Things turning for Tiger?

[TwoGlovesGarcia]

I think trying to standardize purses and fields is a terrible idea. Charlotte and Greenbrier are two examples of tourneys with strong fields even though they are held the week before bigger events (The Players and a WGC event, respectively). Players show up because they like the course or the event or whatever.

By forcing players to attend every event on a rotating basis results in the lowest common denominator and cheapens all events, imo.



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[Chunkylover77]

I think trying to standardize purses and fields is a terrible idea. Charlotte and Greenbrier are two examples of tourneys with strong fields even though they are held the week before bigger events (The Players and a WGC event, respectively). Players show up because they like the course or the event or whatever.

By forcing players to attend every event on a rotating basis results in the lowest common denominator and cheapens all events, imo.



Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

I respect your opinion but I don't see that at all. It's a way of giving back to the fans of that particular area.

 

[bobgeorge]

Personally, I don't think you should force players to play at every tournament every 3-4 years. All tournaments are not equal due to a number of factors like prize money, location, course layout, dates of tournament, etc. If some tournaments draw more top players it is because players favor them. You can't make all tournaments equal.

Just like the LA Clippers & LA Lakers are not equal.

As for players like Tiger skipping PGA tournaments & going for a money grab overseas. Does anyone blame him? It is for $3M...right? As an example, say you make $100K a year & someone offers you $30K to take a week off from your regular job & fly overseas & work for a week. Would you really turn it down?

Leagues make money grabs all time time...for example, the NFL having a game in London, NCAA Football bowls, All these NCAA hoops special tournaments in Madison Square Garden, Hawaii, Alaska, etc. If money grabs are good enough for leagues & teams...then I have problem with players doing it.

 

[ripper]

Personally, I don't think you should force players to play at every tournament every 3-4 years. All tournaments are not equal due to a number of factors like prize money, location, course layout, dates of tournament, etc. If some tournaments draw more top players it is because players favor them. You can't make all tournaments equal.

Just like the LA Clippers & LA Lakers are not equal.

As for players like Tiger skipping PGA tournaments & going for a money grab overseas. Does anyone blame him? It is for $3M...right? As an example, say you make $100K a year & someone offers you $30K to take a week off from your regular job & fly overseas & work for a week. Would you really turn it down?

Leagues make money grabs all time time...for example, the NFL having a game in London, NCAA Football bowls, All these NCAA hoops special tournaments in Madison Square Garden, Hawaii, Alaska, etc. If money grabs are good enough for leagues & teams...then I have problem with players doing it.

Well said.

 

[Smallville]

As for players like Tiger skipping PGA tournaments & going for a money grab overseas. Does anyone blame him? It is for $3M...right? As an example, say you make $100K a year & someone offers you $30K to take a week off from your regular job & fly overseas & work for a week. Would you really turn it down?

What happens when your real job says that they really need you that week and if you take off we'll find someone who will work for us. Again not an apples to apples comparison.

 

[ripper]

What happens when your real job says that they really need you that week and if you take off we'll find someone who will work for us. Again not an apples to apples comparison.

Kind of is apples to apples... The PGA tour does not have any rules preventing him from doing this, and as far as I know, did not petition him to not go to Abu Dhabi. Its like his job says OK if you go, we will get a temp, and please come back as soon as you can.

 

[JB]

Personally, I don't think you should force players to play at every tournament every 3-4 years. All tournaments are not equal due to a number of factors like prize money, location, course layout, dates of tournament, etc. If some tournaments draw more top players it is because players favor them. You can't make all tournaments equal.

Just like the LA Clippers & LA Lakers are not equal.

As for players like Tiger skipping PGA tournaments & going for a money grab overseas. Does anyone blame him? It is for $3M...right? As an example, say you make $100K a year & someone offers you $30K to take a week off from your regular job & fly overseas & work for a week. Would you really turn it down?

Leagues make money grabs all time time...for example, the NFL having a game in London, NCAA Football bowls, All these NCAA hoops special tournaments in Madison Square Garden, Hawaii, Alaska, etc. If money grabs are good enough for leagues & teams...then I have problem with players doing it.

The LA Lakers and the LA Clippers ARE equals. They both play in the same league and have the same type of arena that holds the same amount of guests. One might have more history, but they are both equals. But that is not an apples to apples argument. To make it so you would have to be comparing arenas and not teams. Teams would be equal to the players and arenas to the courses and all arenas are equals as far as the league is concerned.

Kind of is apples to apples... The PGA tour does not have any rules preventing him from doing this, and as far as I know, did not petition him to not go to Abu Dhabi. Its like his job says OK if you go, we will get a temp, and please come back as soon as you can.

I guess some people will never understand giving back. As long as they do the bare minimum of what is needed, that is all that matters.

 

[ripper]

I guess some people will never understand giving back. As long as they do the bare minimum of what is needed, that is all that matters.

