No Laying Up - Golf Podcast - NLU Podcast, Episode 772: Grant Thornton Recap, PGA Tour Investment News + Mike Whan & Martin Slumbers Interview

Episode Date: December 11, 2023

We've got several different avenues to cover on this week's recap pod. First up, Soly, KVV and Tron react to the latest news on the PGA Tour's efforts to snag private investment dollars and do our best to make sense of how these negotiations dovetail with the potential PIF investment into the PGA Tour Then it's on to the Grant Thornton (19:00) where Lydia Ko and Jason Day win the inaugural edition of the PGA-LPGA team crossover tournament. We also talk Rory's return to Twitter, the reactions to Jon Rahm's LIV announcement and some additional ramifications of a restructured PGA Tour (24:00) before we move to Soly's interview with USGA CEO Mike Whan and R&A CEO Martin Slumbers on this week's rollback announcement (44:30) We close the pod (1:42:10) with KVV reading his recent column "Jon Rahm, The Rollback and an Entire Reevaluation" which you can read here: https://nolayingup.com/blog/jon-rahm-the-rollback-and-an-entire-reevaluation Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

I'm going to be the right club today. Yes. That is better than most. I'm not in. That is better than most. Better than most. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to the No-Lang up podcast, Sully here, got my guy, KVV, went viral on the interwebs this week with an article, Hello, Kevin, he's basking in the globe as hot takes. Yes, I'm sure Twitter will be sending me a check any moment now for the

11 cents that I have generated for the platform. So it was very exciting. They really hooked you in with those early paychecks and now we get like 40 bucks a month from them. But TC is here. Hello TC. I got listened to this. The fake, the fake news, failing golf media worried about their, their checks from X or Twitter or whatever we're calling it these days. It's almost like just like farming engagement on there is what's going to get you the most money and all of the all the views on there. It's wild how that new Twitter works. It's crazy. But do you think anybody's trying to gauge that by the game? Not in golf. There is anybody. Oh,

no, not in golf. No, no, no, it's about the truth. Come on, Kevin. It's a you got to get it. You got to get it right from the start. All right. So, listen, you, you guys know the benefits of having food joy on your feet, but the thermo series layering system, you can play more golf in more conditions to extend your season. So you see, I think we're going to need this here in the, in the coming days, we're going to head up to Georgia, play a little golf this week. I think we're going to need several different options to both pile on and to shed off the never fails. Whenever we go up to Georgia, it is a low of about 32. It's, but it's warmer than Florida culture. I'm just realizing it's sounding like we're going to Augusta. We are not going to say don't pretend like you're going.

We're going to champions retreat, no kidding. Thermo series is the most advanced apparel layering system in golf. Anyone who lives or plays near anywhere that's cold knows it's about having the right layers. This collection was made specifically for golf design to work together so you can easily layer up or down as the conditions change. The base layer is fantastic. It is made to keep you warm, but also to give you the most mobility, you need to swing freely. And no matter what layer you put over it or how many you'll be comfortable all day long. This is technically advanced gear packed with performance stretch materials designed for the golf swing while providing warmth and comfort, which means in the temperature drops, you can take it low as well. Those are the most frustrating days those days where you might start out really cold and then it gets warm, figuring out what mix to go with.

But you can go to footjoy.com and you can stock up on those layers and be prepared for anything with thermoseries as the day evolves, you can evolve with it. I'm wearing the thermoseries right now. I'm putting up. Get this really cool. It's nice and cool. Personal endorsement for the vest. Vest is great. Wow, that means a lot. I'm very picky on my vests.

It's got the, it's super thin, so it doesn't restrict you at all, but it's got this really cool fleece liner on the inside. It's the bomb. Got a little bit to talk about here. We have an interview about halfway through here with Mike Wahn and Martin Slumbers of the USGA and RNA about the ball rollback that came out this week, which feels like it was four months ago. KVV is going to read an audio version of his essay as well, the viral one that we talked about. That'll be on the end of this podcast. But first, we have some news on the PGA Tour Front. Speaking of evolving with it as the day evolves, so some news broke here at the end of the

day, Sunday, some kind of news. I'm not really positive. It's, I guess the news here is the PGA Tour Policy Board has unanimously selected an outside investment group to further negotiate with as talks with the PIF continue to progress. There was, they were, you know, they were deciding between several different investment groups and they have decided to move forward with strategic sports group SSG. This was announced Sunday in a memo to tour members. The update followed a series of policy board meetings over the past several days that featured a thorough review of the quote

Extremely strong final proposals submitted by several outside investors SSG as a consortium consortium. How do you say that one consortium consortium? You know what depends on if you're American or if you're British really. I didn't that. Hey, of US based professional sports team investors, the memo further stated we anticipate advancing our negotiations with PIF in the weeks to come further the DP world tour will continue to be an important part of the process as we build toward PGA tour enterprises. The memo declined to further to release further details, but said the board is very confident in an eventual positive outcome for all players in the PGA tour as a whole. Rapping up here, the investors who comprise the strategic sports group, Mark Antinasio, Arthur Blank, Jerry Cardinal.

Cardinal? I'm saying that right, TC. I know you know all these guys personally, probably a flyer or some of that. Co-in private ventures, Fenway sports group might Gordon, uh, Wic Grouseback, John Henry, high post capital, Mark Lazarie, Tom Ricketts and Tom Werner. Uh, T.C. Boy, what does this all mean? What does this news mean tonight? You got like seven pro sports owners there, all sorts of Fenway sports group dudes, uh, get the owner of the Celtics, the Cubs, the Bruins, you know, FC Liverpool, all that stuff. But you know, it's funny how quickly this seemed to happen after the events of December

7th, right? Listen, at some point, you know, I assume that this means that things are finally moving towards a logical conclusion now that, you know, Jay somehow seemingly can't even mess this one up. I would, I would not declare that. I cannot believe you would, you would declare that this. I do find it funny that it's a bunch of Boston guys, you know, and hopefully my guy, what's the PGA tour superstar guy's name, Dick, something. Dick Williams, the general blanks guy. Yeah, the, uh,

the general manager of, uh, the Atlanta drive. Okay. Hopefully he's involved there with AMB enterprises. But, uh, no, I think it's, you know, overall, it's good news. I think it's, you know, we're starting to hear a lot of rumors about big tone, about, uh, Carol Hatton, other things of that nature. and, you know, who knows how substantiated those are, but.

But what does that even mean at this point? What does that mean though? T.C. at this point, like, like, big tone and Carol Hatton potentially maybe already going to live by Tony's quotes of his answer. It sounded like, you know, I mean, I'm not a common honor to why I forget what he said exactly. He's gone, right? But what does that mean at this point?

Like, is there a deal in place? What is, why isn't everyone going to live? I'm struggling to make sense of it all at this point. I mean, it seems like at some point, Yasser would stop paying people to come to live if he feels like there's a deal, whereas the rom one felt like, all right, you got to bring the tour back to the table

and quickly, right? And I feel like he's done that. He's strengthened his negotiated platform or position. And you know, it seems like things are moving towards everybody coming back together in some form or fashion. I guess I just wonder, what does that mean? Like, well, that is, I mean, we'll see Rommet, like the tour champions, like, you know, it's just hard to even conceptualize

like what the agreement will say at this point, right? I assume it's all for 2025, but it how to be wild if like, you know, Romm's sons would live and then he turns up at the century to, you know, warm up the split. He's not spending season. He's not, exactly. Yeah, that's it.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I don't know. We'll not. He's not guaranteed off. So. Yeah. I don't know. We'll see. I mean, you know, Yasser and Jay, it sounds like they're scheduled to meet next week, I guess, now, or someone from the Pugiant Tour. Or, yeah, this week, I guess.

You know, it's what? December 11th, when this comes out on Monday, so, you know, 20 more days to the very inconsequential deadline, you know, assuming that they want to hit that if not, they can extend it more. But it seems like Yosser's the captain now. I'll put it that way. It certainly does. It's been a, you know, such a weird up and down. I guess if I was to try to summarize what has happened here, I was very, very confused and I voiced that confusion after the framework agreement was announced. When it was written in pencil, basically, I guess, I probably overvalued that piece of paper

that they signed back around June 6th to say, hey, the control of this new entity is gonna lie with the PGA tour, and they're gonna do a cost benefit analysis in some way of live and decide what to do in the future. That to me, RedLive was done and it was over with. And I was very confused when Yossir went the next week and told all the live guys, like, no, it's not going away. It was kind of like, okay, well, all right, that doesn't really seem like you guys

are really on the same page with all that. And then the tour players got all up in arms about the deal and went to say, well, why don't we go look into the private equity options? That seemed to piss off Yasser on that side. Two sides did not seem close together at all. And it comes to a head here with using Ron as the massive, massive, massive negotiation, a pawn in the negotiation negotiation and all of a sudden, we're heading towards this thing, finally getting finalized. But again, all that means nothing to me,

if it doesn't mean the best players are getting back on the course at the same time, right? Which is why I'm asking, like, what does this mean about Finau and Hatton going to live? Like they just played 2024 with live and then all of a sudden, 25, we have this new tour, whatever that looks like, you know, our Finau and, and braw, and all these guys going to be hitting shots with live past 2024, like I, I don't see how there's a deal done.

I don't think like the PJ Tours folding up into live. Am I wrong about that? It just seems like you can't really split the baby either, right? Because the thing's not valuable enough. Like in one part, much less tri-fricated or bifurcated into different, you know, disparate parts, right? Like all the value of somebody wanting to come in and invest in this would be predicated upon the global game, everything. So I think, you know, reading between the lines, it seems like this is a win for global golf. I think it may be a loss for US golf just because there may not be as much of a schedule here in the states, stateside domestically, but that said, there's probably too many tournaments to begin with here domestically, you know, as it is. So who knows? We'll see,

you know, how they managed to muck this one up, but it seems like the first step forward in a while for the tour. If you're at TC, though, Arthur Blank or John Henry or Steve Cohen, are you really going to invest in like a global thing? I think you want some guarantee that like a big part of the US product, which is sort of a proven thing that it is can make money. Or isn't that, you know, part of what you want out of this? Like, I guess I would want to know how much of the, like clearly the Piff and Yasser is going to have a major say in whatever happens, right? And, but is, are they going to be satisfied with, you know, having 10% of all this, right?

