"Slow play is a legitimate issue, but not to the point where I think we need to do something like that."

Another head-scratcher from Commissioner Tim Finchem, this time in John Feinstein's Golf World column on slow play:

Of course, it has been 18 years since a PGA Tour player received a stroke penalty for slow play -- and Finchem doesn't sound as though he wants to see it happen again anytime soon.

"Slow play is a legitimate issue," he said, "but not to the point where I think we need to do something like that. The real problem isn't how long it takes to play a round but when one player makes it uncomfortable for the other player or players because of his pace. That's just bad etiquette. And it's true, we do have some players who are in denial about being slow."

So is the Commissioner sending out word, or has sent out word that he does not want a stroke penalty assessed? We know he's not a fan of controversy, so it wouldn't be a stretch to think he's sent word that penalty shots are brand-averse.

Gary Van Sickle also tackled slow play this week for SI and did it in very entertaining fashion. Naturally, he picked the one week they actually played faster at The Players, but he still offers several insights into the problem and a glossary of slow play handbook.

Clockblocked - Forget Greenwich Mean Time. On the PGA Tour, Time Par (no relation to Old Man Par) is what matters. Time Par is the time it should take to play each hole, as determined by the rules crew after careful study. At the Players, for instance, Time Par was two hours, 14 minutes for the front nine and 2:15 for the back, plus five minutes to make the turn. Time Par for the entire round by a threesome was 4:34, 3:58 for a twosome.

The 40 Time - How cool would it be if golf, like basketball, had a shot clock? It would be handy too, because once a group has been alerted that it's on the clock, a player has 40 seconds to hit his shot once it's his turn. The first to play the tee shot on a par-3, a second shot on a par-4 or par-5, a third shot on a par-5 or a stroke near or on the green, gets an additional 20 seconds. If a player exceeds his allotted time, he receives a bad timing.

"So please don't offer any lectures about how many times Woods has gone ballistic, especially when you have a clear financial stake in the spin-control rehab of his reputation."

Steve Elling points out that the Commissioner's suggestion of "overblown" Tiger coverage and excessive focus on one club toss was, well, wrong.

Monday, in an interview in the Jacksonville paper as a lead-in to the Players Championship, Tim Finchem said: "In his early years, [Woods] had difficulty controlling his actions but he worked hard at it and got away from it. But he tossed a club in Australia and everyone was writing about Tiger tossing clubs. Well, he didn't toss clubs ... he tossed a club. It wasn't a habit." As a point of fact, writers from two major sports websites, including CBSSports.com, watched in shock as Woods tomahawked a driver into the ground with such ferocity last year in Boston that the club bounded into a dry water hazard next to the tee, where his caddie was forced to wade into waist-deep hay to retrieve it -- after he finally located it. It was an astounding display of temper worthy of Tommy Bolt. So please don't offer any lectures about how many times Woods has gone ballistic, especially when you have a clear financial stake in the spin-control rehab of his reputation. I have an entire DVD sent to me by a fan, filled with videotaped examples of Woods' tantrums and titanium tosses over the years. To assert otherwise is as unprofessional as it is transparently absurd.

Well, should be an interesting Commissioner's pig roast this Friday at TPC Sawgrass. What do you think Ty: yours truly, Elling and Huggan at the same table?

IM'ing With The Commissioners, 2010 Edition

(click on image to enlarge)When Carolyn Bivens stepped down as LPGA Commish, many of you so kindly lamented the demise of this site's IM'ing With The Commissioners, gulp, franchise.

But I'm happy to report that my NSA sources have been able to share this exchange between the PGA Tour's commissioners, Tim Finchem and Tiger Woods. Click on the image to enlarge.

"Most of our tournaments sell out from a ticket standpoint, anyway."

Tim Finchem's press conferences are always amusing, particularly as he faces an increasingly hostile media (as you'll see). Today's talk announced the signing of Farmer's Insurance to a four-year sponsorship extension for the Torrey Pines event, but it was talk of Tiger, metrics, analytics and the astounding quote above that overshadowed the Farmer's news.

Right out of the chute, from an Orlando television station:

Q. I wanted to ask if the PGA TOUR has any information at this point about when Tiger Woods may return to golf.

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: Well, we have the general information that Tiger is preparing to play, and there's been a lot of speculation about when he might come back out. Tiger has indicated to us that he will give us reasonable notice, because we know we have got some preparation to do.

I don't have the specific date when he’s going to come back, and I could only assume that all of the speculation about late March and early April, if he's going to start back then, we will know soon. Beyond that, I can't help you.

Such brevity and so little jargon! Though as Steve Elling notes, this wait until Tiger calls thing isn't going over too well with some.

Q. And if I could follow-up with another question for Tim. When, and obviously that remains to be seen, when Tiger does come back, can you address at all the security measures, the logistics of it? Sean McManus had said the other day that he thinks his return will be one of the biggest events of the decade. So obviously there will be significant -- if it is a regular PGA TOUR event, I understand if it is the Masters, that's out of your control, but if it were to be Bay Hill, for example, what sort of logistics do you have in place to address his return?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: Well, we have a plan for -- it varies. Every site in golf is different, the capacity to handle media. I think media is the biggest mover. Most of our tournaments sell out from a ticket standpoint, anyway.

