Constructive ideas to improve the PGA Tour

[betarhoalphadelta]

So... This isn't about LIV. LIV is trying to exploit a situation where top PGA players are the ones who *really* create the value of the product on offer (televised tournament golf) but believe they're not getting their fair share. LIV wants to pull them away for a new "super" golf league, but instead we should look at what the PGA Tour is doing, and can do, to both make the top players happier and improve/grow the pie for everyone.

 

The idea for this thread is to come up with ideas that can help them do that.

 

I'll start. 

 

Guaranteed money:

 

• Top 10 players receive $250K guaranteed for every tournament they enter. 
• Players ranked 11-25 receive $100K guaranteed for every tournament they enter.
• Players 25-50 get $50K.
• Players 51-100 get $25K. 
• Players >100 get $10K. 
• If necessary (see below "cost" section), lower-value tournaments may need to reduce these numbers, but should keep some guaranteed structure).

 

What is the benefit? 

 

• Top players will often skip less prestigious tournaments. They risk missing a cut (zero money) or finishing low (not much money). Guaranteed payouts make them more likely to play in more tournaments per year.
• It funnels more of the money to top players. Since they're creating the most value, it makes sense that they get the highest payout. 
• It's graduated, so top players have a huge incentive to make sure they stay top 10 or top 25. Dropping from 10 to 11 means a significant change in guaranteed money. 
• The bottom players at every tournament are helped, albeit modestly, even if they miss the cut. This will help with travel costs, meals, caddie expenses, etc. 
• It improves strength of field at less prestigious tournaments, which improves OWGR points earned. 
• It improves strength of field at less prestigious tournaments, which will increase fan viewership/ratings. This can generate higher TV revenue in contract negotiations.
• It gives the fans a better product to watch by keeping the top players busy. 

 

What's the cost? 

 

• If players 1-125 all show up for a tournament, $6.75M (if I've done my math right).  
• $6.75M per tournament is the maximum. Unless every single player shows up, the cost per tournament will be significantly lower.  
• Only 5 tournaments currently on the PGAT have a smaller purse than $6.75M, and as far as I can tell, 4 of those 5 are alternate-field tournaments. The rest of the low-value tournaments are mostly during the winter slow season. 

 

Where does the money come from?

 

• End PIP. It was dumb and incentivizes the wrong things. 
• More top players at more tournaments will improve ratings, which improves the amount of money generated by TV contracts and the amount of money sponsors are willing to spend for purses/guaranteed money. 
• It may require offset from how much of the purse goes to the winner and top finishers for some tournaments. But this is likely a worthwhile trade-off for many players. The prize money will still be high enough to make winning a tournament or finishing top 10 a big score, just not quite as big as before. 

 

Thoughts? 

[khalespace]

3 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

So... This isn't about LIV. LIV is trying to exploit a situation where top PGA players are the ones who *really* create the value of the product on offer (televised tournament golf) but believe they're not getting their fair share. LIV wants to pull them away for a new "super" golf league, but instead we should look at what the PGA Tour is doing, and can do, to both make the top players happier and improve/grow the pie for everyone.

 

The idea for this thread is to come up with ideas that can help them do that.

 

I'll start. 

 

Guaranteed money:

 

• Top 10 players receive $250K guaranteed for every tournament they enter. 
• Players ranked 11-25 receive $100K guaranteed for every tournament they enter.
• Players 25-50 get $50K.
• Players 51-100 get $25K. 
• Players >100 get $10K. 
• If necessary (see below "cost" section), lower-value tournaments may need to reduce these numbers, but should keep some guaranteed structure).

 

What is the benefit? 