Or are they going to be satisfied? No, no, we want 51% of all this. And are the players going to sort of be okay with it? I would say a lot of these billionaires are getting involved with the idea of like, all right, the only way that's going to pass just as part of the master is if we're throwing our hat in this and we want to see the, what some version of the PGA Tourist survive. Maybe that means it's 100 people or 70 people or 50 people. And we'll play some global golf, but we're not really gonna just turn in entirely

into a global tour. That would surprise me because if I'm Tom Ricketts, or I'm Stephen Cohen, like I'm not all that interested in putting up a tournament in Adelaide or China or whatever, I'm wanting to sort of say like, yeah, no, we should have the best players here and we should have them in Boston. We should have them in Philadelphia. We should have

them in Florida. Well, I think there's a difference between having them in Philadelphia, Boston, Florida. Like I totally agree with you and having them in the Quad cities or having them in, you know, trying to think where like, you know, heart for Connecticut. Like it seems like there's that stuff still going to go on. It just seems like at some point, you know, heart for Connecticut. Like it seems like there's that stuff still going to go on. It just seems like at some point you also fold in, you know, kind of whether it's the best DP World Tour events or, you know, the best events on the PGA Tour. And then some of the other ones like Cornfairy kind of becomes, you know, like the

bottom half of the PGA Tour schedule kind of becomes a feeder tour, same with, same with the DP World Tour. I would assume the Asian Tour as well. And you know, everything feeds up to this thing that's kind of bolted onto the top. So I do agree. I do. And again, I just, I feel like I've said this 35 times over the last two years, like to what does Piff and what do Yossir want out of this, right? Like they want the US. Like that's that's always been the thing. He wants it a gust of membership. He is they've seen it as a table. They've run how many of their events have been in the US, like when they claim to be like the global tour, like no, they want the US capital markets. They don't want US golf. They want like the

capital markets of the United States, right? So that again, if these if Piff and all of this investor group are going to be on the same page, like ignore the PGA tour. So that's like the PGA tour is so broken and so fucked. Like, the only two people playing by actual real, real markets are the investors and Yosser and PIF, right? Like, they're the ones that can actually, like, look at this from a 10,000 foot view. The PGA tour is so mired and a structure that just has to change that they have no negotiating power in all of this. But like, these two groups are has to change that they they have no negotiating power in all this

But like these two groups are gonna probably if they're gonna partner up their interests are gonna be somewhat in common, right? And I don't think any of these groups are signing up for any more internal warring factions of No of these guys are only gonna play on live and these guys are gonna play on the PGA tour PGA tour Enterprises that believes what it was called in the memo. I, I don't know how you don't all get together. And like, again, like I was saying last week, like, start making common sense out of professional golf world because none of the ROM stuff makes sense, unless it's about negotiation, none of the FETA stuff

makes sense, unless it's about negotiation. And I'm just, obviously, like, reading the sentiment online, like, people are done with this. Like absolutely done with all of this and it needs to start coming back together. And I don't see any way that it makes sense. These groups, I'll do this and it doesn't come together. If you're a geosser at this point,

why do you need anybody else? All these people talk about O'Holven's necks, like, you know, funny now, whatever. I look, I might wanna have Rom fill out his team and whatever, but I wouldn't give a shit about, I don't need to sign Fickr Haaven for $300 million. If I'm getting 20% of this next deal, and then I'm going to bring everything together in 2025, I'm just like, yeah, it'll figure it out. I mean, unless Monty is just totally irrelevant, you can say to

whomever you have to answer to, like, yeah, I need another 500 million to sort of, you know, just for fun. Just to say. Well, it's one of those things where he's basically, he's basically shown, he's displayed that, hey, I can keep doing this as long as you want me to. I could, I could spend another 300 million on hovelin. I could spend another, you know, get whoever the next guy coming up is, right? But it's, it's one of those things that's like, all right. So come back to the table. So that's where going back to what you said, KVV, like, it's the 10% like how big of a slice of the pie is he get, right? And what is that worth? And what does that get as far as the schedule goes? But it's still only worth something to him in negotiation, right? Because I am sorry, like, Ram is not going to change the viewership numbers tangibly and from total to live, right? And like that's just what like the

again the very dumb corner of the golf world internet like thinks this is like this massive game changing thing. It is for negotiations 100% and they have BGA toward the most wild the vulnerable position possible as you could see that this thing coming together in just a couple days after the ROM situation but like again this is like the end game for for Yosser can't be for his 130,000 viewers to become 200,000. Like, and that's a massive increase off the backs of Ron, which I would not expect to actually happen. So again, always thinking of this of what the end game actually would be. I think live continues to exist in some way. Like I think it is either a seasonal thing or I don't

know if it goes all the way. I just don't see one. I don't think all the best players in the world are going to end up playing in this format, whatever it is. And I don't think it's going to be and I also don't think it's going to be under the same umbrella. Guys like half the team, half the guys playing on live and half the guys playing the global tour or whatever it is. Yeah, we'll see. But that would be common sense. But that would be common sense. And that has not ruled the day for multiple years in this, in this, you're totally right as

far as like what is Yosterone? He wants to see the table. He wants to be part of the larger thing in that. And he is also like, well, now that I have that, I might as well grab a little bit more of this table, right? Well, it seems like for that, like he's like, he may not be, you know, satisfied with 15% of it. He wants 42% of it or whatever, you know, so we'll see what value these guys bought in with. I think it's interesting that that Jay has all of his old Boston friends kind of at the

all of his old Boston friends kind of at the at the table here. Trying to save an American business, TZ. They're patriots, which do like the idea of fucking goon of these guys, like advising on this and like seeing this through the finish line, instead of like Peter Malnotti, like being a conduit for like the mules and having a say in this, I feel a lot better about that, like a lot, a lot better about that. I wouldn't count the mules and having a say in this, I feel a lot better about that. Like a lot, a lot better about that. I wouldn't count the mules out yet. Oh, the little try. Oh, I'm counting them out.

I'm just saying like they are going to be the voice that's going to get diminished here pretty quickly. I know the mules have been been standing on the back of the range trying to, trying to whip some votes, trying to, you know. So yeah, I think that, I think the, you know, it'll be super interesting to see kind of how this delvetails with the PIF negotiations. I don't know. I mean, it's just funny to me. Like they misspelled Mark Antinoccio's name. It was Mark with a C they misspelled it as instead of M-A-R-K. He owns the brewers, DJ's brewers, of course. And it's like, hey, man, like, how about some fucking details here? How about everybody needs time you have a little bit more detail oriented PGA tour. Like, it's just so emblematic of

everything that they're about and everything that they've done over the last three years. Like, can we get some adults into the room, please? I think this has to do that, right? Like, can we get some adults into the room, please? I think this has to do that, right? Like, I don't read these names and think that we're adding more children into this. But anything else on this front that it's discussed before, I'm sure something else will have broken by the time

this is out by Monday morning. So I want to talk a little grant Thornton, please. Guys, I have to admit, I was quite excited about this when it was announced. Everything that happened this past week, just had me, I was watching it today, and I watched some yesterday, I was like, what, why, like what are we doing here?

Like everything that's happened to this past week has like neutered my excitement even for this crossover, PGA tour LPGA event, which was down in Naples this past week. I feel like there was next to no buzz about it. I didn't hear anyone talk about social media just as the golf world was blowing up. But Lydia Coe and Jason Day win the event at 26th under par. How much of this did you guys catch this week?

I watched quite a bit on Saturday. But did you? Yeah. I watched the fun around today. I was probably from... I wouldn't say watch the whole thing, but I watched the back nine. And I have a little bit of a sort of, I guess personal connection to Lydia Coe,

not only did I profile her years ago, at ESPN The Magazine and spent two, three hours with her. She, if some people remember when we went to the US Open this year, she kind of waived my daughter over and let my daughter and I walk in the ropes with her for practice round and was talking to my daughter and, you know, asking her about her own golf game. And so I came away from that, uh, being like, let me call might be the nicest person in all of golf. Like I am so happy to see her find some confidence.

It was a weird year last year. I feel like people didn't even realize because her ranking didn't plummet quite as much maybe as it should have, but she didn't have a top 30 finish for eight months or something bonkers. She fell really off her perch from starting the year. Number one didn't win at all. I feel like to see her hit that shot into 17

was really awesome. It's like a five-wood or a hybrid couldn't quite tell, but just smoked it, you know, 210, really soft fade in there and then setting up the sort of winning birdie in this. I just felt really kind of excited for her. It's a big purse. I mean, it won 500 grand a piece.

You know, the format was fine. There were some tough scores out there in the scramble, which was kind of funny. But I think the, I don't know, I just felt like a half measure, which I guess you got to start with. But, you know, it's juiceless. Some of that's Naples. Some of that's probably, you know, the second time they've had a

ladies tournament down there in the last three weeks, right? Not the most dynamic course, Tiburon. We're bunkering there. Yeah, it's just, you know, it's actually a Greg Norman design. It's just one of those things where it's like, it felt like, it feels like this event could be so much better than it is, but it just felt like kind of an afterthought. And I don't, but I don't want to bite the hand that feeds of saying, you know, hey, it's taking him this long two decades to get a co-ed event back on the schedule.

It just seems like, guys, let's, let's maybe bump this to a more favorable slot in the season or make, I mean, shit, make the Zurich this or, you know, something that's during golf season that's, that's at a place where you could have some fans that there's, you know, it's near a major Metro. It's not, you know, 12 teams or however many teams this was, 16 teams. You know, the format was fine. It was what? Scramble and then all shot yesterday and then modified for ball today where they switched

balls for their second shots. I was interesting. Alison Corpus and Cam Champ shot 78 in Altshot, which was tough, but you know, it's just, I don't know, it was cool, but it just didn't really, it didn't really move the needle a whole lot. And I don't think that's a factor of the co-ed thing. I just think, hey, you're going up against NFL football,

you're going up against nothing moves the needle. Is that mean? Nothing. In between Tiger Weeks as well. Again, that's not a reason not to do it. It just kind of felt like, we've been hyping this and have been asking for this for quite some time. I wish it had came in a different time

just in terms of what was going on in the golf world and just everything got sucked up into that vacuum. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of

the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of

the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I'm not going to be a big fan of the game. I know, see when I'm touched just shot 60 today. That was big and Madeline shot 28 on the back nine today kind of made a charge. Cory Connors, Brooke Henderson came in second, lost by a shot.

They had a double on third hole today. I said two equals on the front nine, but feel like they, they kind of let this one through their grasp a little bit. It looked like everyone that played genuinely enjoyed it. Like that, I think it's a probably, you know, again, I don't know how that all translates to TV, but a really great experience for both sides, both the men and the women that got to play in it. I feel like they were everyone kind of came off the course kind of buzzing in a way that

you don't usually see them. So team golf is fun. I read it. Yeah. I read Gabby Hertz, I grew up a story for us. I had said that they sold twice as many tickets this year than they did for the QBE stuff. Good last year. They just had Lexi. And to replace the QBE is a huge win because that was one of the worst things in sports. I've been to the QBE twice. Just because of my wife from Naples and it's bleak. I was really bleak, especially when like Chris DeMarco was teeing it up. You know, hey, it's my

guy. 10 years after his prom, you know, 10 years after he kind of lost his card, like it was, it was a tough, tough field. So this was, this was a step in the right direction. For sure. Roy's back on Twitter. He's clapping back at people. Yeah. Fire and shit out. He responded to someone saying the best thing to happen to the 2023 Euro rider cup team was Henry going to live. A lot of people got really upset about this and really bothered by it. Totally. And Polter and Westie. Yeah. Which DC, I got a joy. I enjoyed your dig on that. It's great. I mean, that's that's like one of my favorite gifts out there. The, uh, the boxing raffer. You talking about the, no, the one, your jig at the, your dig at the, uh,

majestics. Oh, yeah. Well, that's the thing. It's like, you know, if people want to argue that live is serious, cool. Go for it. Be my guest. Like, I'm a, you know, I'm a big cleak's fan, but like majestics, like you guys are fucking awful. And at some point, like results matter. And Westwood, Holzer and Stenson, are three captains on one of the worst teams in the league. It had spent like probably top, top three or top four payroll in the league. That's right.

Guys, that's not good. To see the biggest respect that you can pay to live is calling them out constantly and just shitting all over that team until it gets better. I mean, it, you know, if Manchester United was down, would people just be like, well, they're trying. No, they'd go after them. So just like you push this going through your service. Yeah.

Manchester United team. Yeah, I don't know. It's, it's, you know, again, all of the league stands. We wait with Bated Breath to see what happens if they do ROMs, team as an expansion franchise, or if they rebrand the cliques. I saw that they had the 36 hole qualifying tournament, the final round today.

You saw it, I know your boy, Chris Stroud missed the cut, the first round cut. You needed me there. Yeah, as well as a few other kind of PGA, sort of luminaries. Did you see that? Like a rules dispute, TC, like late in the round, and they were like arguing in the fairway. Oh, like, what? Slugger White couldn't be woken up for this.

