These days, conversations about money in golf have become as commonplace as tee markers and commercials starring Flo, the insurance person.
It’s the way of the world and always has been, but it seems particularly acute these changing days.
Perhaps you’ve heard about the ongoing negotiations among the PGA Tour, the DP World Tour and Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund, which potentially could reshape the professional game forever.
It’s about money. And more money (which suggests that His Excellency, Yasir Al-Rumayyan, playing with R&A CEO Martin Slumbers at the Dunhill Links Championship last week at the Old Course in St. Andrews, Scotland, wasn’t sheer coincidence).
The notion of compensating players for participating in the Ryder Cup resurfaced again during the sun-splashed days in Rome, Italy, where the Europeans thumped the Americans again.
It’s a subject that, like Tyrrell Hatton’s frustration, bubbles up from time to time, and it has again.
No one publicly demanded money, but the subject wormed its way into the proceedings because Patrick Cantlay chose not to wear his team hat (which apparently had little or nothing to do with money and everything to do with the size of his noggin) and Stefan Schauffele, father of Xander, blabbed that his son faced excommunication if he did not agree to the various terms of participation provided by the PGA of America.
Stefan Schauffele’s timing was unfortunate, adding an unnecessary layer of angst to the Americans’ already challenging situation. Plus, it’s not his story to tell, but he chose to tell it anyway, leading his son eventually to semi-apologize for his father’s comments, though he didn’t sound entirely contrite.
It feels increasingly idealistic in this logo-stamped world, but Ryder Cup players should not be paid to play.
“Absolutely not,” is how European captain Luke Donald said in Rome when the question was raised.
“What the Ryder Cup represents, it represents true sport … It's a passionate event. It's about pride. It's about representing your country. It's about coming together as a team.
“It's the purest form of competition we have, and I think because of that, the fans love it. There's no extrinsic motivation involved. It's purely, purely sport.”
U.S. captain Zach Johnson also believes in playing for something more than money.
“When it comes to the dollar sign, I don't mean to sound cliché, but the Ryder Cup is about more than any of that. It's about standing with a band of guys to represent your nation, to represent more than you in the game of golf. It's a sport for one week,” Johnson said.
“I would say if there's anything that deals with money, there's guys that would pay to play in this.”
As it should be.
That doesn’t mean it will stay that way, only that it should.
Paul McGinley, a former European Ryder Cup captain and a brilliant voice of reason in the game, said on a podcast last week that discussions will be had on both sides about compensating players. What one side gets, the other should have.
McGinley also said he would prefer that players not be paid for playing in the Ryder Cup, but he’s enough of a realist to understand things change, and not always for the better.
There is so much money in the game – and in the Ryder Cup – that paying the players feels like an inevitable progression. That doesn’t mean it has to be.
If someone doesn’t want to play the Ryder Cup because he isn’t getting paid, then don’t play. See what that does to his marketing opportunities.
Mark O’Meara and David Duval got branded for raising the pay-for-play issue in 1999, though their questions led to players each receiving $200,000 to donate to charity (half of which was automatically targeted to PGA of America programs).
Professional golfers are paid to play golf, but they also donate their time to various charity events. Considering that every player on the U.S. team won more than $3.5 million last year, the money issue regarding the Ryder Cup seems greedy.
There is a difference between needing something and wanting something.
No American players have asked to be paid, at least not publicly, but the subject has been raised again. PGA of America CEO Seth Waugh acknowledged to the Associated Press recently that he has talked with players about the compensation issue.
The PGA of America sends 20 percent of its television revenue to the PGA Tour which thereby benefits the players. The players also receive $200,000 to donate to whatever charities they choose, including their own.
It’s different with the Presidents Cup, which last year gave each participating player $250,000 to use as he saw fit. Players could donate it or keep it. The PGA Tour, meanwhile, donated $2 million to various charities, most of them in the area of Charlotte, North Carolina, where the event was held.
As we have seen over the past two years, players are paying more attention to where dollars come from and where they are going. It’s their business, and it’s in their best interest to stay involved.
Proponents for paying players argue that seemingly everyone associated with the Ryder Cup gets paid except the players. But there is a great value to playing in the Ryder Cup, including monetary bonuses built into player contracts for making the Ryder Cup.
There is so much money in the game – and in the Ryder Cup – that paying the players feels like an inevitable progression.
That doesn’t mean it has to be.
E-MAIL RON
Top: The pay-for-play conspiracies, stoked by hatless Patrick Cantlay and Xander Schauffele's dad, reeked.
PATRICK SMITH, GETTY IMAGES