 

• Top players will often skip less prestigious tournaments. They risk missing a cut (zero money) or finishing low (not much money). Guaranteed payouts make them more likely to play in more tournaments per year.
• It funnels more of the money to top players. Since they're creating the most value, it makes sense that they get the highest payout. 
• It's graduated, so top players have a huge incentive to make sure they stay top 10 or top 25. Dropping from 10 to 11 means a significant change in guaranteed money. 
• The bottom players at every tournament are helped, albeit modestly, even if they miss the cut. This will help with travel costs, meals, caddie expenses, etc. 
• It improves strength of field at less prestigious tournaments, which improves OWGR points earned. 
• It improves strength of field at less prestigious tournaments, which will increase fan viewership/ratings. This can generate higher TV revenue in contract negotiations.
• It gives the fans a better product to watch by keeping the top players busy. 

 

What's the cost? 

 

• If players 1-125 all show up for a tournament, $6.75M (if I've done my math right).  
• $6.75M per tournament is the maximum. Unless every single player shows up, the cost per tournament will be significantly lower.  
• Only 5 tournaments currently on the PGAT have a smaller purse than $6.75M, and as far as I can tell, 4 of those 5 are alternate-field tournaments. The rest of the low-value tournaments are mostly during the winter slow season. 

 

Where does the money come from?

 

• End PIP. It was dumb and incentivizes the wrong things. 
• More top players at more tournaments will improve ratings, which improves the amount of money generated by TV contracts and the amount of money sponsors are willing to spend for purses/guaranteed money. 
• It may require offset from how much of the purse goes to the winner and top finishers for some tournaments. But this is likely a worthwhile trade-off for many players. The prize money will still be high enough to make winning a tournament or finishing top 10 a big score, just not quite as big as before. 

 

Thoughts? 

I like ending PIP

~$7 mil guaranteed money per tournament, that is a lot of money. May be reduce the guaranteed money by half.

Most top players play around 20 tournaments. I am not sure if they want to play more than that.

[vandyfan]

I think less events and less fully exempt players. If you clipped 6-8 events from the calendar you could repurpose that money to the other events. Also, and this is controversial, get rid of the Champions Tour. Just end it. Take whatever money is dumped into CT and re-allocate it to PGA Tour and Korn Ferry. To me the Korn Ferry tour has much more importance to the long term success of the PGA Tour than the Champions Tour. Also, I love the Stephen Alker story but I assume most people are not tuning in to watch Stephen Alker and Brian Gay beat up everyone. Could be wrong. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

12 minutes ago, khalespace said:

I like ending PIP

~$7 mil guaranteed money per tournament, that is a lot of money. May be reduce the guaranteed money by half.

Most top players play around 20 tournaments. I am not sure if they want to play more than that.

 

Admittedly I started coming up with guaranteed numbers before I added it all up. Changing the values is fine, but I think it's the concept and structure that is important.

 

Agreed many top players may not want to play every week, but $250K just for showing up is an incentive to maybe up that from 20 to 25... That's $1.25M more for working an extra 5 weeks. You see the top 10 players each playing 5 more tournaments on average, and the fields get stronger, the product improves, etc...

[4thand11]

All for ending PiP but I don't know if a token guarantee is the answer either.  The top 10 guys are already very wealthy and I don't see them playing in extra tournaments that they don't really want to play in, for an extra $250K.

 

I think the tour needs have a stratified system where they stop pretending all tournaments are equally great and therefore have essentially equal prize purses.   Sorry but Sanderson Farms and the Genesis are not the same.  Take the most prestigious non-major tournaments (Genesis, WGC events, etc.) and DRASTICALLY up the prize purses so all the top players will play them.  In effect a 3-tier system, with the majors and Players at the top, the top-tier regular events next, and the rest of the calendar-fillers after that.

 

They need to make the bigger tour stops feel big and attract all the top guys to play them with massive purses.

[DFS PFD]

I can't debate guaranteed money, these guys shouldn't lose money for showing up. But I struggle with the top 10 getting even more (I understand they've earned their value), but they aren't the ones struggling to make it, so I'd like to see $250K guaranteed reduced to say $100K and redistribute some of that to the lower earning players who won't be on tour forever. The top players make enough that $250K may not even move the needle for them anyways. 