Like, what, isn't that exactly what the hired slugger to do is like sort out these rules issues, and there's just not where anywhere to be found? The guys, the guys protected the field, I give him credit. The guy trying to take a scummy job got back down. My guy, Kaiye Samoya, the finish guy got through Kieran Vincent, one of the best aesthetics and all of golf got through. Yeah, you got to think that one,

at least one of those guys is probably going to, going to make his way to the cleaks, if not both. If I understood how the teams come together, I might be able to add more onto that, but one of them might get traded for the defending champion for all we know. So the last question I'll have on that, on that front is like, what is stopping an insane wave of guys just going for a cash grab for one year? Like if everything's going to come together, what is preventing guys from doing? Is it truly just yoss or not offering everyone a contract? Gotta be logistics of it, right? Like how do you just fold in 10 more teams? No, but I don't know. I mean, what about, you know, the cliques have two spots, right? Just raising your hand and saying, Hey, I'm gonna I want to play for

I mean, I guess the purses are kind of You know, if you're one of the top 50 or 70 guys on tour Is it kind of trade for like even though the deaf's a lot better on tour? Let's say you're hobblins and you don't think the OGR stuff is gonna get sorted out anytime soon Do you just trade a year of not playing in majors for 250 million? Like, we can still play the majors. He would still be out. I don't mean I guess some top 50, but is there anybody who would be like a borderline?

Well, I think I would imagine some of it has to deal with endorsements, right? Because endorsements, the way they structure a lot of those contracts, to my knowledge is PGA tour starts. So would Ricky be, Ricky would be someone like that, right? I mean, he'd still probably be in all the majors from to be in top 50, but would be more realistic that he might miss one if he, I don't know. And he was certainly flirting with the live stuff for a while.

Yeah, I don't know. I just, I just feel like these guys kind of open up a can of worms. If you're going over there, you better be you better be getting more than enough money on the front end to justify some of your endorsements taking a hit just from pure contractual language standpoint, not not meeting your minimum starts on your contracted tour. Yeah. What did you guys think of the reaction to Ram going now? It's been a couple of days. I got to meet.

I took a spin through his like announcement tweet on there. I was blown away at the vitriol. I kind of had thought people had gotten past a lot of the stuff. And the sentiment was overwhelmingly drastically negative. Like people like furious about the whole thing. And it made it all that much more bizarre to me. I don't know what I was expecting, but it just felt like Ram has had his finger on the pulse the whole time and the middle finger he's thrown

at golf fans through all this is basically, I am Lynch called it out too, like his greed is what drove this, right? And he's the person I did not identify as being exceptionally greedy. And I don't know, maybe we are too kind to him, honestly, in the reaction pod on Thursday. I know we are trying to look at like the more of the macro view of it, but I don't know. That reaction was kind of surprising to me. KVV, I think it just goes to your like what you've kind of tried to draw on for your column. It's just people who just tired of it all, right? It's just, you know, it's just unmitigated. You know, whether or not, like, yeah, Jay certainly gave these guys, you know, and out and not really playing the moral high ground anymore,

but at the same time, for ROM to say it was about innovation and growing the game, like, get the fuck out of here, man. Like, you know, like, you're gonna go play in some tournaments that Five or six hundred fans are going to you know, and I get that there's a few that are not they're not tournaments T.C. He said that also 54 whole shock no cuts not a tournament not a golf tournament. That's his own word I don't I do not think people like when people sort of pretend to be one thing and then reveal to me I think that's probably what drives a lot of the Michelson vitriol in general. Is it for years he sort of presented himself

as one thing and then suddenly it was like, oh, you know, I'm actually, I'm the black hat. I'm not the sort of charming good guy. And I think that's how to do some of it wrong. You know, imagine if Norrie had taken the Rom deal. I think the vitriol would be enormous. You know, I think people would be so upset. And so to see rom take some of that even though the new you can sit here and be like, oh, the nuances of it all are you John never like, can't you just mind.

You can't change his mind. But that's such a minority of people. Like again, part of like why the reason I wrote what I did and the way I did it is sort of like, yeah, you guys, when we step outside this bubble, people are pissed off. Like, they are just fed up with it. They're like, fuck off. Like, I do not need to follow golf on a week to week basis. You're telling me, all these people are probably going to be in the majors anyway, then what do I care? Like, I'm not going to sit here and watch two divided different tours.

I'm not going to search it out on it. If it's going to be a remotely difficult, it's hard enough to search it out on the PGA tour stuff. And that was way easier than, you know, the live stuff. So I'm just going to say, forget it. I think that's sort of proving to be how the reaction is. It's just people don't, that you, you can tell me over and over and over again, oh, there's this money involved and this money involved, fans do not give a shit. They will not tune in for a money thing because there really there's no difference between a million dollars and 10 million dollars in the eyes of a fan. They just want to either have some reason to care

and money is not going to be it. Which I would take KBV taking that step farther. It almost feels like people aren't even mad anymore. They're just apathetic and walking away. That's 10 times worse than being mad. Well, like, Ram went on McAfee on Friday and they just like all lapped it up about how much money he was making all that. And that was like one of the most biggest middle fingers to the fans.

Again, we're not rooting for your personal wealth. Like you're an athlete, you're your job to entertain us. Like that's a, unless you're Otani and then we're all like, all right, good to get for you, man. But no one was, yeah, no one was like, oh, it's so sick though that Otani got that deal. That's awesome. They were like, oh, man, it's be fun to watch Otani play for the Dodgers. I mean, it's fun to watch play for the good LA team. I just, I just tell you, right, that Mac if he thing was gross. And I think, you know, look, I,

I'm a former ESPN person. Obviously, I have a lot of friends there and stuff, but like turning over so much of your face of your network to Pat, to me, I mean, Pat's very talented. He's good at what he does, but I just, I can't help but feel like there's a lot of people being turned off by that kind of thing. It's just like, oh yeah, how sick is it that you're just sticking in everybody's face? And you're joking about, oh, is it 400 million

or 600 million? And why would that make me want to watch this? That's the part that bothered me. It was obviously and clearly so pro athlete of like, yeah, he's a professional athlete. And like we're, you know, we, saying we like me, like him and Ram, like we make our money, you know, from professional sports,

like good for you, man, happy for you. But like also do like you're representing like sports fans here. And like part of the like part of the conversation here. And not to mention ESPN is a freaking partner of the PGA tour. Like for ESPN plus that whole thing had was just, I don't know, it was really not the story. I didn't think the story is is, you know, pissed off. Like again, if there were people that actually cared about this league, then that

would be an interesting thing. If it was driven by market forces, this league. All right. Anyway, we can get lost on this. Real quick. I do want to commend, say what you want about the guy. I know he's got his detractors out there. Having Rory acting like a real human being again. On Twitter. On Twitter. That's why I like roaring the first place. For sure.

And being candid and speaking your mind a little bit, even if you're gonna catch some flak, I like that. I think that's pro fan, right? That's pro, you know. That's why, again, like you said, there's definitely people he has rubbed the wrong way in all of this, but like from the jump publicly and privately, like worry cares about like entertaining the golf fan. Like he retweeted your article, Kevin, like he, which was just like a middle finger to

everyone involved in golf, like your article basically was. And he re he reshared that he's like, dude, the golf fan here needs to like, we need to address this. And I'd be stunned with the influence that he has if it doesn't get addressed in some way. I was like, I feel like I've said a million times too, I was rooting for the PGA tour throughout all of this because I felt like it was the best chance at competitive golf, like entertaining us. I lost a lot of faith on June 6th,

and I've definitely lost even more of that faith since then. As things continue to, you know, just dwindle, but maybe it is falling apart to the level that it can get reconstructed in a way that can be good for just like passable product for a coffee. It's got to the point almost that I'm kind of almost rooting for Yosser to just finish these guys off, man. And so that something springs up in their place

or that everything gets brought back together. Cause like Monahan and the gang, they've proven they're not it. We're just gonna keep getting short changed. And it's like, hey, let's just burn this thing down quickly so something else can rise in its place. Just like, it's a demo. It's a full demo and rebuild the rebuild the structure, right?

I do. Oh, honestly, I was thinking about this today, though. Is there a charitable element of the PJ tour enterprises that survives in any way? Like, are all these charities going to totally potentially get completely, like, hi, hung out to dry? I don't want to cut you off. Can we explore that in a diff view? I've? I've been beaten down so much that if you start to tell me like, oh, yeah, all, all so on top

as all the charities are going to get like stripped down. That's going to, that might be what breaks me, right? I mean, I'm not going to pretend to be the most philanthropic person to like, holy fuck, there's so much shit to work out from all this. And that is a depressing one. I feel like the individual tournaments care about the charities and, you know, a lot of the players do a lot to support that stuff. But to a certain extent through the actions of the PJ tour over the last few years and seeing how they've kind of treated certain things. And yes, they netted up some of the host organizations through COVID and stuff, but seeing how they've handled, you know, reduction in pro-AM slots or this or that, it's, I don't think that they give as much of a shit about the charities as we think,

other than it gives them a massive, massive, massive tax break, right? True, but that money is still going to the charities. Like it's, you know, even though there might be a benefit, obviously there is a huge benefit to the tax element of it, but what if it just eliminates entirely if it's's a holy, for profit thing, and all of a sudden you're saying, hey, there's no money for you. We're not doing the 501c6 anymore.

Like, it's just impossible for us to run an actual business like that. I mean, I would think that will be such a massive PR hit that they would not try to do it. But if you're talking about burn it down and rebuilding it, I don't know that they would not try to do it. But if you're talking about burn it down and rebuilding it, I don't know that you would ever, it's not like the NBA or the NFL is giving out an equal distribution of charity money for the profits that they bring in. So there has to be some massive change to it.

So I was kind of curious about this. The Wells Fargo news made me think, oh yeah, I mean, so maybe you have a better understanding of this. So as Wells Fargo news made me think, oh yeah, we have a better, a better understanding of this. So as Wells Fargo basically said, they're leaving as a title sponsor after this year, because from the reporting, I think Josh Carpenter was the first person to get this, that they said that they could go above 20 million, but they couldn't get to 25. And the PGA tour basically said, well, you can't do it then. And they said, we're good, we cannot go higher. We can go north of 25, we can't get to 25.

We could, they tried to, essentially, I'm sure settles somewhere in the middle, 22, 23, but that wasn't good enough. What are these tournaments gonna do? The question I guess I have for you is, is it mandated like the payouts all the way down, where if someone said to me, look, all right, we can do 20.

I would just basically say like, all right, you know what, the bottom guys aren't going to get paid nearly as much if at all. Like we're going to shift the burden of the money going up top to the people who are bringing in the fans and we're going to make it more. You're on a piss off. I mean, I feel bad for the because I think the distribution is mandated by. That's what I was saying. It must be mandated, right? Because like, why would you pay out the lower

division guys in this sort of remixing? Why would you just make it more cutthroat? And basically say, like, Hey, that's a great question. I'm winning the money. Play, play better. That is a new flash is going to show up at your doorstep tonight. Well, I mean, I just don't have someone who spent their entire like 20 years of their career covering other sports. Like without a click of bargaining, I don't quite get why if you're having money problems at the top,

a bad for you. Yeah, but like the bottom guy said, you're better show me. You're bringing in some revenue or I'm just going to ship this money to the top. That's like, our organization, baby, having a homes because paid a shit ton of money. The brawling jams get paid a shit ton of money. No one's like, too, they vote, but like, that's just a shit. There's a lot of them too.

