Thursday Morning Quarterbacking

/

Thanks to reader John for Joe Flint's Wall Street Journal story on the new Tour TV deal.

The PGA Tour has an affluent audience, but in other ways limited leverage. Even though marquee-name Tiger Woods rebounded last year, ratings for the PGA Tour have diminished somewhat over the past few years. Moreover, once ESPN signed a rights deal for Nascar auto racing, its desire to keep the PGA Tour lessened, people close to the network said.

"They're going through a marketplace adjustment," sports-television consultant Neal Pilson said of the PGA Tour's new deal. "The fact that ABC and ESPN had withdrawn was a significant signal that it is a much more difficult marketplace today than it was five or 10 years ago," he added.

"Under the prior deal, you had several different major carriers offering packages that allowed sponsors to play the networks against each other," Mr. Pilson said.

But I thought this network streamlining was a good thing...

Thomas Bonk reports on the Hope moving to cable as part of a three event, Golf Channel-broadcast start to the season (described by one TGC reporter and Mark Rolfing last night as a "big bang" to start the season...uh, maybe for the The Golf Channel but not the Tour.).

Bonk says Milwaukee and Tucson are done as events, and that Chrysler is iffy for future Hope sponsorships.

If Tucson does become the WGC match play site, that means the three remaining WGC events will be anchored in the U.S.  So much for moving those around the world. So much for the WGC.

Scott Michaux's column wins for best lead of the day.

The PGA Tour has "streamlined" its television partners and tethered itself to cable, but the "continuity" of the commissioner's Masters envy remains intact.

He goes on to weigh the pluses and minuses and is spot on. Though I think he's a little hard on Kraig Kann, who has improved significantly and exudes enthusiasm without being overbearing.

Michaux remains skeptical that the notoriously frugal Golf Channel will upgrade its production values. He probably would not feel reassured if he read Richard Sandomir of the New York Times, who offered this from TGC's David Manougian:

"The reality series show that we understand the emotions connected to the game of golf and that there are lots of ways to portray golf entertainment," said David Manougian, the president of the Golf Channel. "We'll continue to push that throttle."

Steve Elling weighs in with the Orlando angle, which is significant. He also had this tidbit regarding the negotiations:

John Wildhack, senior vice president of programming and acquisitions at ESPN and ABC, said talks with the tour broke down in late December when it became apparent that Disney would continue to lose money under the new contract terms. All the networks claim they lost money on the current contract, which ends after the '06 season. Wildhack said golf's TV viewership has suffered significant "erosion'' in that time, a fact borne out by the ratings.

Huh, but the demographics are so...ah forget it. As for the Disney event in Orlando:

Disney World learned the parent company effectively was bailing from golf broadcasting Tuesday night, when tournament officials received a memo informing them the event no longer would be broadcast in-house on ABC or ESPN. Disney tournament officials are scheduled to meet with the tour Friday to learn where they fit on the schedule.

But if the parent company doesn't want to televise golf, why host an event where you have to spend a bunch of money updating the course every few years, all for something that will be on The Golf Channel and minus big name players?

A Major Award...

/

...will go to the first writer who, in analyzing the PGA Tour's new TV deal, dares to question whether the "product" has been made less appealing for television by the shift to a power game, by slow play and by anti-birdie setups.

I know I'm asking a lot, but surely someone will go out on a limb and make such a suggestion. Yes, it requires a historical perspective along with thoughts about course setup, architecture and technology, but I just know someone will try. If nothing else, to be different.

(And to win this major award, the writer has to be American. The Scots, Brits and Aussies have already figured out what the Commissioner and his crew have yet to realize.)  

The All Spin Zone

/

Commissioner, please, you have the floor.

In regard to the strategic partnership, we are excited about our relationship with Comcast and the resources Comcast has committed to put behind this partnership. We are delighted with this long-term relationship with the Golf Channel and the ability to bring the continuity to our early rounds, which we think helps our platform.

Platform is back and back big. All is right with the world. Savor it, only six more platforms to go...