Really? Most tournaments sell out from a ticket standpoint, eh? 

I can't think of a more ludicrous Finchem statement. Ever. And he wonders why the press is growing increasingly skeptical of his statements?

Q. Just on the phone with Tom Wilson, the tournament director here, and he was saying that Farmers is getting a substantially better deal than it would have a couple years ago with the TOUR; yet, the purse is going up, and Tom believes there will be more charitable dollars available to the Century Club. How does that jive? Is that because the TOUR is contributing more money, or what? How does that --

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: No, I think this transaction is very much at market rate, market level and consistent with -- we have announced in the last eight months 15 either new sponsors or extensions to 2014 and beyond.

Transaction?

And in every one of those situations, we have had transactions that allow us to grow, whether it's prize money on the one hand or charitable dollars on the other; every single one.

I know there has been a lot of discussion about Tiger Woods being out. But as Bob said, most companies evaluate their tournament involvement based on the value that is generated after careful analytics. Tiger historically has played in about a third of our tournaments, and yet they have all been sponsored over the years, and there's a reason for that. And that's because there is real value: Business value, advertising value, audience-reach value and value generated from being involved with positive economic impact and charitable giving. That business model is very strong. It's a sponsor-centric business model that drives value to sponsors, and it's been successful. Today's announcement is just another indication of that.

And we just read a sentence with SIX value references! Get the Guinness people on the line! I'm referring to the book of world records, not the brewsters.

Q. If Tiger plays at Tavistock, we found PGA rule that says he must then play in the PGA TOUR in that city where Tavistock is; can you talk about that for a little bit? Obviously Bay Hill is following a few days later.

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I don't know what rule you're referring to but I'm not aware of it, and I have no information as to what he's playing. So as soon as he announces what he's going to do, we will know and you will know.

Now here's where it gets fun.

Q. I just wonder what your thoughts are on that. And Tiger did not play on the weekend in any of the first ten events last year, so seems like a fairly fair apples-to-apples comparison, sounds like a significant drop to me, wonder if there might be a anti-golf hangover from the Tiger affair, or what other theory you might be able to put out there for me.

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I don't have the numbers in front of me, but actually some weeks we have been up this year.

But no, I think that -- I think everybody needs to understand that when Tiger Woods plays, and he's in the hunt on the weekend, he spikes the ratings; that's true. When he doesn't play, we have very acceptable ratings from a sponsor-value standpoint and from an audience-reach standpoint. So you can look at it as the glass half-empty or glass half-full. Our view and our analytics tell us it's a glass half-full, if our ratings spike. But it's off of a very acceptable base.

As a matter of fact, on an average basis, the average PGA TOUR event, year-long, is second in cum. audience reach in sports only to a NFL game; only to an NFL game. We average 23 to 25 million people every week tune in to our tournaments. Now, we are over four days, but that's 23 to 25 million unique viewers.

Okay, first, I thought we pointed out that this cum audience talk just doesn't work? Is there some reason he can't say the world cumulative? Is it tainted?

Second of all, 23-25 million every week tune in on average, eh?

So we have a significant gross audience reach. And when people like Bob Woudstra and the companies that come to the PGA TOUR analyse the quality of the audience, which indexes higher in almost every upscale category than any other sport, and the total audience, which is significant; that's how they determine value, and that's why we are 100 percent sponsored.

These companies, these many, many companies that spend millions of dollars with the PGA TOUR, also spend significant amounts of money measuring the value that they get. They are smart companies, they are good marketers and they make good decisions.

So I know the Tiger thing is important, and I think he spikes things, but don't turn it and make it a negative when it doesn't need to be a negative. It's very strong story week-in and week-out. And as Bob mentioned earlier, in his analytics of this particular sponsorship, for example, he was more focused on the overall quality of the field and the impact of the tournament; and the experience coming out of a week in which Tiger did not play, in this particular case, Farmers Insurance, concluded that they wanted to move forward.

So, I don't know what else I need to say.

Next on the line is another cynical writer...

Q. I understand the power of the demographics. I think we have all got a pretty good grip on that. I'm just wondering if you've got a theory as to why the drop of 18 percent.

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: Well, it has not been 18 percent. But there are a variety of factors.
Now, for example, in an Olympic year, there are three weekends when we are up against the Olympics. It happens every four years. If you go back four years ago when we were up against the Winter Olympics or go back to the Beijing Games in '08, you will see an impact on that. So those things happen in and out of any year or any quarter, and you see movements in the ratings.

But if you compare us in terms of overall audience reach, to any other sporting activity; most companies divide their marketing dollars between some percentage to sports marketing and some percentage to other kind of marketing. We stack up very, very positively, whether it's baseball, basketball, NASCAR or football, in terms of an audience reach standpoint, cum. audience. In addition to that, that cum. audience is a very, very valuable audience. Particularly, with companies that are in the auto area, the financial service area and related areas.

So, there's real value there. So you have to look at the entire picture and do the analytics, and then you come to grips with why we have been successful.

Come to grips? I think someone needs his afternoon siesta!

2010 WGC CA Championship Final Round

I'm proud sad to say I haven't watched one second of Doral this week between work duties and some Zenyatta viewing yesterday, but with Ernie Els in contention the finale should be interesting. Your comments are mostly appreciated...