A lot of mules out there, man. I feel, but, listen, I'm sure there's some listening out there. I'm not trying to steal your money. I'm just saying like, there has to be somebody out there actually trying to protect your money, throw in this idea is around. And how do they, you know And how do they figure that out? Because legitimately, like, Stroud complaining, and then you look, and he's $13 million over the course of his career.

Man, for what you've returned to the league in terms of your value, that to me is about $10 million too much. Now, I'm sure you would think differently, but there's tons and tons of 12 guys in the NBA bench who don't make the 13 millions over the course of their career. So how do you sort of square that with how do you, if you're a mule, how do you defend? Why still deserve all that money, even though nobody is interested in seeing me? Is you think the depth of field is that? I saw a lot of grip.

It was on four play this week. because you're in the hospital visit. Shout out to the real quote, quote, quote, came from I, I didn't, I saw, um, uh, uh, Lonzo Griffin was on four play this week. I did not, I saw only saw the social clip on it. But in the social clip, he was saying, like, I mean, look at, and five, 150 bank players, look at 150 breaks, the prior to the NBA or the NFL or Emma, like, this is not that, dude, holy shit. How can you possibly miss it this widely? Uh, anyway, we're,, that's, so all right.

So Wells Fargo real quick. So they're dropping their sponsorship after 24. Like if Wells Fargo and some of these other, like some of the biggest companies in the country, in the biggest economy in the world are saying, you know what, we can't afford this. This is outrageous. We can't afford this.

We're gonna go spend our sports marketing dollars elsewhere. Like that's a massive canary in the coal mine here. Of this thing is so bloated and why would you be signing up with the tour right now before any of this got settled? Anyway, so who would be giving money to them right now? Totally. It's like, yeah, why would you ever re up for anything knowing that the schedule could be totally different

and they just keep jacking it up and jacking it up and jacking it up. I thought Aiman Lynch had a great column of kind of, you know, John the same things that you did KBV of like, hey, like the greed of John wrong is one thing, but the greed of like all these other players who want to be compensated like the guys who left for live like all these other players who want to be compensated like the guys who left for live, that's an even bigger problem. It's like the equalization or irrational actor added into this is totally fucked pro golf. It is totally messed up with these guys think they're worth and it's God dude, it's someone's going to pay a huge price when the when the market levels itself. It's probably going to be the mules. They're going to get skinned. You know, it's, you know what, though, shout out to the tour. Sure enough, they signed cognizant to be.

That should have had my of the former Honda classic, the Palm Beach. What it was going to be the classic in the Palm Beach. Yeah, we barely knew you. Cognizant is the one company that's betting buddy with the tour right now. But yes, you're, you're move, yasser. Yeah, you know, the tours bringing that to their championship management.

People have played out exactly like that, you know, anonymous tournament director said of like, yeah, you know, you watch the tour is going to try to to throw and horn and say, hey, we came to the rescue here. Cognizant, some massive, uh, massive sponsor of the president's cup.

We're going to bring in tournament director from president's cup to kind of do this as well. And da da da da, and sure enough, that happened pretty much just like that. And you know what, I don't begrudge, like the tour had their big tournament director meeting out in Palm Springs this week. I talked to a few of them out there.

Big J was supposed to come. He did not. He got, he got white from the slate. But there was some vitriol at the beginning of the meeting. I think there was probably less at the end. I do think, hey, the tour has every right to kind of get some of these host organizations in line. Get them, get them, you know, get the least efficient ones that are the five or 10 at the bottom of the

wrong that aren't doing a great job or that are running efficiently. Kick them in the ass a little bit. I got no problem with that, but don't start stealing from the charities. That's big. He's I agree. That's not the DC way. All right. Let's wrap it at that. We are going to cut now to interview from earlier as we recorded this Friday with Mike, one in Martin, slumber is talking about the impact. The rollback that came out this week, a lot of different other avenues they explored with the future of this looks like why it's happening, why it's happening to everyone we asked them all that we possibly could we have Kevin's article. If you didn't catch it on our website this past week, we will have the oral version of that here at the end of the show. So thank you everyone for tuning in

and enjoy Mike one and Martin Slambers. All right, what was announced earlier this week was a departure from what was proposed in March. Departure from what you guys said in March, specifically, Mike, I'll point this one at you because I remember specifically you saying, both on our show and on a lot of television networks You said we surveyed the people that it came back overwhelming to say hey don't touch the recreational game the recreational game is getting touched with what is

proposed this past week what changed in between March and in this past week Mike Yeah, if you know if you really follow the whole process We've had we've had change at the end of every comment period So as Martin I've said, you know, you can't you can't take in comments from all throughout the industry. And then not actually sit down and talk about one of those comments could you incorporate. On your specific question, when we were not with the model local rule, we actually thought that was a pretty good response to comments we had heard the year before. And in the model local rule, we were, you know, we were pretty boisterous about the idea that we could really address distance just at the high end elite level and leave the rest of the game completely untouched.

And if I was being perfect on us, we do the strongest feedback we got across the board. I wouldn't just say tours, but PJ of America and quite frankly, a few of the manufacturers, well, not all, really asked us to consider to not break the bond, as one person said, the magic between what the, what the tour players play and what's available at the recreational level. And probably more importantly, and more specific to your point. We were told in, you know, no uncertain terms that if an MLR is how we're going to address this and the MLR then leaves the decision-making

in the hands of elite competition, that at least in certain of those elite competition leaderships, they were not going to implement. And as I've said before, this was never a paid per exercise from Martin and I. We're not trying to check some employment box. We're actually trying to make a difference with the game long term.

So creating a solution that really wouldn't be implemented is no solution at all. So that forced us back to, okay, so how are we going to do this and then across the board change knowing that and across the board change required us to dramatically lessen the speed in which we were testing so going to ask manufacturers to address more than A-ball, but across the line of balls, we really had to give them time to do that. So I'm actually pretty proud of the fact that our proposals have changed after each piece. It proves and it's true that we heard a lot of feedback and a lot of it we didn't want to hear. It wasn't all the stuff we liked, but we actually had to incorporate that feedback. And so that's the specific. If we didn't think a model local rule would be implemented and a non-implemented model local rule

doesn't really do anything to protect the game long term. It fits into this hot the narrative as well that both Mike and I've been talking about is, from our research work over the last six years, we were both of the view, are both our organisations as well, are of the view that we needed to do something. And we needed to make a change.

And we debated drivers, changing drivers, we debated model occurance for the ball. But the one thing that were both of us said consistently is there are only three options. Change the whole game. Change for the elite game and do nothing. And do nothing with something that both of us felt very strongly was not an option. There are a lot of amateur golfers a lot in my mentions. There are a lot. I'm sure sending mail to both of you guys that will say I've never walked off the golf course and been like I hit it too far and none of the people I play with ever think we hit it too far What what's your response to people that if you can help me out because I don't know what to say What is your response to somebody that gives you that feedback to say like hey, there's no problem for me. Why are you guys doing this?

Well, I think you go back to what why are we doing it in in the round and it to me it's this Concept when you look at hitting distance over a long period of time, it is an expertly going up. If you go back to 1980 and track year after year after year, it is consistently going up. Yes, there are plateaus. And but after every single plateau, it rises again.

And we see that there is no reason to believe that that is not going to continue. And in fact when you follow some of the amateur golf, the elite amateur golf, you know, you've just been with us in Australia and you saw there's the next generation, well, they're even faster and that's the way they're being trained. So there is an army in no no doubt that it's it's going to rise. What we What we then get to the point of saying, OK, so what we're trying to do is to protect the integrity of golf courses. You can't just keep on building T's further and further back. Some places just run out of property to be able to do that.

Secondly, there is a balance of skill and technology in the game that's important, and we've always felt that no one piece of the game should dominate. And the third thing is we just absolutely have to be cognizant of our environmental responsibilities. And just making bigger and bigger golf courses to be able to accommodate, not just the tour place, and I think that's where some of the dialogue is wrong. It's not just about the tour. It is a much bigger picture. We absolutely are affecting thousands of golf courses around the world.

And I think in terms of the recreation of what I would say is, be very clear, we have done a lot of testing. We've talked to a lot of people, a lot of independent people as well. And we have also had golf balls submitted at these higher swing speeds. And what we've learned and corroborated is the impact to the recreation goal for us less than five yards. So what we're actually saying is to really talk about it. One is, quite frankly, you're not going to notice it because it only really impacts your driver. As you go down through the bag, the impact is less and less, and it

verges down to zero once you get down to a five-line and less in the hands. But we're asking all golfers to give a little to make sure that we protect the bigger picture about the game and the bigger picture about the future integrity and evolution of the sport. I can think of multiple angles to go down in terms of what the distance issue, parts of the game, the distance issue touches, right? But I'll start this one with you, Mike. If you had to pick one, you can't, I can give you five to six, maybe 10 reasons to like, you know, there's a distance issue going off.

But you like to pick one. And you have to, you know, you get one answer to give somebody of like, here is why there's a distance issue at golf. What would you put at the top of the list? Number one priority. If you only get, we're able to give one reason. So you know, we're good enough to know that one is a, one is a curse. So that's that's that's my challenge. You're gonna put you in a box here. My one reason would be walk 30 years forward with me. Just no change. Let's just step forward 30 years. Here's the graph for the last 50 years. with me. Just no change. Let's just step forward 30 years. Here's the graph of the last 50 years. Shortest longest average players at the highest end of the male lead game. Here's what's happened. The graph is virtually undeniable. And we're currently testing at 176 mile an hour's

ball speed. The highest people playing on tour right on the top 25, ravaging 183. The actual top of the top are averaging the high 180s. We're seeing these young kids coming in a walker cup in the low 190s. So let's just go 30 years forward. Because everybody wants to talk about, there's no problem because they all talk about today. So 30 years from now, if we're 30 yards longer than we are today, are we okay?

And so are we just simply going to pass by another series of venues and say sorry, but not sorry. And this is not a PGA tour thing. I mean, we're talking about qualifiers. We run all over the world. State amateurs, I have to tell you, junior amateurs are challenging venues for us now going forward in terms of the carries that we're looking for for bunkers to literally be in play.

So I've always said that it's really I've worked for stakeholders. I've worked for shareholders. I've worked for members. I've worked for players. It's really difficult to have a quality conversation about 30 years from now. Really easy to have a conversation about 30 weeks from now. Easier to have a conversation about 30 months from now, but really hard to have a conversation about 30 years from now. And that's why the RNA and the USJ are established the way they are.

