COMMUNITY

When I took lessons from a former tour pro, he said that a good golfer on tour should make at least five times his winnings in endorsements. Now Tiger aside, as he is an anomaly, if this holds true, ut you have to take what you can.

When I took lessons from a former tour pro, he said that a good golfer on tour should make at least five times his winnings in endorsements. Now Tiger aside, as he is an anomaly, if this holds true, a 200K winning on the tour means 1 million in endorsements. He even said they have people watching stop watches to time how long their logo is shown on tv when the player gets coverage.
That being said, it would behoove a player to play more tourneys to be seen more.
I think the answer lies with the sponsors forcing a number of tourneys played a year. If they want more for their money, they can force their player to play more in the contract.
As for the PGA they could make a cluse in their issuance of tour cards that force a player to play a minmum of tourneys a year.
Thing is, with about four weeks off a year, what golfer can play every tourney? Also when do they practice for the big tourneys? Taking off a week prior to the Masters, Open or US Open is needed by some guys.
What about the Europeans that only play a few tourneys, but still have a PGA card? Can they be forced to play more PGA events? Is that fair? I would like to see more of certain golfers also, b

When I took lessons from a former tour pro, he said that a good golfer on tour should make at least five times his winnings in endorsements. Now Tiger aside, as he is an anomaly, if this holds true, ut you have to take what you can.

When I took lessons from a former tour pro, he said that a good golfer on tour should make at least five times his winnings in endorsements. Now Tiger aside, as he is an anomaly, if this holds true, a 200K winning on the tour means 1 million in endorsements. He even said they have people watching stop watches to time how long their logo is shown on tv when the player gets coverage.
That being said, it would behoove a player to play more tourneys to be seen more.
I think the answer lies with the sponsors forcing a number of tourneys played a year. If they want more for their money, they can force their player to play more in the contract.
As for the PGA they could make a cluse in their issuance of tour cards that force a player to play a minmum of tourneys a year.
Thing is, with about four weeks off a year, what golfer can play every tourney? Also when do they practice for the big tourneys? Taking off a week prior to the Masters, Open or US Open is needed by some guys.
What about the Europeans that only play a few tourneys, but still have a PGA card? Can they be forced to play more PGA events? Is that fair? I would like to see more of certain golfers also, b

I think that a sponsor is after quality, not quantity. I'm sure they're a lot happier with Padraig Harrington winning two major tournaments than if he had merely attended all events wearing or playing their stuff. Professional golf is amazingly difficult, and I think that it's smart of sponsors to let players decide when they play. If players had to play when they don't feel ready, it would certainly be detrimental to their performance.
Plus, as LLewis said, players are contractors. They can negotiate whatever they want with their sponsors, we're in a free capitalistic economy. In this context, I don't believe in the concept of "overpaid". You're worth what others want to give you, that's it. Unfortunately, so far Callaway thinks I'm worth $0 ;) their stuff. Professional golf is amazingly difficult, and I think that it's smart of sponsors to let players decide when they play. If players had to play when they don't feel ready, it would certainly be detrimental to their performance.
Plus, as LLewis said, players are contractors. They can negotiate whatever they want with their sponsors, we're in a free capitalistic economy. In this context, I don't believe in the concept of "overpaid". You're worth what others want to give you, that's it. Unfortunately, so far Callaway thinks I'm worth $0 ;)

I think that a sponsor is after quality, not quantity. I'm sure they're a lot happier with Padraig Harrington winning two major tournaments than if he had merely attended all events wearing or playing their stuff. Professional golf is amazingly difficult, and I think that it's smart of sponsors to let players decide when they play. If players had to play when they don't feel ready, it would certainly be detrimental to their performance.
Plus, as LLewis said, players are contractors. They can negotiate whatever they want with their sponsors, we're in a free capitalistic economy. In this context, I don't believe in the concept of "overpaid". You're worth what others want to give you, that's it. Unfortunately, so far Callaway thinks I'm worth $0 ;) their stuff. Professional golf is amazingly difficult, and I think that it's smart of sponsors to let players decide when they play. If players had to play when they don't feel ready, it would certainly be detrimental to their performance.
Plus, as LLewis said, players are contractors. They can negotiate whatever they want with their sponsors, we're in a free capitalistic economy. In this context, I don't believe in the concept of "overpaid". You're worth what others want to give you, that's it. Unfortunately, so far Callaway thinks I'm worth $0 ;)

As LL said these guys are independent contractors, a "business" unto themselves, if you will. Technically, they are self-employed and not employed by the sponsors. They are no more beholden to the sponsors beyond that which is in their contracts with the sponsors. I'm sure, details of endorsements are worked out in the contracts by the agents.
Frankly, if they don't work and they don't get paid. However, they are the best of the best. Get too slack and there's hundreds of guys in line that are "almost good enough" ready to take their place.
Tell me any professional athelete that isn't grossly overpaid. I mean, you get right down to it and they all make their living PLAYING A GAME! Yes, our society is sick to a certain extent.nsors beyond that which is in their contracts with the sponsors. I'm sure, details of endorsements are worked out in the contracts by the agents.
Frankly, if they don't work and they don't get paid. However, they are the best of the best. Get too slack and there's hundreds of guys in line that are "almost good enough" ready to take their place.
Tell me any professional athelete that isn't grossly overpaid. I mean, you get right down to it and they all make their living PLAYING A GAME! Yes, our society is sick to a certain extent.

As LL said these guys are independent contractors, a "business" unto themselves, if you will. Technically, they are self-employed and not employed by the sponsors. They are no more beholden to the sponsors beyond that which is in their contracts with the sponsors. I'm sure, details of endorsements are worked out in the contracts by the agents.
Frankly, if they don't work and they don't get paid. However, they are the best of the best. Get too slack and there's hundreds of guys in line that are "almost good enough" ready to take their place.
Tell me any professional athelete that isn't grossly overpaid. I mean, you get right down to it and they all make their living PLAYING A GAME! Yes, our society is sick to a certain extent.nsors beyond that which is in their contracts with the sponsors. I'm sure, details of endorsements are worked out in the contracts by the agents.
Frankly, if they don't work and they don't get paid. However, they are the best of the best. Get too slack and there's hundreds of guys in line that are "almost good enough" ready to take their place.
Tell me any professional athelete that isn't grossly overpaid. I mean, you get right down to it and they all make their living PLAYING A GAME! Yes, our society is sick to a certain extent.

I totally have to agree with you on this. I think that the big names should play more events. It would definitely help out the sponsors that are paying them so much money.

I totally have to agree with you on this. I think that the big names should play more events. It would definitely help out the sponsors that are paying them so much money.

That's a tough one to answer. Playing every weekend could get real expensive for some of the players who don't get the big indorsements. Esspecially with the traveling. I would like to see some sort of quota that they need to meet, like 15 or 20 tournaments for the top 60 or so guys. Obviously that would depend on their health. Just a thought.f quota that they need to meet, like 15 or 20 tournaments for the top 60 or so guys. Obviously that would depend on their health. Just a thought.

That's a tough one to answer. Playing every weekend could get real expensive for some of the players who don't get the big indorsements. Esspecially with the traveling. I would like to see some sort of quota that they need to meet, like 15 or 20 tournaments for the top 60 or so guys. Obviously that would depend on their health. Just a thought.f quota that they need to meet, like 15 or 20 tournaments for the top 60 or so guys. Obviously that would depend on their health. Just a thought.

LL youre right but jobs are scarce were elese would they apply their trade if not for the PGA?

LL youre right but jobs are scarce were elese would they apply their trade if not for the PGA?

The issue is that the players are not employed by the tour...they are self contractors.