Why is the PGA Championship still a Major?

[JAMH03]

> @LICC said:

> Some of the discussions on other threads about the compressed Majors schedule shows that a majority of fans seem to like the new schedule, but some are complaining that having the Majors held from April to July is too compressed. These people seem to care almost entirely about the four majors and dismiss the Players Championship and the FedEx playoff tournaments. But why are people so caught up on if a tournament is called a "Major" or not? I love the Open and the US Open because they are national championships with outstanding fields played on usually great courses that you don't often see with different setups and challenges than regular Tour events. I love the Masters for all the reasons that people love the Masters. None if it is because they are called "Majors". And while the PGA at Bethpage was excellent this year, in prior years it really hasn't been anything any more special than any other good Tour event. In most years, I've enjoyed watching the Players Championship more than the PGA and the Tour Championship probably just as much.

> So the question- why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"? Historically (prior to 1968), the PGA Championship effectively WAS the Tour Championship, as the Tour was part of the PGA. I think its status as a Major tournament comes directly from the fact that it was the championship tournament of the association that had the greatest golfers in the world. Once the Tour broke off, the PGA Championship no longer is that. The PGA Tour has its own championship tournaments now. The PGA Championship for many years has had 4th rung status among the "Majors".

> So then- Why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"?

 

@LICC I agree with your reasoning but not with your conclusion.

 

Personally I rate the majors in almost an inverse pattern to most but I'm 100% ok with that. By my estimation I'd have no problem saying that there is only 1 major. None the less I see no benefit to going away from 4. And no real need to have 5 though I could be convinced in time.

 

I guess for us to make any headway on this topic we have to agree on who gets to decide which tournaments are majors?

[Vindog]

Indeed my memory was sketchy, regarding the Kaymer timeline, but that's no surprise as I'm a pretty sketchy individual. But anyways...

 

 

 

 

> @imakaveli said:

> I love the “strongest field” argument :D Masters is one of the weakest

 

Indeed it is, TPC should replace it.

[JAMH03]

FWIW I really like the idea of the PGA going back to match-play or something to differentiate it. Been a long time proponent of going back to match-play. Wondered if they could do it over 2 weekends? Or even maybe just have the finalists play a match to determine the winner? Wish em' the best of luck at finding their niche going forward whatever that might be.

 

[JAMH03]

> @Roadking2003 said:> > @BlackDiamondPar5 said:> > > @LICC said:> > It might be number 4 but the PGA is the fourth major not 5 and still stands way above these other desperately contrived events.> > Actually, it's the 2nd Major...

 

Agree

 

[LICC]

> @JAMH03 said:> > @Roadking2003 said:> > > @BlackDiamondPar5 said:> > > > @LICC said:> > > It might be number 4 but the PGA is the fourth major not 5 and still stands way above these other desperately contrived events.> > > > Actually, it's the 2nd Major...> >

 

Agree

 

> > Hi @JAMH03 - I think you are right that the PGA Championship needs a differentiating identity. Now it is the US Open lite, although it has been better run and set up than the US Open in recent years. They will never go match play- too much of a ratings gamble. I’m not sure what they can do. I’ve akways thought the PGA should use different venues to distinguish itself. Go to some modern masterpieces that fans don’t get to see. But that isn’t easy to do.

[JAMH03]

@LICC

 

Right, that's exactly it. The full match-play doesn't fit the business model. TV $$$

 

The PGA's taking on the task of how to run an event better than the regular tour or the other majors is actually tough. I see where you're headed but I don't feel like many agree that courses are really the determining factor on how great these events are. Because the secondary issues are also drivers of success. Getting thousands to the venue, corporate hospitality and so on.

 

For example the PGA did everything presumably "right" this year,

 

the right winner,

in the right way,

on the right course,

right location,

solid execution,

right crowd,

right excitement

was brave enough to take on major change in date

And we're still trying to challenge it's status because something could be "better."

 

Maybe even worse that they do of that they do those things as often or more so than the other 3 and we're still looking for something?

