LIV Tour Discussion Thread (*** NO POLITICS ***)

[Hawkeye77]

2 hours ago, ALIF said:

That was a very "convenient" time to have a month off. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck I wonder what it probably is? A duck??

 

1.  The man had health issues, making light of them or claiming they didn't exist is in poor taste/no basis in fact.

 

2.  It is a hearing he would have very much wanted to attend, there was absolutely nothing for the PGA Tour to avoid.  So the "convenient" bit also fails another fact check. No doubt you didn't listen to the hearing. 

 

3.  The only "ducking" was by the Saudis, period.  As they did when the committee wanted an additional hearing and their attendance.

 

The facts have been out there for going on 9 months.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Short Pete]

Now back to topic: 

 

Does anybody know for how many years the top notch LIV players signed to play? Perez said he got 10 million for three years. What about Johnson and DeChambeau? Three years as well? I am wondering what Sharkie will have to pay them to stay on board. 

[bcjim]

7 hours ago, Pops99 said:

Where's the irony?

 

Was a scummy drop, and I hate it that you can be in deep rough and get a drop on the green, but was 1000% within the rules. 

 

Still unsure as to where the irony in that situation is, though.

It's not much different than having your ball (or stance) on a cart path and getting a favorable drop.  Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes the bear gets you.

[Pops99]

1 hour ago, bcjim said:

It's not much different than having your ball (or stance) on a cart path and getting a favorable drop.  Sometimes you get the bear, sometimes the bear gets you.

That poster said it was ironic that he got that drop.

 

I asked why it was ironic.

 

Not sure what your comment to me means. 

[ALIF]

3 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

 

1.  The man had health issues, making light of them or claiming they didn't exist is in poor taste/no basis in fact.

 

2.  It is a hearing he would have very much wanted to attend, there was absolutely nothing for the PGA Tour to avoid.  So the "convenient" bit also fails another fact check. No doubt you didn't listen to the hearing. 

 

3.  The only "ducking" was by the Saudis, period.  As they did when the committee wanted an additional hearing and their attendance.

 

The facts have been out there for going on 9 months.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I don't believe he's ever talked about what his health issues were. As a physician, I'm very skeptical when somebody says oh, I can't do something because of my health issue. He looked pretty good when he came back after a few weeks off. My, what a quick recovery from such a serious condition.  So again I'm very skeptical.

[King_Slender]

3 hours ago, Short Pete said:

Now back to topic: 

 

Does anybody know for how many years the top notch LIV players signed to play? Perez said he got 10 million for three years. What about Johnson and DeChambeau? Three years as well? I am wondering what Sharkie will have to pay them to stay on board. 

 

Rory mentioned some contracts go through 2028 and 2029.  Guessing Rahm's was 5 years.

[Hawkeye77]

13 hours ago, ALIF said:

I don't believe he's ever talked about what his health issues were. As a physician, I'm very skeptical when somebody says oh, I can't do something because of my health issue. He looked pretty good when he came back after a few weeks off. My, what a quick recovery from such a serious condition.  So again I'm very skeptical.

He doesn’t have to discuss his private medical issues.

 

If you are a doctor you really shouldn’t be making jokes related to someone’s health or suggesting you can diagnose anything about a stranger you see on TV or pictures on the internet for whom you have no personal medical information, history, tests and so forth. 
 

[bcjim]

13 hours ago, Pops99 said:

That poster said it was ironic that he got that drop.

 

I asked why it was ironic.

 

Not sure what your comment to me means. 

You expressed some dismay at the drop. I'm suggesting there are similar situations all the time that wouldn't generate dismay.

[leezer99]

Former Travis Mathew's CEO has accepted the role of GM for the 4Aces.

 

LIV's 4Aces tap former TravisMathew CEO Chris Rosaasen as new GM (sportsbusinessjournal.com)

[CDM]

23 hours ago, One Putter said:

More disingenuous posts by the liv fans.

 

Just curious, how is that disingenuous ?   Something that is 100% true?  

 

Jack, Arnie, Gary...all them did leave to start a new tour over money.  Jack, Arnie and the rest of the players 100% should have left as the players at that time were getting taken by the structure they were in.  

 

What they did changed and allowed the the PGA Tour to be what it is today (well what it was 3 years ago). 

[CDM]

23 hours ago, Pops99 said:

Where's the irony?

 

Was a scummy drop, and I hate it that you can be in deep rough and get a drop on the green, but was 1000% within the rules. 

 

Still unsure as to where the irony in that situation is, though.

 

I saw the replay as don't watch much golf now.   

 

Personally watching it, this was one of those cases that rule needs to be looked at.

 

Edit: Your right it was 1000% within the rules but we all know (they all do it...) he used the rule to better his situation.    

