Liv Golf Central Thread: Events and News

[chisag]

1 hour ago, Preeway said:

I don't think this is about politics anymore. I would rather see them have access to points on a greatly reduced scale instead of zero points but the whole limited field an no cuts thing is hard to look past.

 

... It is and always will be about the money and trying to destroy the PGA Tour. Taking the Saudi's completely out of the equation although for more than a few this isn't possible, but let's say for the sake of argument it was just a successful 'Murican business group with big city Euro ties. They went after 1/2 the league with 250 million bonus for any player to join and absolutely trashed the NFL,but managed to splinter off 4 NFL teams paying them insane amounts of money to play in a new Euro League They would be a Euro division just like the NFL Divisions with a winner although they only play 3 qts. Still the same top players although the bottom of the roster is filed with Europeans by rule. Does anyone think they should/would be able to compete in the playoffs and Super Bowl?. 

[Donn lost in San Diego]

59 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... It is and always will be about the money and trying to destroy the PGA Tour. Taking the Saudi's completely out of the equation although for more than a few this isn't possible, but let's say for the sake of argument it was just a successful 'Murican business group with big city Euro ties. They went after 1/2 the league with 250 million bonus for any player to join and absolutely trashed the NFL,but managed to splinter off 4 NFL teams paying them insane amounts of money to play in a new Euro League They would be a Euro division just like the NFL Divisions with a winner although they only play 3 qts. Still the same top players although the bottom of the roster is filed with Europeans by rule. Does anyone think they should/would be able to compete in the playoffs and Super Bowl?. 

I don't think that is a useful analogy.  The various golf tours are owned by the players and run by hired managers.  Any golfer who qualifies every week in open competitions can play.  All of the Individual events are sponsored by different organizations.  And the OWGR is a separate, supposedly neutral agency whose only function is to collect the results of various tours' events and tabulate the numbers.  The NFL is a private business, teams are owned by individual owners.  It is run as a private club.  How could I create a new league, hire some players, and then demand to play my best team in the NFL Super Bowl?  Oh wait.  The AFL did that, eventually the NFL owners agreed to play a post NFL championship game which became called The Super Bowl, and then they merged.  LIV has enough of the world's best players that they should be factored in by the neutral tabulating agency.  The various national PGAs should ask OWGR to create a category for earning points in other than 72 hole, field-cut, events.  And I don't think the Saud goal was to destroy the USA PGA TOUR.  There are way too many large companies that sponsor all the worldwide tours events.

[chisag]

8 minutes ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

I don't think that is a useful analogy. 

 

... LOL, clearly I do. Not that either of our opinions matter because the liv mutineers have been denied OWGR points. So they will just have to be content with their millions, team play   LOUD music at controversial courses and constant complaints about how they are maligned for no good reason while stating Qu'ils mangent de la brioche. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

24 minutes ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

I don't think that is a useful analogy.  The various golf tours are owned by the players and run by hired managers.  Any golfer who qualifies every week in open competitions can play.  All of the Individual events are sponsored by different organizations.  And the OWGR is a separate, supposedly neutral agency whose only function is to collect the results of various tours' events and tabulate the numbers.  The NFL is a private business, teams are owned by individual owners.  It is run as a private club.  How could I create a new league, hire some players, and then demand to play my best team in the NFL Super Bowl?  Oh wait.  The AFL did that, eventually the NFL owners agreed to play a post NFL championship game which became called The Super Bowl, and then they merged.  LIV has enough of the world's best players that they should be factored in by the neutral tabulating agency.  The various national PGAs should ask OWGR to create a category for earning points in other than 72 hole, field-cut, events.  And I don't think the Saud goal was to destroy the USA PGA TOUR.  There are way too many large companies that sponsor all the worldwide tours events.

All my own opinion - LIV has some talented players. Some. Only a handful I think should be considered some of the worlds best and even that list is small. 

The players that are with LIV or playing LIV don't want to play the PGA Tour (obviously) and were better for story lines vs play when on the tour. That is really what they collective group brought or took away from the PGA Tour. 

Again all my own opinion. I think the decision was proper to not allow them OWGR as it doesnt meet the criteria. Had they met all of it I think the answer would have been much easier and come a lot quicker. 