Number one is that we have a streamlined set of relationships with NBC and CBS having all the weekends. It really relaxes and reinforces the continuity we can now provide to our fans.

Right, because having ABC and ESPN would have messed up that continuity for us fans and created a general state of unrelaxation.

On the cable side with our Thursday and Friday coverage every week of the year with the Golf Channel, it really changes the dynamic of being able to set up our weekend coverage with the combination of our cable coverage leading into our network coverage.

And that is different in what way?

In addition to those things, on the cable side, I think I should point out that the Champions Tour and Nationwide Tour programming have been extended coterminously to a 15-year arrangement with The Golf Channel, as well. So in a nutshell, that's our programming situation, and we are very excited about the way it came out.

Oh yes, it's a word! Coterminous is a variant of conterminous. Link it if you don't believe me (and I know you don't...Microsoft Word sure did not think it was a word).

On the financial side, I would say, first of all, preliminarily, we do not and have not in the past released specific rights fee information with respect to our television arrangements. It has been the case four years ago and eight years ago, and that's just the way we do it.

No, instead, we selectively leak a ballpark figure to writers and players.

However, there are four different ways that we think are important to look at how the overall financial structure of these arrangements will impact the Tour going forward. Four different metrics.

Metrics! Tim has been reading his Forbes.

One is more of a general metric, which is that we think the streamlined presence of our television in providing the continuity it does will benefit all constituents and will deliver more value to our sponsors. In delivering that value to our sponsors, it will have eventually an impact on the overall financial performance of the Tour, and importantly to our tournaments, and I'll come back to that in a minute.

Can't wait. Love the streamlined presence thing. On the CNN news crawl tonight they describe it as "relegated to The Golf Channel." That liberal bias again!

The second thing we looked at is how we can grow financial benefits to the players. We are now comfortable in projecting, because of these agreements and the rest of our businesses, that if we go out and look the next six years, 2007 to 2012, we can project approximately a $600 million increase over that period in player benefits, including prize money and retirement plan contributions. That would equate to a 35 percent increase over the current six years.

More pension funding to incentivize players to play more often. Because it's working so well now.

Thirdly, I think we can now say with reasonable certainty that we can reach the second billion dollar level in the eight-to nine-year period. It took us 67 years working with our tournaments to get to the first billion, which we passed in 2005, and with our financial future intact and the kind of sponsorship we're attracting, we are now comfortable in saying that in that 2013 period, we should be able to hit the second billion dollar level.

What happened to the fourth metric?  Maybe that's the individual tournaments absorbing the blow of going from 62% of the purse subsidized to 50%?

At this point Dick Ebersol chimed in and managed to return normalcy by speaking like a non-MBA'd type. Then Sean McManus spun the benifts of a two-network, Golf Channel thing and reiterated the whole streamlining the marketplace thing. Finally, David Manougian talked about The Golf Channel's glee and its (stunning) 15 year deal. 15 years! 

And then, the Ponte Vedra Over-40 softball league broke out. 

AT&T's operator butchered the name of just about every writer calling in, creating the only true entertainment in this event. Ah, the first question from Richard Sandomir of the New York Times was good.

Q. Tim, can you discuss a little bit of -- was there a bit of scrambling when ESPN pulled out, and how did that affect your negotiations with the Golf Channel?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Well, I don't think anybody pulled out of negotiations. We negotiated intensively with lots of different people. The complexion of negotiations at this level takes on different twists and turns, as has every one we've ever done. I wouldn't say there were any more or less twists and turns in this one than others.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhttttttttttttttttttttttttttt!

Where we came to the Golf Channel was that we had already determined going in that The Golf Channel was a candidate for some of our premier programming. I don't think we would have said that five years ago, given their distribution levels, but with the Champions Tour, Nationwide Tour and the commitment of Comcast, they've really built their distribution, and their distribution is headed north with or without our programming. But when we add the kinds of programming that we have in this relationship now with the best players in the world playing on a fairly consistent basis on The Golf Channel, it just creates a whole other dynamic in terms of the quality of their platform.

And the distribution levels of this strengthened platform will be conterminous for 15 years. 15 years!

