000 when he lost in a playoff to Tiger Woods last fall in San Francisco at a World Golf Championship. Instead of going home, he drove to Las Vegas and says he lost $1.65 million in five hours playing mostly $5,000 slot machines.

"If I don't get control of my gambling, it's going to flat-out ruin me," he says in the book, co-written with Glen Waggoner and published by HarperCollins.

And it looks like someone in Ponte Vedra has been reading Daly's book.

The book got the attention of PGA Tour headquarters, and commissioner Tim Finchem met with Daly on Monday at the Wachovia Championship in Charlotte, N.C.

Finchem said the book does not violate PGA Tour regulations, although "it is clear that he continues to be concerned about and grapple with significant personal challenges."

"I have expressed to John the tour's concern for his well-being, as well as his ongoing need to uphold the image and standards of the PGA Tour," Finchem said. "While we will continue to enforce the regulations and policies of the PGA Tour, I have advised John of the tour's willingness to support him in his efforts to deal with his personal issues."

Of more pressing concern to Finchem was a recent focus group that downgraded Daly's likability rating due to his propensity to not wear shoes during Monday outting play (as recently demonstrated on The Daly Planet). 

The Commissioner and Daly reportedly discussed the potential brand impact of such negative focus group scores, the first port o'call should Daly decide to go shopping, and better ways to interface his feet with footwear.

Speaking To The Decision-Makers...

Reuters offered these Tim Finchem comments on the Tour's return to New Orleans:

 "The PGA Tour is trying to do its part to communicate to corporate America what is happening in New Orleans and what can still happen," Finchem told a news conference after hosting an economic forum attended by around 100 chief executive officers (CEOs).

"Our telecast this week will be speaking to the decision-makers throughout America.

"Our telecasts skew higher than any other sport in terms of reaching CEOs, vice presidents, chief marketing officers, people that would make the decisions to bring groups here, the individuals who make the decision about how to expand their businesses.

"I don't think most people recognise it, but if you add up the cumulative audience of a PGA Tour event it is second only to the NFL (National Football League) in terms of the total number of people that come in for a telecast."

Interface Our Customers, Weave In The Messaging...

Brian Allee-Walsh of the New Orleans Times-Picayune sits down for a Q&A with Commissioner Tim Finchem.

Q: A local business leader said your decision to bring upwards of 50 corporate leaders to New Orleans to participate in Monday's economic forum will be the "most powerful thing to happen in our city this spring." What is your response?

A: It's a nice comment. I don't know powerful it will be. It should be helpful, because what we're trying to do is get the positive side of the equation in front of the corporate community and get them thinking about business, not just tourism, but business in general. We thought the best contribution we could make along that line was to interface (with) our customers. We have a broad range of companies that are involved in our tour. We want to bring those companies in and let them hear first-hand from the city, state and the feds about the future of New Orleans and why people are optimistic.

Oh some crafty editor inserted that (with) after the dreaded interface word. Somehow I think he really did mean to say "interface our customers."  Just sounds so much more MBAish, don't you think?

Q: How did the idea hatch?

A: It goes back to last fall when our golf course was damaged and we had to move our tournament. We were trying to figure out a way to get things moving on our tournament. Then the community down there was telling us that there were some struggles with other sports and wanted us to be the first major televised sporting event to happen in post-Katrina. That was when we decided to move our Commissioner's Cup competition, where we invite all CEOs of our sponsoring companies to New Orleans. The idea to is to combine that with this message and use it kind of as a platform.

I know, I know, I was worried too. Platform has been on the sidelines for some time now, but it's back. Well, "kind of."

Of course, on the telecast that weekend we'll be trying to weave in some of the messaging that comes out of those meetings. We have a TPC club presence there and a longtime tournament history. So we're obviously about the community and it just made sense to try to help out.

Weave in the messaging that comes out of those meetings. Let me set my TiVo now.

Q: How much did your business interruption insurance play into the decision for the PGA Tour not to reopen the TPC of Louisiana for a year after the storm?

A: I don't know the details on that.

Oops! Where did that little cut slider come from!? Sorry I interrupted...

I don't think it was hugely significant. It was a combination of things. A lot of our employees got spread around. It had something to do with some of the work that had to be done on the golf course. Once we determined that we weren't going to be prepared to play the tournament there, and we were moving the tournament, that sort of took away the necessity to get the golf course ready that quickly. So there were a number of factors. I can't really speak to the extent to which the insurance-related matter figured into it. It may have had some impact.