[Donn lost in San Diego]

17 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... LOL, clearly I do. Not that either of our opinions matter because the liv mutineers have been denied OWGR points. So they will just have to be content with their millions, team play   LOUD music at controversial courses and constant complaints about how they are maligned for no good reason while stating Qu'ils mangent de la brioche. 

Weak on my French, but I think without resorting to a goog, "Let them eat bread/cake/Hostess Twinkies"?

Yea, none of our opines mean much, and none of us make the moolah they do. 

[LICC]

6 hours ago, Preeway said:

I don't think this is about politics anymore. I would rather see them have access to points on a greatly reduced scale instead of zero points but the whole limited field an no cuts thing is hard to look past. For that matter, there shouldn't be any points awarded to PGAT events that are also non-cut.

Except the PGAT events with no cuts require qualification based on prior performance for everyone to get into those events. 

I'm surprised OWGR denied LIV entirely. LIV does have a competitive season playing for substantial monetary stakes. The 54 holes, no-cut, shotgun start, lack of any real substantial qualifying and relegation would drop the points values a lot, but I thought those events would be worth something. Maybe 10-20% of the level of a PGAT event. 

But I can't stand LIV or the sell-outs who joined, so I'm not upset about them getting denied. I hope the PGA Tour players somehow torpedo the merger deal and carry on without them.

[Preeway]

2 hours ago, Donn lost in San Diego said:

I don't think that is a useful analogy.  The various golf tours are owned by the players and run by hired managers.  Any golfer who qualifies every week in open competitions can play.  All of the Individual events are sponsored by different organizations.  And the OWGR is a separate, supposedly neutral agency whose only function is to collect the results of various tours' events and tabulate the numbers.  The NFL is a private business, teams are owned by individual owners.  It is run as a private club.  How could I create a new league, hire some players, and then demand to play my best team in the NFL Super Bowl?  Oh wait.  The AFL did that, eventually the NFL owners agreed to play a post NFL championship game which became called The Super Bowl, and then they merged.  LIV has enough of the world's best players that they should be factored in by the neutral tabulating agency.  The various national PGAs should ask OWGR to create a category for earning points in other than 72 hole, field-cut, events.  And I don't think the Saud goal was to destroy the USA PGA TOUR.  There are way too many large companies that sponsor all the worldwide tours events.

The problem with that analogy is that the NFL and the AFL both played the same game with the same rules. Therefore the Super Bowl was a legitimate challenge when proposed. I won’t go so far as to call the LIV Tour a farce but it doesn’t measure up to any other tour in terms of the style of play. Yes, there are some really good players on LIV but none of them even want to play on the PGAT anyway. They just want a way to qualify for the 4 majors. I get that, and those 4 events might just find a way to get them in. Maybe take the top 10 on the LIV money list as auto qualifiers? Who knows at this point. 

[chisag]

2 minutes ago, Preeway said:

The problem with that analogy is that the NFL and the AFL both played the same game with the same rules. Therefore the Super Bowl was a legitimate challenge when proposed. I won’t go so far as to call the LIV Tour a farce but it doesn’t measure up to any other tour in terms of the style of play. Yes, there are some really good players on LIV but none of them even want to play on the PGAT anyway. They just want a way to qualify for the 4 majors. I get that, and those 4 events might just find a way to get them in. Maybe take the top 10 on the LIV money list as auto qualifiers? Who knows at this point. 

 

... Yup, it is the greed that disappoints many of us. If you want to sell out for obscene amounts of money, that is certainly your choice and I respect anyone that willingly admits that. But to whine because you don't get it both ways just sours me on any of those doing so. 

[MGoBlue100]

19 hours ago, Golf2Much said:

I was reading an article and quotes from Official World Golf Ranking board members about their decision.  Many felt they could find ways of overcoming the 54 hole and no cut policies.  From what I took away from the discussion it was LIV's "closed shop" policy that prevented them from being awarded OWGR points.  

Seems as if the PGAT has also become a lot more of a “closed shop” than ever before with all the “Designated (no cut) Events” against limited fields that receive full OWGR points. I feel like the decision was a foregone conclusion. We’ll see where it goes from here. 

[ryan.mzzz]

liv’s players play exhibition golf(definitionally, as outlined in the rejection letter) and feel entitled to world ranking points awarded to athletes in competition. there’s a huge mental disconnect there.

now, one could argue that they were snookered by greg norman into believing his sales pitch, but that’s their problem as much as if I were played for a fool at a used car lot. 

