Ames, Ogilvie Blast Commissioner's Absence

Doug Ferguson reports on the only exciting thing to happen during day one of the Mercedes Championship.
"It's the opening of the year, this is important," Stephen Ames of Calgary said after completing the first round of the year at 1-under 72. "I think he should be here.

"He's here at the end. Is this any different? It should be the same."

Is that any way for a former Players Champion to treat a Commissioner?
Finchem doesn't travel to every tournament, and he isn't always at Kapalua for the first event of the year. PGA Tour spokesman Bob Combs said the commissioner was at the Mercedes the last two years and "will be attending again."

"It was a combination of business commitments and trying to manage a very challenging travel schedule over the course of a full season," Combs said of his absence.

Well that makes sen...oh wait.
More troubling to Joe Ogilvie, a member of the PGA Tour policy board, was not seeing any member of the tour's executive staff at Kapalua for the first shot, the first round, the first tournament.

"I'm pretty disappointed there's no senior staff from the PGA Tour here on opening day," Ogilvie said before adding a heavy dose of sarcasm. "Of course, when you shut down your offices from the 21st of December to the second of January . . . I don't know of a $1-billion company that does that. It's puzzling."

Well, it is a non-profit, Joe.
"I think it does (send the wrong message) when you've got four of the top 10 not here at a marquee event," Ogilvie said. "It seems to be common sense to me.

"The tour tells the players, you have to be there for the first tournament, but there's no senior staff. If I was commissioner, I'd be here."

IM'ing With The Commissioners, Vol. VIII

My NSA sources have been busy trying to dig up those destroyed waterboarding tapes, but they did find time to share an enjoyable little chat between PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem and LPGA Tour Commissioner Carolyn Bivens. It seems PGA Tour executives are considering a potential new method of in-house communication...

twfPGATour©: You there Carolyn?

DaBrandLady: shalom tim!

twfPGATour©: Shalom? Is that Hebrew for Commissioner?

DaBrandLady: oh you're such a komiker! pardon me while I brush up on my yiddish!

twfPGATour©: Why's that?

DaBrandLady: didn't you hear about the lawsuit? legal was so excited when they found out!! they haven't been this busy since i deselected several longtime executives last year!!! :)

twfPGATour©: Oh is this in regard to the Jewish-American group you bumped out of the Fairmont for that new event?

DaBrandLady: yeppers! i'm prepping for the depos already. i figure it can't hurt to speak a little of the native tongue.

twfPGATour©:  I see. Well that's why you get the 45% pay raises. If only I could be so lucky.

DaBrandLady: it is unacceptable that you haven't crossed the $10 million threshold yet. especially considering your platform-based market share dynamic q-rating and those great fedex cup tweaks you just, hahaha, delivered.

twfPGATour©:  Delivered! That's an oldie but a goodie! I sure wish you were on the Independent Board of Directors.

DaBrandLady: you don't pay enough. lololololol

twfPGATour©: We don't? Who says?

DaBrandLady: just a joke tim

twfPGATour©: Look, I had a quick question. Do your C-levels have in-house blogs?

DaBrandLady: so funny you should mention that!!! not more than 2 minutes ago i made a note to myself that we need to have our c-levelers sharing their most important thoughts each day for all of the staff to learn from.

twfPGATour©: But you don't really any other C-levels, besides yourself of course.

DaBrandLady: precisely!

twfPGATour©: Well it's something we're looking at but I just can't really see the benefit of Ed or Charles or Henry getting much benefit out of having a blog. Would our staff or the product benefit from hearing their inner most thoughts?

DaBrandLady: no, but it gives the product the perception that executives are working hard on their behalf. 

twfPGATour©: True.

DaBrandLady: but what about you tim?

twfPGATour©: My bandwidth is stretched thin as it is. Between trying to value-stream licensing agreements and bucketizing offshore brand revenue equity, I hardly have time to sit down and write memos much less write a blog post about the negative amortization of Nationwide Tour revenues.

twfPGATour©: Plus, I've used that story about going to that Stones concert too many times now.

DaBrandLady: i don't agree. sure, it was the steel wheels tour and that was about 5 tours ago, but it still connects you with a younger demo, which is why you should blog, tim. it's a great way to communicate with the product and your consumers without actually having to engage in any interface.

twfPGATour©: You really think so?

