The Round Table: is Tony Finau ready to win a major?

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.

Tony Finau bested World #1 Jon Rahm to win the Mexico Open on Sunday. It was Finau’s sixth PGA Tour victory and fifth in the last 18 months. Always recognized as having immense talent, the only thing seemingly missing from his record is a major. Do you think Finau has reached the level where he needs to be included in a list of top contenders for majors?

Jim Deeks, Fairways Magazine (@jimdeeks): Yes, but maybe in the second tier behind McIlroy, Rahm, and Scheffler, but alongside guys like Thomas, Spieth, Morikawa, Koepka and Cam Smith.  Finau is a good, solid player, obviously, but just can’t quite seem to pull himself out of the top ten standings.  I was happy to see him hold off Rahm this weekend.

Craig Loughry, Golf Ontario (@craigloughry): I like Finau a lot as a player and a person. He is an exceptional player; his putter is the only thing holding him back and its why I’d put him just outside being in the upper echelon in Majors. But of he can get the flagstick working one of those Major weeks, I think he could pull it off. The PGA Championship is his best chance in my opinion (closest thing to a regular Tour event).

Michael Schurman, Master Professional / Hall of Fame Member, PGA of Canada: Tony Finau has developed his game to the point where all parts are Major Championship level. Sometimes players win because the ‘stars line up’ but their game isn’t at the Major level. When a player’s game is at that level, victory often comes through the tiniest of details. For instance, they hit a 325-yard drive into the fairway and the ball rolls past an impossible divot or hit an iron shot that should bury in a bunker but pops out of the plug or their ball reaches the crest of severe slope on the green and rather than remain in an awkward position it rolls into birdie range. During a tournament, all kinds of these things happen to everyone, but the best players are better positioned to benefit. Tony is in that league.

TJ Rule, Golf Away Tours (@GolfAwayTJ): For sure, and he’s in the conversation of best current player without a major.  He has gotten well over the hump of winning a regular event, time for him to win a big one, he’s capable of winning any one of the four majors.  He’s in the top tier of major contenders for the last three of 2023, and I hope he gets one.

Peter Mumford, Fairways Magazine (@FairwaysMag): I generally don’t think of anyone as a top contender until he’s won a minimum of two majors, and I include the Players Championship. It’s a select group of 15 active players, who figured out how to win a major once, then proved it a second time or more. Everyone else is either waiting for their first or waiting to prove the first one wasn’t a fluke. Tony is waiting. Right now, he looks good to break through, but I sure wouldn’t rank him ahead of players like Rahm, Koepka, Scheffler, Thomas or Smith, who are also playing very well and have already proven themselves in major competition.

Jon Rahm opted to play the Mexico Open as the defending champion, although it would have been understandable if he had skipped the event to focus on the elevated designated big money tourneys. Rory McIlroy skipped the designated RBC Heritage after his Masters debacle and both Rahm and Scottie Scheffler are not playing this week’s designated Quail Hollow event. The whole idea of the designated events was to get ALL the best players on Tour together more often. Now they seem to skip them whenever they like. Does the concept need a reboot already?

Deeks: Let’s give it one season to adequately judge, but yes, the opt-out of big names is worrisome, especially to Jay Monahan, I’m sure.  After all, it doesn’t look very good when one of the architects of the new format (Rory) is prepared to do his own contrary thing.  Perhaps, though, it’s good news for the non-designated events, who can say there’s really little difference between them and us.

Loughry: It’s hard to get players to commit to events (even elevated), its one of the glaring weaknesses in the Tour. They try and cover it by focusing on the players that do show up that week versus who’s not there. All the players seem to commit to Majors though. Again, this is why I think Majors have even more status (if that’s possible) than they did prior to all this mess.

Schurman: This is called “shooting yourself in the foot”. Thanks to the angry, hateful reaction to LIV by Jay Manahan we now have two tiers of events. About 7 or 8 years ago, I wrote a story on GNN predicting the downfall of the PGA TOUR because they were not protecting the image projected by the players and/or providing ample opportunity for players outside the 75 to be considered and respected. Further, the product is boring; every week 72 holes of stroke play with little access to the players for interviews, autographs or interaction with the public and/or sponsors. Now with escalated purses the best players will be able to afford more, bigger, faster private jets to wing away from the tournaments quicker and reside in areas with taller fences. In short, the tour is made up of a bunch of computer-trained, impersonable, robots. BTW, the Pro Am portion of most events was one of the most appealing reasons for attracting sponsors. If the Tour fails to provide the big names, these highly desired days will vanish.

Rule: I don’t think so.  Most of the top guys are still playing the elevated events, which is what they were aiming for.  Selfishly I hope they do re-boot a bit, because it would help the Canadian Open, but I see them sticking this out for a few years.

Mumford: The concept was flawed from the get-go. Setting aside the uncertainty that is created for non-designated events and the two-tiered player structure, the required attendance at designated tournaments flies in the face of what top players have always said they wanted – and that’s to control their own schedule. Jay Monahan dangled a boatload of cash in front of them and they voted to comply but when you get past the money, each player has different wants and needs. Many of them have obligations to lesser events because of sponsorship loyalties or past champion status or maybe they just need a break. Something’s gotta give.

At the LPGA event in LA on Sunday, players from India, China and Australia headed to a playoff, won by Hannah Green of Australia. The final leaderboard also showed players from Thailand, South Korea and Japan in the Top 10 with only 3 Americans. And last week was not an outlier as Canadian, French, Swedish, English, Scottish, Irish and South African players have also won or been fixtures on the leaderboard regularly. It truly has become an international tour. Is the LPGA unique or should we expect a similar evolution in men’s golf too?

Deeks: I think it’ll take a much longer time for the PGA to become as cosmopolitan as the LPGA — the US college system just keeps churning out a fresh crop of exceptional American boys, and it’s harder for Euro and Asian kids to get scholarships.  A different story for young women.  I’m actually amazed at how few American girls are competing and winning on the LPGA these days, but I also think it’s a good thing that so many countries are represented on LPGA leaderboards.  Good thing or not, though, it doesn’t seem to be paying off in US television ratings, or in on-site spectator viewing.  Watching the Chevron championship (an LPGA major) a couple of weeks ago, you could count the spectators following the final group on the back nine on Sunday… with two hands.

Loughry: Golf is a global game, just not on the men’s competitive side as equally as woman’s golf. I’m not sure what to attribute that to exactly, but its great for golf which is one of the few sports that has a professional pathway to a “job” in woman’s sport.

Schurman: The same result is occurring on the PGA TOUR. It has taken a little longer for the international players to mature but they are coming. One way of keeping track is the level of competition in the Ryder Cup and the Presidents Cup. To date, the Presidents Cup has struggled but slowly the international players will begin to develop, and those games will benefit. The Ryder Cup has already showcased a strong Euro Team who has outperformed their talent by a common background, but the future is very bright for a very large international tour. Geez, I wonder if it will be LIV?

Rule: The LPGA has been more international for years now with the Korean ladies in particular dominating the tour. I don’t see the PGA Tour getting to the same level, and maybe that’s partly due to the LIV Tour taking some of the big international names from Australia and South Africa.  But it’s nice to see both tours become a world-wide game, it’s a good thing for everyone!

Mumford: Strong national programs in many countries have benefitted the growth of the women’s game and contributed to the international make-up of the LPGA but I don’t see it happening for the PGA Tour. That Tour is American through and through, from sponsorship to host venues to players. The PGA Tour accommodates a contingent of elite foreign players but its main attraction is home grown talent. That’s what American fans want to watch. Any hope for a more international Tour will have to develop elsewhere.