Would the LPGA Tour be better off leaving the Golf Channel?

I don't think you could find a broadcast network that would be willing to cover all rounds of a LPGA tournament. They would want to do a few hours a day on the weekends. And even then they would not drop baseball or football to cover the LPGA. At least the Golf Channel provides viewers with all round coverage, even if it is in a delayed time slot.

My local newspaper does not even put the LPGA in their TV listings.
...or a network might want to cover some events and not others to the point that potential viewers would have to scramble every week, not knowing when, if, or where they can find coverage. Plus each network would probably want its own team to cover the event. A combination that might actually lower the exposure and revenue for the LPGA.
 
If a network thought they could make money airing LPGA more than the Golf Channel does, then it would be doing just that.
 
I would love to see a cable channel devoted to women's sports. Women's soccer, golf, basketball all deserve more coverage than get.
 
Golf Channel should put the LPGA on before TCT. Honestly right now I prefer the LPGA to a lot of tour events.
 
Golf Channel should put the LPGA on before TCT. Honestly right now I prefer the LPGA to a lot of tour events.
If enough people feel like you, then I imagine they will.
 
NBC seems to be underutilizing Peacock in situations like these.
 
Where are they going to go?

The networks are not going to bump football in the fall or the other major sports the rest of the year. It also has to do with marketing. Outside of the Korda's and maybe Lexi and Lydia Ko there are not a real lot of household names that resonate with the casual fan-let alone the golf diehards.

It's great to see some of the American players play well this year like the Kordas, Lexi, Jennifer Kupcho, Daniel Kang.
 
I think they could end up better off by switching to another network, but it could go very poorly as well. You would want the right partner.
 
It's great to see some of the American players play well this year like the Kordas, Lexi, Jennifer Kupcho, Daniel Kang.

I am glad too about the Americans stepping up because it gives them more of a chance but, I am so out on Lexi. Apparently she cussed out a volunteer this past week.
 
The LPGA should follow the tennis WTA model. The men ATP and women WTA play on the same week at the same site for ATP 500, Masters 1000 and GS events. Not only that, both men and women champions at the Australian, French, Wimbledon and US Open get the equal prize money. That's not the case in golf. PGA US Open winner gets like 2.25M while the LPGA US Open winner gets less than 1M. WTF.... Where is the metoo movement? LOL...

I would like to see both men and women compete at the same event at a single site in the same week. It is must see TV.

Both the LPGA and PGA should combine their events together. I think that would be awesome. I would like to see Sunday pairing of Koepka/Thomas and Korda/Ko on the same golf course, and on the same channel
 
To me it makes sense why they "play third fiddle". I like to watch the pga the most followed by the champions, and LPGA third. I think the commentators have a lot to do with it too though because I fall asleep trying to watch the European tour.
 
I think it is more women's sports in general. My wife is a huge LPGA fan but also loves women's soccer and the WNBA. Try and find them on any network or even see advertising for their events. I think, as a whole, the networks believe women's sports do not generate viewers and therefore not enough revenue.

Yep, overall I’d guess that the LPGA gets more network TV coverage than any other women's sport so they’re probably doing better than most. And it’s not that the networks merely believe they don’t generate viewers, that’s just reality. It isn’t that they ‘deserve‘ more/better or that it’s some sexist conspiracy, it’s a business decision, and when more people (and more women) start caring about the LPGA the purses will get bigger, the commentators they hire will be better, and so will the coverage.
 
The LPGA is 3rd fiddle for some reason behind PGA Tour and PGA Tour Champions on the Golf Channel. Would they be better off finding a network that would feature them and not run them tape delayed nearly every week?
Or Golf Channel could just make the LPGA Tour more of a priority. Unfortunately, as far as we've come with gender equality, many still view womens' sports and 3rd best.
Its pretty pathetic when GC thinks that watching a bunch of old, washed up golfers is more important than watching the best female golfers in the world, in their prime.
 
I think it is more women's sports in general. My wife is a huge LPGA fan but also loves women's soccer and the WNBA. Try and find them on any network or even see advertising for their events. I think, as a whole, the networks believe women's sports do not generate viewers and therefore not enough revenue.
It is not a matter of belief, the numbers support the position.
 