DaBrandLady: yep. i was just thinking about how my first post was going to be on shtemplen dynamics and Bangalorization of non-essential platform maintenance.

twfPGATour©: I'm familiar with Bangalorization of non-essential platform maintenance. We just set up a new call bank for PGA TOUR© travel in Nelamangala.

DaBrandLady: how's that going?

twfPGATour©: Great, all of our call takers use names like Boo or Bubba or Tiger or Annika. The product gets a big kick out of that.

DaBrandLady: wow, why didn't i think of that!?!?!?

twfPGATour©: But Carolyn, you mentioned shtemplen dynamics. I know that I know what that means, but could you give me an example on the latest in product shtemplenization?

DaBrandLady: oh you shmendrick. a shtemplen is yiddish for brand!

twfPGATour©: Ah okay. My Yiddish never has been what it should be.

DaBrandLady: tim, you are a shtemplen whether you like it or not. you know that any good shtemplen leverages their shtemplen-equity to extrapolate maximized value streams, even if this means sharing details of your personal life as any good blogger does.

twfPGATour©: You put it that way...and, well I'm still not sure. I'll have to think about it and monitor the blog by our non-C-levels to see how that goes. I just have a feeling this will lead to some staff deselection and I know how much it pains Ed and Charlie when they have to fire people.

DaBrandLady: just call me. deselection is one of my favorite parts of the job!

twfPGATour©: Well on that upbeat note, Merry Christmas. Or is it Happy Chanukkah?

DaBrandLady: it's all a mitzvah tim! Mazel tov!

twfPGATour©: Give my best to...

DaBrandLady: He says mazel tov back!

 

"We’d like to see the groove configuration requirements changed."

Commissioner Finchem, in a Q&A with Michael Arkush at Yahoo:

Arkush:  Where you do stand on the heavily-debated technology issue? Does the game need a uniform ball?
Finchem: I don’t think we need a uniform ball. The whole ball controversy had to do with jumps in length. Over the last four years, the distance increase on the PGA Tour has been negligible; in fact, this year, it was down a little bit. In terms of the way the game is played, though, we do have a couple of issues. We feel like there should be a bigger penalty when you hit the ball off the fairway than currently exists, and we’d like to see the groove configuration requirements changed.

The USGA must be pleased that the Commissioner is on message. I wonder if his position will change when the manufacturers make it clear they hate the grooves idea.

It will also be interesting to see he's as adamant about this position as Deane Beman was since some believe it cost Beman his job. 

"I've learned after 11 years to let Tiger speak for himself."

I filled my November press conference reading quota so thankfully reader Steve forwarded this rare beauty from Tim Finchem's session in China last week:

 Q. Could I ask a quick follow-up; could you ever envision today where because of this Tiger Woods would be a member of The European Tour and would you welcome that?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: I've learned after 11 years to let Tiger speak for himself. (Laughter).


“Maybe 20 million isn’t so much after all.”

Brian Hewitt scored an exclusive "one-on-one" with the PGA Tour Commish and as you can see by the breadth and length of the Finchem quotes, it probably occurred when they ran into each other at the World Golf Hall of Fame induction ceremony buffet line. One fun highlight pertaining to Lawrence Donegan's Dubai-$20-million-purse exclusive from last week:
Regardless, $20 million is a staggering sum to play for in one week. “The world of golf’s going to change massively in the next few years,” said one highly-placed European source with knowledge of the Dubai deal.
 
But maybe $20 million is not so staggering when you consider that the six gulf countries of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates have made a reported $1.5 trillion from oil in the last four years. That’s $1.5 trillion as in a 15 followed by 11 zeroes.
 
PGA TOUR Commissioner Tim Finchem said he was “delighted” at the reported size of the purse because, he said, the compensation levels for the world’s top golfers still “trail” those of athletes in the major team sports.
 
As to the $1.5 trillion figure, Finchem cracked, “maybe 20 million isn’t so much after all.”

"That (report) got some attention" **

The first reactions are in on the PGA Tour's Tuesday announcement and it's apparent there are a few questions that need to be raised.

Gary Van Sickle analyzes the changes (or lack thereof) to the FedEx Cup and notes the inclusion of marijuana and cocaine on the banned list. He also isn't too wild about the Tour's decision not to deal with FedEx Cup points.

Steve Elling asks what took so long to rejig the schedule. Of course, with not even a cosmetic change in the points structure and no decision on tweaks to the playoff points structure, you have to wonder if the particulars of a drug testing program have overwhelmed the boys in Ponte Vedra.