Edited March 27 by CDM

[italianstallion]

15 minutes ago, CDM said:

 

Just curious, how is that disingenuous ?   Something that is 100% true?  

 

Jack, Arnie, Gary...all them did leave to start a new tour over money.  Jack, Arnie and the rest of the players 100% should have left as the players at that time were getting taken by the structure they were in.  

 

What they did changed and allowed the the PGA Tour to be what it is today (well what it was 3 years ago). 

 

I think that the reliance on internet meme formats to try and create a 'mic drop' moment, without providing full context, makes it disingenuous. As @BlackDiamondPar5 said in response to that post "the PGA Tour wasn't government funded let alone by a dictatorship" is important context that is completely omitted by the meme. If it was the PGL and not the PIF/LIV, then the position postulated by the meme would be correct. I personally had no qualms with the idea of the PGL then or now. I think a lot of people who are anti-LIV feel similarly for the same reason I do; boil down all the differences and you're going to be left with the one reason why that is.

[Togatown22]

3 hours ago, CDM said:

 

I saw the replay as don't watch much golf now.   

 

Personally watching it, this was one of those cases that rule needs to be looked at.

 

Edit: Your right it was 1000% within the rules but we all know (they all do it...) he used the rule to better his situation.    

I was taught the smartest golfers intentionally use the rules to better their situation when they can.  That is the benefit to knowing the rules - sometimes they can help you.  It happens fairly regularly on Tour; maybe you should watch more golf?

[CDM]

21 hours ago, Togatown22 said:

I was taught the smartest golfers intentionally use the rules to better their situation when they can.  That is the benefit to knowing the rules - sometimes they can help you.  It happens fairly regularly on Tour; maybe you should watch more golf?

 

I know the rules, play plenty enough to know. 

 

As I noted IMHO he used it to "better" his advantage.  IMHO using a rule to gain an "advantage" for a poor prior shot.... well it is what it is at this point.   You must have missed my statement "They all do it" is because I used to watch.

 

I did stop watching, its great, playing more and doing more events has made me get back to the game and away from the noise.

 

It just gets sooo nauseating listening to all the "I better get paid".   

 

Somehow there is all these posts that LIV players only talk about "getting paid" or the money they got.   Odd to me as the ones who talk about getting paid are PGAT players. Now we have players who were barely inside the top 200 talking they need to limit fields, cut throat, etc.    

 

LIV players took the stupid money and divided we are.  Yet I cannot find any interviews, articles of any player for LIV stating actually what the contract amount was, etc. ?  Yet people say that LIV players only talk about "money"?  Truth is they all skirt it, never state what it really was.  Which I am sure they are not allowed too either.       

Edited March 28 by CDM

[Titleist99]

21 hours ago, Togatown22 said:

I was taught the smartest golfers intentionally use the rules to better their situation when they can.  That is the benefit to knowing the rules - sometimes they can help you.  It happens fairly regularly on Tour; maybe you should watch more golf?

100% Absolutely! You're a fool if you don't take advantage. The rules are there to help you. Oddly enough the best players knows the rules the best. I used to marvel at the fact that Tiger, Phil and Ernie knew the rules of golf so well. Golf is hard and the rules are vast and brutal sometimes.

[jdl]

On 3/22/2024 at 3:46 PM, Titleist84 said:

Good point on OWGR timeline, Greg did promise them they would get ranking points and be able to play in the majors at first.  I still think this could've all been avoided if the tour just gave the players exemptions to play in LIV events.

 

Another LIV account waking up to talk about the same stuff from the previous months (years)!

 

Sure, just let their top guys play in events on a rival tour with no repercussions. IOW, become a feeder tour for LIV. Yep, that would have certainly "avoided" what has happened. And pretty much end the PGA Tour. I guess you're a fan of Bob Knight? i.e. "if rape is inevitable, might as well lie back and enjoy it". 🙄

 

On 3/22/2024 at 5:48 PM, Titleist84 said:

No you can't talk about the Saudis because the tour wants their money.  

 

Smaller fields, higher purses, majority of them have no cuts but yeah sure, the signature events are nothing like LIV.

 

News flash! The PGA Tour has had limited field, no cut events for a long time, well before LIV existed. They have a few more now because that's what the players want. Not really what the fans want, but we haven't mattered in all this.

 

On 3/26/2024 at 7:38 PM, ALIF said:

I don't believe he's ever talked about what his health issues were. As a physician, I'm very skeptical when somebody says oh, I can't do something because of my health issue. He looked pretty good when he came back after a few weeks off. My, what a quick recovery from such a serious condition.  So again I'm very skeptical.

