I read where Scottie Scheffler, Justin Thomas, Rickie Fowler and others think the LIV players should be fined or otherwise penalized to return to the PGA Tour.
Huh? The individual players should pay the LIV guys to come back. If Phil Mickelson, Brooks Koepka, Dustin Johnson and other name guys didn’t join LIV, would Scheffler, Thomas, Fowler and the rest of the elites have $20 million, limited-field, no-cut “signature events?” Would the elite 36 get to split $750 million? Would the tour have done that on its own? Not a chance. Without these guys, LIV probably never would have achieved this level of relevance, and the PGA Tour would be same old, same old.
I'm not ready to put Mickelson next to the late Curt Flood, but Flood brought free agency, which resulted in significant economic wealth to baseball players. That’s what Mickelson and the others who followed him did for professional golfers: brought them significant economic wealth.
Charlie Jurgonis
Fairfax, Virginia
A great deal has been said or written about the future of professional golf, with LIV as a participant. However, I have seen very little of what fans or spectators want. Have there been any surveys or forums or investigations? After all, the money is only going to be available for a product that people will pay to watch, whether live or on TV.
Here in the United Kingdom, LIV golf is not readily watchable. And in any case, I really struggle to find any interest in “exhibition” golf.
I have been brought up on white-knuckle-ride competition, and I love nothing more than seeing a youngster arrive on the scene and prevail against the odds. I also love to see the very best golfers play their very best golf. Both are possible in the pre-LIV arrangements.
I am not keen on the LIV “closed circuit” setup, with very little jeopardy in sight. Come to that, I am not sure about the new PGA Tour elite proposal either.
Andrew Pearse
Guilsborough, Northamptonshire, England
I am not a fan of exhibition golf, which is what LIV does. It is not a viable alternative to competitive golf. If the public’s eyes wander from PGA Tour golf, then so be it.
PGA Tour tournaments are true competitive golf. Changing to three-day events is like changing to 12-hole layouts. LIV is not real competitive golf. We all know where the true athletes make their credentials, and that’s on the PGA Tour. Anything else is fluff.
It is unwise for the PGA Tour to try and compete with LIV money. The PGA Tour has the true top-echelon product. It will survive. Making this a money war will yield a poor result.
Keith McIntyre
Statesboro, Georgia
LIV is not the problem. Twice now in two weeks, the PGA Tour showed no respect for its members.
An amateur wins one week, and they give top prize to the guy who finished second (“It’s decision time for Nick Dunlap,” January 22 GGP). What about the charities? Maybe they would like to be a winner.
Then, two weeks later, the winner gets first-place prize after 54 holes (“Clark takes place in Pebble Beach lore,” February 5 GGP). Is that fair to a bunch who might have had a shot after 72 holes?
They wonder why we are less interested.
Andrew MacLeod
St. Simons Island, Georgia
GGP published a letter contributed by Peter S. Kaufman that was analytical, sans emotion, of the PGA Tour/LIV merger (“It’s Your Honor,” February 5 GGP). I would encourage everyone interested in this professional golf world issue to read his thoughts about the ongoing discussion of the “merger.”
Kaufman’s credentials speak for themselves, and his experience/analysis puts the whole money issue with the PGA Tour and LIV in real-world economic reality.
Traditionalists will scream; moralists will also. But the reality is that money talks. To paraphrase, “He who has the gold is king!”
Dave Richner
Kingwood, Texas
Global Golf Post welcomes reader comment. Write to executive editor Steve Harmon at saharmon83@gmail.com and provide your full name, city, state and country of residence. If your comment is selected for publication, GGP will contact you to verify the authenticity of the email and confirm your identity. We would not publish your email address. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and brevity.