• Tour Talk

  • Players Championship and the week that was/wasn't...

To clarify something about the FedEx cup deal... this was just reported yesterday, via Golf Channel.

**PONTE VEDRA BEACH, Fla. – Along with the announcement on Tuesday that the PGA Tour has reached a new, 10-year agreement with FedEx to sponsor the circuit’s season-long points race came news that the deal includes a category exclusivity clause.

According to sources, the clause will keep players from participating in the season-long race if they have endorsement deals with one of FedEx’s competitors.

“All I'm going to say on that front is when you're in business with someone for 30 years, and you're about to commit to 10 more, you do some things to protect each other on a long-term basis,” commissioner Jay Monahan said. “That's what we've done in this agreement, and our players know that; our players understand it; our players think so highly of FedEx and what they've meant to them in terms of playing financial opportunities. So we do everything we can to protect our partners.”

Lee Westwood and Louis Oosthuizen both have endorsement deals with UPS but have been grandfathered in and will not be impacted. Their manager, ISM’s Chubby Chandler, said he has not received any official correspondence from the Tour regarding the sponsorship status of either player.**

So it appears, at least on the surface, that players that have already been sponsored by UPS (or another competitor to FedEx) prior to this new contract coming into effect, will be permitted to compete in the $10 million FedEx Cup points race.

But the bigger issue not being talked much about with this new "exclusivity clause" agreed to with FedEx, is what happens when other sponsors start demanding the same criteria for their tournaments? Is Farmer's Insurance, Bridgestone, etc. gonna expect the same concessions in their tournaments when it comes time for them to renew their sponsorship deals?

It smells like a can of worms may have been opened.

Interesting.....I could see it being legal....there is some sort of joke looming about getting free shipping, but cannot come up with anything at this time😉

I thought it was a great tournament. It has one of the strongest fields all year and tied for the biggest purse with the PGA at 10,500,000.00.

I think it is the 5th Major. It's a tougher course with the recent changes where disaster awaits on any hole. You really need to manage your way around that course. It's a tournament where truly anyone in the strong field can win.

For me it ticks off the criteria for a Major. Strong field, large purse and I like that this one is played on the same tough course year after year (35 years) like the Masters.

No one complains when Fred Couples or Bernard Langer competes for 54 holes at the Masters and then collapses. I like that a short hitter or bomber can win at the Players. Unique tournament in it's own right.

Sunday's television ratings couldn't beat the final round of the Pebble Beach Pro-Am back in February.
Down 16% from last year's event, down 1/3 from 2015, and tied as the lowest final round of this same event going all the way back to 1998.

But... I'm glad you liked it.

    PA-PLAYA

    I think that using television ratings is of limited value these days and certainly when trying to compare to years gone by .

    millions of people have ditched cable tv and the numbers are growing rapidly ( especially up here) a large segment of the population streams their sports now and others like myself use android boxes to watch .

    Golf viewership and participation rates have been dying for years now and will likely continue to. its not just golf but NFL etc are all getting less views ( although I suspect that the above reasons are a contributor)

    as far as I know spring and summer golf tourneys always get less viewership ( excluding majors) than winter and fall events do .....weather is nicer and more folks are out and about not sitting in and watching tv.

    i too enjoyed the tournament, especially with Poulter in the hunt, a nice story line. The lack of a big name in the hunt Sunday probably hurt a bit . I only watched Th,fri and Sunday and watched it all Sunday.

    as for the course, the pros seem to like it and while it is quite a deviation from the normal courses we see, I think that it adds excitement and intrigue to the event so I'm fine with it. 17 is always voted the best and most exciting hole on tour
    not what i want to see every week ( then again neither is a US Open set up) likewise I wouldn't want to see a course like St Andrews or Chambers Bay used every week, i like that they are mixed in once in a while

        What happens if UPS decides they want to wholly sponsor a tournament......and they demand no mention of FedEx during the broadcasts? And, of course, no player logos or on course signs??

          Par4QC

          I'm no financial wizard, but $10 million per year over the course of 10 years is a lot of money. And that's just for the year-long points race annuity windfall, not including the $6.5 million sponsorship purse they provide to the FedEx St. Jude every season.

          So to answer your question, if UPS gave me said demand for what amounts to a $5-$6 million per year sponsorship, I'd politely decline.