[ikegoody]

If I'm looking at this right, it seems that the players would simply be paid for showing up, but what about prize money? If the top 125 show up and collect the $6.75M, is there an additional prize pool for results? If a player ranked 100+ wins, do they still just get their allocated $10k? Sure, their ranking will go up and they'll get a bigger cut the next tourney they enter, but it's hardly the $1M+ they'd currently get for a win.

Edited June 2, 2022 by ikegoody

[NJBigFish22]

I don’t think large guarantees are the way to go.  I do think that if you are fully exempt (125) these players should receive $10-15,000 for expenses and travel.  

 

Having different tournament tiers is a good idea, prize money, FedEx points and exemptions should be different. 

 

Top 100 qualify for the playoffs.  Players 101-175, plus top 15 from KFT and Top 10 ranked college players have a 72 hole tournament for the last 25 exempt spots.  

 

The first event in Hawaii for the winners, make it a match play tournament. Every player in field gets $250,000. The winner gets $3 million winner takes all bonus.

 

All players must play 50-60% of tournaments or they loose status, unless injured.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

48 minutes ago, DFS PFD said:

I can't debate guaranteed money, these guys shouldn't lose money for showing up. But I struggle with the top 10 getting even more (I understand they've earned their value), but they aren't the ones struggling to make it, so I'd like to see $250K guaranteed reduced to say $100K and redistribute some of that to the lower earning players who won't be on tour forever. The top players make enough that $250K may not even move the needle for them anyways. 

 

Yeah, the idea is that the ones who are drawing eyeballs to TV screens are the top players, and they feel they're not getting proper compensation for that. 

 

The goal is to find a way to improve that, but ALSO to find a way to improve the product. Top players want it both ways--get money commensurate with their value drawing viewers, but compete in as few tournaments as possible (and thus some tournaments get terrible viewership). 

 

12 minutes ago, ikegoody said:

If I'm looking at this right, it seems that the players would simply be paid for showing up, but what about prize money? If the top 125 show up and collect the $6.75M, is there an additional prize pool for results? If a player ranked 100+ wins, do they still just get their allocated $10k? Sure, their ranking will go up and they'll get a bigger cut the next tourney they enter, but it's hardly the $1M+ they'd currently get for a win.

 

There would be prize money in addition. Winning or finishing top 10 should still be a massive reward. This is an issue for the less prestigious tournaments, because purse values aren't universally large. So actual amount of guarantee and where it comes from may need to be adjusted. But there would DEFINITELY still need to be prize money. 

 

The other caveat that I would make is that guaranteed money doesn't count towards the money list. Money list should be based purely on tournament winnings, not guaranteed money. 

[Hammer_Hands]

[iutodd]

I think there are two things the tour can work to improve:

 

1.) The top guys need to make more money.

2.) The guys at the bottom need more security.

 

Let's start with number 2:

 

The tour has added one thing that sort of went under the radar this year:

 

https://www.si.com/golf/news/the-pga-tour-will-pay-50k-to-every-pro-who-plays-15-events

 

So if you play 15 events you'll get $50,000.  

 

The tour can't protect everyone.  And it's hard to know what these guys are working with in some ways.  Let's pick a guy near the bottom at random.  How about Ted Potter Jr?  Here are his relevant stats for 2020-2021:

 

25 events, 16 missed cuts, 9 cuts made, 1 top 10.  $356,000 in earnings.  His 182 finish in the Fedex cup earned him no bonus.

 

Did he "make" money?  Like - who knows?  But this year he would get a $50K bump from the tour and that's a fairly significant bump from the $350K he earned.  I do think it's fair to ask what obligation the tour has to the players outside the FedEx 125/guys that don't keep their cards but I will just note that the guy at 126 in 2021 earned $966,000 in winnings and the guy at 150 earned $650,000 (and all those guys got $85K in FedEx payout (deferred)).  And purses increased a lot this year so the guys in the 126-150 slots will make more.

