Do We Really Have to Do This Now?

The President's Cup is this week. Nevermind that it's getting trashed all over the place for a moment and consider that the PGA Tour purposefully had the Champions Tour and Nationwide Tour sit it out this week so that the President's Cup could have all of the spotlight. (It's not as though either of these tours are noticed at all outside of golf circles, but still, it's the thought that counts.) Even despite that scheduling, the PGA Tour still has an alternate event this week!

It's the Viking Classic, formerly the Southern Farm Bureau Classic, and DJ Trahan is the defending champion. Who knew? To bemoan an event whose status has not changed with the invention of the FEC and Fall Series, though, is not the point. The point is that the PGA Tour is so concerned about catering to the mediocre ranks of their membership that an even which is supposed to be HUGE (the President's Cup, not the Viking Classic) cannot have the stage all to itself.

Players would complain that they are not being given sufficient opportunities to make money. The whole point of the Fall Series is to allow guys who are struggling to try to get into the top 125 and other key points on the money list for invitationals next year. If that is the point, my question is this: is it ok for a golf tournament to happen and have absolutely no one care about it except the people playing in it?

The answer should be no. The PGA Tour touts itself - and actually is - a very charitable organization. That charitable giving, though, is made possible by the sponsors of tournaments, advertisers, and those who attend the events. If no one watches, then no one will sponsor or advertise. If the best players are not within 1000 miles of the event, then few people will probably come. The end result is holding a golf tournament with very sparse galleries and gives the corporate groups involved a very small retrun (if any) on their investment.

Sure, the players will have a chance to make money and that's great for them. But, why not wait a week when the event can receive the Tour's full media blitz? It just does not seem to make any sense. Is it that important to the mediocre players of the Tour that they have an opportunity to make money for with very few interruptions? If so, maybe it is a good idea to cut down on the number of invitational events (especially since the FEC adds four more to the already long list) and institute more full-field events.