When we started to focus on that possibility beyond just a portion of the programming to the notion that if we could create a continuity for our viewers, one of the problems we've had over the years is generating value for our sponsors on the early round side because it's been piecemeal, and at the same time providing continuity to our fans to be comfortable with where we are. Both of those things were solved by the combination of things that David and his people have brought to the table to provide very serious commitment to the programming side of our early rounds, and you add that to the four-round commitment that we've made and we see that platform being elevated to a point where it can generate very significant numbers.

If you have any idea what that all means, you are one bright person. Or you're David Manougian. 

Q. I have two questions: Are there not markets that the Golf Channel doesn't reach right now, one; and secondly, for a tournament like Sony or even Bob Hope, if you negotiate with the title sponsor out four years, do you now have to go back and renegotiate if they thought they were going to be on a network or ESPN and are now going to be on The Golf Channel?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: The answer to the first question is there are pockets, and maybe David is better to follow up and give more detail. But The Golf Channel has pockets around the country with a distribution of approximately 70 million right now where they don't reach. We're well aware of that. We're partners with The Golf Channel on Champions Tour and Nationwide Tour programming. Those pockets are slowly but surely disappearing, and we are very comfortable with the projected growth pattern of distribution. And I would say this, the overlay throughout the country of reaching our fan base is very, very powerful. So we don't have any hesitation there.

Pockets. Love this TVspeak.

On the second question, I would say that we have, as I think you know, very strong sponsor structure today. We have been 100 percent sponsored throughout the last five years during a recession, during the post-9/11 environment, during a very difficult time in the television marketplace. We were 100 percent sponsored. We see no difficulty in maintaining sponsorships, and I think the continuity in our sponsorship base will continue.

Coming to a bookstore in 2007: The Non-Answer Answer, by Tim Finchem.

Q. Can you say what the increases are in terms of the actual rights fees?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: No, I've already answered that question. We don't release detailed rights fee information. We've never done it before and we're not going to do it this year.

DICK EBERSOL: By my math right now, four different questions have tried to get you to tell them what the actual television rights fees are, and I just want to cheer you on, don't tell them.

Now guys, you were happy to tell us how much more the players will be making over the six years, why don't we get to know how much the Tour is skimming bringing in for charity? 

Q. I was just wondering, you mentioned the deal with The Golf Channel provides viewer continuity. But aside from that, is there any advantage for having such a long deal? And then secondly, does your deal also provide an opportunity for some events to migrate to the OLN later on?

COMMISSIONER TIM FINCHEM: Let's see, the first part of your question is there's a range of benefits in our new arrangement with David. There is very significant differentiation in the programming flexibility of The Golf Channel. To put the best programming, the programming that can generate the most interest effectively in front of the fan base at times when they can see it. The Golf Channel is a 24/7 service, it can show our stuff at night, it can show stuff in prime time, it can replay at night, it can do all those things. It can generate more value for our sponsors and more total viewership, which total viewership is a very important thing in our business, in our sport, much more I think than other sports. We look at how many viewers we reached total through the course of a tournament. That's what our sponsors look at. As a consequence we're less driven by average ratings in any particular day part. So those things, The Golf Channel brings a lot.

See, it's not about the ratings. Just ask Nascar. And this Sportscenter, ESPN stuff, they just don't have total viewership platforming capabilities like Golf Channel.

In terms of a long-term arrangement, it's a combination of looking at the current strength of the platform, the strength of the platform that we foresee in this partnership with our programming and their capabilities in the next three, four, five years, and then the reason for 15 years is that it sets the table for us to put our position in -- to protect our position in the long-term as the television marketplace continues to evolve. So for all those reasons, we thought long-term strategic partnership was very important, and there are elements on the partnership side that we're excited about in terms of our two companies working closely together, as we will on the network side with CBS and NBC. What was the second part of your question?

Oh don't worry about it. We just filled our platform quota here.     

Dawson: "As we predicted, the distance issue has plateaued"

/

From Sporting Life:

But Peter Dawson, the R&A's chief executive, said today that data gathered from the American and European tours has shown that "as we predicted, the distance issue has plateaued.