 

As for number 1:

 

The LIV conversation has put this into an interesting light I think.  LIV has 8 events with $255 million in total payouts plus the potential for players to just sign for a giant amount of money.  A point made in the main LIV thread was that the young guys have such massive potential earnings it's hard for them to jump.  The PGA Tour has 47 events with $480 million in purses plus all the retirement stuff plus the bonuses (not sure if the $75 million FedEX bonuses are included in the quoted $480 million number or not) plus endorsements.  It's not clear what kind of endorsements players will keep going to LIV btw.

 

The PGA needs to sell the top players on the idea that they can earn the most money staying on their tour.  They clearly have more purse money up for grabs.  I think the FedEx Cup payouts need changed.  They are too heavily weighted toward the winner.  Here is my idea:

 

What if, instead of the bonuses being pre-set, they instead changed the structure to say: OK, if you WIN the Fed Ex Cup you get a bonus that gets you to a certain "salary" level.  So, as an example, the winner of the FedEx Cup is guaranteed $20 million in salary...So in 2021 Patrick Cantlay earned $7.6 million through the BMW. His bonus for winning would have been $12.4 million.  Second place gets to...say, $15 million.  Rahm would have gotten around $7.2 million.  Third gets to $12.5 million...so silly Kevin Na would have gotten something like $8.3 million because he jumped so high..  4th-10th gets to $10 million.  11-20 gets to $7.5 million.  21-25 gets to $6 million.  26-30 gets to $5 million - with a $1 million minimum guarantee.

 

*If a player has already earned more than that - like say if Scheffler this year has a crappy playoff run after making $11 million in 2022 - they're guaranteed at least $1 million for making it to East Lake.

 

The tour should also expand the Comcast Top 10 to include the Top 30 IMO - and give every player who finishes in the top 30 for the regular season a $1 million bonus.

Edited June 2, 2022 by iutodd

[TLUBulldogGolf]

I felt like the PIP was a roundabout way to give more money to the top guys, but I think it incentivizes the wrong things. Maybe just increase the FedEx cup prizes. They are already elevating tournaments to pretty incredible amounts as far as prize money. Scheffler is going to shatter the money record this year. 

 

I don't know that I like giving out that much guaranteed, I like the idea of some sort of stipend. I'd really like to see them continue putting more into the KFT. 

[llewol007]

Pga just needs to put a good product with competitive payouts. They are increasing their purses and a lot of players are sticking around. Who is gonna suffer is probably the Kornferry tour. The thing about PGA is they are televising their stuff here a lot more so the player who play LIV will basically just be playing for the cash purses. So to the everyday fan who watches, I could care less is DJ or Lee Westwood or Phil decide to go. There is a lot of talent now that the up and comers will start to be in the spotlight i.e Burns, Scheffler, Thomas, Morikawa, Speith, Rory. Do we really need to be worried 

[me05501]

I don't think guaranteed money is the answer to any of the Tour's issues. The dog-eat-dog aspect of it is what makes the whole thing work from top to bottom. It's a supposed reflection of the supposed U.S. ideal of limitless opportunity for those willing to take the risk of flaming out and getting nothing. 

 

If anything, guaranteed money from sponsorship deals has diluted the competitive fire of many players we can all name who probably would have a few more major trophies on their mantle if they weren't so comfortable. 

 

I'd rather see them double down on the "limitless opportunity" thing. 

 

Maybe the guy who wins each Korn Ferry event should get a sponsors exemption into the next PGA Tour event. This would create some interesting story lines and give more exposure to players who are doing well on the lower tour. 

Edited June 2, 2022 by me05501

[KNOWMOREDOUBLES]

Next thing you know we'll be forgiving college loans!

[mat562]

19 hours ago, joelco said:

 

Surely you jest?

 

The Fed Ex Cup is undoubtedly the pinnacle of the season. It's a riveting series of events in which the cut and thrust of play over several linked events and the knockout format guarantees high drama. I can name every player to win it and vividly recall the crucial shots they hit on the way to those victories as though I'd hit them myself.

 

In fact, I'm the one who jests. If I took the labels off the tins in my kitchen cupboard, the build-up to tomorrow's dinner would be more exciting.