 

[PeterHenric]

4 hours ago, MGoBlue100 said:

Seems as if the PGAT has also become a lot more of a “closed shop” than ever before with all the “Designated (no cut) Events” against limited fields that receive full OWGR points. I feel like the decision was a foregone conclusion. We’ll see where it goes from here. 

Is this true? The designated no cut events will get OWGR points? I don’t know enough about them but what makes those any different than a LIV event? Because they are 72 holes instead of 54? The shotgun start? Anything else? Seems like those events shouldn’t get full points they way a normal PGA event does.

[Preeway]

I would agree they shouldn’t get full points. The key difference is the players have to qualify to play in them by playing in legitimate competitions beforehand. Personally, the designated events should be about money, not points. 

[LICC]

13 hours ago, MGoBlue100 said:

Seems as if the PGAT has also become a lot more of a “closed shop” than ever before with all the “Designated (no cut) Events” against limited fields that receive full OWGR points. I feel like the decision was a foregone conclusion. We’ll see where it goes from here. 

That is not what they mean by “closed shop”. It is not the limited field, but the lack of qualifying and relegation season to season. 

[RockerFCC]

These guys on both tours are ridiculously good, so I don't think LIV players are less competitive, or their events, even though they are a round less should not be thought of as competitive.  And outside of the top 20 or so PGAT stars, are the rest really that much better than most LIV players? Major competition shows the top LIV players certainly can hang with the top PGAT players. I would imagine the lower half of each tour could be similarly compared. While there is some merit to the argument that the extra round is a tougher test, it doesn't mean success over 54 holes isn't a good test of competitive skill. And I don't know why anyone would use the outside factors like too noisy at events, how much they get paid or anything other than scores on the course as a gauge of whether they should be represented in the world rankings. Personally, I kind of like the whole Happy Gilmore kind of mentality they have going on, it's probably something a LOT of people can identify with. I DO think it is in great part a political and PGA power influenced decision. You can argue that is their right I guess, but I think they deserve some consideration when we start talking about which players are the best in the world. They could come up with a "fair" reduced point system, or allowing their top players, either by result or money in major events, they just don't want to. 

[Preeway]

17 minutes ago, RockerFCC said:

These guys on both tours are ridiculously good, so I don't think LIV players are less competitive, or their events, even though they are a round less should not be thought of as competitive.  And outside of the top 20 or so PGAT stars, are the rest really that much better than most LIV players? Major competition shows the top LIV players certainly can hang with the top PGAT players. I would imagine the lower half of each tour could be similarly compared. While there is some merit to the argument that the extra round is a tougher test, it doesn't mean success over 54 holes isn't a good test of competitive skill. And I don't know why anyone would use the outside factors like too noisy at events, how much they get paid or anything other than scores on the course as a gauge of whether they should be represented in the world rankings. Personally, I kind of like the whole Happy Gilmore kind of mentality they have going on, it's probably something a LOT of people can identify with. I DO think it is in great part a political and PGA power influenced decision. You can argue that is their right I guess, but I think they deserve some consideration when we start talking about which players are the best in the world. They could come up with a "fair" reduced point system, or allowing their top players, either by result or money in major events, they just don't want to. 

When I refer to lack of competition I am speaking solely to the fact that there are no cuts (everyone is guaranteed a pay day), no need to qualify to get in (same field every week regardless of how bad you’ve been), and you get on this tour by invitation rather than having to qualify. Every sport has qualifiers or tryouts in some fashion. Just not LIV. 
 

And yes, there a handful of really good players there that are fun to watch. But in the end, it lacks the components necessary to qualify for points. I think the rational for why they don’t makes sense. 

As far as politics go, Norman has had a long standing beef with the PGAT going back to the 80s and 90s. He tried to get the PGAT to expand to a worldwide stage and incorporate some of the monetizing aspects you see in LIV with teams and was turned down. He’s been looking for a way to stick it to them ever since. There isn’t much, if any, love lost between them. 

