looks like USGA going to find juniors

[tiger1873]

5 minutes ago, heavy_hitter said:

FJT is an allied associate they are mentioning.  I don't think they get screwed.  I think the tours it will hurt the most are the independents like Hurricane, Top 50, NFJGT, SEJGT, TJGT, Future Junior Golf Tour and others like them.  This is setting up for every kid to play USGA state affiliates and PGA sections.  If they don't play them then they have no shot at this program, at least that is what I read.  That means the USGA would actively put tours out of business. 

 

I agree I think this is bad for Hurricane, US Kids and any independent tours out there .  I agree this reads like they are planning be one clear path to junior golf.  

 

If what I am reading is true I can't see how anyone will continue to play the path they set out who isn't being supported by the USGA program.   It will effectively end junior golf at 15 or so except for the few.

 

Honestly I think a lot kids will end up jumping to amateur events and college recruiting will look at those events and this new Junior path will end up being something you don't want to do.

 

 

[Bizzle80]

You guys are such downers. This isn't putting anyone out of business...or making it harder for anyone. Per the interview:

 

"Our plan right now is to start with a junior national team of both the boys and girls next year in 2024. What those numbers look like as it relates to the number of athletes, not sure yet. I think we have it spec’d out at about half capacity. We’re looking at, over time, 30 boys and 30 girls."

 

They are talking National teams of 30 juniors for boys/girls. This will most likely look like a sponsorship for the select athletes: funding, travel, clothing, support and professional level training for just a handful of kids. Just like other national team programs - think National level skiing/gymnastics programs rather than AAU hoops. This does not remotely look like USGA trying to come in and build a national junior tour to make money and put others out of business.

 

This is a way for USGA to SPEND money...not create a revenue stream. Don't worry, this isn't taking away from any of us, or making anything we do with our junior golfers more difficult.

 

The USGA under Mike Whan is taking all the wealthy donors involved and pooling endowment money to create long lasting programs. They are creating a $20M endowment so that Walker/Curtis Cup's are funded forever and look to be doing the same to support National golf program. These select kids will still be playing AJGA and all the other tours where they live, just have better access and funding for what sounds like a future series of international competitions.

 

If your kid isn't competing for spots on those Walker/Curtis cup teams, you probably don't have to worry about this affecting you.

 

[tiger1873]

4 minutes ago, Bizzle80 said:

You guys are such downers. This isn't putting anyone out of business...or making it harder for anyone. Per the interview:

 

 

What do think will happen if they make a clear path with allied associations.   Do you really think people are going to pay $300 to play a junior tournament that you get nothing and rankings don't matter.

[heavy_hitter]

10 minutes ago, Bizzle80 said:

You guys are such downers. This isn't putting anyone out of business...or making it harder for anyone. Per the interview:

 

"Our plan right now is to start with a junior national team of both the boys and girls next year in 2024. What those numbers look like as it relates to the number of athletes, not sure yet. I think we have it spec’d out at about half capacity. We’re looking at, over time, 30 boys and 30 girls."

 

They are talking National teams of 30 juniors for boys/girls. This will most likely look like a sponsorship for the select athletes: funding, travel, clothing, support and professional level training for just a handful of kids. Just like other national team programs - think National level skiing/gymnastics programs rather than AAU hoops. This does not remotely look like USGA trying to come in and build a national junior tour to make money and put others out of business.

 

This is a way for USGA to SPEND money...not create a revenue stream. Don't worry, this isn't taking away from any of us, or making anything we do with our junior golfers more difficult.

 

The USGA under Mike Whan is taking all the wealthy donors involved and pooling endowment money to create long lasting programs. They are creating a $20M endowment so that Walker/Curtis Cup's are funded forever and look to be doing the same to support National golf program. These select kids will still be playing AJGA and all the other tours where they live, just have better access and funding for what sounds like a future series of international competitions.

 

If your kid isn't competing for spots on those Walker/Curtis cup teams, you probably don't have to worry about this affecting you.

 

They said the goal was to get 1,000 kids in the program.  If the program is using USGA state chapters, PGA Affiliates, and AJGA to push the program, do you think parents/player are going to want to be involved in the Hurricane events?  They are going to try and play as many of the affiliate programs as possible.