 

Add to the fact that golfers REALLY don't like change nor to be challenged on their values and we've stirred up a hornets nest just asking the question.

 

I wouldn't change it but I think it's a very worthwhile ask.

 

Fairways and greens my friend.

 

 

 

 

 

[imakaveli]

> @Vindog said:

> Indeed my memory was sketchy, regarding the Kaymer timeline, but that's no surprise as I'm a pretty sketchy individual. But anyways...

>

>

>

>

> > @imakaveli said:

> > I love the “strongest field” argument :D Masters is one of the weakest

>

> Indeed it is, TPC should replace it.

 

Bunch of old people eating pimento cheese and drinking lemonade, what a joke.

[imakaveli]

> @LICC said:

> > @Roadking2003 said:

> > > @cdnglf said:

> > > > @LICC said:

> > > > The PGA has 4th rung status among general golf fans. And while generally all PGA Tour events are held at well-conditioned good courses, the other majors usually are held at outstanding, best-in-the-world at the highest level courses (the USGA had a few missed but usually has incredible venues). The PGA? It's gotten better courses in its rotation but does Quail Hollow, Trump Bedminster, Valhalla, Bellerive, Hazeltine, Atlanta Athletic Club, etc. really make you think of the best courses in the world?

> > > >

> > >

> > > What alternative are you proposing?

> > > That there should only be 3 majors?

> > > That the Players (which is played on the same course every year) should somehow replace the PGA?

> > > That some other tournament should somehow replace the PGA?

> >

> > Maybe the Players should replace the British.....

>

> According to Golf Magazine, 5 of the worst 10 majors of the decade were PGA Championships.

>

> https://www.golf.com/news/features/2019/07/23/ranking-majors-best-worst-last-decade/

>

 

Gotta love they put Kaymer at 39 just because of Kaymer :D

[LICC]

> @JAMH03 said:

> @LICC

>

> Right, that's exactly it. The full match-play doesn't fit the business model. TV $$$

>

> The PGA's taking on the task of how to run an event better than the regular tour or the other majors is actually tough. I see where you're headed but I don't feel like many agree that courses are really the determining factor on how great these events are. Because the secondary issues are also drivers of success. Getting thousands to the venue, corporate hospitality and so on.

>

> For example the PGA did everything presumably "right" this year,

>

> the right winner,

> in the right way,

> on the right course,

> right location,

> solid execution,

> right crowd,

> right excitement

> was brave enough to take on major change in date

> And we're still trying to challenge it's status because something could be "better."

>

> Maybe even worse that they do of that they do those things as often or more so than the other 3 and we're still looking for something?

>

> Add to the fact that golfers REALLY don't like change nor to be challenged on their values and we've stirred up a hornets nest just asking the question.

>

> I wouldn't change it but I think it's a very worthwhile ask.

>

> Fairways and greens my friend.

>

>

>

>

>

I agree with most of this. If the PGA was like this year every year it would be tremendous. But generally over time the PGA courses aren’t as good as the Open’s or US Open’s. Golf Magazine just ranked the majors of the decade and 5 of the bottom 10 were PGA Championships.

 

The Open has the links identity, the US Open (despite messing it up every so often) has the identity of the greatest US courses set up in the sternest challenge of all for the pros. What is the PGA Championship’s defining feature? Good courses with some great ones thrown in and being well run?

 

[Roadking2003]

> @LICC said:

> > @JAMH03 said:

> I agree with most of this. If the PGA was like this year every year it would be tremendous. But generally over time the PGA courses aren’t as good as the Open’s or US Open’s. Golf Magazine just ranked the majors of the decade and 5 of the bottom 10 were PGA Championships.

 

One magazine writers opinion. Meaningless.

[bermuda]

> @RobS14526 said:

> Do you think privately, Jack resents that his invitational didn’t become as highly regarded as Bobby Jones?

 

No, but if there were to be fifth major, the Memorial would be more worthy of that than the Players.