[chisag]

5 hours ago, RockerFCC said:

These guys on both tours are ridiculously good, so I don't think LIV players are less competitive, or their events, even though they are a round less should not be thought of as competitive.  And outside of the top 20 or so PGAT stars, are the rest really that much better than most LIV players? Major competition shows the top LIV players certainly can hang with the top PGAT players. I would imagine the lower half of each tour could be similarly compared. While there is some merit to the argument that the extra round is a tougher test, it doesn't mean success over 54 holes isn't a good test of competitive skill. And I don't know why anyone would use the outside factors like too noisy at events, how much they get paid or anything other than scores on the course as a gauge of whether they should be represented in the world rankings. Personally, I kind of like the whole Happy Gilmore kind of mentality they have going on, it's probably something a LOT of people can identify with. I DO think it is in great part a political and PGA power influenced decision. You can argue that is their right I guess, but I think they deserve some consideration when we start talking about which players are the best in the world. They could come up with a "fair" reduced point system, or allowing their top players, either by result or money in major events, they just don't want to. 

 

... I think your reasons to accept or enjoy LIV as a Tour are all valid but has nothing to do with OWGR points or playing in the Majors. They were warned before joining LIV there would be consequences and if they were blinded by the $money$ and either willfully or ignorantly accepted Normans false promises, that's on them. As much as some want to take the politics out of the equation I think that it's like "Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?"  

... You would think when someone approached them and said if you leave the PGA Tour you will never have to make a cut again and we will pay you 10 times as much as you are making now they would have asked "Sounds great, but what's the catch?" 

 

[DaveP043]

On 10/11/2023 at 8:18 AM, RockerFCC said:

I get some of the points about not being as competitive, but no points? It just all has become so political, do not like that and should not be such a big part of sports. I don't know the right solution, but this doesn't seem like it...

I have a hard time suggesting that the OWGR's use of its pre-existing criteria is in some way "political".  Quite the opposite, for the OWGR to change its criteria specifically for LIV would be the more political move, I'm happy they didn't bend their own rules that way.

On 10/11/2023 at 12:43 PM, GolfSpy_APH said:

The players that are with LIV or playing LIV don't want to play the PGA Tour (obviously) and were better for story lines vs play when on the tour. That is really what they collective group brought or took away from the PGA Tour. 

I believe I remember a number of LIV players who said they wanted to play in PGA Tour events, even though they broke the agreement they'd signed with the PGA Tour.  They wanted the privileges without the corresponding responsibilities.

Just my opinion, but I'm glad the OWGR stuck with their acceptance criteria.  But even if they'd accepted LIV, by the time they'd considered all of the factors, no-cut, small field, short tournaments, access and relegation, strength of field, every factor diminishing the points awarded, the LIV players would still have been whining about how few points they got.  

[Stuka44]

I think because this is so new, the OWGR, can stick to their guns for now. But remember LIV was going to fail, give it two months!  Nobody of ANY consequence will go play for them!  Let them file suit, nothing will come of it.  "I am here to PROTECT THE PGA PLAYERS, and those who stuck with us".  10 MINUTES LATER!  Hey just so everybody knows I just made a deal with the LIV tour Jay Monahan! Common sense says that if the PGA made a "DEAL" with LIV without a single detail being worked out, the PGA's position, and all of the rock solid framework, and the history of how things had, and have been done, is clearly not that strong.

LIV has proven that money, regardless of if there is a cut, or its just a contract,  like every other professional sports operates,  TALKS,  and history, and the idea that a "guy isn't a real golfer if he doesn't have to risk not making the cut, is a fading idea.  Afterall the reality of it is, that anybody on the PGA tour, to whom financially it actually matters weather or not they make a cut, is likely someone most golf fans have not heard of, and wouldn't prefer to watch over other well known players.

LIV money, and influence will begin to "go to work" on things like the OWGR, format of events, and other things.  One thing at a time.  LIV took the PGA Tours  hard line stance of , "we are unassailable", "you are nothing LIV", and proved that wrong.  One thing at a time!

 

[RockerFCC]

7 hours ago, Preeway said:

When I refer to lack of competition I am speaking solely to the fact that there are no cuts (everyone is guaranteed a pay day), no need to qualify to get in (same field every week regardless of how bad you’ve been), and you get on this tour by invitation rather than having to qualify. Every sport has qualifiers or tryouts in some fashion. Just not LIV. 
 