I find it inexplicable that the playoff points volatility was not addressed. Now, Elling points out in his piece that this will be revisited in February, as does Doug Ferguson in his recap, but a major sports organization of the Tour's caliber should not be tinkering with a playoff format midseason.

Buried late in Elling's column is this little shocker regarding the change in FedEx Cup payout and Finchem's gabfest with writers following the PGA Tour's media summit:

Finchem said governmental pressures contributed to the tour's decision to back away from giving the FedEx winner's bonus out in deferred payment. Instead, next year, the winner will receive $9 million in cash and $1 million in deferred payment. Elected representatives in Washington, D.C., are taking a long, dim look at large deferred payment plans, Finchem said.

One publication reported that if Woods won six FedExs Cup titles, he would have a $1 billion nest egg by the time he retired, based on earnings projections.

"That (report) got some attention," Finchem laughed.

Should be interesting to see if anyone pursues this angle.

I wonder if this hits at some of the complaints players like Sean Murphy have had about the deferred compensation? 

"Just giving him the respect he deserves is really all it would take for Finchem to carve out a relationship with the No. 2 draw in golf."

In this week's "Quiet Please" column, Golf World's Tim Rosaforte writes:

Tim Finchem might learn a lesson from Phil Mickelson's appearance at this week's Fry's Electronics Open.  Mickelson is playing at Grayhawk GC for no other reason than he's a loyal guy. He's carried the club logo on his bag without re-upping his contract since 1994, has the grillroom named after him and is the front man and course designer at Whisper Rock, just north on Scottsdale Road. It's his way of paying back a community that has been supporting him since his days at Arizona State. The lesson: Phil is good to people who are good to him. Just giving him the respect he deserves is really all it would take for Finchem to carve out a relationship with the No. 2 draw in golf.

Now, off the top of my head, I can think of one embarrassment Finchem saved Mickelson from this year.

So I'm struggling to understand what it is that the Commissioner is supposed to do that he's not doing now for Mickelson? 

While we're on the subject of Whisper Rock, Tom Dellner profiles it for the current issue of Links. 

"I don't know why you are asking me about this"

gwar01_071005jackgarydiaz.jpgGolf World's Jaime Diaz considers the future of the President's Cup in this week's issue...
Meanwhile, the game's second most viable star, Mickelson, could potentially use the threat of not playing in future Presidents Cups as a lever to persuade the tour to make some of the changes he is seeking in the implementation of the FedEx Cup.

In an effort to head off such an insurrection, the tour has been predictably sensible. To create some breathing room for team play that did not exist this year nor will for the Ryder Cup in 2008, the 2009 Presidents Cup at San Francisco's Harding Park will be held Oct. 5-11. The 2011 event in Melbourne, meanwhile, is scheduled for November.

But while San Francisco offers enough star-quality resources, Australia will be a litmus test of the Presidents Cup's true growth. The same site in 1998 produced the most desultory American performance to date -- a 20½-11½ pasting. If Woods and/or Mickelson decide against the trip, it could start the Presidents Cup the way of the once proud, now in shambles World Cup.

Asked about the future of the event, the assessments of several principals ranged from defensively optimistic to non-committal. The former stance, not surprisingly, was taken by PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem. "I saw the enthusiasm, and I don't know why you are asking me about this," he said Sunday after the matches. "All I see are guys who love this competition. It's hard for me to imagine a situation where a guy wouldn't make every effort to participate because I know how much they care. Based on that, my comfort level for the Presidents Cup is high."

Ty Votaw, the tour's vice president of communications and international affairs, seemed even more comfortable. "I think in terms of the Ryder Cup and the Presidents Cup, the players really don't have a choice," he said. "They can't skip them. It's God and country."

"But for the problems in other sports, I doubt we would be at this point."

The press conference on the "anti-doping" policies demonstrated that our governing bodies and assorted tours are on the same page. But I continue to be fascinated by Commissioner Finchem's stance on how this all came about. 

Q. If you don't mind me paraphrasing, you've always said that there was no evidence of any performance-enhancing drug use, and the honor system of golf, etc. All that said and wherever you are today, do you consider this a landmark day for golf or a sad day for golf?

TIM FINCHEM: Well, I think that as everybody else has spoken, it's a day where we are going to be proactive in light of the realities of what's happening in sport. But for the problems in other sports, I doubt we would be at this point.