Given that most players hate the course, were you hoping it was completely destroyed? Oh sorry...

Q: Are you hopeful that the golfers will take time to tour the devastation for themselves?

A: I think they will. Interestingly, we've invited spouses with our corporate guests. Particularly in a situation like this you wouldn't see a fairly good turnout of spouses because it's partly a golf event. But a lot of spouses are coming because there is this interest in terms of where New Orleans is and what has happened. There's that side of it.

Uh, am I missing something here? What's interesting about the spouses tagging along?

Q: You must be proud of the PGA Tour players' relief efforts and fund-raising work the past eight months, specifically the three Louisiana pros, Kelly Gibson, David Toms and Hal Sutton. Do you anticipate the contributions of your players increasing during the week of the tournament?

A: I can't speak to that. I don't want to assume anything. The players have families at home and they give an awful lot themselves for charities around the country. Our tournaments raised over $90 million last year for well-deserving charities. The players themselves raised over $25 million in fund-raisers around the country. People need to recognize that they do an awful lot. Whatever we're doing in New Orleans is just an extension of that. But it's also important to recognize that there are hundreds of thousands of people around the country who are impacted by what players do and what tournaments do.

Sheesh, relax, it was just an innocent question! 

Q: As you look long-term at the FedEx Cup Championship Series, what is your vision? Are you looking at this as a Final Four or Super Bowl environment?

A: The PGA Tour FedEx Cup Championship Series, those last four weeks, it's unheard of in this sport to have all the best players playing head-to-head in the same field week after week after week. It just doesn't happen. There is a question of stamina. There will be a lot of movement after these players are seeded. They'll be seeded after the first part of the season and when they go into the playoffs they'll be seeded again. It has a tremendously exciting potential to elevate a consistent relevance with the fans and will give the media a lot of things to focus on and continue to raise the profile of the sport. I'm very optimistic about what can happen. Now we have to execute and we have a lot of work to do to bring this on next year. I'm very bullish on it.

He's bullish! The part about players being seeded after the first part of the season is interesting.

And I don't know what this next answer means:

Q: Are you concerned that you might lose some elite international players who might be involved in the European Tour at that time of the year?

A: Not really. It may be that a particular player who's also playing the European Tour and isn't very highly seeded, he might not play in the FedEx Cup Championship Series. Mathematically, everybody has a shot and there's a lot at stake here. Each of these tournaments in and of themselves is going to be a big tournament. So you add it all up, I've got to believe virtually everybody is going to be playing.

If this doesn't make you laugh out loud, I don't know what will...

Q: Is there one accomplishment you're most proud of during your tenure?

A: It's a very simple one. I'm most pleased that we've developed and continued a history of a close working relationship between the people who work at the Tour and the players.

See, I told you it was funny. Continue...

That's fundamental. I think we've done a much better job of working closely with our tournaments and represent our volunteers out there on the charity side. There are a lot of specific things I'm pleased that we've done. It's like anything else in business, you can't move away from the fundamentals. There are things that might have more notoriety and have a little bit more flash that are great, but in this sport it's very important to have these working relationships. We have a great team here.

More Norman v. PGA Tour

Greg Norman has plenty to say about his request to open the PGA Tour's books in this Greg Hardwig story (thanks to reader Dan).

"To me, an open book's an open book,'' he added. "Like I said, I'm not on any witch hunt. I just feel like I have the right, and I have the right as a shareholder of a corporation.''

Playing tournament golf isn't taking up Norman's time as he recovers from his second knee surgery in four months, the last in February in Pittsburgh. He hopes to start hitting balls in June, then return for the slew of Champions Tour majors in July and August, sandwiched around the PGA Tour's International.

Norman and Finchem have feuded over the years, most notably from allegations that Finchem had Norman's idea of a world tour squashed, then stole it and turned it into the World Golf Championships.

But Norman claims this goes beyond that; he's concerned about the future of the tour and feels the players should have all of the information and are entitled to it.

"Am I hoping to find something wrong? No,'' he said. "I think it's just the right of every player to make their decisions on the information that you can read in the minutes of the meeting.

"I feel personally that some of the decisions made in there are probably made without all of the information being disclosed to all of the members. That's what I feel. If I'm wrong, I'll gladly say I'm wrong. I'm not on a witch hunt here. I'll fall on my sword as good as anybody if there's nothing in there.''

The tour has offered to have Norman come up with a list of questions or issues he's concerned about and then release excerpts from the minutes concerning those. "That's not the way to go about it,'' he said.