No conflicts, no financial ties, to really have an unbiased view and be the ones that can spend most of their time worrying about the long term, the game that my kids' kids will inherit. And if we're simply gonna say, yeah, if that's what it takes, those these events, well, either gonna have a really small number of courses

that can hold these literally thousands of events that happen throughout the world in any given year, or we're gonna make some change to be more responsible. On top of the fact that if we just tell everybody build for the future, which is when you get into conversations with Jack Nicholas and Gil Hans and all the other, when they're being asked by these owners

to build these courses at lengths that they know they don't really need, but they all believe they might build something that could host something huge in 10 years. They're just adding life, adding property, adding maintenance and a nutrients, it's just so short-sighted. So if I had one, I'd say go 30 years with me and let's stop talking about 30 days from now or top talking about 2028. Let's start talking about 2048 and and join me on realizing that doing nothing is a real mistake. Yeah, if I had to kind of just sum that up for people as well, I mean, because we've heard so much conversation about obsolete golf courses,

bringing back obsolete golf courses. And this, I don't think addresses that, right? This puts a pause on things. I don't think this means, hey, we're now gonna play the, you know, the US open at Cypress Point all of a sudden, right? This is getting legislation through that looks like that would be a lot more challenging already

than it already, you know, already has been. Martin, I'm curious, either, would your answer be any different as to what the number one issue is, or if you had to put a number two then on the list behind what Mike has already said to highlight the top, top, top issues of why something needed to be done? Yeah, I think Mike says that is the number one issue and it expresses it very eloquently. And your point there about, this is not going to suddenly bring courses back onto the rotors, is absolutely correct. But I'll give one other aspect, which

is linked to not just the environmental issue, not just the property issue. But in club golf, increasingly, we're hearing the amateur golfers, there's more and more playing the game and stronger and stronger and not as good as hitting the ball straight as maybe the top players are. There's a lot of courses having to redesign holes because for safety reasons and balls traveling distances left left and right. So this is a whole picture about looking, looking forward. And you know, our job is to look forward. It's not to be

instantaneous. It is to worry about the future of the game. So I would put that number two, reflective of the point that our job is to look forward. I've spent some time with you down in Australia, Martin, and I, we found some common ground, I feel like in the, uh, a bit of the romantic side of golf, right? And I, I think, uh, some people are having trouble with the idea or the phrase, de-skilling, uh, you know, as it relates to golf and, and I understandably, I think the casual fan can have, uh, it's a, it's a tough sell for me to be like, hey, watching, at least at the professional level watching the guys hit mid-Irns into the green,

it's gonna be more exciting than hitting short-Irns into the green, right? And I think it is, do you find that to be a tough sell amongst the market that you guys are governing? And could you kind of explain a little bit about, because I've done it as many times I possibly can, but about what your view as the chairman of the RNA is on the balance of skills that are required.

And particularly interesting I've found in what you guys have published is to say, regardless of how these distance gains are happening, an increase in these distance gains are not healthy for the game and for the balance of skills and how it relates to the game. I'm wondering if you could kind of explain that better than maybe I can. Yeah, I mean, I have long been talking about the balance of skill and technology. You know, there is no doubt in my mind that technology coming into our game has been a fantastic thing.

You know, when I learned to play the game, the driver was the hardest thing to hit in the bag. Today, it's not. Many would argue that it's the easiest thing to hit. I think the same thing I would say is that contrary to some commentators, I absolutely believe that hitting the ball out of the middle of the driver and hitting it at high speed is a huge skill. But we did in this announcements this week did actually flag, but we're also interested in the forgiveness of drivers and rewarding center hits versus

off-center hits. Now we've not figured out how to do that effectively. We have one solution for it, but that's probably not the best solution at the moment. And so that very much comes back into the play. But to your broader point, when you look back hundreds of years, golf was always, it was a mixture of things. It was a mixture of driving. It was hitting it out of Terro amounts of sand dunes and back in the link stays. But it's always been made up of driving approach shots, which short, short game and putting. And if you look at the great players of our sport, very rarely does one of them dominate in every single angle of that,

and every single piece of it. Some of them are outstanding drivers, but not such great wedge players. But they work around their skills to be able to create the best product that they can do. So you get a very heterogeneous game. Everyone was different. I think where we are today, where I feel, is that as this technology has got better, which

is a good thing. And I think most people cannot overestimate how good technology has been to help us bought. But that and the question of golf balls and the fact that we have not updated our testing mechanism for 20 years actually means that the driving has become overly dominant in the elite in the elite game. And if you look at whether you look at a stroke's game door or in any other in any other way of looking at it, hitting the ball a long, long way, and not necessarily straight, was actually the best way to have success.

Yes, you've got to be able to chip and do all those other things. But I do think the game could become quite homogeneous. We've seen that in a lot of sports, you know, there are a lot of top sports where they figure out the biomechanics to make the best athlete, and you already see that size of athlete. And I think that would, the game of golf, it will be worse if we don't have that variation and not just have one type of way of playing. You know, you did a nice job in the question before kind of pointing out what this what this change doesn't do, you know, it doesn't bring a bunch of courses back out of the folder of which we can't do. Another thing this change doesn't do is we won't impact scoring, meaning we don't set up the golf courses every day at any of the global tours. So if any,

you know, global tours says, I hate this, I like the way we were scoring before, and they want to play from team markers that are 13 yards closer than they played from in 2027, they'll just eliminate this. And I've said this, I was in an argument with the LPGA professional the other day. And I said, I know a lot of PGA professionals, and I know a lot of LPGA professionals.

They all have a lot of different points of view, but they can all step five steps. So if they don't like this, just pick up your white tea, walk five steps and put them back down, and you can make this a non-issue. So whether you're talking about tour level players, elite level players, elite amateur competitions, we don't, we're not in charge of how you set that up, where you put the teas, how long you play it. And we really would love it, Martin and I, to wake up in 2028 or 2029 and watch a event that still has 15 yards of room behind every T that there's room for the game to actually continue to evolve because it certainly will. But this has never been about scoring. Martin, I've never been in a meeting and talked about what, you know, what under is winning on what course. Because we don't really

in charge of that. So I just want to make sure that people say no matter how you feel about that stuff, this has always been about distance pushing the boundaries of the game, not just not really about today, but about the future. But if people don't like this and want to implement their own change to it, they can make it a nod in shoe. That's totally up to them. And I think it, understandably, the average golfer does not, they contend to conflate scoring with shot value, right? I mean, Martin, you're going to test to this, the set up at the open shape in ship at St Andrews, the pins are in places that they wouldn't be in probably if the balance of the shots was different. And if guys weren't coming in with wedges, it

wouldn't make sense to put pins up on a plateau and things like that. And there is a, there's a lot of things that have been done to combat distance that have probably only exacerbated it over time, narrowing fairways, growing up rough. And all of that again is just like a separate conversation from, you know, how far the ball actually goes. And I, I, I, it was interesting thought I had to as well as I just keep hearing about guys are getting faster getting more athletic Just look at like the average speed going up, you know on the PJ tour and and whatnot and things have gone on long enough like we're 20 20 kind of plus years into like the golf ball evolution and the 30 plus years when you talk about titanium drivers and all that stuff to say

There is some trends that we can see and I've read the study that came out I think from the PGA tour to say, there is some trends that we can see. And I've read the study that came out, I think from the PGA tour to say, like, look, I mean, guys are getting taller on the PGA tour. And I said, like, whoa, that, that's alarming there because guys aren't getting taller. Guys are getting replaced by guys that are taller. And guys that, there's enough, you know, the average swings be coming up on tour.

Guys aren't swinging it faster. There's a level of player that's getting replaced by guys that are swinging it faster and has become a bit of a prerequisite to say, like the hurdle you have to clear to bypass this whole group of guys and learn how to bomb it is it's a huge hurdle and that replacement, we've seen it happen already.

It's not like, hey, this is gonna happen. It's already happened. And I feel like I had a different conclusion reading that than people have come away with. I'm curious, either you guys reaction to that. going to happen, it's already happened. And I feel like I had a different conclusion reading that than people have come away with. I'm curious, either you guys reaction to that. I think that, I mean, we looked very much into that as part of our research program as well. We got into deciding what we wanted to do. And that's part of my point about the game could become homogeneous. If it ends up that, I mean,

I always look at rowing, completely different sport. Rowing in Great Britain has been an enormous success over the last 20 odd years. But they figured out by mechanically that actually the best rows have this following physique, and then they can teach them to row and be successful. And I think golf, if we didn't move forward here, golf could easily fall back into that process. But I keep, I wanna keep coming back to two points if I may on the link to this. One is we have not changed the rule

about how a conforming golf ball works. What we've done is we've changed this standard and updated it to the modern day. And the existing rule is 20 years old in terms of speed. And you were talking about change. Anyone who's watched golf knows it's changed in 20 years. And that what this does is bring that back, you know, bring it up to the model to the modern game. But it's the same type of concept that we had 20 years ago. And the second thing that, you know, I keep reading is people say, well, you shouldn't do the golf ball, just throw the fairways, throw the rough longer, tighten the fairways. That, from my perspective, that could be the ultimate irresponsibility as a governing body.

Why would we outsource the cost to the facilities who are already Trying to work out there the struggles between revenue revenue and cost. That's just bad governance To be able to do that. Yeah, we can do it for the elite Championships because we have more control and we throw more money at it Which we can't ask thousands of golf courses to just do that and, I think if you put the rough long and fairways type for the average golfer, that's going to be a much bigger impact on their enjoyment of the game than actually hitting the ball five yard shorter, which they frankly they won't notice because the longest and the shortest of the drivers that they hit in one day at least 20 yards. So I just

wanted to make those two additional points on your common question. at least 20 yards. So I just wanted to make those two additional points on your column question. If I had to bottom line it for me again, talking about, we're talking about a lot of trends in the game, right? And guys swinging it fast. Now let us just them and all this stuff. But if I would back up to that, I would say, Hey, a big cog in that kind of trend is the fact that guys have permission is what the use I always word to whale on the ball, to swing hard at the ball. And the risk reward for hitting driver, it comes down to like hit it hard.

It's not going to go that far off line because your off center hits don't go that far off line and figure out the rest from there. Whereas if it was a 240 cc driver versus 4 460 CC, guys would swing differently. That's my case on, you know, kind of why, a big reason why things have turned it this way. You guys have looked into this. You guys have talked about how you're gonna continue to look into this.

You talked about this in March, Mike, about the difficulty of fixing driver heads. Although it's back to you then, Mike, what has evolved on that front since March? What are the challenges in fixing driver head? And again, I'm I'm rambling a little bit here, but like this one, I find to be a lot more challenging to convince the amateur golfer like this would be a good thing for the game, right? I don't know if we need

more amateur golfer sitting at way more offline. So I'm wondering, you know, is there a chance for bifurcation along that line down the road and just kind of your reaction to all that? Yeah. If you're if you're history buff and you've kind of followed the proposal process of the USG and RNA and maybe that's a pretty small audience now that I think about as I say that that out loud from the very beginning when we first came out after the distance insight and started into proposals that we wanted to hear back from the industry. The first one we really brought to and was a model local rule for a driver that would have a reduced sweet spot or reduced, you know, forgiveness and quite frankly reduced face rebound of what we call CT characteristic time.

With the idea of being that at the absolute highest end of the game, you ought to really be rewarded for center hits and there ought to be some disadvantage for just going out of this hard as you can if you can't hit the sweet spot. And we really, you know, conceptually love that idea, probably still do if Martin and I were being honest with you. The reality of the research was in order for us to make a difference that would really matter at the elite level, that difference is quite significant. It isn't as small as you just in your grandma got us suggested.

So you've got to go pretty darn far. And in going that pretty darn far, you realize that to get to a difference, a real difference maker at the driver club, in order to not make then three woods, five woods, seven woods, hybrids, and better, you actually have to go all the way down the back. So if you started talking about a model local rule

for a driver, that was really meaningful. In other words, worth doing. We'd probably say to the leap male players, you have to have a different set of fairway woods and hybrids. And again, maybe serviceable at the PGA tour level with five trucks sitting just across the street of your driving range, but not really serviceable. You start talking about tours all over the world

or LPGA or college level, and certainly not for elite amateur events, where we're seeing the same distance. So, and then on top of that, when we went back and had some conversations with some of these tours and some of the, you know, PGA of America and others around the world, you know, this concept of MLR was really challenging.

There's virtually no way we could incorporate a driver like that across the game without really negatively impacting the game. And you know, Martin and I have top of our list, I mean, sitting over there in my corner right now, you know, minimal impact on the recreation. Can't kill the phone, can't kill the excitement to be here. And so when we started talking about a driver

at the MLR level, first of all, we got into something that really wasn't serviceable across the tours. And second is there's something that we really couldn't do across the board. So the reason we put it in this release, this last time, as we left it in there, is because for both Martin and I and our technical teams,

we're still looking. You know, we think there's something here. We just haven't found the something yet. And every time we've gone to the industry and asked for feedback, we've got a combination of stuff, you know, we already knew, and a combination of stuff we really didn't know. So we tried to keep it fresh, even in this last release, because we want to keep hearing for people that might have unique ideas.