There is no argument that he could give back more and many other golfers could as well. The point I was responding to was that he is not doing his job, and that is not the case. Going over and above is something else.

 

[ripper]

The LA Lakers and the LA Clippers ARE equals. They both play in the same league and have the same type of arena that holds the same amount of guests. One might have more history, but they are both equals. But that is not an apples to apples argument. To make it so you would have to be comparing arenas and not teams. Teams would be equal to the players and arenas to the courses and all arenas are equals as far as the league is concerned.

But they are NOT equals. They are valued different and have different leverage. If a free agent can sign with either team, which team would you put your money on him signing with. To say they are equals is very black and white and not how it works in the real word. In the same way not all tournament are equal.

 

[JB]

But they are NOT equals. They are valued different and have different leverage. If a free agent can sign with either team, which team would you put your money on him signing with. To say they are equals is very black and white and not how it works in the real word. In the same way not all tournament are equal.

Not the case. The equity system in the sport says it does work. Because every team has the same amount of money to spend on players. Its not MLB (weaker soft cap) where the richest team can buy all the players. There is a cap (soft cap) in place that keeps all teams on even spending. So YES they are equals.

Again, the teams can be the same as players, as some have more history and more wins, etc....But a venue is a venue. Be it an arena or a golf course. The players that house that venue make it what it is.

 

[Smallville]

Kind of is apples to apples... The PGA tour does not have any rules preventing him from doing this, and as far as I know, did not petition him to not go to Abu Dhabi. Its like his job says OK if you go, we will get a temp, and please come back as soon as you can.

But what if your job, as I mentioned in MY example says, we'll find someone wh will do the job if you won't. Meaning, you are gone, we don't want you back if you go do this $30K deal.

That's why I said it was not apples to apples. The golfer has a job waiting when he gets back, you do not.

 

[JR]

This thread seems to be as inflammatory as an absence of Gold Bond on a humid day...

I am seeing a pattern here. The younger folks seem to have no problem with this, and the older folks seem to be all for giving back.

I am gonna straddle the fence. I think that the honorable thing would be to play a smaller domestic event, but I would find it hard to argue with accepting a 3 million dollar pay day. At the end of the day, were I in Tiger's position, I would play the domestic event, but I don't know if I would fault someone for accepting the money.

 

[bobgeorge]

But what if your job, as I mentioned in MY example says, we'll find someone wh will do the job if you won't. Meaning, you are gone, we don't want you back if you go do this $30K deal.

That's why I said it was not apples to apples. The golfer has a job waiting when he gets back, you do not.

Almost every job allows a person to build up vacation time. An employee could use his vacation time to work his "other" job.

Also if you require golfers to play each event every 3-4 years then the popular tournaments now would just get less stars & lower their value....because most golfers would probably play the same amount of tournaments a year that they do now. I just looked at this year stats & a majority of golfers play between 20-25 tournaments a year. At a glance Tommy Gainey led the way with 34 tournaments.

It seems like only a few big stars move the needle in ticket sales and TV ratings (e.g. Tiger and Phil) anyway because the die hard fan will go to the tournament regardless. The casual fan is not going buy a ticket just because Bill Haas or Webb Simpson are playing in the event.

 

[Smallville]

Almost every job allows a person to build up vacation time. An employee could use his vacation time to work his "other" job.

Also if you require golfers to play each event every 3-4 years then the popular tournaments now would just get less stars & lower their value....because most golfers would probably play the same amount of tournaments a year that they do now. I just looked at this year stats & a majority of golfers play between 20-25 tournaments a year. At a glance Tommy Gainey led the way with 34 tournaments.

It seems like only a few big stars move the needle in ticket sales and TV ratings (e.g. Tiger and Phil) anyway because the die hard fan will go to the tournament regardless. The casual fan is not going buy a ticket just because Bill Haas or Webb Simpson are playing in the event.

You're assuming that this faboulous offer came up while he still has vacation time. And what if you just started the job and don't have any vacation time yet? Do you still take the 30K for a week job and hope you have your $100K a year job when you come back?

What if it's in the same industry and you have a non-compete agreement?

 

[Smallville]

What if he's already taken his vacation time in July and this offer doesn't come up until September?

What if this fabulous offer comes up but he doesn't have the seniority to take the vacation time when he wants, and someone else has already taken the week?

Do you still go anyway and hope for the best when you come back?

 

[bobgeorge]

This thread seems to be as inflammatory as an absence of Gold Bond on a humid day...

I am seeing a pattern here. The younger folks seem to have no problem with this, and the older folks seem to be all for giving back.

I am gonna straddle the fence. I think that the honorable thing would be to play a smaller domestic event, but I would find it hard to argue with accepting a 3 million dollar pay day. At the end of the day, were I in Tiger's position, I would play the domestic event, but I don't know if I would fault someone for accepting the money.