But certainly the problems in other sports have created a growing perception among fans that athletes generally in many cases, in the minds of many fans who utilize substances that in other sports are banned. Now we don't ban substances in our sport, but when you combine that in the reality that for example, in the case of The European Tour, they have to undergo testing protocols because governments are requiring that they do; as does the LPGA in some instances, all of these things argue for moving forward.

I think it doesn't mean we like it and it does mean we are concerned about shifting the culture of the sport from one where you know the rules and you play by the rules, and if you violate the rules, you call a penalty on yourself; to if you engage in testing, perhaps creating the specter that an organization doesn't trust what the player says, which is certainly not the case.

So we are going to have to work hard on that point, but we are where we are given the way of the world and I think it's a positive day for golf because we are, A, together; B, we are spending a lot of energy to do it right. We are learning from watching what the other sports have done that in some cases have not been perhaps the right thing to do. It's taken them awhile to get it right, and we've been quite deliberate about where we're headed. And all of these things I think are positive. I think that's a positive message for the game.

"We are where we are given the way of the world." 

Okay, I can see that. Just like Jake could see the logic of Elwood trading the Blues mobile for a microphone.

However, let's ponder this for a moment. And to longtime readers, I apologize for sounding like a broken record.

We've heard for the last 10 years or so, and quite specifically from various leaders, that distance gains have been the product of improved athleticism with little acknowledgement that equipment might be the driving force. The most notorious was USGA President Walter Driver's claim that 75% of distance increases could be blamed on "improved athleticism." (And in Finchem's defense, he's also been quite clear that this evolving athleticism might lead to some form of distance regulation.)

So aren't we here today at least in part because golf's leadership wheeled out a suspect rationale for distance increases? A rationale that might drive young athletes to try performance enhancing drugs in order to improve their athleticism, and therefore, perhaps keep up distance-wise? 

IM'ing With The Commissioners, Vol. VII

My friends at the NSA have been waiting for LPGA Tour Commissioner Carolyn Bivens to return from the Solheim Cup, knowing that an inevitable instant message chat with the PGA Tour's Tim Finchem would take place after all of the FedEx Cup excitement died down. Previous chats are here, here, here, here, here and here).

twfPGATour©: Carolyn, are you there?

DaBrandLady: hi tim! wow, you never say hi first. what's wrong?

twfPGATour©: Well, the usual stuff.  More importantly, how about that product Sunday?

DaBrandLady: i know, who would have though morgan would beat annika!!!!!!

twfPGATour©:  Oh.

twfPGATour©: No, I meant the conclusion to the PLAYOFFS©

DaBrandLady: oh right. you know i tito'd it and was going to watch it this week after i got caught up.

twfPGATour©: Well it was pretty spectacular, even though Tiger chose not to embrace certain platform dynamics that we had outlined in the witty and truly spectacular FedEx Cup creative that ran in the first quarter of this year.

DaBrandLady: what, he didn't whistle eye of the tiger?

twfPGATour©: No, that was the third quarter creative. I was referring to the ingenious "Who will be the first to kiss the Cup" line from our friends at GDS&M.

DaBrandLady: you mean GSD&M?

twfPGATour©: Right! Always get that mixed up.

DaBrandLady: here's what i think. it's tiger's loss that he didn't embrace the brand momentum! especially since your prediction came true that the events would be "the most impactful series of events in the history of the sport."

twfPGATour©: Thanks Carolyn. Yes, I must say they were pretty special. And thanks for putting that in quotes.

DaBrandLady: anytime. speaking of impactful tim. are you a milk of magnesia man?

twfPGATour©: No, I eat a spinach salad every day when I'm here at headquarters and I really nurse the flax seed oil when I'm on the road. Family history with IBS.

DaBrandLady: you mean ubs? they did some nice stat work for us at the evian masters and we're really hoping to sign them up for an account in the fourth quarter of this year, preferably for something on the domestic schedule.

twfPGATour©: No, no, IBS, irritable bowel syndrome.

DaBrandLady: oh, sorry.

twfPGATour©: Well I've been lucky so far. And thankfully, I'm not one of players, it looks like one of the IBS drugs may be on our banned list.

DaBrandLady: oh how's that coming along tim? i'm anxious to see what you guys do with tetrahydrogestrinone and modafinil.

twfPGATour©: Big announcement Thursday. Email Ty. He'll get you in on the conference call if you'd like.

DaBrandLady: well, good luck with the testosterone issues.

twfPGATour©: I'm not having any problems. Did someone say I was?