 

 

Edited June 3, 2022 by mat562

[betarhoalphadelta]

1 hour ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

I felt like the PIP was a roundabout way to give more money to the top guys, but I think it incentivizes the wrong things. Maybe just increase the FedEx cup prizes. They are already elevating tournaments to pretty incredible amounts as far as prize money. Scheffler is going to shatter the money record this year. 

 

I don't know that I like giving out that much guaranteed, I like the idea of some sort of stipend. I'd really like to see them continue putting more into the KFT. 

 

I think my concern with just increasing the FedEx cup prizes is that for the top players, getting into the FedEx cup is already easy. What I was hoping was to find a way to grow the entire pie--get them playing more of the less prestigious tournaments, improving the fields. That will lead to higher ratings and more money in broadcast rights. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

Maybe another idea...

 

Just make "appearance fees" legal... These wouldn't be structured payments that you have to have provided by the PGA Tour, but allow it to be above board that tournament promoters can pay top players to show up. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

Just now, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

I think my concern with just increasing the FedEx cup prizes is that for the top players, getting into the FedEx cup is already easy. What I was hoping was to find a way to grow the entire pie--get them playing more of the less prestigious tournaments, improving the fields. That will lead to higher ratings and more money in broadcast rights. 

 

They can only do so much, requiring a minimum number of events, requiring new tournaments every number of years. It just seems like the easiest way to get them more. Outside majors and traditionally prestigious events, I think fields are largely due to where tournaments fall on the schedule, and it's hard to generate prestige where it doesn't already exist. 

[NJBigFish22]

1 hour ago, iutodd said:

I think there are two things the tour can work to improve:

 

1.) The top guys need to make more money.

2.) The guys at the bottom need more security.

 

Let's start with number 2:

 

The tour has added one thing that sort of went under the radar this year:

 

https://www.si.com/golf/news/the-pga-tour-will-pay-50k-to-every-pro-who-plays-15-events

 

So if you play 15 events you'll get $50,000.  

 

The tour can't protect everyone.  And it's hard to know what these guys are working with in some ways.  Let's pick a guy near the bottom at random.  How about Ted Potter Jr?  Here are his relevant stats for 2020-2021:

 

25 events, 16 missed cuts, 9 cuts made, 1 top 10.  $356,000 in earnings.  His 182 finish in the Fedex cup earned him no bonus.

 

Did he "make" money?  Like - who knows?  But this year he would get a $50K bump from the tour and that's a fairly significant bump from the $350K he earned.  I do think it's fair to ask what obligation the tour has to the players outside the FedEx 125/guys that don't keep their cards but I will just note that the guy at 126 in 2021 earned $966,000 in winnings and the guy at 150 earned $650,000 (and all those guys got $85K in FedEx payout (deferred)).  And purses increased a lot this year so the guys in the 126-150 slots will make more.

 

As for number 1:

 

The LIV conversation has put this into an interesting light I think.  LIV has 8 events with $255 million in total payouts plus the potential for players to just sign for a giant amount of money.  A point made in the main LIV thread was that the young guys have such massive potential earnings it's hard for them to jump.  The PGA Tour has 47 events with $480 million in purses plus all the retirement stuff plus the bonuses (not sure if the $75 million FedEX bonuses are included in the quoted $480 million number or not) plus endorsements.  It's not clear what kind of endorsements players will keep going to LIV btw.

 

The PGA needs to sell the top players on the idea that they can earn the most money staying on their tour.  They clearly have more purse money up for grabs.  I think the FedEx Cup payouts need changed.  They are too heavily weighted toward the winner.  Here is my idea:

 

What if, instead of the bonuses being pre-set, they instead changed the structure to say: OK, if you WIN the Fed Ex Cup you get a bonus that gets you to a certain "salary" level.  So, as an example, the winner of the FedEx Cup is guaranteed $20 million in salary...So in 2021 Patrick Cantlay earned $7.6 million through the BMW. His bonus for winning would have been $12.4 million.  Second place gets to...say, $15 million.  Rahm would have gotten around $7.2 million.  Third gets to $12.5 million...so silly Kevin Na would have gotten something like $8.3 million because he jumped so high..  4th-10th gets to $10 million.  11-20 gets to $7.5 million.  21-25 gets to $6 million.  26-30 gets to $5 million - with a $1 million minimum guarantee.