Really?? I bet most PGA golfers would take the $$$ if it was offered.

I did some two google searches and found this pages.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/jan/19/european-tour-pga-abu-dhabi-championship

[URL]http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050313/news_1s13sullivan.html [/URL] Guys making $500-600K for a 1 day corporate event???

The bottom line is sports is about $$$$. Events/tour stops, sponsors, and players....in a free market society if a tour stop cannot turn a profit then they should not be a tour stop.

 

[bobgeorge]

What if he's already taken his vacation time in July and this offer doesn't come up until September?

What if this fabulous offer comes up but he doesn't have the seniority to take the vacation time when he wants, and someone else has already taken the week?

Do you still go anyway and hope for the best when you come back?

In your situation above then you would have to plan for next year.

Golfers are only required to play X amount of events per year. Once they meet the requirement then what is the problem?

Here are what a few golfers think:

Mickelson is on the record as saying that a one-in-four mandate isn't realistic in the age of a 43-event Tour season that runs from January through November. "Arnold [Palmer] and Jack [Nicklaus], playing in the 1960s and '70s, had only 26 to 28 events," says Mickelson.Brandt Snedeker, who has made seven starts so far this year, one less than at this point in '08, sees both sides of the argument. "You tell our sponsors that one out of every five years you get Tiger and Phil, it sells our sport even better," he says. "But you do run into a gray area for the guys who aren't accustomed to playing the week before or after a major. Plus, they'd have to hire a statistician to figure it out."

 

[JR]

Yes really. You will learn after you have been here for a little longer that I very rarely mince words, and I meant what I said. I would support the local event, but I would not look down my nose at someone who chose to make a little extra cash.

Really?? I bet most PGA golfers would take the $$$ if it was offered.I did some two google searches and found this pages.http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2011/jan/19/european-tour-pga-abu-dhabi-championship[URL]http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050313/news_1s13sullivan.html [/URL] Guys making $500-600K for a 1 day corporate event???The bottom line is sports is about $$$$. Events/tour stops, sponsors, and players....in a free market society if a tour stop cannot turn a profit then they should not be a tour stop.

 

[JB]

Of course they would. And while I agree that sports is about money, there are many many guys that continue to give back in every sport by playing in events that are not just the biggest, or have the largest appearance fees. Its about remembering where you came from, what brought you to where you are and what the "league" will be like when you leave.

Heck on some tours, players are required to surrender a portion of their winnings to keep the tour alive. On another, they had an event with no prize money and most of the top players still came and the money went back to the tour. Will everybody? No. But for some fans they look for the "extra" things athletes do to go the extra mile. Not just "Its part of the rules, so its okay".

 

[MWard]

What happens when your real job says that they really need you that week and if you take off we'll find someone who will work for us. Again not an apples to apples comparison.

Still not an apples to apples comparison. They're self employed, they get to choose their own hours and their own "appointments" so to speak.

 

[Sean]

According to Forbes magazine TW's net worth is in the neighborhood of $500 million. The $3 million appearance fee represents .006% of that. .006% of the $100,000 figure that was bandied about earlier would be $600.

We can go round and round on this, but IMO TW should appear at the smaller events. It's not like he'd walk away empty handed.

 

[Smallville]

Still not an apples to apples comparison. They're self employed, they get to choose their own hours and their own "appointments" so to speak.

I know, and I said it wasn't apples to apples. That is my whole argument with these guys, and they keep saying it is apples to apples.

 

[Smallville]

In your situation above then you would have to plan for next year.

Golfers are only required to play X amount of events per year. Once they meet the requirement then what is the problem?

Here are what a few golfers think:

Mickelson is on the record as saying that a one-in-four mandate isn't realistic in the age of a 43-event Tour season that runs from January through November. "Arnold [Palmer] and Jack [Nicklaus], playing in the 1960s and '70s, had only 26 to 28 events," says Mickelson.Brandt Snedeker, who has made seven starts so far this year, one less than at this point in '08, sees both sides of the argument. "You tell our sponsors that one out of every five years you get Tiger and Phil, it sells our sport even better," he says. "But you do run into a gray area for the guys who aren't accustomed to playing the week before or after a major. Plus, they'd have to hire a statistician to figure it out."

ANd once again, you're assuming this great offer is going to be a yearly thing. What if it isn't? What if it's this year and this year only? Do you still take your chances?

 

[bobgeorge]

ANd once again, you're assuming this great offer is going to be a yearly thing. What if it isn't? What if it's this year and this year only? Do you still take your chances?

No I would not take the chance. But golfers can take appearance fees at an international event & still play on the PGA tour the next week.

 

[Smallville]

No I would not take the chance. But golfers can take appearance fees at an international event & still play on the PGA tour the next week.

That's exactly right. And that's why this is an apples to oranges comparison.