It is not a matter of belief, the numbers support the position.
I agree... at least let's hope it's based on research and not some executive making decisions based on what he believes. Lol.

Completely my opinion here, but the LPGA would benefit from a superstar, freak of nature like Tiger Woods was for the PGA. A woman who would be good enough to make the weekend cut on the PGA. As dominate as Annika was, she didn't do that when given the chance. I don't have a problem at all with sponsor exemptions letting a woman compete in PGA events. But she would have to finish towards the middle of the pack for it to be legitimate. That's a very high standard because the distance element is just such an advantage at that level.

Still, I'd like to see the sport become more popular and the prize money increase. I don't believe they necessarily deserve it, or that it's pathetic that they don't get the same coverage or prize money. Professional sports and the networks are businesses after all.
 
Back in the Colgate era, even pre-Nabisco, the over the air networks were showcasing LPGA golf.
While purses may be bigger, the game seems smaller.
Some blame the Asian dominance, and that's possible, but I'm not sure that I'd blame that.
Just before them, Europeans (Sorenstam) and Mexicans (Ochoa) were dominating.

I think golf itself could possibly be receeding as an egalitarian, working class-including sport
as it started to rapidly become in Post WWII America. It's possibly backtracking just a bit to a more elitist game.

A new set of good clubs costs between three and four grand, and green fee courses are much more expensive than they used to be.

Club golf cost has gone up but not gone up by quite as big a percentage, perhaps, due to corporate owned clubs
becoming a bigger percentage of the whole relative to membership equity clubs which tend to have wealthy members.
The former don't have the same kind of big initition fees and aren't subject to asessments.

The women play better golf than they ever did. They certainly hit the ball a lot farther than their predecessors did.
They're realy worth watching if you're into golf sports entertainment as well as golf participation.

But women's pro sports never produced the same revnue as men's pro sports, and pro golf as a whole may be on a bit of a popularity decline.

Just my thoughts.
 
The LPGA should follow the tennis WTA model. The men ATP and women WTA play on the same week at the same site for ATP 500, Masters 1000 and GS events. Not only that, both men and women champions at the Australian, French, Wimbledon and US Open get the equal prize money. That's not the case in golf. PGA US Open winner gets like 2.25M while the LPGA US Open winner gets less than 1M. WTF.... Where is the metoo movement? LOL...

I would like to see both men and women compete at the same event at a single site in the same week. It is must see TV.

Both the LPGA and PGA should combine their events together. I think that would be awesome. I would like to see Sunday pairing of Koepka/Thomas and Korda/Ko on the same golf course, and on the same channel
I don't think that would ever work. I worked a Womens open and the Sr. Mens Open at the same course. The course set up for the senior men was much harder than the women and it really showed on the pin placements. Women got the easier pin placements by far. I don't see how you could play them together even if the mens tees were 75 -100 yards longer playing to the same pins.
 
I don't think that would ever work. I worked a Womens open and the Sr. Mens Open at the same course. The course set up for the senior men was much harder than the women and it really showed on the pin placements. Women got the easier pin placements by far. I don't see how you could play them together even if the mens tees were 75 -100 yards longer playing to the same pins.

That’s a good point. We saw what happened when the #1 women's golfer in the world played Colonial back in 2003. Playing on the same course would just highlight how vastly different the two tours really are and end up hurting more than helping.
 
I read an article about the Olympics golf competition this past year. Other than the distance - men at 7447 and women at 6600 - the course was setup the same according to the article. Not sure about pin placement however.

None of that really matters much in regards to GC showing more of the LPGA. Women do not play at the same level. We know that. I can't speak for others, but that's what makes it more enjoyable for me. It's golf at a high level with distances closer to our own.
 
None of that really matters much in regards to GC showing more of the LPGA. Women do not play at the same level. We know that. I can't speak for others, but that's what makes it more enjoyable for me. It's golf at a high level with distances closer to our own.

I disagree that women “do not play at the same level”…Ko=63 consecutive greens in regulation? Blistered the course under pressure in The Tour Championship?
If you mean level in terms of distance I would agree but we don’t see LPGA golfers coming out of thier shoes in the tee box either. It’s much easier to relate to the LPGA for the average golfer vs the PGA IMHO of course.
 