[smashdn]

> @LICC said:

> I agree with most of this. If the PGA was like this year every year it would be tremendous. But generally over time the PGA courses aren’t as good as the Open’s or US Open’s. Golf Magazine just ranked the majors of the decade and 5 of the bottom 10 were PGA Championships.

>

> The Open has the links identity, the US Open (despite messing it up every so often) has the identity of the greatest US courses set up in the sternest challenge of all for the pros. What is the PGA Championship’s defining feature? Good courses with some great ones thrown in and being well run?

>

 

I've said several times it needs an identity. It needs to be played in August, in the heat, on mid-western courses not on the US Open rotation. Traditional parkland style courses that are made (as) hard (as they can be) utilizing tough hole locations and the length available. Moderate rough, dry firm fairways. Score would be around -10 to -16. Un-apologetically under par but not a birdie fest and not concerned with protecting par at all costs either. Be the most well run of the (US) majors. They have the ability to do it.

 

I posted my course list earlier in the thread.

[bscinstnct]

Winners for the past 20 years or so. Not perfect, of course, but looks like a very good measure of who is playing the best golf.

 

2019 - Brooks Koepka, 272

2018 - Brooks Koepka, 264

2017 - Justin Thomas, 276

2016 - Jimmy Walker, 266

2015 - Jason Day, 268

2014 - Rory McIlroy, 268

2013 - Jason Dufner, 270

2012 - Rory McIlroy, 275

2011 - Keegan Bradley, 272

2010 - Martin Kaymer, 277

2009 - Y.E. Yang, 280

2008 - Padraig Harrington, 277

2007 - Tiger Woods, 272

2006 - Tiger Woods, 270

2005 - Phil Mickelson, 276

2004 - Vijay Singh, 280

2003 - Shaun Micheel, 276

2002 - Rich Beem, 278

2001 - David Toms, 265

2000 - Tiger Woods, 270

1999 - Tiger Woods, 277

1998 - Vijay Singh, 271

1997 - Davis Love III, 269

1996 - Mark Brooks, 277

1995 - Steve Elkington, 267

1994 - Nick Price, 269

1993 - Paul Azinger, 272

1992 - Nick Price, 278

1991 - John Daly, 276

 

[LICC]

> @smashdn said:

> > @LICC said:

> > I agree with most of this. If the PGA was like this year every year it would be tremendous. But generally over time the PGA courses aren’t as good as the Open’s or US Open’s. Golf Magazine just ranked the majors of the decade and 5 of the bottom 10 were PGA Championships.

> >

> > The Open has the links identity, the US Open (despite messing it up every so often) has the identity of the greatest US courses set up in the sternest challenge of all for the pros. What is the PGA Championship’s defining feature? Good courses with some great ones thrown in and being well run?

> >

>

> I've said several times it needs an identity. It needs to be played in August, in the heat, on mid-western courses not on the US Open rotation. Traditional parkland style courses that are made (as) hard (as they can be) utilizing tough hole locations and the length available. Moderate rough, dry firm fairways. Score would be around -10 to -16. Un-apologetically under par but not a birdie fest and not concerned with protecting par at all costs either. Be the most well run of the (US) majors. They have the ability to do it.

>

> I posted my course list earlier in the thread.

 

Having the tournament in May opens up other parts of the country that are too hot in August. Half the courses you mentioned in your earlier posts are boring layouts that, while they may be fine for challenge and logistics, provide nothing compelling in the courses themselves from a golf fan standpoint.

[cdnglf]

> @bermuda said:

> > @RobS14526 said:

> > Do you think privately, Jack resents that his invitational didn’t become as highly regarded as Bobby Jones?

>

> No, but if there were to be fifth major, the Memorial would be more worthy of that than the Players.

 

It has a weaker and smaller field. Smaller purse. Fewer OWGR and FedEx points. Fewer exemptions. Less important for HoF eligibility.

 

Yeah, makes sense.