And yes, there a handful of really good players there that are fun to watch. But in the end, it lacks the components necessary to qualify for points. I think the rational for why they don’t makes sense. 

As far as politics go, Norman has had a long standing beef with the PGAT going back to the 80s and 90s. He tried to get the PGAT to expand to a worldwide stage and incorporate some of the monetizing aspects you see in LIV with teams and was turned down. He’s been looking for a way to stick it to them ever since. There isn’t much, if any, love lost between them. 

I get what you are saying, just disagree with the premise that there shouldn't be recognition for the best performers, who are unquestionably some of the best players on the planet. And the PGA tour has all the power here, so hard for me to agree that it is Norman who is the only political one. The PGAT have squashed all competition who even suggested anything outside their ropes for decades. In the end I feel the tour had a massive influence on them making this choice, even though some of the people who made it clearly thought there were options to make something work. Hence my feeling it is driven by other than them caring about the game, or any other issues. I just thing this is about the PGA Tour making more money, which makes them not so different from those who chose LIV.

 

[RockerFCC]

2 hours ago, chisag said:

 

... I think your reasons to accept or enjoy LIV as a Tour are all valid but has nothing to do with OWGR points or playing in the Majors. They were warned before joining LIV there would be consequences and if they were blinded by the $money$ and either willfully or ignorantly accepted Normans false promises, that's on them. As much as some want to take the politics out of the equation I think that it's like "Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play?"  

... You would think when someone approached them and said if you leave the PGA Tour you will never have to make a cut again and we will pay you 10 times as much as you are making now they would have asked "Sounds great, but what's the catch?" 

 

Not sure I agree with your assessment of the scenario that occured but even if you are spot on, who says the PGAT has the right to threaten and bully their members into always doing only what they say. Isn't that the core of the LIV lawsuit argument? One the tour is quite possibly not very confident they would win? Look, I know they signed stuff saying they knew the rules, were warned, all that. And they made the choice to leave, knowing those consequences could very well be the reality. But I am not so sure the tour should have held that position, or that by law it is a winning position. They forced exclusive membership to even participate in the sport at the highest level possible. What choice did the players have, choose not to play? Play on a tour where they don't make anywhere near that money. I think Monahan and the tour has become arrogant and too secure in their position, and I am glad someone challenged that and has had some success. It's not just the players who are making a LOT of money on the PGAT. Some of this is an out of tough leadership IMHO. And I think some of the "non star" players might very well feel that way. If the rankings are based on who the best players on the planet are, how can anyone say some are not on LIV? At the very least, I think previous winners and the top players on LIV should be in all the majors, and not excluded just because they chose a better plan for themselves. And I would think most fans of golf would rather have them playing than not playing in these events, especially if they previously met the conditions to so do. Just my $.02

[RockerFCC]

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

I have a hard time suggesting that the OWGR's use of its pre-existing criteria is in some way "political".  Quite the opposite, for the OWGR to change its criteria specifically for LIV would be the more political move, I'm happy they didn't bend their own rules that way.

I believe I remember a number of LIV players who said they wanted to play in PGA Tour events, even though they broke the agreement they'd signed with the PGA Tour.  They wanted the privileges without the corresponding responsibilities.

Just my opinion, but I'm glad the OWGR stuck with their acceptance criteria.  But even if they'd accepted LIV, by the time they'd considered all of the factors, no-cut, small field, short tournaments, access and relegation, strength of field, every factor diminishing the points awarded, the LIV players would still have been whining about how few points they got.  

I guess we just disagree. I feel that some of the players on LIV ARE some of the top players in the world, and they should be recognized for their play, wherever that is. It's not like it isn't real competition. These are all REALLY good golfers, it isn't being dominated by 1 or 2 people. And I think most people want to see some of them in majors, especially if they have won them before. Just my opinion, I don't know much, generally speaking 

[Stuka44]

18 hours ago, RockerFCC said:

When I refer to lack of competition I am speaking solely to the fact that there are no cuts (everyone is guaranteed a pay day), no need to qualify to get in (same field every week regardless of how bad you’ve been), and you get on this tour by invitation rather than having to qualify. Every sport has qualifiers or tryouts in some fashion. Just not LIV. 