"In the last three years it has hardly moved. The 2005 season was one of the most exciting we have seen, and there are no symptoms of a game in decline.

"The top players are still coming to the top, but if there is one issue that does concern us it's the dis-connection between success and driving accuracy."

Mr. Dawson might be wise to check out these numbers with regard to his "hardly moved" remark. And as for symptoms of a game in decline, well, perhaps he's speaking of golf's popularity in the greater St. Andrews area.

And as for flogging ("the disconnection between success and driving accuracy"), the numbers might not be so bad if fairways returned to the 30 to 35-yard widths that we saw back in the mid-90s. But then, scores would go way down, and Lord knows, that's one area of the sport where progress must be halted at all costs.

 

First TV Deal Roundups

/

Doug Ferguson provides an overview of the deal.

John Hawkins in this week's Golf World had the news on ESPN pulling out before today's announcement, and how the Tour admirably refused to budge on ESPN's desire for marquee tee times, which would have been a ridiculous situation.  Hawkins also weighs the move to The Golf Channel and whether it will be similar to the Champions Tour's move there.

Gene Yasuda calls the loss of ESPN a "significant and unexpected blow." 

I've started a thread on the TV deal playing off of Dan G.'s post from last week.  Curious what everyone thinks.

Distance Measuring Device Follow Up

/

The USGA has posted the proper wording for local rules related to distance measuring devices.

Also seems that they don't like being affiliated with these devices.

In establishing these usage guidelines, the USGA does not endorse or approve any brand of distance-measuring devices. Manufacturers are not permitted to use the terms “USGA approved” or the like in any product advertising. 

Then they might not want to go to this home page, where they are talking about the "official sanctioning" of the devices.

New TV Deal at 2 EST

/

The Commissioner explains at 2 why they will be just fine without ABC and ESPN.

**Update: "We couldn't be more pleased with the outcome of these discussion." -Finchem

Parameters:

-6 year deal with networks, CBS increases to 19 events, NBC from 5 to 10

-Golf Channel handles all early round coverage and the Mercedes/Sony/Bob Hope kick off to the season. 

-TGC also handles all post-FedEx Cup events, and is signed for 15 years(!?) to "fully accomplish" the objectives of getting TGC on more than its curren 70 million homes

-15 year deal to continue Champions and Nationwide coverage on TGC 

-World Cup of Golf, R.I.P.

Otto Confirms Magic Ball Project

/

Lawrence Donegan in The Guardian profiles the R&A's Steve Otto. You may recall that it was revealed a few weeks ago by Douglas Lowe that Otto has embarked on a R&A research project into flogging.

"My job, and the job of the people I work with, is to evaluate equipment and produce data," the man in charge of the R&A's research and testing says. "Larger philosophical questions about the impact that technology has on the game and what measures are required to keep everything in balance are taken at a much higher level than the one I operate at. I am merely a scientist."

Otto the scientist has some interesting things to say about distance.

Like every other senior member of the R&A hierarchy, Otto is unconvinced by the arguments that the modern ball goes too far. "There are many factors involved here," he says. "If there has been any increase in distance - and I don't necessarily accept that there has been - then I would say it is down to the greater athleticism of the players; then there is the ball and then there are the clubs. There is also the question of more efficient matching of the player and their clubs. Plus, we are also doing a study in the effect of course conditions," he says, adding the unnecessary qualification: "It is not as straightforward as people think."

No increase in distance? Perhaps he should look at these numbers, or these numbers for another point of view.

And , the efficient matching of the player and their clubs? Optimization? Perhaps Otto knows why the USGA and R&A were ahead of the curve on that issue, and chose to shelve their interest in that subject, giving us the mess we now have?

Oh no, he does better.

Unlike other R&A blazers, however, he is not coy about discussing the work that both his organisation and its American counterpart, the United States Golf Association, has put in on this issue of the golf ball. Last year the governing bodies admitted they had a "research project" into a ball that wouldn't go as far as those currently in use, although the details were sketchy. No longer.