[cdnglf]

“What is the identity of the PGA Championship” is a dumb trope used by lazy golf writers. The answer is obvious: it is the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

 

[Darth Putter]

> @Vindog said:

> Indeed my memory was sketchy, regarding the Kaymer timeline, but that's no surprise as I'm a pretty sketchy individual. But anyways...

>

>

>

>

> > @imakaveli said:

> > I love the “strongest field” argument :D Masters is one of the weakest

>

> Indeed it is, TPC should replace it.

 

At least you admit the sketchiness.

 

The Masters problem isn't quality, it's quantity. Not enough players from 70-125 to keep up with the other four biggest events.

Still, they don't have to change a thing to remain the most important event in golf.

 

 

 

 

[Darth Putter]

As for the PGA's status as a major.

 

Real majors don't get moved for FedEX Cup Playoffs.

[LICC]

> @cdnglf said:

> “What is the identity of the PGA Championship” is a dumb trope used by lazy golf writers. The answer is obvious: it is the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

>

 

Being the major most similar to a regular Tour event isn't a great identity.

[cdnglf]

> @"Darth Putter" said:

> As for the PGA's status as a major.

>

> Real majors don't get moved for FedEX Cup Playoffs.

 

The Olympics were also a factor.

[Darth Putter]

> @cdnglf said:

> “What is the identity of the PGA Championship” is a dumb trope used by lazy golf writers. The answer is obvious: it is the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

>

 

If the TPC was a major, it would be the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

[Darth Putter]

> @LICC said:

> > @cdnglf said:

> > “What is the identity of the PGA Championship” is a dumb trope used by lazy golf writers. The answer is obvious: it is the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

> >

>

> Being the major most similar to a regular Tour event isn't a great identity.

 

Strike against the TPC then.

 

As Dan Jenkins once said back in the day when this occurred, "Majors don't have pro-ams on Wednesdays."

[dlygrisse]

> @LICC said:

> Some of the discussions on other threads about the compressed Majors schedule shows that a majority of fans seem to like the new schedule, but some are complaining that having the Majors held from April to July is too compressed. These people seem to care almost entirely about the four majors and dismiss the Players Championship and the FedEx playoff tournaments. But why are people so caught up on if a tournament is called a "Major" or not? I love the Open and the US Open because they are national championships with outstanding fields played on usually great courses that you don't often see with different setups and challenges than regular Tour events. I love the Masters for all the reasons that people love the Masters. None if it is because they are called "Majors". And while the PGA at Bethpage was excellent this year, in prior years it really hasn't been anything any more special than any other good Tour event. In most years, I've enjoyed watching the Players Championship more than the PGA and the Tour Championship probably just as much.

> So the question- why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"? Historically (prior to 1968), the PGA Championship effectively WAS the Tour Championship, as the Tour was part of the PGA. I think its status as a Major tournament comes directly from the fact that it was the championship tournament of the association that had the greatest golfers in the world. Once the Tour broke off, the PGA Championship no longer is that. The PGA Tour has its own championship tournaments now. The PGA Championship for many years has had 4th rung status among the "Majors".

> So then- Why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"?

 

The Players is a good field on a lame course and has bounced around itself, it is a manufactured event by the PGA tour with a lot of money thrown at it, it's all about the Benjamin's and not about history.

 

The Fed Ex Cup is LAME. Stupid, Silly, and it's painful to listen to the marketing and attempted hype. If I needed this crap I would watch NASCAR. It offends my intelligence and senses to even hear the words Fed Ex Cup as it pertains to the game of golf and it's fine traditions. :( I do like the Tour Championship as a stand alone event, and the course choice recently, is nice.

 

The PGA is a fine championship, it has history and tradition on its side, while it may not be viewed as prestigious as the other majors at this point by some, it wasn't that many years ago that it was viewed very favorably by many as the best major. I prefer it in August, and I like the fact that they let a few PGA professionals participate. Just ask anyone who has won the PGA, if it should be a major or not and you know what the answer should be.....so Tiger has only won 9 majors now? But he did win the Player twice so maybe it's 11?