Yes, this sounds like the response of a physician. 🙄

[Shilgy]

On 3/27/2024 at 7:13 AM, CDM said:

 

I saw the replay as don't watch much golf now.   

 

Personally watching it, this was one of those cases that rule needs to be looked at.

 

Edit: Your right it was 1000% within the rules but we all know (they all do it...) he used the rule to better his situation.    

Write the rule.  Let’s see you come up with a better one.  Are you going to color code the sprinkler heads? Blue one no relief?  You get relief from an immovable obstruction if it interferes with your stance or swing.

Elegant and simple.

 

And if “we all know” they do it….do what exactly?  Know the rules well enough to use them when warranted?

[CDM]

7 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Write the rule.  Let’s see you come up with a better one.  Are you going to color code the sprinkler heads? Blue one no relief?  You get relief from an immovable obstruction if it interferes with your stance or swing.

Elegant and simple.

 

And if “we all know” they do it….do what exactly?  Know the rules well enough to use them when warranted?

 

I don't need to write any rules, the rules are written and I know them well. 

 

I noted twice now he was using the rule correctly.  I question as some writers and tv staff question if that rule was "intended" how it was applied in this case. No one questioned  the rule itself. 

 

Standing / hitting on a sprinkler head making a full swing from 170 yards is way different Vs a chip next to the green. 

 

Hitting from 4" thick rough Vs dropping it on the fringe allowing him to putt, which he can control vs the club sticking, chunking out the rough is way different.   The point regardless of the rule is it was clear he gained an advantage using the rule and YES the rule is written as noted. 

 

One could flip it and pull a Rory so to speak  "Hit it better" and it would never be in question.

 

I look back Victor Hovland at the PGA Championship last year. The ball appeared to be imbedded.  It was questionable for sure given it was bunker but so high up in the bunker. The rules official made the call just like they did this last weekend..   *Granted I was pulling hard for Victor to win so might be a bit biased on that call. 

 

As I will note for the third time it is what it is at this point..... 

 

Edit: *I did find one of the writers comments pretty funny, "if that was Patrick Reed, no relief"  🤣

Edited March 29 by CDM

[Shilgy]

5 hours ago, CDM said:

 

I don't need to write any rules, the rules are written and I know them well. 

 

I noted twice now he was using the rule correctly.  I question as some writers and tv staff question if that rule was "intended" how it was applied in this case. No one questioned  the rule itself. 

 

Standing / hitting on a sprinkler head making a full swing from 170 yards is way different Vs a chip next to the green. 

 

Hitting from 4" thick rough Vs dropping it on the fringe allowing him to putt, which he can control vs the club sticking, chunking out the rough is way different.   The point regardless of the rule is it was clear he gained an advantage using the rule and YES the rule is written as noted. 

 

One could flip it and pull a Rory so to speak  "Hit it better" and it would never be in question.

 

I look back Victor Hovland at the PGA Championship last year. The ball appeared to be imbedded.  It was questionable for sure given it was bunker but so high up in the bunker. The rules official made the call just like they did this last weekend..   *Granted I was pulling hard for Victor to win so might be a bit biased on that call. 

 

As I will note for the third time it is what it is at this point..... 

 

Edit: *I did find one of the writers comments pretty funny, "if that was Patrick Reed, no relief"  🤣

Sounds like we agree…other than the feeling that it is somehow “taking advantage “.

[idrive]

On 3/26/2024 at 3:52 PM, Short Pete said:

Now back to topic: 

 

Does anybody know for how many years the top notch LIV players signed to play? Perez said he got 10 million for three years. What about Johnson and DeChambeau? Three years as well? I am wondering what Sharkie will have to pay them to stay on board. 

 

I wonder, someone like Perez. Why would they pay him anything? Where's he going to play, especially for the kind of money where you take last place and still make bank?

 

Guys like DJ, Champoo. They're team captains. Supposedly these teams are going to be worth millions. 

 

I'll be surprised when their contracts expire they pay them big money. IMO they don't have to or need to. They are pretty much already locked in with nowhere else to go and, nobody else is going to give then any kind of signing bonus. 

[Shilgy]

6 hours ago, idrive said:

 

I wonder, someone like Perez. Why would they pay him anything? Where's he going to play, especially for the kind of money where you take last place and still make bank?

 

Guys like DJ, Champoo. They're team captains. Supposedly these teams are going to be worth millions. 

 

I'll be surprised when their contracts expire they pay them big money. IMO they don't have to or need to. They are pretty much already locked in with nowhere else to go and, nobody else is going to give then any kind of signing bonus. 

Depends ….a guy like Bryson may decide to play golf where he could get into majors. This is year four of his five year exemption into majors for his US Open win. At the end of his contract we will see what he really desires…..just more compensation or competition.  