So you're right. We agree with you. Conceptually, it makes all the sense in the world, but we haven't figured out a way to do it, sort of, and be serviceable in the real world of elite play. And certainly not possible if it wasn't across the board change. Bad interviewing here, but I'm just going to, I'll make this statement here and I'll give you your reaction to it, Martin. This, this seems like the driver head seems like something that would have been a lot easier to do 20 years ago. What's your, what's your reaction to that? We've, we've, we've had

these driver heads for 20 years. It's really, really, really hard for people to picture going back to something with a small head that goes farther offline just because of how much tees have moved back over that course of time. What's your reaction to, you know, kind of why we stand where we are with the distance issue in 2023? I think, you know, hindsight is always easy in these things. And we're all victims of our history. You know, could we, should we, or could we have changed the ball 15 years ago?

Yeah, we did. We could have, but we didn't. Could we have not allowed the 460CC drivers to grow? And I think, I think you're like 360 something like that before, before that. Yes. And, but this goes to the heart of what Mike and I and our teams have had to really wrestle with through this is, is thinking through the laws of the unintended consequence. So when the driver was allowed to go to 460CC, did anybody think that this is where it would end up? No. Nobody. Not even the manufacturer has did. It was a way of making the driver a little go faster. That was the original bigger driver. It was hit it, hit it further.

It wasn't talking about forgiveness. And it's been metallurgy changes that are really improved upon that. Was we've developed these ideas in this decision that we've announced this week. And then also the notes about continuing to look at driver. We have to balance up the three things of, we need to have a real impact in the elite game,

because if we didn't, then we'd be failing. We need to make sure that there is a little bit, that there is a minimal impact on the recreational game, because the last thing we want to do, and the USG and the RNA are the two biggest investors into the growth of the game, growing the game around the world. So anyone who keeps thinking that Mike and I want to actually damage the recreational game is just talking nonsense.

We're the biggest investors into this sport all the way around the world. So we absolutely didn't want to hurt the recreational game. But we had to give a little bit of impact to be able to get the impact on the on the on the elite side. And we have to look forward in terms of the unintended consequences of of of decisions that we're making. And it's hard. And we won't know until 20 years, you know, 20 years time, whether we are right. But I'll bet you we're more right the wrong. And that that's the that's the function of doing what we do for a living.

I'll react to your comment too, Sally, which is, I've only been in this position two and a half years, but I can promise you this, the term, it would have been easy to dot, dot, dot, when it comes to regulation of equipment changes does not exist. So this is not easy. It wouldn't have been easy then. If you can, maybe. Maybe easier, but you know, this is quite a process and everybody looks at change through their own lens. And I don't blame them for that. But we certainly don't get common feedback. It's funny to me when I was at the golf chair

a couple of days ago, off air, one of the commentators said, well, I guess every ball manufacturer said, and I don't remember what he said after that, and I said, every ball manufacturer does not provide the same input. I mean, not even close. I'm just for whatever twerth. If you look at their comments about, you know, our most recent, you know, change, those aren't the same. So, but that's just so, and I would also tell you that, you know, being back at that time, I was a tailor-made at the time, I think, was kind of in the era that you're sort of talking about.

Back then, we were making these products, thinking these are really going to be game improvement products for the recreational player. The pros and the top elite players were asking us for smaller headed versions of the same one. So at the time, really didn't envision top players playing some of those clubs. Jumping for today, got it. Seems like that would have been natural, but pros weren't asking for the oversized heads, you know, back at the turn. So it's interesting now to jump forward to think, you know, that, and I think the USG and the R&D,

again, I wasn't here, but we were in dialogue with them. They're always trying to walk the line between, how much do you clamp down on innovation? And how much do you want a little more innovation to see been in the game? Because it does make the game more fun, more enjoyable, more capable of getting started. So never right, never wrong.

And I've said this, my favorite term around here is governance is hard because no matter what you do, half the group, you said to me, I bet you were getting a lot of emails today about the people that don't like this change. And I said, yeah, and just as many from people that think we totally failed and should have done more, there's no both sides feel like it was either too much or not enough and I guess that's governance. Again, I probably should emphasize, I do definitely understand that this stuff is really, really, really hard. And the overwhelming thing here is that none of this is ever going to add up to 100, right? Because probably what helps the amateur game and make it more enjoyable,

technological advances do help that. I do believe that. And at the same time, technological advances can hurt the product of the professional game, right? And there's an effect, cause an effect of everything, right? And I think the more that driver heads, the balls go farther and the driver heads allow forgiveness, it does make the amateur game more enjoyable, but at the same time, it has an effect on the pro game that I personally, some people can disagree. I personally don't think is palatable. And I think that's where I led to bifurcation, but when you came out

bifurcation, I was like, man, that is messy. Like, it's tough. It's just really, really tough. My favorite is standing on a driving range, and I do this a lot and people may follow me for this, but, you know, what a pro says. Um, why just don't make it any farther. Just this is as far as it goes. Just draw a line today. Nobody gets to go any farther. I said, how do you want us to do that? I mean, that guy down there hits it to, you know, 326. You hit a 319. That guy down here to 312. I was, so that's the line now. Or once it gets to 326, should I put a governor and the balls fall out of the sky and then, you know, 10 years, everybody will be at 326

and driving will be like kick-off in an NFL game, just kicking in zone, put the ball down. And so we want amateurs, pros, elite athletes, male, female, if they want to chase distance as an advantage, we want to provide that. It's athleticism. So we want to make sure whatever we're putting in, there's still an opportunity. If you want to go through speed training, figure out how to play the

game at a higher speed. If you can use distance as an advantage, we don't want to take the game and eliminate the driver from the game. So this whole just stop it here. I can think of nothing I'd less like to do than just have a governor where the ball falls out of the sky at a certain level in the when 20 years that's just that's just driving. There's nothing exciting or fun about that. People say to us, you just don't like drivable par fours and I'm like, what's the last time you were in the US open where I didn't promote a drivable par four? I mean, we and if and if you think I'm taking drivable par fours out of the game, move the tee up on what drivable par four you used to have. So we don't want to we don't want to take the excitement

of trying to be longer than your friend, than your peer, than your competitor, out of the game. And I've said this many times, I have a feeling 20 or so years from now, maybe last, you know, maybe a lot less, we'll be right back here talking about distances that are about here. And if that's the case, that would really be a success at least in my mind

because at least we won't be talking 20 years from now about being 25 years longer. So can we just expand a little bit on the recreational game for a second? Because there's a lot of people talk about and we have a little bit in this conversation, the recreational game in the context of playing on a golf course. But the game is much bigger than that.

We talk about the, there's a hundred million people now, consume golf. And I'm very careful about using that word consume and not just play, because the real growth in the game has been, has come through the off-course type of golf. You know, the short courses, the top golfs, the simulators, and some of them in Asia, the adventure golf. And all of those are actually a real part of our game that are as important as playing on a golf course. And so even we all fall into the trap and we talk about recreational golf thinking about it's those who are playing on an 18-hole golf course. Well, no, it's a much bigger game than that. And this distance does not impact that part of the game at all. And this, this, this, this, this doesn't impact that, that part of the game.

That's all in fact, if you go to a driving range, you're hitting a ball that's, you know, a lot shorter than a premium golf ball already. That's why I think back to what you were saying, Mike, I think there is the perception among some people that this is about attacking the longest hitters. And I, I want to stop that in a check, say, no, it's about, hey, the longest hitters, we can have a long drive B310 yards.

And there's a downstream effect of that. That is way healthier for the game than a really long drive going 340 yards, right? I think that's where like, if I was to bottom line it, it's that. And we could talk about, we could go down a million different rabbit holes of what that means and what that does to mid-Iarns skill testing and what that does to pin positions and what that would do to, you know, the longest players being able to just blow it over bunkers and not be able to move teas back farther. It just has a very pervasive effect.

And I don't, I don't know if you've licked it on this. I don't know if you've got it right. We'll see when we see the golf balls, right? We don't see any of that. So flipping over to that side. Go ahead. I think we're new, Celia, we're using the exact same test method. We've been using it essentially for 50 years.

So when somebody says to me, how do you know longer will be longer in shorter? How do you know this? That we haven't changed anything. We're using the exact same test method. So today, if you can generate more ball speed and therefore generate more distance, you do. Regardless of sort of, I would really don't change that test methodology in terms of the speed in which we're hitting it. So, yes, will the longest hitters

on tour be a little shorter? They will. Will the shortest hitters on tour be a little shorter? They will, but advantage for length will exist. And it won't just exist on tour, it'll exist at any level. The difference is, length is relative. It's relative to your competing against. I don't think anybody was any less awestruck

when Tiger was at any 309-year drives versus somebody that was getting a 290-year drive. And I've stood behind Rory many times and watched him hit a drive. I couldn't tell you when it flew, it was 336 or 326. I just knew it was unbelievable. And it will be unbelievable unbelievable regardless of the number.

I remember when you took the job, Mike, we came on the show and I was, you know, I was like, all right, man, it's time to do something about distance and I, every single time I've talked to you every single year this has gone on. I've understood another layer of complexity that goes into it, which one of which, I remember one of the things you said was,

hey, look, I mean, you know, manufacturers,, manufacturers, when I'm running LPJ tour event, if I'm setting up a new one, I'm knowing that maybe I forget what you said exactly, but maybe 34% of the revenue of the sponsorship of that event might come from an equipment manufacturer of some kind. And then there is a stakeholder, there's many stakeholder interests in this. You've been on the manufacturer side, now you're on the governance side. I'm wondering if you could just shine a light on, again, the perspective you've had from both sides on what this means for manufacturers, what this means for testing, what you guys have gone through in terms of your relationships with them and feedback periods with them and making sure that they

end up in a healthy spot at the end of this and understanding the fact that they do have an important role and you're not trying to kill their bottom lines. Just give us a little bit of insight into how that has worked and evolved over your career. Yeah, there's there's probably two questions in there. So let me break them into both. Back to our original conversation of the importance of manufacturing in our business. I think it probably came from you or somebody else, I mean, why don't you just create a ball and that's the ball like tennis, just create a ball? And that's the ball, like tennis, like football. That's the ball, that's the spec. Everybody has to build it the same way. Which is certainly doable.

We've never really told manufacturers how to build anything. We've created the test standards and then they can do, because by giving the test criteria, and then they can do what they want. We create variety. The variety's good for different kinds of golfers. And we really believe in that. And because of that, golfers get this incredible variety

and incredible R&D that comes out of from different angles. And that's really important to our game. You know, with tennis, there's just one ball and you can buy from a bunch of different manufacturers. But generally speaking, there's one ball. So there isn't really this significant market there. In our case, when we turn on a televised golf event, yeah, 25, 30% of the advertising

that's coming from manufacturers, they really, a televised golf event. Yeah, 25, 30% of the advertising that's coming from manufacturers, they really help invigorate the game and people get excited on Christmas Day thinking there might be technology under the tree that can help them. We don't, we don't want to get rid of that. So I think that, you know, that's an important part of this we didn't want to miss.