 

*If a player has already earned more than that - like say if Scheffler this year has a crappy playoff run after making $11 million in 2022 - they're guaranteed at least $1 million for making it to East Lake.

 

The tour should also expand the Comcast Top 10 to include the Top 30 IMO - and give every player who finishes in the top 30 for the regular season a $1 million bonus.

The tour needs to do better, and the options I presented and you presented are going to be extremely difficult, and basically it all comes down to money and who has it.

 

If LIV takes hold, those players will earn significantly more money in endorsements than on the PGA Tour.  There are a lot of non US based companies around the world that care less about being woke or care about Saudi Arabia.  If these players play more outside US, the endorsement money will flow.

 

As for the purses, the LIV is offering almost 3X the purse size.  Plus a player only has to play 1/6 of the amount of events on tour to make close to the same money.  Some simple math. If the $28 million LIV purse was divided equally, each player would make $583,000.  Now for the 8 events $4,666,000.  All guaranteed.  Not counting any upfront money.  Cantlay made $7.2 in a lot more events with minimal guarantee.  FedEx bonus, Comcast, PIP are all well and good, but aren’t guaranteed.  The biggest hope for keeping the top guys on the PGAT is for the LIV to an absolute S**t show and players actually not make anything close to being reported.

 

I type all that to say the tour will have a hard time increasing purses enough to reach the guarantee that they are up against, a lot of companies aren’t doing sponsorships for sports like in the past.  If the tour has to double purses, they may not have enough from corporate sponsors or media rights deals to do it.  The tour and their partners don’t have deep enough pockets.

[Strategery]

Reduce from 4 to 3 rounds. Reduce from 4 to 3 hours via shot clock. Golf just takes too long.

[cdnglf]

Just find a sugar daddy and give everyone 3x the money that they currently do.

That's basically the LIV model, no?

 

[getitdaily]

Give tiger a cart

And all the trt and hgh he needs to stay young

[tatertot]

Hold on ... who on earth is honestly thinking "you know what, pro golfers really don't make enough money. We need a way to shovel more money into these hard working men's pockets so they'll play more golf on my TV." Seriously? That's where we're at as a society? We have people going hungry, and we're debating how to get pro golfers more money?

Edited June 2, 2022 by tatertot

[tatertot]

I got some ideas ...

 

* Raise prices of Pro V1s from $4 a ball to $75 a ball

* $500 for a new 3 wood isn't enough ... make it a $1,000

* $750 for a round at Pebble Beach is way underpriced ... make it $1,500

[betarhoalphadelta]

19 minutes ago, tatertot said:

Hold on ... who on earth is honestly thinking "you know what, pro golfers really don't make enough money. We need a way to shovel more money into these hard working men's pockets so they'll play more golf on my TV." Seriously? That's where we're at as a society? We have people going hungry, and we're debating how to get pro golfers more money?

 

Well, the question isn't "how to get pro golfers more money". The question is what does the PGA Tour need to do for its long-term health in order to continue providing their product--tournament golf with the best players in the world?

 

By definition we want more golf on our TVs, and better golf, for that matter. That's why we're in the "Tour Talk" subforum at GolfWRX!

 

The question is how do we get that? And more money might be one of the answers... I'm looking for as many others as we all can come up with, though. 

[Chunkitgood]

How the heck could you be a “top player” and not make enough money to make this irrelevant?

[Mr.Cleeks]

I 100% support the idea behind ending the PIP. The rich are getting richer and it's as simple as that. I think the tour should pour use the pip money to increase the purses for alternate events and the KFT.

[Jwin323]

I’d like to see one event, maybe the TofC where the tour pays all expenses for the players and families and caddies for the week in exchange for a say $10 mill winner take all. That would add some pucker on the Sunday back nine.

[Tpfol]

Why does it need improvements? It's popularity is huge