Koepka I think they would need to give a Rahm-like bonus

 

DJ….didnt he say he wanted to retire at 40?  That’s this June.

 

Gooch…any further results on LIV would need an * if he left.(aka who cares)

 

Niemann? I expect him to return to PGA for sure.

 

Anyone else really matter at this point?

 

I say a story this morning that Nicholas Hoigaard turned them down.  The tours should highlight those stories a bit more imo.  But, of course, you’d also be paying attention to a tour that no one else cares about.

 

[betarhoalphadelta]

2 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Depends ….a guy like Bryson may decide to play golf where he could get into majors. This is year four of his five year exemption into majors for his US Open win. At the end of his contract we will see what he really desires…..just more compensation or competition.  

 

 

A guy like Bryson is an interesting case... When his exemptions expire, he may want to play somewhere else to regain entry to the majors. OR, he might want to keep playing LIV if they pay him enough. 

 

But... What if he doesn't have a [real] choice? 

 

His value to LIV diminishes greatly if he can't play in majors IMHO. To an extent every LIV player has effectively "left the golf world" 48 weeks of the year, because nobody is actually paying attention to LIV. But LIV gains credibility when their players are in majors (and especially if they do well like Koepka). If he isn't going to be in majors, is he worth it to THEM to re-sign to a big contract? 

 

We may or may not see what he desires, if LIV lowballs him to stay. Because I don't know that he'll stay on the exhibition tour if he's effectively *only* playing for the purses. 

[bscinstnct]

Congrats to Rahmbo, he is truly living the dream

 

 

 

But I got a feelin he gonna be the biggest bust in sports history

 

By a mile 🤣🍻

[drn92]

5 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

A guy like Bryson is an interesting case... When his exemptions expire, he may want to play somewhere else to regain entry to the majors. OR, he might want to keep playing LIV if they pay him enough. 

 

But... What if he doesn't have a [real] choice? 

 

His value to LIV diminishes greatly if he can't play in majors IMHO. To an extent every LIV player has effectively "left the golf world" 48 weeks of the year, because nobody is actually paying attention to LIV. But LIV gains credibility when their players are in majors (and especially if they do well like Koepka). If he isn't going to be in majors, is he worth it to THEM to re-sign to a big contract? 

 

We may or may not see what he desires, if LIV lowballs him to stay. Because I don't know that he'll stay on the exhibition tour if he's effectively *only* playing for the purses. 

I’m struggling to see why LIV would give these guys another signing bonus. 
 

drn92

[bcjim]

9 hours ago, drn92 said:

I’m struggling to see why LIV would give these guys another signing bonus. 
 

drn92

Because if their name players leave, it's over.  There will be literally nobody watching instead of almost nobody. 

Tough spot to be in for Yassir.

 

Brooks and Bryson are the main concerns because they can still play and they saw what Rahm got. The others are either old or don't gaf about golf, are 2nd rate players won't get money anyway,  or Niemann.  I don't know about him.  Seems like a player but it's tough to judge and he's certainly not a giant bonus type of guy. 

[leezer99]

12 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

Congrats to Rahmbo, he is truly living the dream

 

 

 

But I got a feelin he gonna be the biggest bust in sports history

 

By a mile 🤣🍻

 

Jon looks very proud to show off his wife's uterus. 

 

I hope they schedule the birth on an off week for LIV because as an employee that might be considered a conflict of interest if he misses work. 

[jdl]

17 hours ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

A guy like Bryson is an interesting case... When his exemptions expire, he may want to play somewhere else to regain entry to the majors. OR, he might want to keep playing LIV if they pay him enough. 

 

But... What if he doesn't have a [real] choice? 

 

His value to LIV diminishes greatly if he can't play in majors IMHO. To an extent every LIV player has effectively "left the golf world" 48 weeks of the year, because nobody is actually paying attention to LIV. But LIV gains credibility when their players are in majors (and especially if they do well like Koepka). If he isn't going to be in majors, is he worth it to THEM to re-sign to a big contract? 

 

We may or may not see what he desires, if LIV lowballs him to stay. Because I don't know that he'll stay on the exhibition tour if he's effectively *only* playing for the purses. 

 

Bryson can always rely on being a social media superstar.

 

 

[Shilgy]

14 hours ago, drn92 said:

I’m struggling to see why LIV would give these guys another signing bonus. 
 

drn92

Maybe so they don’t leave LIV?

[stinger_gc]

I predict a 15 shot win for Stinger GC at LIV Miami and a brand new green coat for Charl in 2 weeks! This shouldn’t even be up for debate 

[tomjas]

8 hours ago, jdl said:

 

Bryson can always rely on being a social media superstar.

 

 

He actually puts out some good practice content