 

These thread are ridiculous. Majors are about history, not votes on the internet by millennials who have fallen for social media memes.

 

I do like the WGC events, but they aren't majors, they are quality events that get many of the best players from around the world together, which is nice.

Another great event is the Memorial, Jack is building a nice tradition there, sort of in the mold of the Masters, but with it's own identity. Is it a major?, no, but it has arguably the greatest golfer in the history of the game behind it, a great course and it is building some tradition.

[cdnglf]

> @"Darth Putter" said:

> > @cdnglf said:

> > “What is the identity of the PGA Championship” is a dumb trope used by lazy golf writers. The answer is obvious: it is the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

> >

>

> If the TPC was a major, it would be the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

 

Yeah, but TPC is moving to the winter.

 

[cdnglf]

> @LICC said:

> > @cdnglf said:

> > “What is the identity of the PGA Championship” is a dumb trope used by lazy golf writers. The answer is obvious: it is the major that best epitomizes modern professional golf.

> >

>

> Being the major most similar to a regular Tour event isn't a great identity.

 

Why not? They don’t move the 3pt line in, raise the baskets, or play outdoors for the NBA finals.

[Darth Putter]

> @dlygrisse said:

> > @LICC said:

> > Some of the discussions on other threads about the compressed Majors schedule shows that a majority of fans seem to like the new schedule, but some are complaining that having the Majors held from April to July is too compressed. These people seem to care almost entirely about the four majors and dismiss the Players Championship and the FedEx playoff tournaments. But why are people so caught up on if a tournament is called a "Major" or not? I love the Open and the US Open because they are national championships with outstanding fields played on usually great courses that you don't often see with different setups and challenges than regular Tour events. I love the Masters for all the reasons that people love the Masters. None if it is because they are called "Majors". And while the PGA at Bethpage was excellent this year, in prior years it really hasn't been anything any more special than any other good Tour event. In most years, I've enjoyed watching the Players Championship more than the PGA and the Tour Championship probably just as much.

> > So the question- why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"? Historically (prior to 1968), the PGA Championship effectively WAS the Tour Championship, as the Tour was part of the PGA. I think its status as a Major tournament comes directly from the fact that it was the championship tournament of the association that had the greatest golfers in the world. Once the Tour broke off, the PGA Championship no longer is that. The PGA Tour has its own championship tournaments now. The PGA Championship for many years has had 4th rung status among the "Majors".

> > So then- Why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"?

>

> The Players is a good field on a lame course and has bounced around itself, it is a manufactured event by the PGA tour with a lot of money thrown at it, it's all about the Benjamin's and not about history.

>

> The Fed Ex Cup is LAME. Stupid, Silly, and it's painful to listen to the marketing and attempted hype. If I needed this crap I would watch NASCAR. It offends my intelligence and senses to even hear the words Fed Ex Cup as it pertains to the game of golf and it's fine traditions. :( I do like the Tour Championship as a stand alone event, and the course choice recently, is nice.

>

> The PGA is a fine championship, it has history and tradition on its side, while it may not be viewed as prestigious as the other majors at this point by some, it wasn't that many years ago that it was viewed very favorably by many as the best major. I prefer it in August, and I like the fact that they let a few PGA professionals participate. Just ask anyone who has won the PGA, if it should be a major or not and you know what the answer should be.....so Tiger has only won 9 majors now? But he did win the Player twice so maybe it's 11?

>

> These thread are ridiculous. Majors are about history, not votes on the internet by millennials who have fallen for social media memes.

>

> I do like the WGC events, but they aren't majors, they are quality events that get many of the best players from around the world together, which is nice.

> Another great event is the Memorial, Jack is building a nice tradition there, sort of in the mold of the Masters, but with it's own identity. Is it a major?, no, but it has arguably the greatest golfer in the history of the game behind it, a great course and it is building some tradition.