            Weirfan

            I think the 17th is a fabulous hole, undoubtedly my favorite hole of the entire layout. But overall the course just seems a bit too artificial for my tastes. Then again, I tend to favor the more traditional style layouts. I was never a huge fan of Doral either, so maybe it has more to do with the typical Florida style layout than anything else (superficial mounding, lots of water, etc..) Yet I do like the Honda Classic and Bay Hill, and both those courses have a lot of the same characteristics I guess.

            The streaming viewership aspect, imo, has yet to make a sizable difference as far as taking away normal television viewing (at least for golf). Although there's no doubt that in the coming years it will have a significant impact as far as a lot of other sports. I don't think there's any doubt that the PGA Tour is already looking ahead and preparing for that inevitability. And when that does happen, it'll be interesting to see how they go about marketing it, and how that will all transition with the tournament sponsors, advertisements, etc.

            I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that a majority of the viewers watching golf currently are older, as in those who would still rather watch the program via cable tv as opposed to online streaming. The other aspect is within the streaming concept itself and the potential features available to the viewer. If the only available-viewing option is live, then that's going to be a huge negative to those of us who've grown to enjoy the ability to DVR the coverage and FFW through commercial ads a few hours later watching it delayed.

            That ability to FFW through commercials and all of the other nonsense is really the only thing holding my interest currently. I might make an exception with maybe the Masters, since commercials are limited to only 4 minutes per hour during the usual telecast. And their streaming coverage online is excellent, as I'm usually watching it prior to the live televised coverage starting. I'm sure to some degree that the online streaming is fairly significant that week for golf, but mostly because they seem to improve their online product each year. It is fantastic, especially if you're using a wide-screen computer monitor. They allegedly implemented a viewing app for Apple TV this past tournament, although I have Apple TV and searched all of my available apps and couldn't locate it. But that would be an awesome option too.

            But given where things are heading, I think the PGA Tour would be wise to consider creating their own network and do something similar, if they're not in that planning process already.

            Then, of course, the question is whether they'll require an annual fee to subscribe, and if so - how much.

            And one last thing - let's assume that a majority of people will completely do away with cable tv at some point and convert to online streaming for most of their sports/entertainment viewing. What impact will that have on download speeds? I currently have the quickest/best online package available for residential customers, yet there are times when it's impossible to watch something because so many other people within the network territory are also online, like peak hours for instance... Sunday night, 8 p.m. Although this seems to be the direction we're heading for sure, I'm not so sure that most internet service providers are prepared for that type of demand quite yet. But you can bet that when they upgrade their servers and overall infrastructures to better handle that type of increased volume - those upgrade expenses are going to be quite significant, and naturally passed on to the consumer.

              I believe I heard The Players since it's been played at TPC Sawgrass (since 1982) and The Colonial (now Dean and Deluca) are the only tournaments that haven't had a back to back winner. I tend to like courses that don't favor one type of player (i.e. a bomber). It's also nice to see where minus 10 wins a tournament.

              Also, my guess is if you asked the players besides the Majors which tournament they'd like to win, it would be the Players. That would say a lot in factoring whether it being called a 5th Major has any merit IMO.

              Outside of the "Masters",this is one of my favorite tournaments to watch.
              Seems like danger is just around the corner on just about every hole.
              You always have one of the if not the strongest fields of the year,and the fact that
              no one seems to be able to repeat as the winner proves what a challenge Sawgrass is.
              17 has the major league 'pucker factor' for being such a short hole,just adds to the excitement
              and drama of The Players.
              And 18 is no picnic either,also the the changes to the drivable par 4 12th hole just adds to the risk/reward
              choices this diabolical course offers.

              Should it be a Major?
              Why not,you have a tough course that 'tests'every aspect of a golfers game,always a strong field,tons of money and spectators,and it seems like one of the tour stops the pro's really want to win and put on their resume's!
              Hey the LPGA added a 5th might as well have the PGA follow suit! IMO 😉

                darpar

                I can, on some small level, agree that the tournament generally offers one of the stronger fields, and (with exception to the tournament this past week) often times offers somewhat of an exciting finish. And one could easily argue that a majority of the past Players Championship winners have either won or gone on to win major championships.

                Nevertheless, I still can't possibly elevate this tournament to the status of the current four majors. To do so, imo, devalues the traditional concept of everything required to be considered a major champion. As much as some of us like to rank the PGA the "less-prestigious" major of the four currently, it nevertheless traditionally requires a lot more competencies of a would-be winner than what is required to win the Players.

                But based on the credentials of those who've won this event in the past, I can understand why some would have no issues elevating it to major status. I just personally believe that the layout itself is too inferior to equate the accomplishment to that of the same level as a major.