Let's be serious.  Getting paid a salary has nothing to do with the level of competition.  Relegation (as in soccer), or being cut from a team, is ample motivation. Does a rookie 5th  round pick cornerback, making the league minimum $865,000, not sacrifice himself on special teams trying to make a name for himself, to stay on the 53 man active roster, eventually play on defense, and get himself a Denzel Ward 5yr.  $100 million contract.  Of course he does.  If he doesn't just like golfers being paid would quickly find out.  Take whatever part of your contract is guaranteed, and we'll see you later.  Play well and you stay in the PGA/LIV top 120.  Every other sport known to mankind, has proven that elite players in any game play to win, regardless of how much money they may be being paid.  Because if you can't help someone win a championship, then you're not worth any money, and you find yourself out of the league.

Edited October 13, 2023 by Stuka44

[DaveP043]

7 minutes ago, RockerFCC said:

I guess we just disagree. I feel that some of the players on LIV ARE some of the top players in the world, and they should be recognized for their play, wherever that is. It's not like it isn't real competition. These are all REALLY good golfers, it isn't being dominated by 1 or 2 people. And I think most people want to see some of them in majors, especially if they have won them before. Just my opinion, I don't know much, generally speaking 

I definitely think there are a few really good players on LIV.  I'd have no objection to the Majors changing their invitation criteria to include some (small) number of LIV players based on their standing in LIV.  I'd prefer that LIV modify their procedures in an attempt to comply with the OWGR criteria, but LIV has said that they no interest in doing that.  They're saying "I don't care about your rules, we're good, you have to take us".  And by "good" they mean they can regularly beat  Phil and Pat Perez and a bunch of other guys nobody has ever heard of.  

[Headhammer]

They made their bed by going to LIV, but the majors are not as exciting without the likes of Brooks, Cam, DJ & Phil. The good news is many LIV guys will get exemptions into a few majors as past champions, at least for the time being. 

[chisag]

21 minutes ago, RockerFCC said:

Just my $.02

 

...  I deplore capitalisms love of money over all else. I am a lifelong member of the Screen Actors Guild. SAG in the strictest definition most certainly in your words "threaten and bully their members" into not accepting non union work. Or looking at it another way, the union has used collective bargaining to make working for a living viable for all their members with fair pay and working conditions and we are better for being unions members even with all the rules and restrictions they entail. Are there things I disagree with or wish were different? Of course but that's what compromise is all about. Quite a few members crossed the picket lines back in 2001 in the middle of a 7 month strike because they wanted/needed the money. Newsflash: around 90% of members striking also needed the money. But the scabs knew the consequences and took the cash anyway, then whined and complained when the strike was settled and they weren't re-instated. 

... I also think in the end it pretty much comes down to if you approve or disapprove of LIV.  "Most fans of golf would rather have them playing than not playing in these events, especially if they previously met the conditions to so do" Nope, I am watching the college tournament this week along with the LPGA in China so consider myself a very serious golf fan. I'd rather see invitations go out to up and coming young stars than anyone on liv. None of my golfing friends have ever watched 1 second of liv and couldn't care less about the mutineers either but as fans of golf they watch every Major. I think we just differ on whether or not life choices have consequences, especially moral ones which to me includes greed. Tip toeing a fine line, where LIV plays is just as important to me as who is playing and where they get their money.  

... That said your 2 cents are worth exactly they same as mine. Nothing discussed here has any effect on our lives and if the Martin Shkreli's of liv are awarded OWGR points and are allowed to play in the Majors again it won't make any difference in my life at all. But if not, they can snack on their $4k bottle of Moet & Chandon with their $7k jar of Beluga caviar and I'll have some $10 homemade chili and iced tea while we both watch on TV. I have a feeling I will enjoy it more than they will. 

[DaveP043]

2 hours ago, chisag said:

"Most fans of golf would rather have them playing than not playing in these events, especially if they previously met the conditions to so do" Nope,

I don't agree with you here, I think the Majors are better if all of the best players play.  Certainly Koepka and Cam Smith fall into that category, and they'll get in based on their previous wins.  DeChambeau and DJ are close, and they'll be in for another year or more. 

But in looking at the LIV money list, I can't say I believe Taylor Gooch deserves an invitation to anything, Nor Harold Varner, Mito Periera, Brandon Grace, Charles Howell III.  They MIGHT deserve to get in, if they could perform that well against bigger fields, but there's no way of comparing.  They chose to play in their own little fishbowl, isolated from the rest of the competitive golf world, and they were told that OWGR ranking points weren't available now, or maybe never.  I agree with you there, they made that choice, now they're living with the consequences.