 

The TPC has been around since 1973, so it's not nothing when it comes to history. And it's been played at the same memorable (and highly controversial) course since 1982.

 

The PGA viewed as the best major? By who? I'm 49 years old, it has never been close to that in my lifetime. It's been #4 the entire time in any survey of the public or pros that I've ever seen. Was it when the tournament at match play or when the 1967 PGA Championship consisted of 112 club pros and 56 tour pros? I'm not sure history and tradition are on the PGA's side.

 

[LICC]

> @dlygrisse said:

> > @LICC said:

> > Some of the discussions on other threads about the compressed Majors schedule shows that a majority of fans seem to like the new schedule, but some are complaining that having the Majors held from April to July is too compressed. These people seem to care almost entirely about the four majors and dismiss the Players Championship and the FedEx playoff tournaments. But why are people so caught up on if a tournament is called a "Major" or not? I love the Open and the US Open because they are national championships with outstanding fields played on usually great courses that you don't often see with different setups and challenges than regular Tour events. I love the Masters for all the reasons that people love the Masters. None if it is because they are called "Majors". And while the PGA at Bethpage was excellent this year, in prior years it really hasn't been anything any more special than any other good Tour event. In most years, I've enjoyed watching the Players Championship more than the PGA and the Tour Championship probably just as much.

> > So the question- why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"? Historically (prior to 1968), the PGA Championship effectively WAS the Tour Championship, as the Tour was part of the PGA. I think its status as a Major tournament comes directly from the fact that it was the championship tournament of the association that had the greatest golfers in the world. Once the Tour broke off, the PGA Championship no longer is that. The PGA Tour has its own championship tournaments now. The PGA Championship for many years has had 4th rung status among the "Majors".

> > So then- Why is the PGA Championship still a "Major"?

>

> The Players is a good field on a lame course and has bounced around itself, it is a manufactured event by the PGA tour with a lot of money thrown at it, it's all about the Benjamin's and not about history.

>

> The Fed Ex Cup is LAME. Stupid, Silly, and it's painful to listen to the marketing and attempted hype. If I needed this crap I would watch NASCAR. It offends my intelligence and senses to even hear the words Fed Ex Cup as it pertains to the game of golf and it's fine traditions. :( I do like the Tour Championship as a stand alone event, and the course choice recently, is nice.

>

> The PGA is a fine championship, it has history and tradition on its side, while it may not be viewed as prestigious as the other majors at this point by some, it wasn't that many years ago that it was viewed very favorably by many as the best major. I prefer it in August, and I like the fact that they let a few PGA professionals participate. Just ask anyone who has won the PGA, if it should be a major or not and you know what the answer should be.....so Tiger has only won 9 majors now? But he did win the Player twice so maybe it's 11?

>

> These thread are ridiculous. Majors are about history, not votes on the internet by millennials who have fallen for social media memes.

>

> I do like the WGC events, but they aren't majors, they are quality events that get many of the best players from around the world together, which is nice.

> Another great event is the Memorial, Jack is building a nice tradition there, sort of in the mold of the Masters, but with it's own identity. Is it a major?, no, but it has arguably the greatest golfer in the history of the game behind it, a great course and it is building some tradition.

 

None of what you said is compelling. The PGA Championship was "manufactured" by club pros teaming with a leading department store retailer (Wanamaker) whose interest was to generate interest in retail sales of golf equipment. You basically are just saying what some others said- because it just is, and, history.

This is from an interesting WSJ article from a few years back:

 

The current constellation of major tournaments was more or less secured in the early 1960s, when first Arnold Palmer and then Jack Nicklaus started making annual pilgrimages to the British Open. In the 1940s and 1950s, very few American players made the Atlantic crossing, a notable exception being Ben Hogan’s single, victorious visit in 1953. “I promise you the pros didn’t talk much about majors back then,” said journalist Dan Jenkins. “I think it was [golf writer] Herbert Warren Wind who starting using the term. He said golfers had to be judged by the major tournaments they won, but it’s not like there was any set number of major tournaments.” Mr. Jenkins is the world authority on majors since he’s attended more than anyone else, exactly 200 and counting.