As it relates to your question about manufacturers, we needed to and I think any manufacturer you asked to will agree, we did. We really did have to kind of walk this with them. In this process that's six years long, a lot of people, I remember the US Open this year, one reporter asked me why so fast. And if you know me, six years and fast,

don't really go together. But so when we first went out with this cell, we, Martin, I were fully convinced that we were going to test every golf ball at the optimum flight conditions of that golf ball. We call it optimized flight condition because you can do that now or the manufacturers can do that. And so some ball slide better at 12 degree launch angle and this spin rate, some fly better at 11. But right in the very beginning we sat down and across the board manufacturers explained to us the challenges that would create in their R&D to process, the unnecessary cost, the time.

And we looked at that and said, you know, for a yard or two on an individual ball, that juice probably isn't worth the squeeze. But when we were fully committed, we loved that concept. But if you're gonna go out and ask manufacturers for things. So the other thing that happened is, you know, when manufacturers said to us, if you're gonna make a change across the board,

we need another year in a perfect world too, relative to this 2026 timing you're talking about. Neither Martin and I work started about 2028. But if you're really going to listen to him and kind of take this in, and so what I can tell you have lived on the manufacturing side is, if you go back to two years ago,

and we first started making proposals about ODS, which are overall distance standard ball testing, coming in at higher ball speeds, thousands of engineers started working on this thing 24 months ago. And the reason I know that is we've already seen balls coming from each of our last areas of interest. But when you put a thousand engineers in the world,

some of the best in the world on this between now and 2028, we're going to see some incredible product over the next four or five years. And they know it. I mean, Abelie is saying to me, are we done? And I said, yeah, this is the finally said, well, then we're going to go innovate and I said, I figured you would. So we needed to respect the time. We needed to respect their input. And now I think it's, and now I think if anybody thinks we're going back to the 1990s and technology man there, they aren't spending time with the R&D teams that we're going back to the 1990s and technology man there, they aren't spending time with the R&D teams that we're spending time with.

This is gonna be unique. And once these guys know what the boundaries are, once you tell where the out of boundstakes are, they'll always impress you with their abilities. I have zero doubt that'll happen again. Sort of close that down, because I completely agree with every word I've just said then. But it is really important for you and your listeners

to get this clear. Our job is to be neutral. But we have, and doing that, we have listened to every single one of the manufacturers and all the points they've made. Now, have we reflected all that one might may say, no. Have we reflected the industry that we think makes sense? Yes, that is our job to be that neutral there. But I think this, it has been said to us both, that this process

over this period of time is probably the single most consultative equipment decision that's been made it, may have been made in our game. And I think that is really important for people to really understand that has been a massive collaboration. But at the end of the day, the RNN, the USJ's job is to make a decision. I'm curious, I'll start with this one with you, Martin. You guys are not, you guys are two different people, you represent two different bodies.

I'm curious, if we could get a little, maybe insight into your guys' process. Are there examples you can give us of areas where maybe you two have disagreed, or your teams have disagreed, or how have you worked out internally? I struggled a little bit that you guys have been 100% a million percent aligned in every step of the process,

but I'm wondering if you could give us a little bit of an insight into how your guys' internal process has worked on that front. Yeah, I mean, you're absolutely right. We have not agreed on everything, but we have agreed on the final outcome, and I think that's just been just to be very, very, very clear. We both have some very talented scientists and engineers who work in our equipment standards, who have been doing it for a long, long time.

And the way it's really worked between Mike and I, we knew what we were trying to get it, which is, do we make a change in regulation around golf balls? And it was, do we make a change? And if we don't make a change, what are our options? And here I would talk a lot, or I would talk less than Mike. But we would talk a lot around the higher level things, and then work with our teams to answer specific questions. And we went back to the engineers who really, the club of guys,

they joke around equipment regulation, isn't, isn't rocket science, but it does help that our head of regulation, equipment regulation used to work for NASA. So, you know, these, guys, they go back and they come back to us and say, Martin, you're wrong. You need to go and tell Mike, he's on the wrong path. And he would call me and say, my guy is telling me that you're wrong, Martin. We looked at hundreds and hundreds of different options. It's been an incredibly professional, it's been incredibly challenging period of time. And we've iteratively worked from our thinking and then using our scientists and then it has come to a logical, sensible, simple answer.

Yeah, I think that makes sense. What's the majority of our listeners are here in the US and we've talked to Mike more on the show than we have you Martin. So what's the global reaction been? What have you felt since this has been rolled out in terms of reaction? Joe, one of the things we did in the precursor to this, we did our distance insight report, was actually we did a lot of market research

into people's perceptions about distance and is it important and what aspects of it is important and we did it on a global basis. And one of the things that came out quite clearly is, in the UK and the Europe and sort of the developed golf came out quite clearly is in the UK and the European sort of the developed golfing markets in Asia, they are much more interested in the balance of skills in a golfer and less interested in the distance issue than is Ed prevalent in America. So now maybe that's our history, maybe that's the way we play golf. But the

reaction around the world has been, we needed to do something. The environmental issue is pressing, it's really important. We've talked to all of our major affiliates, the countries that are associated with the RNA, and they are pretty much to a man on board and in line with what we've done and are very supportive. Mike, how do you evaluate or determine success here? If, how will you walk away, and in what year will you say,

this was a successful change that we made and how will you evaluate that? Yeah, first is on the Dirtz-Jay Martin and I dress code is the number one difference between the If if we, you know, it's going to be a long-term run. It took us a long time, long time to get here. You know, we've talked about the distance insight to 2018 and in 2000 and at the end of 2023, we're talking about implementing in 2024. So this is not been rushed and the outcome of this change won't be rushed. If we are if we are 15 years from now, it distance levels at the elite male game similar to where we are today. I think both Martin I would say it was well worth it. If if that less so. I had a really good tour player friend of mine saved the other day and this is his favorite phrase. What if you're wrong? I guess he knows me well enough to know that that's

possible. And he always says at the end of whatever thing I say, what if you're wrong? So here it came and he said, what if you're wrong? And I said, and I said, wrong about what? What if distance increases aren't going to continue? What if we've really sort of plateaued out at the highest level, which is a whole nother, no data argue that, but so be it? And I said, well, if I'm wrong, and we implement this change, and this is the last change we'll have to make

for the next 40 or 50 years in the game just fine, I'm going to be so excited that we did it. And I said, but what if I'm right? And what if a yard a year, which never alarms anybody anybody, but over 30 years a year is is really alarming. What if I'm right? And and we followed your advice of just sit back and let's wait another 12 or 15 years and see what happens. Just think about whether or not that is a better sport in the world. is our sustainability and footprint going to be acceptable in Southern California, Vegas, Arizona, Portugal, Australia. It's the risk of what if you're wrong is so much more significant, the risk of what if you're right is so much more significant.

Because the one if you're wrong here is really not that challenging. And quite frankly, I hope I'm a little bit wrong and that this thing can really be the the last change for a long time, our goal in governance, and this will sound strange to you, Celia, and Niggity or listeners, but our goal in governance is to identify challenges long term, get in and find realistic solutions,

and then get out of the way, and get out of the way for as long as you can. You really don't wanna hear from the referees on every play of a football game or the young pirate every play. And so what we try to do is make governance changes. One of the things we've heard consistently, and you'll hear it from people that'll scream,

they don't like this is, why don't you just make a smaller change and then look at it more often, which is just up your speed a little bit and then maybe look at every five to seven years. And I'll just say what I say to everybody who brings that up, which is that is that one would be really difficult if not impossible to do the manufacturer.

So make a change across your board across your line. And five years from now, I'll tell you if I have to make another change across your line, really disruptive in the marketplace, really expensive in the marketplace. And I think the same thing for players, I don't really want an athlete to feel like they have to go through this every five or six years.

I'll be do this once in your career if we can kind of figure this out right. So a little bit, a lot more often, sounds phenomenal on a PowerPoint slide or in a presentation, is really challenging in the marketplace. And so we've stayed away from that because we want to govern by get in, make a change and get out as long as you can get out. Yeah, I think again, I could keep you guys for a lot longer on this, but two points to make when you talk about that just the, the, the, the one yard of creep year by year creeps are wrong works. That's a separate issue of what you, of what you guys just discussed as well. But one player average 300 yards in the professional game in 2002, 98 players average

that in 2022 to 2023. And I think 50% of the drive set this year in 2023 with 300 yards or longer. I mean, more than double, what was the case just 20 years ago, 50% is that what you said? 50% that's insane. That's absolute. I don't know if it's worth pointing out, we didn't really talk about CT. Is that something that's worth explaining? Sure. You you be your own interviewer here because I failed on that front. Tell us about see. It's done a lot of time on the ball. But one of the things that came out of this process is I don't think Martin or I were really when we got in the very beginning we're thinking about addressing some form of CT creep when we started this process. But in this process of industry feedback we were both a little surprised that we heard from multiple tours and actually multiple manufacturers

that this idea that a so for CT creeper, everybody else, so CT for us is characteristic time, which is a fancy way of talking about face rebound. And the characteristic time means how long does the ball and face stay together before it comes off? And so, you know, currently that time limit is 257 microseconds.

So the ball can be on the face for trimmer, so that sounds like, you guys know me well off to know that I'm not technical, but I can at least explain that to you. And longer the balls on the face, the more it launches, correct? Right. The more it can kind of read, I'm more like a trampoline effect, the longer time the trampoline higher shoots up. So we've set that in that limit's been there a long time. One of the things we heard from manufacturers, and even tour players was I've been using this driver for a while. I think it's hotter and I think I'm hitting it longer. I'm just not sure if it's still conforming to the limit and not

knowing causes some anxiety. Now we go out throughout the year, both Martin and the USGA and we do onsite testing. So we'll show up on a Monday or Tuesday, we'll test clubs both in the bags and in the trailers. And if there's heads that have already creep past limit, we'll take them off. But as some of the tours were saying, that's kind of too late in the process, making changes on Tuesday. Can you do something earlier in the assessment process when you guys assess a driver is conforming to the limits? So we started looking at that with our group.

And so what we've said is just like the ball, we're not going to change our limit. That 257 is still that 257. That's the high end of CT that you can have on the face. But if we see a driver, and we're actually going to start this in April of next year, so starting in April of 2024, if we see a driver submitted, and that CT level is 251 or higher, what we would consider the high margin, the edge of CT limit, we're going to require more samples from that manufacturer. We're going to take those samples to multiple tests. One of those tests will be hitting the faces of drivers multiple times, so 150, 200 times at speed, to see what happens to the face and the forgiveness. Does it actually creep over the line? If it creeps

over the line, then we're going to have to work with the manufacturers more. I think what will happen now that the manufacturers know that's the process is they'll probably less likely to manufacture right to the edge, or they'll, you know, they can all do this testing in their own process. So they'll do their own testing and they'll know before they submitted to us how much a driver will creep over time. Again, this was not something that was driven by the R&A and USJ more of something we were asked to look into. I don't think this is going to have, you know, this isn't 10 yards of impact, but mostly just to provide comfort and less than the cost of some of the manufacturers because if they felt that everybody was pushing it to the limit, they had to push it to the limit and if you actually had creep afterwards, it was making everybody a little uncomfortable. So I give credit to the industry for asking us, this is no different than green reading materials that the industry came to us and said,

let's provide some standards otherwise, you know, we don't like what this is doing in terms of pace of play and time with the game. My reaction to all that, and if I had a suggestion, your guys, wait, talking about this on a podcast, way easier than governing it. That sounds really difficult, and I really enjoy my job of just talking about it and throwing ideas at you guys. Well, in Mike one, won Bingo if I get to say CT three times, I get like at the upper right hand square. So I'm excited we got there. I'll close it with this with you guys. With each, you know, we anything we haven't talked about

any lasting impressions. I'll start with you, Martin, of what you would want to leave listeners with either on state of the game or the changes that you've made or, you know, what you would want people to walk away from this with. Yeah, I think I just let people to walk away with a very, very simple and succinct message, which is, and there's a lot of, there's a lot of dialogue around, and you know, one journalist said to me, actually, this is the biggest rule change that's happened

in the social media era. And so, there's, you know, there is a huge amount of dialogue. The end of the day, well, I, people to, it's come back to what we're trying to do. We're trying to ensure the integrity of the game of golf in this broader sense. We're trying to ensure the balance of skills. And we're trying to be coldness of our environmental responsibilities. And that's our objective. It has impacts across the game. We think that impact to the recreational game is very small.