DaBrandLady: oh tim, it's always about you!
DaBrandLady: i was talking about the testing for steroids and measuring rises in testosterone levels.

twfPGATour©: We are testing to detect the T/E ratio on testosterone to epitestosterone, drawing the line at 8:1

DaBrandLady: oh no, you have to go 6:1. you also have to subject the urine samples to gas chromatography and mass spectrometry

twfPGATour©: is that where they heat the product to turn it into gases so they can separate and analyze the molecular levels?

DaBrandLady: that's the one. characteristic “signatures” will betray the presence of banned substances every time.

twfPGATour©: Jeese. Most of our guys didn't understand deferred compensation, I can't imagine the player meetings on performance enhancing drugs.

DaBrandLady: but just think tim, this testing does so much for our brand positioning and upward integrity streaming.

twfPGATour©: That's right, just what I told the sponsors in a conference call today.

twfPGATour©: I need to run Carolyn.

DaBrandLady: the UBS acting up?

twfPGATour©: No, but close. Phil Mickelson on line two. Give my best to, uh...

DaBrandLady: he says hi back!

"I'm concerned that, if you were in a sinking ship with Finchem and there was only one lifeboat, you wouldn't get that lifeboat. He'd have it, and you'd go down with the ship."

John Huggan tries to understand Tim Finchem's buckets and mostly lets Peter Alliss consider the impact of the FedEx Cup on European golf:

While it is easy to make fun of the verbally-manipulative Finchem, the danger he presents to golf in the wider sense should not be underestimated. He thinks "outward looking" means anywhere inside the US. Hence his utter indifference when it was pointed out to him the damage the Fed-Ex Cup would almost certainly do to, for example, a suddenly star-starved European Tour.

"This so-called special relationship between Great Britain and the United States in all things doesn't seem to exist in golf," says BBC commentator Peter Alliss. "As much a politician as Tim Finchem is, I'm not sure he really cares about the European Tour. If we went under, I'm not sure it would register on his radar. He's always squeezing dates. The Ryder Cup is moving farther and farther back. All it will take is a bit of mist in the morning, and they won't get the next couple played in three days.

"He doesn't really seem to care. He's always going on about playing against the rest of the world, but only on his own terms. I remember when Greg Norman was going to start a so-called world tour. Finchem killed that, then virtually copied what Greg was proposing.

"I'm concerned that, if you were in a sinking ship with Finchem and there was only one lifeboat, you wouldn't get that lifeboat. He'd have it, and you'd go down with the ship. I really don't think he gives a shit. He'd be very apologetic, but at the end of the day he'd be looking after his own."

And... 
"The US Tour is a bit like going to see The Mousetrap every week, and going across the road from the theatre to eat the same meal," Alliss, a former Ryder Cup player, observes. "No matter how good the play is or the food is, you soon get bored with it. I know the counter-argument is that Finchem is not obliged to look at the bigger picture: he is employed solely to make money for his members, something he does very well. Look at the bonus system they have for making cuts. If Tiger were to retire when he is 40, he'd get some ridiculous sum of money.

"But for Finchem, the state of the game is neither here nor there. He is responsible for providing tournaments for his members to play in. I didn't think he could continue to find sponsors willing to put up a $1m first prize every week, but he has."

What has also boosted sympathy for Finchem's latest cause is the whining from players, most notably Mickelson, whenever the unavailability of the Fed-Ex prize-money is mentioned. The pampered souls will receive the cash only when they reach the age of 45.

"Professional golf has come so far in a relatively short period of time that I wonder how much longer it can go on and on," says Alliss. "The reaction of some of the players worries me. I never thought I would say there is too much money in professional golf. But I'm beginning to think there is. The top players are seemingly not tempted by anything. The Fed-Ex is worth $10m, and it can't get them to play every week. Money just does not stir them."


"it's been a very, very successful run"

I should never comment on a Tim Finchem press conference after sweating away five pounds while trying not to step on a snake in otherwise lovely land for golf, so I slept on his annual season-ending "state of the Tour" gabfest just to see if the buckets of nonsense I read were in fact uttered by the Commissioner.

Oh and for those of you who took the tri-fecta bet on buzzwords du jour value-equity-product, we got all about the equity dropping, several marketplaces and lots of value. Better luck next time!

Here is the Commish on the FedEx Cup, which a reader tells me Scott Van Pelt called the ForcedFedExCup or some such thing on last tonight's Sportscenter:

But in terms of evaluating it, we continue to look at what we set out to do, and that was to strengthen this period of the season, be able to carry the television audience into the football season to some extent, create more value for the players, create more excitement for the fans, and continue to grow the tournaments that are involved in this part of the season, including, of course, the playoff events.

