The Round Table: Does the LIV Golf – PGA Tour merger get done or not?

Each week we ask our panel of writers, PGA members and golf industry experts to weigh in with their views on the hot topics of the day.

After deliberating for over a year, the Official World Golf Ranking group has decided to deny LIV Golf’s application to earn points. Do you agree with the decision, and will it really matter to current and potentially future LIV Golf players?

Jim Deeks, Fairways Magazine (@jimdeeks): I’ve always considered LIV Golf, at best, as a series of pointless exhibition matches (at worst? Don’t get me started!), and exhibition matches have never counted in OWGR rankings. Nor should they.  And don’t cry crocodile tears for the players who defected to LIV.  They knew the conditions (i.e. no OWGR points) the day they bolted.   Will it matter?  I think it will, which is why they applied for acceptance.  But since they bolted for LIV, does anybody give a hoot for Koepka, Johnson, Cameron Smith?  Outa sight, outa mind.

Craig Loughry, Golf Ontario (@craigloughry): I don’t agree not awarding points to LIV events; however, I do confess that it’s a complex problem. LIV a closed circuit (same players every few weeks), no cuts for all events, no real qualifying process (for the Tour itself, and week to week). And quite frankly the bottom 25% of the field is quite weak, the top 15 players are definitely world class players (top 50 in the world easily). This will take a while to figure out, or don’t ward points for those events but allow players to play other Tours that do.

Michael Schurman, Master Professional / Hall of Fame Member, PGA of Canada: Everybody won with this decision. The PGA TOUR can hold their monopoly heads high, the naysayers can proclaim victory and the Saudi haters can continue buying their heads in the sand while ignoring the real problem which is a competitive entity. LIV comes away with an outline of what is necessary for them to change in order to qualify. The choice is theirs. Either conform or not.

TJ Rule, Golf Away Tours (@GolfAwayTJ): I thought that tour as we know it was going the way of the dodo bird now that the tours are merging.  But in the meantime, I guess they are still playing, and the strength of field for the events is strong.  I still can’t find a way to get interested in the product, but it does seem like they should get some OWGR points for their events given the strength of field.  I’ve never been a supporter of LIV, but it doesn’t seem fair that they don’t get any points.  Then again, hopefully it doesn’t matter in the near future.

Hal Quinn, Freelance Writer, Vancouver: It was obvious from day one that 54-hole no-cut exhibitions don’t qualify for OWGR points, no matter how ridiculous the purses. No one already part of LIV, or anyone thinking about cashing the cheques, gives a hoot about their OWGR status or legacy in the Majors — except when belly aching in the media like Phil. It’s just another moot point in this awful saga that should be muted.

Peter Mumford, Fairways Magazine (@FairwaysMag): The decision seems like losing on a technicality but also leaves the door open a crack. If LIV survives the merger, then I expect they’ll find a way to get some of their top-ranked players into majors. There are players that deserve a higher world ranking and whether it’s through points or some other method, they should be in the majors. Bryson DeChambeau suggested they just take the top 12 players. Whether it’s Top 12 or some other number, that works too.

Since the return of Jay Monahan from his self-imposed leave, there has been no news about the proposed PGA Tour – LIV Golf merger. The political winds have certainly shifted in both the U.S. and the Middle East while the denial of OWGR points has put another roadblock in LIV Golf’s attempt to become an accepted professional golf tour. Does this deal get done or is it just waiting for someone to sign the death certificate.

Deeks: I think more the latter.  I seem to be the only person who thinks the “merger” is simply a cover for the capitulation of the Saudis to get out of this whole LIV debacle, with some degree of face-saving.  It is also a way for the PGA Tour to avoid increasing and expensive legal fees.  Even if it IS supposedly a real “merger”, I bet you won’t see a Saudi involved in the new “entity” by 2027.

Loughry: I still think the deal gets done between LIV and PGA Tour. Its just going to take some time. The environment politically sure got a lot more complicated. I wouldn’t want to be on either side trying to navigate the complexities of the merger though.