According to Norman, the tour is afraid he will go public with information in the minutes. "That's not my style,'' he said. "I wouldn't do that.''

Hartford: They Were The First Port 'O Call!

Commissioner Tim Finchem drops a juicy nautical metaphor in this Bruce Berlet story on how Hartford landed back on the 2007 PGA Tour FedEx Cup schedule.

First, you might some want some Dramamine after this song-and-dance routine on the summer vs. fall...

"It was a tough call but we thought, for a lot of reasons, that it could work quite well in Hartford in the fall," Finchem said. "But that was a miscalculation of the attitude of the community, which felt strongly that it could not be as strong in the fall. That led to the shift in interest in the Champions Tour, which obviously isn't as big a deal but what [the Jaycees] thought might work better in the summer than the fall date.

"Hartford had always been a priority for us, but [its date] had moved around a lot and inhibited the tournament from being able to grow from a marketing standpoint. We never felt Hartford was a tournament that didn't deserve to be in the summer, but we just had to make some choices. We made the determination that we were going to lock people into dates as best we could, and we felt Hartford would be good in the fall because of agronomics, weather, being one of the top two or three courses in that time frame and being able to be marketed well."

Amazing what work it is to say "the 84 Lumber people were more willing to meet our price, then they changed their mind."

Now, for those permutations of the port of call...

"But the community felt they would much prefer to be in the summer, so we worked with them on all the permutations. We already knew it could work in the time frame and told St. Paul we weren't in position to do exactly what they wanted to do to trigger their commitment. But when 84 Lumber stepped aside, they were the first port of call and everybody got excited."

 You know I've been thinking, the Commissioner could better tap into the youth market if he would talk more like HBO's Ali G. Using the Ali G translator tranzlata, see how that last statement could better connect with the coveted 18-34 year olds:

"but da community felt dey would much dig to be in da summa, so we worked wiv them on all da permutations. we already knew it could wurk in da time frame and told st. paul we weren't in position to do pacifically wot dey wanted to do to trigga their commitment. but whun 84 lumba stepped aside, dey were da first port of call and me crew got excited." 

"Me crew" is just so much more youthful. Anyway, just a suggestion on skewing younger Commissioner. Yours in branding, Geoff.

Oh, and he also talked to Berlet about the FedEx Cup...

Finchem said the FedEx Cup points system is likely to be finalized at a tour board meeting in June, with major championships having more points but not "throwing the system out of whack." Players will accumulate points from January to mid-August, and those higher in the standings will have an advantage going into a three-event series in suburban New York, Boston and Chicago before playing the Tour Championship.

"Top players have to pay attention to the aggregation of points and that translates into the likelihood of playing a more concentrated schedule," Finchem said.

Ah, maybe he's been looking at MacDuff's FedEx point standings?

Fidlin on Finchem

The Toronto Sun's Ken Fidlin won't be getting a First Tee brick in his name from Tim Finchem after this column, which looks at the dreadful date given to the Canadian Open and other PGA Tour activities of late.

"Until It's Done, It's Not Done"

Stopped taking Ambien? Well, I have just the organic cure for your sleep disorder.

But first, Commissioner, congratulations on the new 6-year deal. That's your 6-year deal at $4.5 million per year.

And now, the reason you get the big bucks. The floor is yours. Let's get the inevitable fifth major question out of the way:

Stature is something that we don't determine, others determine. At some point along the way in the '50s, stature meant calling The Masters a major. At someplace along the way earlier than that, the Western, which had been called a major, wasn't called a major anymore. Sometime around 1960 when Arnold Palmer wins at St. Andrews and the modern Grand Slam was sort of inaugurated, people sort of started talking about the British Open as a major, although it wasn't until the 1990s that we recognized the British Open as official money on this Tour and took steps to recognize it greater, even though it was clearly recognized as a major. So these things move around.

The British Open sort of was not a major until they sort of recognized it in the 1990s by sort of adding it to the money list. Take that Old Tom!

We were watching a film last [night] at the Past Champions Dinner about the shotmaking that these champions have conducted over the years, and I continue to believe that stature also has to do with people growing up watching things.

Whoa! A Champions Dinner. How original. What's next, azaleas, a champions locker room, a par-3 tournament?

And when a player like J.B. Holmes was 13 watching Freddie Couples make eagle at 16, and that generation grows up, I suspect that that will also impact on the stature of The Players. Where that leads, at least at this point, I'm not in a position to predict.