And we do recognize it. It does have an impact. So we ask people to bear with us. But it is important to realize that what we're trying to do is to protect the game for the long term. Anything different than that, Mike? Yeah, I would just say in the world of social media, be careful of the alarmist.

There's a lot of people out there that don't want to change, I get that. So they all kind of look for the one nugget or true or false or based on nothing that gets everybody riled up. We're talking about five yards or less for the average golfer. We're talking about nine to 11 less for the average golfer. You know, we're talking about, you know, nine to 11 yards for the average

pro golfer. This is not rolling us back to the 80s or 90s. About a third of the golf ball models that are in the marketplace today are going to still be under 230 yards of total distance in 2028. So there's going to be golf balls that people play that could still be out there. I wouldn't be shocked if they had some change. Like I said, when all these engineers start working on on what's possible, I have it feeling that there'll be improvements made. We've pulled golf balls that we do spot testing and golf balls and tour events and late mail events all the time. We've got the 10 11 models of balls that have been used on tour, you know, in the last 10, 12 years, that in these new test results would still fly at 320 or less. So, people will tell you we're going back to some sort

of yesteryear era of wound or, you know, a different world is just, is just alarmist trying to create enough excitement to try to push back. I know that people consider us bullies sometimes because because we have to make changes to the rules, but we certainly face our share of bullies too who want to try to create enough anxiety to stop us from doing what we really believe is the right interest. There's there we have virtually nothing to gain here. The only thing the RNA and the usge knew for certain on Wednesday when we went public is that people would like us less. That's the only thing that we knew for certain. And Martin, I talked this weekend,

and Martin said, any reservations, and I said, none other than, you know, I'm a guy who would like to be liked, and that's over. So the option here of saying, geez, this is really gonna be painful. Like you said, we're gonna be easier. I think there's no surprise that we don't do this more often because this is hard, it can be disruptive. And it's tough on your brand and on your

own ego, but not doing that. You don't have the heart to really govern and really think about the game long term, then you're the wrong person for the job. And so I'm really proud of the fact that Martin has pushed me along the way. And I pushed him first breakfast I had with Martin, which was seminal during the walker cup. And he said to me, I just want to make sure you know as you enter the USGA that my perspective is we can do nothing to upset the momentum of the recreational game.

If there's going to be a recreational impact, it's got to be minimal. It's got to be minimal and something we can minimize with picking up a tee and walking forward. And I knew from the very beginning that, because that was the thing I was worried about and I was brand new walking in. So I'm glad I had a partner in this. This is hard enough to do on your own. It's much easier to do with somebody. But, but anybody who thinks the USGA and the RNA wake up every morning and think, you

know what we really like to do? We'd really like to go and announce this. This is, this is tough stuff, but not doing it is tougher. I would say just because something is unpopular, I think this has been and will be unpopular, it does not mean it's wrong. Like, that's where a lot of governance lies, right? It doesn't mean you know, you have to make the always popular decision. I'll do something that I'm not sure many people have done to you guys so far this week. I would congratulate you on what you've pushed, managed to push forward. I know there's, I'm probably on the side

of maybe you haven't done enough. I know everyone's gonna follow on one side of the line, but I will say this is definitely not a reason to do nothing. And I would congratulate you on getting this through because as you've outlined in this, it is extremely, extremely challenging. And there is no perfect answer,

and you will never find a perfect answer. You will never get a 100 out of 100 on the test score from the entire golfing, golfing audience. And that's, that's part of what your guys makes your guys job interesting and very interesting to talk about. And I thank you guys both for your time and outlying it and, and all that. But it's been an exhausting week. I'm ready to get out on the golf course. I'm hoping, hoping you guys can see the golf course as well this weekend. I certainly will. Thank you very much indeed for giving us time on your show. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it.

I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it.

I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it.

I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. I'm really looking forward to it. and reported pieces there. Our column from this week is about John Rom and the rollback and the roll the fans play in all this. I hope you enjoy it. We'll catch you next week. I'm often hesitant to assign much weight to anecdotal evidence. But this week, during one of the busiest seven-day stretches in the history of professional golf, I received a text from a friend that stopped me cold. We don't play golf together as much as we'd like, owing to our busy work schedules,

but he follows the game closely and reads about it constantly. He listens to podcasts, watches videos, then shares them with friends. He is, in simplistic terms, a golf sicko. He also belongs to what is arguably the sport's most coveted demographic. He owns his own business, he has disposable income, he isn't married to any particular political

ideology, and he buys new clubs as often as some people buy golf balls. He wanted to let me know he was fed up with a professional game, done with it. He still loved the sport and still looked forward to teeing it up together, but he wasn't going to watch anymore. He might tune in for the majors, but that was probably it. The PGA Tour and Live, all of it had started to feel a little gross. Everything going on, whether it was John Romes to part your to live, the squabbling over billions of dollars in equity and a potential merger between tours, even the governing

body's decision to try to curtail distance had left him feeling used. The fan experience, he wrote, is secondary at best, and fans don't like getting fucked with. As someone who makes a living writing about golf and frequently commenting on the professional game, I would love to pretend my friend is an outlier. He might be mad now, but this too shall pass, as the idiom goes. In recent days, I've come to realize he is more likely the tip of the iceberg. It is impossible to understate how many people have been turned off by what's transpired

over the last two years, by the litany of decisions that feel driven by greed, narcissism, and stupidity. I came into this week thinking I supported the USGA and RNA's rollback proposal. I had done the reading, weighed the complexities, and felt like it was a prudent decision. By week's end, I began to feel like it was just one more instance where fans were being asked to pay for the sins of the professional game, whether it was in yards or dollars or time. Remember baseball after the 1994 strike, my friend asked me, if golf does the damage I think they're doing, it may take another tiger-like figure to bring people back. So how the hell did we get here?

The highest level professional golf for starters has completely lost touch with reality. Golf is a niche sport. It will always be a niche sport, certainly outside of the majors. Deep down, golfers know this. They are aggressively uncool compared to other athletes. They get to have long careers and they get to rub elbows with wealthy, important people, business tycoons or heads of state, but their skills don't move the needle. We know that live ratings have been laughable, so let's ignore them for a second.

Let's take the PGA tour's most important event, the Players Championship, as exhibit A when we examine the allegation of golf's cultural irrelevance. In 2023, the players Sunday broadcast drew 2.83 million viewers. That was up 11% from the previous year. Do you know how many people tuned in to watch Ohio State play Michigan in college football's marquee regular season matchup? 19 million. When the Kansas City Chiefs and the Philadelphia Eagles faced off recently, it was watched by 29 million people.

The most important event on the PGA tour drew about 500,000 fewer eyeballs than a game between Iowa State and Kansas State. Are we really supposed to believe, based on numbers like this, that ROMs $450 million contract, which who knows the real number when accounting for clauses and equity, is driven by a real market? It's Asinine. When the Saudis came along and started looking for ways to longer their global reputation, a bunch of golfers suddenly became convinced they deserved to get paid significantly more

than they had in the past. To be fair, that was their right. But in doing so, they have decided to take whatever good will their skills have built up over many years and light them on fire. As easy as it would be to point a finger solely at those who went to live, there are very few innocent bystanders here. Those who stayed with a PGA tour are now mud-wrestling over different piles of money and control. They do not seem to care if the sport, at least the professional version of it, is irrevocably

broken in the process, as long as a handful of them achieve generational wealth. I understand in a micro sense why Rom went back on his word and took lives money. He almost certainly looked at the mess that is the PGA tour, and realized he was under no obligation to support that clusterfuck of ego and uncertainty. I can't pretend I know Ram well, but I've been around him enough to know he is driven by pride more than money. He did not feel sufficiently valued by the PGA tour, so why help them wade through a murky future when someone was dangling half a billion dollars in his face?

With all the private equity sharks circling the PJ Tour at the moment, many of them whispering in Tiger Woods' ears about ways to box out the Saudis, you can understand why Yasur El-Ramayan, the chairman of the public investment fund, felt he had to make a bold chess move with Ram. Whether the master's winner is a knight or a pawn probably doesn't matter, though I'm sure Rom sees himself as the former, not the latter.

In a macro sense, I wish Rom would have made true to his word, because he is among the most thoughtful, principled, and interesting people in professional golf. I fear he'll be neutered now that it is part of his job to be a mouthpiece for an autocratic government. Perhaps he'll prove me wrong, and I hope he does. He'll be interesting to study his temper when his 2024 US Open Prep involves three rounds of team golf in front of dozens of fans at golf club of Houston sweltering conditions in June.

If the CW Network is still bothering to count viewers, they can put me down for that one. I will almost certainly continue to follow professional golf. It is a big part of my job after all. But I am not so sure about the dozens of people I play with regularly. They aren't deeply entrenched in the pointless daily arguments of golf Twitter. They don't really care about OWGR points, and certainly couldn't name members of the four aces. They like to squeeze in rounds when they can, have fun and give each other shit, drink

a few beers during or after around, and flip on football when they're finished. It's not a choice of supporting the PGA tour or live, it's a decision to ignore both. They might gamble a little, but a lightbulb has gone off recently. Their many fans have begun to wake up to the idea that almost no one involved in this corporate game of thrones thinks about them at all. For all the lip service paid to growing the game, it hasn't led to less expensive equipment or access to elite private courses. Broadcasts are still choked to death by commercials, to the point where it made the Ryder Cup borderline impossible to watch.

PGA tour purses have grown so disproportionate to revenue that tournaments almost certainly won't be able to meet the charitable obligations established in previous years, meaning communities will get the short straw. And because professional golfers through a tantrum when the governing bodies proposed the idea of bifurcation. Now amateurs are looking at a future where their version of golf won't quite be the same. Will the game get harder? It's possible. At the very least, they're going to lose some distance because the best golfers on the planet recoil that the suggestion that they give up some of theirs. For years, we've been told that the biggest argument against bifurcation is that amateurs, when surveyed, believe there is an essential link between regular golfers and professional

golfers. We want to believe we all occupy the same universe, and when we daydream at our local muni, we can pretend that we are John Rom trying to win a major. That bridge between the two worlds has long been deemed imperative. But what happens if the opposite becomes true? What if regular hacks are so turned off by the selfish nonsense of professional golf that they start to realize we don't need any of it to love and appreciate the game? It feels like that day may be here sooner than most pros realize.

Some, I suspect, couldn't care less regardless. They will be set for life, so I sweat it. Pity the next generation of professional golfers if this current infusion of oil money ever drives up. We might have to pass the collection plate around for them. There may not be enough fans to support the husk of what's left. I'm Kevin Memmolkber, editorial director of No Leng Up. If you enjoyed this, you'll find additional essays, videos, and reported pieces by visiting

us at NoLeng Up.com. We'd also encourage you to join the Nest, our community of avid golfers. Nest members get a 15% discount in our pro shop, access to our vibrant members' only message board. A link to our monthly Nest podcast, as well as the chance to sign up early for our Roost Events held all around the country. Up comment, you can email me or any of us at kvb at nolingup.com. Thanks for listening. I'm going to be the right club today. Yeah. That's better than most.

How about in? That is better than most. Better than most. Better than most.