[Bizzle80]

I'm assuming the 1000 number means over long term. She directly states 30/30 teams...much like other national sport teams. They are not building a "National Team" of 500 boys and 500 girls and footing their bill. Most of our National sports teams have a small pool of players that compete in events and even amongst themselves for starring roles and opportunities.

 

This is going to be to support the creme de la creme. The Rose Zhang's and Jordan Spieth's. Not my kid...or yours most likely...

 

Again, I don't think the intent here (if you read the details) is to build some huge national junior league or to 'push' some program. It's to identify the top talent in the country and support them with everything that goes with golf.

 

I will leave you all to fret about how this is taking away your opportunities, but I guess we will all see how it builds out.

 

 

 

[heavy_hitter]

21 minutes ago, Bizzle80 said:

I guess we will all see how it builds out.

 

 

 

Agreed.  Change is hard for most of us.  Thankfully, I will never have to worry about it.

[wegobomber31]

I see at least 4 different paths that juniors will take once this is rolled out.

 

1. Promising kid who doesn't have access to the resources and opportunities, takes advantage of the opportunities and it puts him/her on a higher trajectory of golf - WIN!

2. Promising kid gets into the program early, thinks that have it 'made it', doesn't end up working as hard or doesn't take full advantage of the opportunities that are provided.  Maybe a LOSE, but perhaps they wouldn't have made it anyways

3. Promising kid gets passed over for the program (or just chooses to forge their own path), uses it as motivation fuel to take down every kid chosen ahead of him/her over the next 10-30 years -- WIN!

4. Promising kid gets passed over for the program, figures they don't have a shot of 'making it' and gives up the game altogether. -- LOSE!

 

 

[heavy_hitter]

29 minutes ago, wegobomber31 said:

 

4. Promising kid gets passed over for the program, figures they don't have a shot of 'making it' and gives up the game altogether. -- LOSE!

 

 

I think this is what @tiger1873 is referring to.  I see this happening as well.  I think this helps elevate the better female golfers, but really hurts the game for female juniors overall.  There is a large gap in women's golf from the elite players and lower end.  This just widens that gap in my opinion.  Goal should be to close it.  

[tiger1873]

1 hour ago, Bizzle80 said:

I'm assuming the 1000 number means over long term. She directly states 30/30 teams...much like other national sport teams. They are not building a "National Team" of 500 boys and 500 girls and footing their bill. Most of our National sports teams have a small pool of players that compete in events and even amongst themselves for starring roles and opportunities.

 

This is going to be to support the creme de la creme. The Rose Zhang's and Jordan Spieth's. Not my kid...or yours most likely...

 

Again, I don't think the intent here (if you read the details) is to build some huge national junior league or to 'push' some program. It's to identify the top talent in the country and support them with everything that goes with golf.

 

I will leave you all to fret about how this is taking away your opportunities, but I guess we will all see how it builds out.

 

 

 

 

They actually put thi in the new release

 

"That number will grow each year and by 2027 the program aims to fund 1,000 juniors across the country and impact thousands more."

 

From what I can tell it basically means they will be funding a 1000 juniors a year.  There was no details. I doubt it full funding for everything but a lot kids will get money if they actually mean what they said.

 

 If it works like what I seen in other countries is you will have tournaments where you will get an exemption and funding to travel to a bigger event.  Make no mistake to get to the higher levels there will be politics that will get in the way.

 

I think it will fail because in America if you good enough to be the top player you turn pro instead of making no money as a amateur. So they will end up with 2nd and 3rd teams worse then today.  

[RmoorePE]

I'm trying to imagine the personnel and infrastructure to locate, and fund 1000 kids across the USA for the program. IF they are going to try and use some amalgamation database as well as on the ground coaches to find/scope/recruit kids for it. You would have to have pretty good talent scouts, with really good networks surrounding them. Hiring someone with a big network is really expensive. 

 

Which they can probably afford, but finding those folks will be hard. These grants are going to have performance standards and accounting standards attached. To manage this sprawling of a system, is going to take very good management. 

[golfortennis]

6 minutes ago, RmoorePE said:

I'm trying to imagine the personnel and infrastructure to locate, and fund 1000 kids across the USA for the program. IF they are going to try and use some amalgamation database as well as on the ground coaches to find/scope/recruit kids for it. You would have to have pretty good talent scouts, with really good networks surrounding them. Hiring someone with a big network is really expensive. 