For those of us who can't remember one Players from another, I'm glad he mentioned how old J.B. was. The 1996 Players? Oh right...Freddie made eagle. I remember it like it was 1996.

Ah, now the fun begins. 

Q. Is it your sense on TOUR that there's a feeling among players of helping rebuild the city's efforts by participating in this year's tournament (in New Orleans)?

TIM FINCHEM: There were two things we were focused on there. One was trying our best to be able to play when a lot of other sports, for whatever reasons, losing their stadiums, were not going to be in a position to play.

But then, secondly, we started to focus on the opportunity to tell a positive story through the tournament about the future of what's going to happen in New Orleans, and that's why we moved our Commissioner's Cup early in the week, which is the CEOs of 50 companies that do business with us, major companies, and we will do a half a day. We will do a half a day briefing is that right?

BOB COMBS: Yeah.

See, that's why Bob gets the big bucks.

TIM FINCHEM: I have to get up to speed.

Oops. Interrupted too soon.

We do a half day briefing with state and local folks so that these companies can understand the vibrancy of what's happening in New Orleans and what the upside is, instead of what we see in the newspaper all the time, whether the dam has really been fixed and isn't it a shame how the Federal Government bungled dealing with it. You don't really see the activity that's going on.

See, it's that liberal, Eastern media elite focusing on the negative. That's what's ruining America! 

Oh, and not to be picky or anything Mr. Commissioner, but they were levees, not dams. Sorry, continue...

We want, through that briefing, and have Rudy Giuliani as our guest speaker for that, seminar if you will, to talk about what can happen. And then on the telecast that week, we will sort of tell that story. And so we want it to be an upbeat, positive message, and we're delighted to be able to participate in that.

Q. But do you feel a sense that the players by their participation feel that they can help rebuild or help the efforts of the City of New Orleans?

TIM FINCHEM: I think so. The quality of the event will also send the right message, too, that business as usual is returning to New Orleans. We're all worried about the tourism side of the equation in New Orleans, and not just the infrastructure getting rebuilt. That tourism needs to come back and be able to demonstrate we've got good quality golf facilities through the golf tournament, which is a big reason we have the tournament there anyways, is an important message as well.

See, it's really all about money telling that positive story.

Hey, time for a question similar to one suggested on this site:

Q. This course by modern Tour standards is not very long as Fred Funk proved last year, and this tournament has a history that you don't have to be a bomber to win here. Why hasn't this tournament followed the trend of extending courses to extreme length?

TIM FINCHEM: Well, I'd say the fundamental reason is that we recognize that the fans like watching this field play this golf course. To me that's the fundamental. And you have to be sensitive to that as you look at, you know, making this change or that change or where the ball is going or the fact now that we may have firmer, faster conditions. And so we have been we have been, I would say, knowledgeably and aggressively reticent, if you will, to make those kind of changes. That's the number one thing.

Knowledgeably and aggressively reticent. Wow, that could be the title of someone's biography!

The second thing is, I think we do like the notion that we have the deepest field in the game from A to Z, and virtually every one of those players can win. We would not want to move drastically away from that.

Craig Perks agrees.

Having said that, we have been looking at changes for a number of years, and we have made a few changes. I mean, we've moved a few tees over the years. But when we move a tee, we're not moving a tee because we're exasperated that a player is hitting a 7 iron versus a 5 iron.

Ouch, take that Hootie!

The other thing is that we don't want another answer to your question, frankly we're not excited about changes in the golf course being the story at any point in time. We want the golf course and the history of the golf course to be the story and not that myself or some group of people or some group of players got together and decided that it was a golf course that needed to be significantly changed. We don't see that.

Hootie, Hootie, Hootie. Even the Commish is saying you've gone too far and made it all about you. Wish I could be there when you two have your annual Masters stop and chat.

Q. The new schedule in 2007, have you given any thought to the introduction of a drug testing regime, and if not, why not?

TIM FINCHEM: Have I given any thought to?

Q. The introduction of a drug testing regime on the PGA TOUR, and if not, why not?

TIM FINCHEM: We have given a lot of thought to drugs.

Cialis, Levitra, Viagra. You know, potential tournament sponsors. Oops, sorry...

You can't not think about drugs with what is going on in today's sports. Our policies currently are if you're talking about steroids as an example, steroids are an illegal drug. I have authority of my board to require a test of any player who I have reason to believe or our team has reason to believe is using illegal steroids.