"We wanted to see if there was a magic ball out there," Otto says. "We looked at a bigger ball, and a lighter ball; we looked at balls made from different rubbers and at balls with different dimple patterns."

The project ran into many difficulties, the most significant being that a ball that was 10% shorter for one type of player might be 20% shorter for another, and therefore intrinsically unfair. "People thought there might be a solution that would keep the game the same but also address this question of distance," Otto says. "There wasn't. The problem is there is no single definition of a magic ball."

As for the current location of those intriguing, if less than magical, balls, Otto laughs. "They are in a cupboard somewhere, under lock and key." Never to be seen again? "Exactly."
You may recall that former USGA Executive Director Frank Hannigan wrote about a "miracle ball" that the USGA was attempting to develop back in February, 2004. He was not taken seriously.
 

It's not clear where Otto's remarks on the ball project leave the current USGA/R&A request for manufacturers to submit "rolled back" balls for testing. 

Though no companies had submitted balls as of November, Titleist said last summer that they cooperated.
 

Preferred, Corporate Sponsor, Partner

/

Various distance measuring device companies have been circling the Golf Coaches Association of America, eager to profit off of college athletes. 

So eager is the GCAA administration to speed up play in golf, they've announced a partnership, a preferred device and a corporate sponsor. Amazingly, that covers all three makers of golf related distance measuring devices!

Bear with me. 

First, LaserLink announced yesterday that they were "partnering" with the GCAA, making official what was first posted here a few weeks ago.

“We are extremely excited to be partnered with the GCAA, and we look forward to doing our part to help to speed the pace of play at collegiate tournaments around the country,” said Rob O’Loughlin, President, Laser Link Golf. 

“The leaders in collegiate golf are making the right decision,” said O’Loughlin. “Distance measurement technology can only help these young competitors play faster and better rounds.  Gathering distance information is a time consuming process, and a process that every player goes through before every stroke.  Golf tournaments at every level could benefit from a quicker pace, and the Laser Link Distance System is the quickest and easiest way to calculate distance to the flagstick.”

And at just $250 per thing-a-ma-jig, why wouldn't he want to be a partner?

“The GCAA is excited about the impact range-finding devices will have on college golf and the options that players and coaches have to potentially speed up the pace of play,” said GCAA Executive Director Gregg Grost.  “Laser Link Golf’s system will be a great tool on the course.” 

In December SkyGolf announced they were the "preferred" rangefinder of the GCAA.

...SkyGolf, makers of the SkyCaddie "next-generation" GPS rangefinder, has been chosen by the Golf Coaches Association of America (GCAA) as the organization's preferred GPS rangefinder. This means any of approximately 9,000 men's NCAA Division I, II or III, NAIA or junior college golfers could be some of the first to employ SkyCaddie for critical distances during competition once the new ruling takes effect in January 2006 

And then a letter from Bushnell went out to college coaches this week. A couple of coaches forwarded it with cranky comments grumbling about now there's "even more money I have to raise" and "why do I have to use my already thin budget on this?"

Anti-capitalist technophobic agenda types are in the coaching ranks too!

From Bushnell:

Dear: GCAA Member/Coach  

We are pleased to announce that Bushnell Yardage Pro Laser rangefinders are back as a corporate sponsor of the GCAA. 

Pardon the interruption. Yes, the triple crown: a partner, a preferred and a corporate sponsor. But no official supplier yet.

Gosh, you'd think if they were really concerned about pace of play they would be handing these out for free. More Bushnell:

Currently a website is in its final stages of construction and it will be dedicated for use by GCAA members only; however, we wanted to provide you with the 2006 Bushnell Collegiate Program right away.

Key Points to remember before making your decision: (Please see attached comparison sheet)

-Bushnell is used by over 95% of the players on the PGA, LPGA, Champions, and Nationwide Tours for a REASON. 