Creating value for the players, so you know what that means...

In every aspect, we think, even though we have one more week to go, a full four days of competition, that it's been a very, very successful run, and we're very pleased with the impact. We're pleased with the steady growth of fan interest during the course of the year. We're delighted with the value that has been generated for sponsors. The tournaments that have been conducted thus far have significantly been elevated in terms of their charitable impact, their sales in the marketplace. We've had big crowds.

At some places. 

Great that they are creating value for everyone, and yet it's non-profit, it's to give back. Amen brother.

And thankfully, we now know sponsors don't look at ratings...

We estimate that 25 to 27 million households tuned in during the course of the week last week at some point. I think everybody concentrates on the ratings except our sponsors. Our sponsors look at total viewership. That's what they invest in. That's what they want to know, how many households are focused during the course of many, many hours of coverage -- not that many households sit there and watch television for four hours on a Sunday afternoon. We're pleased with the overall rating, we're pleased with the overall household reach.

On to the topic of fixing the FedEx Cup, a metaphor I would not have chosen for a bucket full of reasons.

If you were to ask me, as you have, what are you thinking about doing, I sort of categorize it in three buckets.

Yes, buckets. MBA's out there, please help. Do they really teach this one or is this something the Commish came up on his own?

One bucket would be those things that relate to making the system itself as compelling as it can be. And by that I mean a system that people can understand, a system that players relate to well, the fans comprehend and look at, things we've seen on television the last few weeks or scenarios of what could happen versus the history, and a system that the media enjoys reporting upon and can report upon reasonably well given the limitations that the media has, whether it be written or electronic or the space that the producer on television is going to give you to talk about the system.

Well that was a bucket full of...sorry, go on.

The second bucket is really a question of the basic schedule. Does the schedule work for the fans, does it work for the TOUR as a whole, does it work for the players. And there are some challenges with the schedule. You know, I think that it's worked well. Obviously virtually all the players have supported it. However, as we go into the -- we do the schedules on a four- or six-year basis, we have to evaluate the extent to which it impacts the events before and after to some extent and whether we can command strong player support and something that the fans can follow easily.

So by that I guess I'm saying that if we had more space in a couple of the years coming up, it would be helpful. Whether we can achieve the space and make some changes, I don't know.

Uh, there is our first admission that the current schedule is flawed. 

I don't think it's critical to the future of the Cup if we don't. But it would be better in some instances in some years if we did, and we'll be looking at that.

The third thing is

...bucket Tim, bucket...

I think areas that relate to enthusiasm that players feel for the competitions, particularly the Playoffs. I think you don't have to go in farther than the quality of play to conclude how the players have mentally prepared for this competition of the Playoffs and executed it, it's been phenomenal.

So as we see these emails come in and blogs from the fans suggesting this,

I'm beginning to think he just says blogs because either he does not know what they are or it makes him sound hip to pop culture. Or both.

that and the other, some of them are crazy, some of them are too smart, some of them make a lot of sense, we have determined that starting at the first of the year or as soon as we can execute it, we are going to create a place on pgatour.com where fans can go and speak openly of their attitudes about anything with respect to the TOUR.

Because the army of VP's don't have enough things to check on their Blackberry already.

If they're in the Playoffs and they want to go on and do blogs and say this is the dumbest thing I've ever seen, they can do that, it will be on our site.

So we can take it down!

If they want to make suggestions, they can do that. If they want to applaud Brandt Snedeker for doing a good interview with some of the media, they can do that.

Yeah, fans are going to rush to their computers to send those well-wishes.

It's going to be wide open. The only thing we'll edit on this portion of our site is we might edit for obscenities or things we don't want young fans to look at or something like that.

Protecting the children. Always smart.

But the product and the content of what fans can post is going to be unabridged. It'll be an interesting step.

We really have enjoyed the repartee of arguing amongst ourselves, with the players, with media and now fans about elements of this process. We think it's a healthy thing and we want to encourage it going forward, so we're going to take that step next year.

Wow, freedom lovers finally embracing freedom. Moves me to tears I tell ya.

Fans, when Phil and Ernie missed Boston, some fans felt that -- some of the emails we got, blogs, that a player can't get into the Playoffs and take a week off, that's not right.

They got blogs!