We are not opting for and by the way, I have no material information that that is the case with any player. We see no reason to jump into the testing arena at this point without having any credible information that we have issues.

In golf, a player is charged with following the rules. He can't kick his ball in the rough, and he can't take steroids. We rely on the players to call rules on themselves, and if you look at our Tour over the years, many players have, to their significant financial detriment. That's the culture of the sport.

Having said all of that, if, if, if we were to develop any basis upon which it was reasonable to assume that we had widespread steroid use or steroid use of any significance, we would not hesitate to engage, but it would not be a program that you and the public would look at and say, well, this is sort of a halfway program. It would be a program that would determine for sure that we did not have a problem.

If, if, if...speaking of if's, the Commissioner was asked about Fed Ex points...

I think that two things will happen. I think you will see some players play more in the base season. I think the players who have historically played in the fall will play in the fall. I think we'll see probably less European players in the fall because some of their bigger events are going to move back into the fall in Europe, and THE TOUR Championship isn't there to pull them back.

Other than that, I think the fall will probably be as good as it's been. There may be some more starts in that base season; I suspect there will be.

The fall has been so as "good as it's been," that it's being totally revamped and stuck behind the "base season."

Q. Can I just follow up on a very provincial question? Do I take it to understand that Washington is now in danger of not having a PGA TOUR event in 2007?

TIM FINCHEM: I wouldn't call it in danger. Every tournament has to have a sponsor, and we went through the period of talking to Booz Allen and we had very positive discussions with Booz Allen. We maintained a very solid relationship with them there and I think it was excellent of them to offer and commit, actually, to be a million dollar supporting sponsor.

Solid relationship? Can you imagine what the no-so-solid relationships are like?

Now we have to arrange for a title sponsor position. I have every reason to believe we will do that, but until it's done, it's not done.

Got that?

Until it's done, it's not done.

Actually, that was a special coded message to Bob Combs. Translation: these questions are veering coterminously toward a trajectory I find platform unfriendly. 

BOB COMBS: Ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much.

TIM FINCHEM: Thank you.

No really, thank you. 

It's All About Capacity...

Who says there's no Christmas in February?

After Commissioner Tim Finchem thanked more people than an Oscar winner, he took a few questions from the assembled scribblers:

Q. The commitment to Tucson, how long is that for, is that through the sponsorship? 2010?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Virtually all our agreements are linked to our cycles, a sponsorship cycle and television cycle. All of our agreements dovetail; in this instance they dovetail in four years.

Judge, can you direct the witness to answer yes or no. 

Q. The other part, do you think the World Golf Championships are meeting the stated aim of developing developed to enhance the competitive structure of World Golf worldwide?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Yes, I think the first and primary reason for the World Golf Championships was to create a vehicle whereby the fans could enjoy the opportunity to watch all of the best players in the world assembled, a more frequent number of times during the course of the year. Heretofore, that was primarily the major championships and THE PLAYERS Championship.

Heretofore? Mr. Commissioner, we're not dictating a memo to Candace. You are talking to people. Well, members of the media. Please, continue...

Today we have, with the World Golf Championships, another group of tournaments where all the best players in the world play. There are others, as well, but as a constant flow with Ryder Cup and Presidents Cup competition included in that. And that was the primary mission.

The secondary mission was to continue to grow interest in the game by focusing on the International and global aspects of the game. And that's why we've had such a great relationship with a company like Accenture, because they have a global focus. And I think that secondary mission is being met, as well.

See, Accenture has a global focus, so the events have had a worldly flavor! That answers the question, right?

Nope, it's about to get awwwwkwaaaarrrd.

Q. I think 39 of the 64 players in this week's field come from overseas. Can you part one of my question, can you explain why so many of these championships are played in the United States? And part two is don't you think that you have a responsibility to take these tournaments elsewhere in the world and to grow interest in the game elsewhere in the world?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Where the players come from is frankly not of too much import. Our system is such that from the start of the system...

Q. I'm trying to point out that it's a global game, golf is a global game.

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: I understand that. I'm remarking that I had questions during the course of the week, and they're disturbed that over half of the field is not from the United States.

Q. That was not my question.

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: I understand that. To the second part of your question, yes and no. We would like to see World Golf Championships played around the world, and we have seen that the first eight years. I think we've played on five different continents. Today the World Cup continues to be played this past year in Portugal, and this coming year in Barbados as part of the World Golf Championships. We may add another World Golf Championship. That is a nice thing to do.