 

Which they can probably afford, but finding those folks will be hard. These grants are going to have performance standards and accounting standards attached. To manage this sprawling of a system, is going to take very good management. 

 

If the PGA Tour is any indication, they will need several people with 6 figure salaries to make this happen.  No problem.  The money is there to spend!  They will spend it!  No cost is too great to accomplish whatever the heck this is supposed to accomplish.

[TroyB123]

My son's a 2026, so probably won't affect him.   The thing that he loves about golf is that it's all up to him.   If you threw him in a program with set practices, a coach he might not like, and a set schedule, it would kill the enjoyment and just feel like all the other travel sports that felt like more work that fun to him.

 

Left to his own devices, he'll spend every waking moment playing golf and working on his game.  You give him a program like that, and he'd begrudgingly do what was required, and end up hating the sport.

 

I'm sure there is a benefit to lots of kids who maybe can't afford it and might be beneficial to a lot of kids to get away from overbearing parents running their sports who may be doing more harm than good.   Hopefully it is just one avenue and not the only avenue.

[Movingday]

5 hours ago, heavy_hitter said:

AAU Basketball made basketball worse.  That statement isn't even debatable.

Amen!!!

[kekoa]

In reading this, I would only be interested in access or grants to tournaments.  My buddy's son is playing his first AJGA preview next month and he is spending an insane amount of money.  Obviously he can afford it, but most cant.  

 

If the USGA requires a prospect to take lessons from a certain coach and attend camps I'm not interested.  

[TroyB123]

12 minutes ago, kekoa said:

In reading this, I would only be interested in access or grants to tournaments.  My buddy's son is playing his first AJGA preview next month and he is spending an insane amount of money.  Obviously he can afford it, but most cant.  

 

If the USGA requires a prospect to take lessons from a certain coach and attend camps I'm not interested.  

 

What's he spending his money on?   The entry fees are under $200 and include a practice round.   The preview events are spread around the country pretty well and you can only play one, so should be able to drive to one or get a discount airlines flight.   

 

Usually can find a mid range hotel in the area for around 150/night.   I get that is expensive to a lot of people, but wouldn't really call that insane and seems like a bargain to travel baseball/soccer/etc.

[Pinewood Golfer]

10 hours ago, heavy_hitter said:

AJGA shouldn't be involved at all.  They have cultivated a lot of the problems that exist in Junior Tournament golf today.

I liked the idea until I saw the association with the AJGA. Shouldn’t bed themselves with such a self serving organization 

[Pinewood Golfer]

9 hours ago, heavy_hitter said:

I will sound like an a**, but really don't care.

 

This seems to me like it favors those that "have" and those that "have not".  The middle class gets screwed, again.  There are plenty events that my kid doesn't play in because we can't financially support it.  Those that "have" already afford the best instruction, coaching, tournaments, and equipment.  Those on the low end economically already "have" avenues through local charities, golf associations, and AJGA to economically help them out.  This will be a rich get richer and helps the lower income while the middle income kids get screwed.  Middle class always gets screwed.  This sounds just like Public Education.

 

Just my 2 cents.

I agree with this 100%

[golfortennis]

12 hours ago, kekoa said:

In reading this, I would only be interested in access or grants to tournaments.  My buddy's son is playing his first AJGA preview next month and he is spending an insane amount of money.  Obviously he can afford it, but most cant.  

 

If the USGA requires a prospect to take lessons from a certain coach and attend camps I'm not interested.  

 

And there is the other part.  How many tour pros have lost their game after going to another instructor?  If the USGA is paying $125,000 to a "coach" of a team(cause these organizations don't pay market, they pay above market), they aren't going to also provide a stipend for your kid to continue seeing the coach he has had his whole life.  

 

The program in Canada required kids from Ontario to go to the centre in Calgary, which for those geographically challenged would be like sending Florida kids to California.  The US would likely have more spots and thus shorter travel, but still, this will evolve to everything being within their ecosystem.  Like other things in recent golf news, there are always strings.

[heavy_hitter]

13 hours ago, TroyB123 said:

 

  The preview events are spread around the country pretty well and you can only play one.

 

 

This actually is not true.  There are ways to play in more than one.