 

Back in Bobby Jones’s day, the majors certainly included the U.S. and British Opens and Amateurs, all of which he won in 1930 for a grand slam, establishing four as a nice number for majors. But the players and media also considered the Western Open, first contested in 1899, to be a major in those days, as they did the North and South Open, played annually starting in 1902 at the Pinehurst Resort in North Carolina. “The North and South was the Masters before there was the Masters,” Mr. Jenkins said. “It was played at the same course every year and the players were treated like royalty.”

 

But the North and South Open, for pros and amateurs, was discontinued in 1951 after a dispute between the tour and Pinehurst’s patriarch, Richard Tufts; and the Masters eclipsed the Western Open for prestige in the mid-1950s when television chose to broadcast the former and not the latter, Mr. Jenkins said.

 

Except for the Masters, Mr. Jenkins points out, all the current majors are championships of something: the USGA, the Royal and Ancient in Great Britain, the PGA of America. By that standard, the Players Championship, staged by the PGA Tour, ought to be the fifth major, and Mr. Jenkins believes it is. Most of the media, however, haven’t come around to that point of view—perhaps, he suggests, because five is an “awkward number.”

[Darth Putter]

For those of you wondering why the PGA Championship and Players Championship are two different things and why the PGA of America and PGA Tour are two different things...

https://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/2018/07/25/pga-championship-nearly-died/

 

Can you imagine this forum with that sort of stuff going on?

[smashdn]

> @LICC said:

> Having the tournament in May opens up other parts of the country that are too hot in August. Half the courses you mentioned in your earlier posts are boring layouts that, while they may be fine for challenge and logistics, provide nothing compelling in the courses themselves from a golf fan standpoint.

 

And that goes to my point; The PGA Championship needs an identity. Having it in May does not open more courses. Heat should not be an issue. We have a tournament this week in Memphis and the Tour Championship is at the end of August in Atlanta. Avoiding heat cannot be used as a reason given those tournaments. Having it in May if anything rules out some courses. You probably should not be having it at course at the northern range of the transition zone as the warm season grasses may not be fully grown in, especially if there is a hard winter kill the previous winter. Northern tier states may not be in good condition either if there is a late winter.

 

Medinah is a fine course. Crooked Stick is a course with Major history. Hazeltine as well. Southern Hills, Inverness, etc., all fine courses.

 

The compelling nature is in the fact that a championship is being held on courses that resemble the courses that the average Joe plays every weekend. That the "American-style" parkland course can be set as an adequate and even stern test of par without a US Open type set-up provide you give the players adequate length, dry, running fairways that require a calculation of run out and bounce be considered and harder than member-guest hole locations. When you don't ask clubs to completely destroy or take their courses to the brink of death for one tournament a year I think you will find more clubs willing to open their courses, especially considering most clubs have multiple PGA of America members on staff.

 

Where The Open is held on links, the PGA Championship can be held on historic parkland layouts at clubs in the mid-west.

 

Being everything to everyone is costing the PGA Championship in my estimation. Pick a lane, stay in it and be the best at what you do.

[disco111]

> @"Darth Putter" said:

> For those of you wondering why the PGA Championship and Players Championship are two different things and why the PGA of America and PGA Tour are two different things...

> https://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/2018/07/25/pga-championship-nearly-died/

>

> Can you imagine this forum with that sort of stuff going on?

 

Very interesting read..........What I take away from that and it's nothing more than a personal opinion, is that the Tour is placating the PGA by allowing 20 club pro's to participate. I also can see a possible shift in having the Players replace the PGA as a major, in the future. I really think that this was the ultimate goal of the tour when they birthed the Players. With the amount of money that's being played for and the PGA had really nothing to do with the growth of the tour, the tour really does not need the PGA. The tour can actually designate that they will make this adjustment and who is to say they can't?