They're pretty intrigued with a system that would create a scenario where Phil would come back in and have a chance of winning. It's not like he jeopardized the Cup because here he is trying to win and doing everything he can to win and going about it in his own way, which is kind of what a player does in our system at the start of the year.  

Uh huh.

Q. Several of the players have said this year they felt like it was a conscious effort by the TOUR to make the courses tougher, to make the conditions tougher. I'm wondering, is that something at the beginning of this year or the end of last year you and Harry and Mark and whoever is involved, is that something you wanted to do or has that been an evolutionary thing? The second part of that is, do you think fans would rather see more low scores or do you think fans enjoy seeing guys winning with 3-under par like Akron where Tiger is the only guy under par?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I think fundamentally fans want to see close competition, preferably with several guys in it. I think those two things, if you have that -- in Boston you had four guys in it and you had close competition. I don't think it's really important how many birdies or pars or bogeys, just close competition, I think that's the fundamental.

Well, high rough and narrow fairways will give you close competition. Not interesting, but close.

Now, at certain stages of the golf course, I've always said in my view that Augusta National is the greatest stage for the game and the best for television because the risk-reward element is prevalent throughout the back nine and you see birdies, eagles, bogeys and double bogeys, and that's nirvana if you're a fan. Not all golf courses are set up that way, but to say you should move from last year's winner won at 14-under, and we want single digits, we don't have that philosophy. We don't adhere to that.

That's more like it!

On the other hand, we try to set the golf courses up to challenge players and make them make shots, and that's resulted in the last six or seven years tighter pins, players play with the square grooves and they can come at the pin from just about anywhere. Our scoring has not gone up. Our scoring has not gone up, and we've got much tighter pins.

Oh boy...the grooves. It's the grooves. That's why they can go at those tucked pins! Not those 340 yard drives putting a wedge in their hand. Good news Far Hills, Tim's in.

 

"Q. Did you ever think you'd see the day where you would put up $63 million in prize money over four weeks and guys would be bitching about it?"

I'm curious about the circumstances surrounding Commissioner Tim Finchem's press gathering today. I suspect it was like last week's scrum where he simply appeared in the press center and the slingers moved in with their antiquated tape recorders.

Anyway, after talking about what a great American Phil is and how he won't divulge their conversations, Ernie Els' press conference came up and I think he did a nice job clarifying the deferred compensation question.

Q. Did you have a chance to read Ernie's comments today because he was pretty vocal and critical in his complaints that the Commissioner's office and the players are growing apart, and the players had next to no input on all of this.

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: No, somebody mentioned the no input question. I've heard that from two or three players. You know, I think if you go back and look over the last three years, the number of player meetings that have been called to discuss the details of the Cup, the number of PAC meetings that have been called, the amount of information that's been distributed to players, you know, in hindsight I feel comfortable that we did a good job in reaching out to players on the details.

Now, over the last six months, we've discovered that a lot of players, regardless of the amount of information that might have been discussed, didn't necessarily for whatever reason want to pay much attention to it. When we got to the Playoffs, the players were calling the office saying, how come I'm not an alternate. There's no alternates in the Playoffs, they didn't pay attention to that.

When a player comes to me, which I had one do in the last ten days, and say, well, wouldn't it be better if this cash wasn't in the form of an annuity, and I said, well, it's not an annuity. Well, it means that the TOUR puts up less money. No, that's not the case. If you win the Cup you have $10 million in your account. It's not an annuity that you buy something for a certain amount of money and it grows and you get $10 million a number of years from now. That's not what happens. It's $10 million that's earning interest tax-free.

When I hear a player say, well, the problem I have with the deferral is I don't see the money for 20 years. That's not the case. You earn the money and get the money right away in your account. You can spend it starting at 45 or when you retire, whichever is later.

So a lot of players just for whatever reason are focused on some of the details. I say a lot. Some players. I talk to a lot of other players that say, yeah, I knew that.

But the point is right now I think the important thing about the FedExCup and the Playoffs is, is it accomplishing what it was designed to accomplish, not whether we have little details in the structure of it that players didn't focus on or we need to look at going forward.And in my view, my strong view, it's accomplishing what it's set out to do, create a better end of the season, create some really powerful events in business markets around the country, get the best players playing, and most importantly, give the fans something that they can enjoy. I believe strongly that's happening over the first two weeks.

So I don't want to get off on worrying about these detail issues. I'm sure that when we get through with the Playoffs we'll have a complete opportunity for any player to have the opportunity which he may not have chosen to utilize over the last two and a half years to say wait a second, I didn't know this and I'm not so sure I agree with it.