Schurman: The deal gets done because JM wants to be the new CEO. Don’t forget, there are other tours around the world that are potential take-overs. LIV has been successful financially in every sports-business endeavour they have entered. The rumour is they offered the PGA TOUR $750M. If that’s true, the PGA TOUR has assets worth more than that. The Players’ Pension Fund has more than that in it. LIV will buy the PGA TOUR and all the other tours around the world. JM sees himself as the czar of world professional golf.

Rule: It has gone awfully quiet, which leads one to wonder if anything is still happening behind closed doors.  But we were surprised before when they came out with the merger announcement, maybe they’ll surprise us again.  I just can’t wait for it all to be done and dusted.

Quinn: Along with the horrifying chaos in the Middle East, the partisan chaos in the U.S. Congress is hamstringing any government examination of the so-called deal. But brokering any workable and lasting agreement could be as difficult, indeed as impossible, as finding a lasting solution in the Middle East. Here’s hoping the Saudis tire of the hassle and just go ahead with their massive sport washing in every other activity with a price tag.

Mumford: I think it dies. Many stakeholders want an American-made solution and the latest news from the Middle East is not helping a Saudi-backed merger. There are rumblings that a lot of people with real money are interested in investing in professional golf, so a different outcome is at least possible, if not probable. I think you’ll start to hear alternatives soon and that could spell doom for the Saudi deal.

Throughout the years, the player/caddie relationship in professional golf has been a popular area of speculation as to whether caddies really help or not. Do you think they do and if so, which caddie raised his or her player’s performance the most?

Deeks: Boy, that’s a good question, but unless you’re a real insider, it’s really hard to know what each player/caddie relationship is all about.  Also, it depends on how you interpret “help” … with on-course advice, with practice tee swing tweaks, or as a psychologist/motivator/calming influence?   When I was a bit of an insider, 30 years ago, I could see Jeff “Squeaky” Medlin being a calming influence on Nick Price… and Joe LaCava being a voice of reassurance to Fred Couples on club selections and putting line reading.  Steve Williams couldn’t really tell Tiger anything he didn’t know already, but Steve was a useful cop and linebacker in dealing with Tiger’s crowds of fans. But can I think of a player who wouldn’t have succeeded without his caddie?  No, I can’t.

Loughry: Caddies absolutely make a difference in the players performance (both good and bad, more good than bad though). I hate to say it (because I don’t personally like him), but I think Steve Williams helped Tiger the most, and Adam Scott.

Schurman: Even Cecil Timms who caddied for Hogan at Carnoustie made a contribution to the victory. Any top player who thinks his/her caddy isn’t a vital part of the equation is either dumb or lying. Every single championship is won by the team of a great caddy and a competent player. Remember 10-year-old Eddie Lowrey? He would be my choice for who has been the most helpful.

Rule: I do think a caddie to make a difference on and off the course and can be an important part of the team.  And it’s probably not so much from the technical standpoint of giving numbers, reading putts, etcetera, but more from a psychological perspective.  I remember reading about how Steve Duplantis helped Rich Beem to his first win at the Kemper Open, as Beem was a nervous wreck.  That’s where a caddie does his or her best work, easing the stress or anxiety a player feels when out of their comfort zone.

Quinn: Have been fortunate to have enjoyed the assistance, and company, of some great caddies especially on links courses. Have no doubt that the Tour pros benefit from the counsel and camaraderie, and especially the yardages. Big Herman helped Trevino, Fluff helped Eldrick (before he was fired like anyone else who got too famous) and so did Williams, especially throwing a grandmother’s camera into a water hazard (now Penalty Area, but doesn’t sound as dramatic), and Fanny helped Faldo before he became a knight. Caddies (from the French cadet, for the soldiers watching over Mary Queen of Scots when she played golf as a young girl) play a vital and helpful role, unlike the guy on the Florida panhandle who admitted to being ‘visually dyslexic’ after three very strange putt reads.

Mumford: I believe most great players would have got there even with their Aunt Mabel on the bag. However, some caddies have likely provided an occasional boost to a nervous wreck, a player suffering a loss of confidence or perhaps even one that needed to be reined in from his or her worst inclinations. I think Ted Scott was a tremendous calming influence on Bubba Watson and is it just coincidence that Scottie Scheffler became World #1 after Scott took over his bag. Jim “Bones” Mackay did a good job of pulling on the reins when Phil Mickelson was inclined to wildly shoot at every flag he could see.