 

An AJGA Open is $1,000 to $1,500 in expenses.  An AJGA Preview is $700 to $1000 in expenses.  That is highly expensive to me just to play golf for a weekend.  Multiply that by 5 and you are looking at around $7500 a year to play travel golf on the AJGA.  For people that aren't upper class for qualify or the ACE, that is not sustainable.

Edited February 25, 2023 by heavy_hitter

[iteachgolf]

1 hour ago, golfortennis said:

 

And there is the other part.  How many tour pros have lost their game after going to another instructor?  If the USGA is paying $125,000 to a "coach" of a team(cause these organizations don't pay market, they pay above market), they aren't going to also provide a stipend for your kid to continue seeing the coach he has had his whole life.  

 

The program in Canada required kids from Ontario to go to the centre in Calgary, which for those geographically challenged would be like sending Florida kids to California.  The US would likely have more spots and thus shorter travel, but still, this will evolve to everything being within their ecosystem.  Like other things in recent golf news, there are always strings.

Market rate for a national level instructor is a LOT more than $125,000. If they hire college golf coach type coaches the market rate for top college coaches is also well above $125,000.  If they are going to pay “above market rate” it’ll cost 3x more than that at least 

[leezer99]

1 minute ago, iteachgolf said:

Market rate for a national level instructor is a LOT more than $125,000. If they hire college golf coach type coaches the market rate for top college coaches is also well above $125,000.  If they are going to pay “above market rate” it’ll cost 3x more than that at least 

**furiously updates LinkedIn.

[moostache]

23 hours ago, golfortennis said:

My bigger concern would be that it becomes a "factory."  We have this in Canada, and I know of one situation where the parents actually kept the kid out, even though they were most certainly eligible.  Why?  You have to use their coaches, their facilities, etc.  This is a solution in search of a problem(the US does not seem to have a problem turning out professional golfers), or more likely, an item suits can pat themselves on the back with, while also spending money to maintain the not for taxes designation.

 

Not to mention, whose purpose does it serve to "develop" golfers?  This discussion happens in hockey up here all the time.  "We need to develop players."  For whom?  For what purpose?  These guys ultimately want to make the NHL, and the NHL needs players to have a product to present/sell.  So let them take care of development, like European soccer players do.  Those who don't like the sport don't care, and even those who do, how is life in your country improved by this?  You get to yell at a TV every few years when national teams face off?  

 

As I said, this reeks of a solution in search of a problem.

This is it. I'm sure we'll get some really good players that never had opportunity before, but the ones that don't make it will be behind in the other facets of life...

[iteachgolf]

13 minutes ago, leezer99 said:

**furiously updates LinkedIn.

The top women’s golf programs pay $250kish (Alabama is 245 and Auburn is 275 as examples) and men’s golf is closer $300k

[leezer99]

Good discussion on Twitter: 

 

 

[golfortennis]

48 minutes ago, iteachgolf said:

Market rate for a national level instructor is a LOT more than $125,000. If they hire college golf coach type coaches the market rate for top college coaches is also well above $125,000.  If they are going to pay “above market rate” it’ll cost 3x more than that at least 

 

While that would likely get brought in I don't consider college coach salaries "market" rates.  There is absolutely no market in the US for professional water polo, and a tiny market for volleyball, yet there are college water polo coaches making over $100k, and volleyball coaches making well above that.

 

The reason for that is not that there is a market for coaches that requires salaries be raised to draw them, but rather to maintain the not for taxes status, athletic departments have to spend the gobs of money that come in each year.  And since you can only rebuild so many facilities, put so many TVs in basketball players' lockers, etc., the money starts to flow out to other coaches.

 

Given that it's the USGA and they need to spend money as well, it will likely end up as you describe, but that would be due to a a real distortion in economics rather than a true example of them.  I count 14 people listed in the form 990, and all of them are paid north of $335k.  

 

The more we dig in, the more I think this will benefit a chosen few, and a large number of them will be within the USGA's umbrella.

 

 

[golfortennis]

5 minutes ago, leezer99 said:

Good discussion on Twitter: 

 

 

 

The US doesn't dominate in women's golf.  The men's side is pretty representative. 