The REASONS are: 
-Accuracy (+/- 9 inches, also Bushnell laser will give your players exact distance to the flag and not to a quadrant or generalized pin location on the green, which can be up to 5 yards off) 

-Ability to range to any target on the golf course (flag, lip of a bunker, trees, etc)
Reliability (you don’t need to worry if the course has been mapped or if it has reflectors)

Pricing Program: PinSeeker Tournament Edition (SKU # 205102): Approved for tournament play!

-This model features PinSeeker technology which allows for easy acquisition of the flag without inadvertently getting distances to background targets.  When more than one object has been acquired, the closer of the two objects will be displayed and made known to the user via the LCD display.

-This model also features SCAN which allows you to scan across the landscape while viewing a continuously updated LCD display of the distances between you and the targets acquired.

Golf Market Price $299
GCAA Price $287
Buy 9 units and get the 10th model at 50% off

Wow, what a deal! They're knocking $12 whole dollars off each model, not even 5%! The savings might cover the cost to insure these. Oh but there's more to buy...

PinSeeker Slope Edition (SKU # 205103):

-This model features PinSeeker technology, SCAN, and Slope +/-

-Slope provides the golfer with a compensated distance based upon the amount of incline or decline in a particular shot.

-This model is only legal for practice rounds and turning in scores for handicap purposes, it is NOT legal for tournament play.

Golf Market Price $339
GCAA Price $322
Buy 9 units and get the 10th model at 50% off

Yes, so if you are Oklahoma State and you have a $165 million, naturally you buy both models to show recruits how much money you have. The rest, you're on your own.

Ordering Information:

Bushnell will be at the GCAA show in Daytona Beach; however, due to very limited quantities of our New Tournament Edition, we ask that you place your orders ASAP to ensure delivery before your first event.  We are committed to you and your success with our product line and will do whatever is necessary to make you completely satisfied with your purchase.

Bushnell accepts Visa, MC, AMEX, and Discover credit cards.  If possible we urge you to please use a credit card as it will expedite your order.  If you have any questions or concerns please feel free to email/call Margi or myself.  I look forward to meeting you and working with you in Daytona Beach.

And taking your money. 

Perry: Might Not Come Back To Kapalua

/

Doug Ferguson does a nice job summing up the different views on toughened-up and trade-windy Kapalua.

The debate is the same old deal: some players whine when the wind is up and the greens freakish, but they are not able to explain why their whining is legit. And others embrace it as ideal golf. Sadly, there aren't too many who fall somewhere in between, able to explain why the architecture was designed to play a certain way, and how the new green speeds perhaps weren't meant for the trade-winds.

(And it would be nice to hear from just one player about the noticeably soft approaches contrasting with the firm greens...a chintzy setup element that I don't remember being an issue in previous years, especially since the approaches are so vital to the Plantation Course's design).

But as usual, the guys who might have a legitimate gripe come off sounding like big complainers.

"I think they've blown it," Kenny Perry huffed after a 77 in the third round. "It's a little unfair. Everyone has to play it, but I don't think it's golf, in my opinion. Who wants to shoot 75 or 76 when that's the average score? I tell you what, it's shot my confidence."

Perry was so flustered that he said he would consider not returning next year if he was eligible. Mark Calcavecchia thought that was a little severe. After all, they're in Hawaii being treated like royalty. Last place paid $70,000. Every player got a free room at the Ritz-Carlton.

Whew...bet the Mercedes and Kapalua people will be biting their nails all season long, wondering if charismatic Kenny will win again and grace them with his presence.  On the other side...

"I think it's great," said Brad Faxon, who opened with an 82, closed with a 74 and tied for 23rd at 17 over. "A lot of people thought this course was too easy. I would think Mercedes would be a competitive tournament, not a 30-under romp. If 2 or 3 under is leading, you can have a handful of guys who can win." 

Judging by the number of times my grandmother nodded off because we made her watch the final nine holes, I'm going to say the tough setup put more people to sleep instead of bringing in new fans.

Because as much as they want to wheel out words like "integrity" and "challenge," it's just entertainment folks. David Toms seemed to understand:

"I walked off the second green and told people they need to go watch football," said Toms, who was one shot out of the lead going into the weekend until rounds of 79-75 left him in a tie for 13th. "Obviously, some guys are playing good. But to see pros in the teens over par starting the season? That's not a lot of fun." 