[chisag]

27 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I don't agree with you here, I think the Majors are better if all of the best players play.  Certainly Koepka and Cam Smith fall into that category, and they'll get in based on their previous wins.  DeChambeau and DJ are close, and they'll be in for another year or more. 

 

... Dave I have no doubt I am in the minority when it comes to say Koepka, Cam and DJ not playing in Majors. But my point was someone stating every fan of golf would rather have liv players in majors, just isn't accurate because I don't and all my golf friends don't. If and it is a big IF, everyone involved could ignore the difference and just focus on the Major it wouldn't be as much of an issue. But the media loves to stir the pot and Koepka rubbing everyones nose in it with Rickie Fowler, Xander Schauffele, Max Homa and Sam Burns wearing liv team shirts was another example of stoking the flames unnecessarily.

... Of course I have absolutely no issue at all with your's or anyone else's opinion being different than my friends and I because our freedom means we have the right to disagree publicly which is quite different than liv's home. 

[Shapotomous]

4 hours ago, Stuka44 said:

Let's be serious........  Because if you can't help someone win a championship, then you're not worth any money, and you find yourself out of the league.

Have you watched the NBA recently????!!!!

[funkyjudge]

3 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I don't agree with you here, I think the Majors are better if all of the best players play.  Certainly Koepka and Cam Smith fall into that category, and they'll get in based on their previous wins.  DeChambeau and DJ are close, and they'll be in for another year or more. 

But in looking at the LIV money list, I can't say I believe Taylor Gooch deserves an invitation to anything, Nor Harold Varner, Mito Periera, Brandon Grace, Charles Howell III.  They MIGHT deserve to get in, if they could perform that well against bigger fields, but there's no way of comparing.  They chose to play in their own little fishbowl, isolated from the rest of the competitive golf world, and they were told that OWGR ranking points weren't available now, or maybe never.  I agree with you there, they made that choice, now they're living with the consequences.

I agree with you on both counts, Dave.  Currently, I believe that at least Brooks Koepka and Cam Smith deserve to be in the fields in the Majors, and maybe DJ and DeChambeau, as well, but those two are right on the outer margins. The rest of the guys that you named? Nah!

[RockerFCC]

8 hours ago, chisag said:

 

...  I deplore capitalisms love of money over all else. I am a lifelong member of the Screen Actors Guild. SAG in the strictest definition most certainly in your words "threaten and bully their members" into not accepting non union work. Or looking at it another way, the union has used collective bargaining to make working for a living viable for all their members with fair pay and working conditions and we are better for being unions members even with all the rules and restrictions they entail. Are there things I disagree with or wish were different? Of course but that's what compromise is all about. Quite a few members crossed the picket lines back in 2001 in the middle of a 7 month strike because they wanted/needed the money. Newsflash: around 90% of members striking also needed the money. But the scabs knew the consequences and took the cash anyway, then whined and complained when the strike was settled and they weren't re-instated. 

... I also think in the end it pretty much comes down to if you approve or disapprove of LIV.  "Most fans of golf would rather have them playing than not playing in these events, especially if they previously met the conditions to so do" Nope, I am watching the college tournament this week along with the LPGA in China so consider myself a very serious golf fan. I'd rather see invitations go out to up and coming young stars than anyone on liv. None of my golfing friends have ever watched 1 second of liv and couldn't care less about the mutineers either but as fans of golf they watch every Major. I think we just differ on whether or not life choices have consequences, especially moral ones which to me includes greed. Tip toeing a fine line, where LIV plays is just as important to me as who is playing and where they get their money.  

... That said your 2 cents are worth exactly they same as mine. Nothing discussed here has any effect on our lives and if the Martin Shkreli's of liv are awarded OWGR points and are allowed to play in the Majors again it won't make any difference in my life at all. But if not, they can snack on their $4k bottle of Moet & Chandon with their $7k jar of Beluga caviar and I'll have some $10 homemade chili and iced tea while we both watch on TV. I have a feeling I will enjoy it more than they will. 

LOL, Fair enough. I can't stand caviar and really don't care for Champagne. As they say, to each their own.