Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

TEE TO GREEN, STEVE SCOTT: Rewarding players for social media presence IS growing the game

Tiger Woods stands to gain a maximum £8 million from the PGA Tour's Player Impact Program - even if he doesn't hit a shot.
Tiger Woods stands to gain a maximum £8 million from the PGA Tour's Player Impact Program - even if he doesn't hit a shot.

Regular readers will know that T2G likes to refer to the PGA Tour’s perennial Local Rule, that added to the normal Rules of Golf but apparently superceding every other one.

It is: Anything that even mildly inconveniences the elite golfer is to be strenuously opposed or even eradicated.

It is in this spirit that we have the tour’s new $40 million Player Impact Program (PIP) bonus pool, revealed in a fine scoop last week by Golfweek’s Eamon Lynch, the golf world’s most suave Irishman.

This is a new money stream to “reward” top players for their success in driving fan and sponsor engagement. A number of “metrics” – I believe that’s the correct term – will measure players “who positively move the needle” (sorry Patrick Reed) and they’ll get a piece of the new, lucrative pie.

Therefore the 10 most visible players on social media and fan engagement (Tiger, obviously, Bryson, clearly, Phil Mickelson, probably) are likely to get more cash even if they suck it up on the course.

Good money, but PGL had much more

To digress briefly, the general view is that this is a way of steering players away from the perceived threat of Premier Golf League (PGL). The Saudi-backed breakaway has whispered in a few ears, although it has had few takers among the real elite.

Well, $40 million’s a fair whack for sure. But if the rumours are true, PGL offered Tiger five times that, just for himself, to defect to them. At least they did before he hit the accelerator when he meant to hit the brake (ahem) in LA back in February.

Anyway this new PIP takes player convenience to new, unprecedented levels. You don’t even have to play, just make sure you get thousands of Twitter, Instagram and Facebook likes being “positive” and you could win a maximum of $8 million. It’s genius.

Being less flippant momentarily, two aspects of this upset the traditionalists. The first is it messes with golf’s fabled meritocracy.

This means you earn big money only by playing well against the best. Of course there are many ways around this with appearance money, the Champions Tour and the like. But generally, if you don’t play well you don’t earn, and if you don’t earn, you’re gone, reasonably quickly.

Now we have a method that will at least sustain some big names without the need to play terribly well…but only for a little more time than usual. I don’t think Phil Mickelson’s witty jibes on Twitter will help him for long if he continues to miss cuts.

A different way to Grow The Game

The other aspect that annoys the fuddy-duddies (check spelling) is the importance PIP places to modern media streams. The golf world, populated by a massive proportion of unreconstructed over-50s, views social media with suspicion and often outright hostility.

That it may actually have some importance is beyond them. Mark Calcavecchia, the former Open champion, rather ironically used Twitter to voice his opposition to the PIP. He asked why the money couldn’t be used to (that old chestnut) “Grow The Game”.

Well, it seems to me that recognising modern media streams and acknowledging their influence in driving interest among the young – you know, the people we’re trying to get to take up the game – is a sounder attempt at growing the game than most we’ve tried so far.

In that respect, the Player Impact Program is even like the Super League project which has floundered in football.

The people behind that, albeit ham-fistedly (and apparently without asking the people who actually coach and play the game) were looking at making ludicrous amounts of money, yes. But they also recognised the future: modern media streams, and a new kind of fan. That project may be dead in current proposed form, but it’ll be back.

It also reminds me of the general view in other sports – notably rugby and cricket – that terrestrial TV coverage is absolutely essential to getting into the minds of the young. How that’ll work when kids are all watching their phones and streaming sites and barely watch any “orthodox” TV anymore, I’m not quite sure.

The way to attract the young is to go where they are

And being on their phones and social media is not necessarily a bad thing either.

Last week, I gave my 23-year-old son a book on a subject I knew he’d be interested in. (It was David Halberstam’s classic `Playing for Keeps: Michael Jordan and the World He Made’).

He said he didn’t read books, and of course I was appalled. But the fact is he’s read far more than I had at his age (and I did a literature degree). He does so daily, and is much more informed than I was. It’s just he, his friends and it seems everyone younger, uses a different method.

The only way to reach the young is to go where they are. Right now, they’re all on their phones or tablets. That’s where golf – and other sports – have to go in the future.

In that respect, the PIP is maybe actually foresighted rather than just more golfing greed.