 

Tough = Fun, Vol. 9,231

/

Thanks to readers Josh and Scott for the heads up on Chris Baldwin's excellent rant on the impossible=fun mentality in modern day golf. 

Especially fascinating (well, depressing) are the quotes from Barrie McWha about 6,600 yards becoming the new minimum yardage that he sees many golfers perceiving to be the line in the sand for course legitimacy.

PGA Tour Driving Distance Watch Vol. 1.5

/

Just a follow up on the driving distance item: the 2005 Mercedes produced an average drive of 276.4 yards according to the PGA Tour. That's a 21.5 yard drop.

And if you were wondering (I'm sure you were not), Michael Campbell was not included among the driving distance stat leaders because of his Tour (non) status.

Sheesh, it's not like he crossed a picket line.

PGA Tour Driving Distance Watch, Vol. 1 (2006 Edition)

/

pgatour.jpgMaybe they used meters on the two driving distance holes last week?

The Kapalua field averaged 254.9 yards off the tee, nearly 35 yards below the 2005 average.

But if you go to the Tour's "Longest Drive" stat page, more than half the drives from Kapalua are listed.

There were 238 tee shots over 350 yards for the week, and 565 over 300 yards.

And of the 999 drives listed, the average was 314.6 yards.

With a field of 28 having 15 driver chances per round, there were 1680 possible drives, with 1/3 of those 45 or more yards over the week's "average."  

Kind of makes you wonder which two holes were used for measuring.

 

Augusta National : Torrey Pines

/

I bet when Hootie Johnson and Tom Fazio started tinkering with Augusta National they never thought they'd be lumped in with Torrey Pines...and actually have someone be complimenting them at the same time:

"Now, I like these changes," [Charles] Howell said. "The reason I do is because if you look at other golf courses we play, like Torrey Pines, golf courses that are 74- or 75-hundred yards are becoming fairly customary and normal. I don't think you want to play a major championship on a golf course that is not in keeping with other courses we play on tour in terms of length."

"Any time you take a golf course and completely overhaul it, you're going to get some mixed feelings," Howell said of the evolution of his opinions. "But now I think it's fine. I really do. There isn't one thing I saw at Augusta National that I haven't seen done everywhere else."

But aren't we drawn to Augusta/The Masters because they didn't do things like everywhere else? Sorry, I interrupted again. Looks like Scott Michaux--author of the story where Howell's comments appeared--was thinking the same thing:

Purists will argue that Augusta National isn't everywhere else and should be above trying to keep up with the Joneses or Woodses or whoever. Being held to a different standard is part of the unique fascination with Augusta's evolution.

"It's a change for Augusta National," Howell said, "but if you forget how the golf course used to be, it's fine. If this is your first year coming and playing the Masters, you won't think any big deal of it. The problem is that everybody has watched the Masters since they were old enough to watch TV and everybody knows that golf course better than they know any other golf course in the world."

Michaux also writes:

And the eye-popping new measurement for the par-4 No. 11 (505 yards) only begins to tell how much harder that hole has become.

"The shortest 11 can play is 505," Howell said, saying the yardage marker is situated at the extreme front of the tee box instead of the customary center. "I walked it to the back and it was 513, which puts it longer than No. 13."

Now that's more like the old time-Clifford Roberts run Augusta we all love and know.

The biggest impact of all the recent changes might be forcing many of the older champions to give up playing in the Masters much sooner than expected. The latest changes almost guarantee that Jack Nicklaus will not change his mind and return to play one more Masters on the 20th anniversary of his epic 1986 victory.

Other past champions like Tom Watson and Ben Crenshaw might be forced to retire far sooner than their predecessors or risk embarrassing themselves on a course now built for younger players.

"I think it will keep a lot of guys from coming back," Howell said, lamenting the potential loss of a unique aspect of the tournament which allowed him to play in his first Masters with Gary Player.

Now that's less like the old time-Clifford Roberts run Augusta we all love and know.