sdandrea1 I don't think they thought they'd have to give up the majors, though. I don't think any of them care about playing PGA Tour events. Whether they were just naive or LIV sold them a bill of goods that they'd be able to play majors I don't know, but I bet if you told them they could play the majors only they'd be fine
Super League Predictions
sdandrea1 It could get interesting if enough "name" players said "I want to play and I haven't signed with LIV, but I'm not signing your non-compete any more". Could they force the Tour to relax and restructure the contract? Plenty of players want to play on the Tour so they wouldn't have a shortage, but does the Tour need big name players?
It's going to be interesting if LIV expands and keeps pumping in the money. In order to compete, the PGA tour will need to get more sponsor money at a time when corporations aren't seeing much growth in the future. More people have been playing recently than ever before, but at least anecdotally in my area, the peak was probably six months ago and now the numbers are dropping. New course development doesn't seem to be a thing and that would be required to fuel growth above and beyond where golf is now. It seems probable that LIV may have hit at just the right time to outspend the PGA Tour and take a large share from them over the next few years if the LIV sponsor thinks there is a payoff.
PGA will continue to hang on to the old ways as long as they can.
Change is a comin'.
The more they bleat, the more I want them to fail miserably.
btw, the President's Cup is an exhibition, and a joke of one as well.
Non competitive and boring, and meaningless.
Invented only to appease those that are "left out" and of course, an attempt at money making for the PGA.
- Edited
johnnydoom if the LIV sponsor thinks there is a payoff.
The sponsor (Saudi Royal Family) is getting the payoff they want. For them it's not monetary. 
So we can't measure success like we normally would by them making money.
Greg Norman says they're here to stay. But time will tell if they'll continue to throw around money like it was candy.
Sneakylong For them it's not monetary
I disagree. Although there is not a payoff anytime soon, if they take enough (or potentially all) of the PGA Tour's business they'll be making an annual profit 5 - 10 years from now. Whether they take away the top tier, or become a partner in it. You think they are sport washing, I think they are investing in long-term diversity from the oil industry since they know the oil will dry up eventually. If they are simply sport washing, I think their interest is only short term and they'll dump the whole thing in a couple of years. Golf is not going to give them billions of dollars of extra access into new markets and absolutely nobody (I'd wager even you) is choosing their gas by how much Saudi oil content there is in it.
KCee Plenty of players want to play on the Tour so they wouldn't have a shortage, but does the Tour need big name players?
The Tour will always have 'big name' players. Guys like Scheffler will come along and win a few tournaments a year, every year, and they will become those big names. There will never be someone like TW or Jack though. Not that we might ever see anyway. Not sure how long we will remember their names, but there def will be stars passing through.
Look at Zalatoris. A big name already, and has never won. There are others, and will continue to be. Some of the big names now, going to LIV, are almost has-beens anyway. No loss, except for the 'draw' the PGA wants.
- Edited
Sneakylong But time will tell if they'll continue to throw around money like it was candy.
We need only to look at our own country's political parties to answer that. Yes. They will pump in even more in future years. They won't stop. They are 'buying a new face', and it takes time for the old one to get rid of the scars.
Par4QC It's pretty clear they own a chunk of both parties. Despite all of the tough language coming out of Washington politicians, there is absolutely no official effort to change the official status that they are an ally and business partner.
sdandrea1 Maybe they're just trying to bust up the PGA monopoly on competitive pro golf? That would open the door to move about in the scene as desired.......IF their LIV agreements allow.
Greg Norman is just doing what he wanted to do 30 years ago, but failed to do. Which is his 'Stars' Tour. Now he has a backer with deep pockets.
I'd bet dollars to donuts that these contracts require them to play all of the LIV events. But don't prevent them from playing elsewhere if there is no LIV exhibition going on that week.
LIV is the usurper here. The PGA Tour doesn't want to give any ground to a competitor that they cannot financially compete with. LIV wasn't part of the lawsuit. LIV has no claim of harm imo.
They're getting players and having their events. It's the players that wanted their cake and eat it too and tried unsuccessfully to claim they were being harmed by being suspended by the PGA Tour.
Reading the tea leaves the PGA Tour may have to make some minor adjustments. But both the PGA Tour and LIV have contractional obligations that the player agrees to by being a member.
I wonder who will be the first LIV player to say 'I don't want to travel all around the world playing in all the required LIV events'. What will their punishment be for violating their agreements?
johnnydoom I was merely referring to the fact that our parties throw literal billions into campaigns, with no profits to be made. It is money that is gone forever, and if you watch politics, with nothing to show for it. From either side of the aisle.
At least the Saudis are not taking that money from their people's wallets/begging it with dinners/donations.
johnnydoom there is not a payoff anytime soon
They have stated that at this point, "start up" costs are expected, like any business, and the initial investment is expected to bring some returns down the road, like any business.
Sneakylong I wonder who will be the first LIV player to say 'I don't want to travel all around the world playing in all the required LIV events'. What will their punishment be for violating their agreements?
We'd have to know how their contracts read, before giving an educated answer. Doubt we will ever know that.
If the judge yesterday had the sense to ask to see one, as they should have, we could then get that info.
Par4QC They will pump in even more in future years. They won't stop. They are 'buying a new face', and it takes time for the old one to get rid of the scars.
I agree 100%. And in their mind more lipstick on the pig will make them look less like a pig. lol
- Edited
Par4QC that our parties throw literal billions into campaigns,
The money they throw away is ours. They are all getting richer by the day. We are the one's that are literally throwing our money away. The Saudis are re-investing their oil profits.
Sneakylong But, there are reports that things are getting much better in that country, so maybe this is their 'boost' to make it faster.
Let's say in 2 years we see their country has done a huge turnaround, how will people look at them then?
Already know the answer.....just look at the talk here about things from 150 yrs. ago, still causing problems. Like slavery, for ex..
It won't matter to a lot of people what they do there, they will always be 'bad guys'.
- Edited
Sneakylong What will their punishment be for violating their agreements?
Death........ it's a cultural thing.
Sneakylong I agree 100%. And in their mind more lipstick on the pig will make them look less like a pig. lol
I will go with Brooks not wanting to play all of the events.