 

Let's also not forget this isn't basketball.  Lots of countries had golfers playing at a very high level for a very long time.  To think the US should dominate in golf is foolish, IMHO.  

[Medson]

43 minutes ago, moostache said:

This is it. I'm sure we'll get some really good players that never had opportunity before, but the ones that don't make it will be behind in the other facets of life...

I just read Roger Federer’s biography. He was sent to tennis boarding school at age 14. I think the book says that’s pretty much when his academic schooling ends. It’s tennis all the time. 

 

Maybe this is the model this national program or maybe any national program will model after?
 

identify the talent early. Set up a shop probably in FL. Golf all day everyday. If kids can’t handle, GTFO. Survive of the fittest kinda deal. 👍

 

[iteachgolf]

23 minutes ago, golfortennis said:

 

While that would likely get brought in I don't consider college coach salaries "market" rates.  There is absolutely no market in the US for professional water polo, and a tiny market for volleyball, yet there are college water polo coaches making over $100k, and volleyball coaches making well above that.

 

The reason for that is not that there is a market for coaches that requires salaries be raised to draw them, but rather to maintain the not for taxes status, athletic departments have to spend the gobs of money that come in each year.  And since you can only rebuild so many facilities, put so many TVs in basketball players' lockers, etc., the money starts to flow out to other coaches.

 

Given that it's the USGA and they need to spend money as well, it will likely end up as you describe, but that would be due to a a real distortion in economics rather than a true example of them.  I count 14 people listed in the form 990, and all of them are paid north of $335k.  

 

The more we dig in, the more I think this will benefit a chosen few, and a large number of them will be within the USGA's umbrella.

 

 

In golf they are market rate.  Top instructors make as much or more than the top college golf coaches.  There absolutely is a market that requires the salaries to be that high to attract top talent. It’s why many former top college coaches still move into the recruiting/advising world over coaching, because they can make even more money there.  If anything the market has proven that to keep the top coaches coaching they’ve had to increase salaries. 
 

 

[golfinbrad]

54 minutes ago, Medson said:

I just read Roger Federer’s biography. He was sent to tennis boarding school at age 14. I think the book says that’s pretty much when his academic schooling ends. It’s tennis all the time. 

 

Maybe this is the model this national program or maybe any national program will model after?
 

identify the talent early. Set up a shop probably in FL. Golf all day everyday. If kids can’t handle, GTFO. Survive of the fittest kinda deal. 👍

 

It already is and has been.  USA Hockey National Development Program, Soccer, gymnastics, etc.  They all identify the best young talent and get them to go through these programs.

[golfinbrad]

1 hour ago, golfortennis said:

 

The US doesn't dominate in women's golf.  The men's side is pretty representative. 

 

Let's also not forget this isn't basketball.  Lots of countries had golfers playing at a very high level for a very long time.  To think the US should dominate in golf is foolish, IMHO.  

Totally agreed.  No question with our countries resources we probably should do better in some sports, but how important is it really?  The USGA should be focused on growing the game.  Getting more people interest, especially kids.  First Tee, PGA Jr League, LPGA Girls, free greens fees for juniors, free clinics, etc have all been great.  I think (I'm sure many will disagree) spending these resourcing on 1% of golfers is our of their lane.  I hope I'm wrong, but I hope it doesn't turn into a USA Hockey, USA Soccer, Gymnastics, etc.  I remember when Sweden took their hockey program to another level.  USA Hockey pushed their hockey model on everyone saying in the next 10 years we will have more players in the NHL than Canada.  Yeah, good luck with.  Didn't happen.  Then they changed course and said we are focusing on goaltending.  Our goal is to have more goalies in the NHL than any country.  There isn't a formula to make a superior athlete.  Sure countries did this pre 1990s (USSR, etc.), but kids here have so many more opportunities.  Kids will not succeed if they don't enjoy it.  Never once did I hear them talk about how to get more kids to enjoy it.  How can we get more kids involved.  All about the making their program successful.  I found it very frustrating.  Us on GolfWRX are more passionate about the sport than most people.  I think we all hope this program takes a different course and maybe a new model other sports can follow.  I just hope they don't lose perspective you are working with kids.  While some will go on to be awesome athletes, they are just as many that have had negative experiences that has scared them.  Sorry for the rant and I truly hope the USGA goes about it the right way for everyone involved.