As I was reading the transcript, I had a similar sentiment...

Q. Did you ever think you'd see the day where you would put up $63 million in prize money over four weeks and guys would be bitching about it?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I don't think they're bitching about it. I wouldn't characterize it that way.

Q. Whining?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: We've got $28 million in cash and $35 million that's going to go into players' deferred accounts. I think that's -- our job is to take actions and make decisions that are in the best interests of the TOUR players generally and the fans, and I think that's what we've done in this case.

Can it be done differently? When you stand back and look at -- you guys are taking a couple comments here, and I understand that, but when you stand back and look at the import of what these comments are about, these, again, are not fundamental questions.

Well, I don't know about that.

Q. Referencing back to Els' comments, did the players actually have an up-down vote on this thing?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: We have a system.

That's a no!

The players get together and give us their comments with our directors present at multiple meetings. We have a Player Advisory Council, and we have a board of directors, just like any company. We call it the PGA TOUR Policy Board. I'm not going to get into the details here, I'm just going to say we worked reasonably hard, I think very hard, to reach out to players over an extended period of time. If something is far off in the distance, perhaps they don't get as focused about it.

If the policy board made decisions without fully understanding the detailed focus of the players, we should correct that. I think it's important to recognize on this question of deferred money, there's no benefit to the TOUR whichever way it goes. The money is either going into an account for a player and the interest is deferred, or it's going into his bank account and he goes and spends it now. That's the only difference. There is no benefit to the TOUR. There is no agenda as to why it's in the interest of the TOUR.

So when the TOUR directors made that decision, they did it on the basis of what they believed was in the overall best interest of the players.

Now, having said that, I would recommend that we do whatever the players basically want to do, within reason. If it's all cash, it's all cash. But what we heard was a lot of players saying that, look, why don't we take advantage of the vehicle, and that's what you would do and I would do and most people would do, but not everybody would do it. And a number of players feel differently for whatever reason. It doesn't matter, they're entitled to that view. There's no point in arguing. The merits are the merits. I think the board should, going forward, make decisions on the basis of what players feel.

And if what players feel about that issue was not properly measured, we should go out and measure it again, because candidly, I certainly don't care, nor does the TOUR care, it's just what's in the best -- from a fiduciary responsibility, we have a fiduciary responsibility to make decisions that are in the best financial interest of the player. So they made that decision and they made a decision to provide more options to the players because, just so you know, I don't know if I mentioned this, this is self-directed investments. The players determine the vehicles to which the funds will be invested to their benefit.

Measure=vote?

Q. Did you get a commitment from the high profile players, or at least an understanding from the high profile players, like Phil and Tiger, that they would play in all four events?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: No, I never asked for a commitment. I never ask for a player to tell me, if we schedule the Presidents Cup, will you play it. We go out and say, here's a tournament we're going to play, this BMW tournament with the Western Golf Association, it's got this date on it. Do you like moving in this direction? I don't ask a player to commit to me that he's going to play. It's just not the way we go about things.

Flashback: "Woods and Mickelson didn't draw up the plan, they simply were the strongest voices."

Just in case Phil Mickelson or Tiger Woods try to put all of the blame on Commissioner Tim Finchem for the shortened season, they might want to read Doug Ferguson's July, 2006 column on how the shortened season came about. It was originally posted here.

"I think for us to compete against football, and for us to continue our season after the PGA Championship as long as it does, I just think it kind of loses its luster," Mickelson said at La Costa in February 2005. "It's just not exciting. I'd love to see a lot less tournaments on tour, so the top players play in a greater percentage of those events."

Woods and Mickelson are not the best of friends, but it sounded as though they were in cahoots on this one. For it was only two days later that Woods also argued for a shorter season.

"End it Labor Day," he said.

A week later at Doral, Woods was more expansive on his wish for an early end to the regular season, which would allow top players to compete against each more often besides the eight biggest events — four majors, The Players Championship and three World Golf Championships.

"It would be more exciting for the fans, and I'm sure the sponsors and TV and everybody, if we did play more often together," Woods said. "The only way you could do that is if we shortened the season, which I've really been trying to get into Finchem's ear about."
And Ferguson ended with this....
Woods and Mickelson didn't draw up the plan, they simply were the strongest voices.

And until the PGA Tour goes through its first season under the revamped schedule, no one can be sure it's a bad idea.

If it is, blame them.