That is a nice thing to do? Uh, let's back to the MBAspeak...

I think the fundamental, however, is not that. The fundamental is to bring to the world via incredible television capability, to 145 countries, all the best players in the world playing. The reality is that frankly Sergio Garcia is seen who is not here, is seen when he's played in a World Golf Championship by more people than typically any other event he plays, regardless of where it is, whether in Europe or Asia or anywhere else.

See, it doesn't matter where you play. It's about the television capacity. This is why they should just build one golf course in Orlando with stadium seating and a big parking lot. Construct a 6,000 foot runway (for the G5s, of course), some player housing, and just play all of the events in one place. You can maximize margins and just let that television capacity do its thing! 

Ernie Els gets more global television exposure when he plays here this week than he does when he plays in China or Hong Kong.

Imagine if he won a match how much capacity he would have maximized!

But I think the important thing is not that, it's that who are we reaching through World Golf Championships, are we reaching just as many people, and we think the answer is absolutely. Not to say we won't continue to work with having tournaments around the world. We are proud of the fact that we play on five different continents, and we will continue to play somewhere around the world, as well.

I think he meant the past tense there, "played on five different continents." But hey, we're going to throw an event to China so we'll still be playing around the world. Quit your complaining!

And now it's time for the Commissioner's intermission so the Accenture suit can out-MBA the Commish (the audacity!):

Q. Mr. Murphy, was Australia that much of a failure for you when it was played down there? If you were to continue your relationship with this World Golf Championship, would there be any scenario in which you'd be willing for one year to take this tournament abroad?

JIM MURPHY: The Australian tournament in many ways was a huge success for us, because we relaunched our new brand from that place. And Australia happened to be the major continent in the world where our brand was new, because in the time zones that's how it worked out. We changed our name from an older name to what we have now on midnight that day, and we played that week.

Ah those fond memories of the brand relaunch. Amazing how these WGC's just warm the heart.

But it's not all about relaunching the brand for Mr. Murphy...

From a timing point of view, it worked out great. We were somewhat disappointed in the field; some of the top players didn't come. The television coverage was great, we had great client entertainment there, and we saw it as a plus.

Would we do it again? Well, we'd consider it. Certainly we'd talk to the PGA TOUR about it. The PGA TOUR and other Tours drive this process, and we're sort of in a reactionary mode.

A reactionary mode? Scribblers, was Finchem making a note of that one? That's a peach, hon!

We can influence what happens, but they're the experts on golf, and we're experts in managing and selling technology services. We recognize our roles.

Oh, nice, subtle plug. I was wondering what the heck Accenture does.

Okay, enough of him. Back to the Commissioner...

Q. Based upon your knowledge of The Gallery, what were your impressions of the course specifically, and anything you feel The Gallery needs to do to be fully prepared for that event next year?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: We've been engaged for months, and our team has, with everyone related to The Gallery, many of whom are here today. We have a good, solid working relationship on the short term and long term planning that will relate to the conduct of the Accenture Match Play in Tucson. There are, obviously, in any instances like this, a lot of things that need to be done. We're very, very comfortable with the working relationship we have.

Uh, that's a no, he hasn't seen the course.

Q. What's your feel for the State of golf worldwide at this time, is it growing or is it receding, both in terms of the PGA and in terms of..

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: I gather the question is what is my perception of the state of the game in terms of its growth globally; is that correct? Well, that's an interesting question, because it's an interesting question, the answer of which has been perhaps many times in the media misanalyzed to some extent.

Pausing here to allow you to go back and read that one more time. After all, it's an interesting answer to an interesting answer.

And by that I mean here in the United States, for example, there is a focus on the total number of rounds played as it relates to golf courses. And in today's society the regular golfer is playing a few rounds less than perhaps he played he or she played five or ten years ago.

On the other hand, there's been each and every year an increase in the number of participants in the game. So from a total participant standpoint we've seen regular growth here in the United States.

More people playing less. At least he's honest about it. 

Q. I realize it's not done yet, Commissioner, on the FedEx Cup points, but where do you see the World Golf Championships positioned with that series going on next year?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: It would be premature for me to say. We're evaluating different processes. It will be a process that goes to June. But whether or not it's a process that relates to strength of field or a process that relates to purse or a process that relates to stature of events, under any of those scenarios World Golf Championships will fare well, and fare well in that configuration.

And it's a process that we'll be processing for quite some time since no one can really process how this FedEx Cup process is going to be processed.