I typically don't like long-winded Q+A's, but Bob Verdi's interview with Phil Mickelson in the June edition of Golf Digest doesn't miss a beat. The most interesting part of the discussion was Mickelson's proposal for a modified Tour schedule.
Mickelson suggests that the Tour should have 20 events that the top guys are required to play. Crazy, right? Well, here's his explanation:
For the 20 events with the top guys guaranteed, sponsors and television would have to pay a premium. That would create a huge discrepancy in purses between those 20 events and the others without the guaranteed top guys...
If the commissioner were in a position to control when and where players played, as I believe he should be, and if he were able to sell that, he would be able to go to the four majors and the Ryder Cup and say, "If you want our guys to continue to play in your event, you have to pay the tour a certain fee." After all, the players are the product, right? Then you take that new revenue stream and subsidize the 20 or so events where the top guys are not guaranteed to play. Then, the gap between the events is narrowed.
Mickelson said that he prepared these ideas for two years and then presented them to Tim Finchem. Lefty said they were disregarded.
After reading his proposal, I'm not surprised.
Mickelson also says a commissioner should "be concerned with the big picture and make decisions without any input from the players." I always appreciate Phil's candidness, but where's Joe Ogilvie to talk some sense into him?