I disagree that women “do not play at the same level”…Ko=63 consecutive greens in regulation? Blistered the course under pressure in The Tour Championship?
If you mean level in terms of distance I would agree but we don’t see LPGA golfers coming out of thier shoes in the tee box either.
Is it your opinion that if you took the 5 middle-of-the-pack PGA pros and had them play an entire season on the women's tours from the same tees, those 5 would not dominate? I can't argue the point because I don't know for sure. But I believe those 5 men would win the majority of the tournaments. I don't believe even the top women can compete with the men because the advantage of distance is too much to overcome. I would love to be wrong about that.

It’s much easier to relate to the LPGA for the average golfer vs the PGA IMHO of course.
Yes, I agree it's more interesting to watch because of their distances, though I can't relate to their ability.
 
I read an article about the Olympics golf competition this past year. Other than the distance - men at 7447 and women at 6600 - the course was setup the same according to the article. Not sure about pin placement however.

None of that really matters much in regards to GC showing more of the LPGA. Women do not play at the same level. We know that. I can't speak for others, but that's what makes it more enjoyable for me. It's golf at a high level with distances closer to our own.
Women don't play at the same distances, but they definitely play at the same level. There are plenty of LPGA players who are just as good (or better) drivers, ballstrikers, short gamers and putters as anybody on the PGA Tour.

Put the ladies at LPGA Tour length tees and the men at PGA Tour length tees, and let them play each other. I don't think the difference would be anywhere near as big as you think.
 
Women don't play at the same distances, but they definitely play at the same level. There are plenty of LPGA players who are just as good (or better) drivers, ballstrikers, short gamers and putters as anybody on the PGA Tour.
But that distance is a huge advantage. When the top women are pulling a mid-iron, the average male is pulling a wedge. As far as your other points about the short game and putting, how could you possibly know unless they played head-to-head?
 
I agree... at least let's hope it's based on research and not some executive making decisions based on what he believes. Lol.

Completely my opinion here, but the LPGA would benefit from a superstar, freak of nature like Tiger Woods was for the PGA. A woman who would be good enough to make the weekend cut on the PGA. As dominate as Annika was, she didn't do that when given the chance. I don't have a problem at all with sponsor exemptions letting a woman compete in PGA events. But she would have to finish towards the middle of the pack for it to be legitimate. That's a very high standard because the distance element is just such an advantage at that level.

Still, I'd like to see the sport become more popular and the prize money increase. I don't believe they necessarily deserve it, or that it's pathetic that they don't get the same coverage or prize money. Professional sports and the networks are businesses after all.

Didn't we see that with Michelle Wie? She did well on the PLGA and played in some PGA events... although that wasn't as successful from what I remember.:confused2:

Back in the Colgate era, even pre-Nabisco, the over the air networks were showcasing LPGA golf.
While purses may be bigger, the game seems smaller.
Some blame the Asian dominance, and that's possible, but I'm not sure that I'd blame that.
Just before them, Europeans (Sorenstam) and Mexicans (Ochoa) were dominating.

That was "back in the day" before ESPN, ESPN 2, The Ocho, and a myriad of other sports networks right? Wasn't the shows you're referring to followed by Mutual of Omaha's Wild Kingdon? <-- That's not a knock on age or anything like that. It's a legit question.

But that distance is a huge advantage. When the top women are pulling a mid-iron, the average male is pulling a wedge. As far as your other points about the short game and putting, how could you possibly know unless they played head-to-head?

When you say average male, are you referring to average men or PGA pros? I'd argue that an LPGA pro will hit the ball just as far as the average male and have a much better short game. But that's my opinion.





Regardless, I think if the LPGA was seen as "more profitable" to network executives, it would receive more attention, air time, and promotion. As it stands, tv networks aren't in the business to do anything but make money right? And, while it's very unfortunate, results show it's PGA, old farts, and LPGA tours.:(:):ROFLMAO:
 
I think it is going to be hard to square that circle until the average golf viewer gets excited about the LPGA.
I enjoy watching it, but know I am in the minority of golf viewers.
They need to make some changes instead being “just as good” as the PGA tour, they should be totally different which would draw viewers/advertisers/etc. Them it would become a good business decision for a large network to show it.
 
Back
Top