We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Nike pushing for tights on the PGA Tour?

Nike is sure getting the publicity they want out of this. Great marketing move for sure, whether it happens or not I'm not sure they care. Getting people talking Nike golf at the moment.
 
Golf Ghost said:
Same for where I work. Though, there's nothing that says someone couldn't walk to the first tee with shorts, shirt tucked, and a belt on with tights underneath, under the current code.

The bigger problem I see, is that it means a tour player wearing shorts. Think this argument from a tour perspective means that if they approve this, they'll almost certainly have to approve shorts only. If not right away, in due time.
Click to expand...

This is where we can agree. This may be Nike's way of pushing the envelope to get shorts allowed on Tour.
 
Canadan said:
Why is that?
Click to expand...

My above argument that compression isn't only worn for warmth and that if you make the argument for allowing compression tops due to restriction, someone could make the same argument for pants.

In the scenario given in your previous post, a player is wearing a compression top as a base layer, making it easier to add layers, such as polo and jacket without restriction. I could easily argue that I want to wear compression pants with shorts because if I have to add rain pants, that the addition of another layer creates bulk.

I'm not saying that would specifically happen, but I don't see how the argument can be made for the top, but not the bottom also.
 
cbaker2882 said:
Nike is sure getting the publicity they want out of this. Great marketing move for sure, whether it happens or not I'm not sure they care. Getting people talking Nike golf at the moment.
Click to expand...

I read this a lot nowadays... Like making a splash and people having a conversation is a great thing for a company, but I disagree with it every time. Take Nike out of the title and it's still a conversation -- They just happen to be the company that openly said "wear what you want" while everyone else offers the same basic articles and lets people do their thing.

As a few have mentioned, this isn't anything new.
 
JB said:
My club has those same rules and would allow tights.
I can say for fact that one of the finest in this state, Quail West does as well.
Click to expand...

I have reached out to a couple of people who are on the board at a well known private club in Virginia who texted back "not in my lifetime". Funny what mentality prevails on a regional basis.
 
sixcat said:
I have reached out to a couple of people who are on the board at a well known private club in Virginia who texted back "not in my lifetime". Funny what mentality prevails on a regional basis.
Click to expand...

It's easy to say, but I would be curious to know if there is anything in their current dress code that would actually allow them to enforce it.
 
Golf Ghost said:
My above argument that compression isn't only worn for warmth and that if you make the argument for allowing compression tops due to restriction, someone could make the same argument for pants.

In the scenario given in your previous post, a player is wearing a compression top as a base layer, making it easier to add layers, such as polo and jacket without restriction. I could easily argue that I want to wear compression pants with shorts because if I have to add rain pants, that the addition of another layer creates bulk.

I'm not saying that would specifically happen, but I don't see how the argument can be made for the top, but not the bottom also.
Click to expand...

I'm not comparing bulk from top to bottom, I am saying only one genuinely matters, especially in cold weather. Adding a top layer like a light jacket or sweater changes the swing movement. Wearing pants vs shorts does not even remotely factor.
 
Canadan said:
Because compression tops allow for additional layering without the bulk. It serves a purpose to wear a polo with a compression shirt rather than a long sleeve polo or sweatshirt... You're combating the weather, staying warmer, and not losing out on upper body movement. In what world does a golfer lose out on flexibility by wearing pants that are the same material as their shorts? They aren't.

To me, this is fashion over function.
Click to expand...

What about the people that want to use it for their body?
What about the people that still love to feel the breeze by wearing shorts but want to cover skin?
 
sixcat said:
I have reached out to a couple of people who are on the board at a well known private club in Virginia who texted back "not in my lifetime". Funny what mentality prevails on a regional basis.
Click to expand...

I think you make a great point regarding location. I can see Florida being more friendly to this concept as well as other high heat States by comparison to the midwest. Absolutely.
 
JB said:
As someone that lives here I can say that there are FAR more than you realize. TONS of golfers are wearing them for sun protection.
Click to expand...

I started wearing them more late last year after a visit to the dr.
 
Canadan said:
Take Nike out of the title and it's still a conversation
Click to expand...

That's still the point. It's a completely mundane almost having nothing to do with golf in general and it's sparking a controversial conversation. We're having an entire thread/argument about a hypothetical situation that Nike created off a press event. Call it what you will, it's a marketing tactic. And IMO it's working.
 
JB said:
What about the people that want to use it for their body?
What about the people that still love to feel the breeze by wearing shorts but want to cover skin?
Click to expand...

I've never met anyone who wears shorts and compression pants on a golf course to genuinely offer my thoughts on 'them' so I'll just pass on comment. Of the many members at my home course who do not care for the sun, all simply wear pants. We're in a great age for breathable material, and in my climate, it never gets bad enough to be of concern. And as I've said already in here:

Canadan said:
I'm not here trying to make blanket assumptions on what people would like or do, just trying to relate to my every day. If people need to wear compression to hide their skin from the sun, I support it 100%..
Click to expand...
 
Its funny to me how sleeves under short sleeve are "accepted" but the exact same thing done on the legs is not.
Golfers are such a funny bunch.
I remember when the mock shirt was this same exact conversation because it wasnt a collar.
I remember when soft spikes and sneakers were going to ruin the game.
I remember when flat brims and orange loud clothes were taboo.

This is all in the last 20 years. Crazy thing is I wear none of them (I think most are awful looking) and still kind of chuckle at how against it people are.
The mock turtle neck was downright laughable. These same conversations with the same "board members" at the same clubs all said the exact same thing. Two years later, they were everywhere.
 
I don't necessarily like the look but as your as your etiquette everywhere else on the course is solid, im ok with it.
 
Golf Ghost said:
It's easy to say, but I would be curious to know if there is anything in their current dress code that would actually allow them to enforce it.
Click to expand...

"Exercise clothing shall not be worn on club grounds, except on your way into the facility when changing immediately once inside. They may be worn only in appropriate areas such as the fitness center, locker room areas, gentleman's grill and ladies lounge."

Direct quote from the above mentioned board member. I am assuming they would consider male tights to be "exercise clothing".
 
Canadan said:
I'm not comparing bulk from top to bottom, I am saying only one genuinely matters, especially in cold weather. Adding a top layer like a light jacket or sweater changes the swing movement. Wearing pants vs shorts does not even remotely factor.
Click to expand...

The argument could be made. Just like the argument could be made that adding a long sleeve polo over a short sleeve one does not add additional bulk or restriction.

Jamie-Dornan-Brian-ODriscoll-style-100615.jpg
 
cbaker2882 said:
That's still the point. It's a completely mundane almost having nothing to do with golf in general and it's sparking a controversial conversation. We're having an entire thread/argument about a hypothetical situation that Nike created off a press event. Call it what you will, it's a marketing tactic. And IMO it's working.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's where we disagree I guess. This conversation doesn't really vault Nike forward in any way, they just happened to spark debate on what makes sense to wear on a golf course.

It's not really any different than the Puma jogger conversation. It sparked conversation, sure, but did it really do anything?
 
sixcat said:
"Exercise clothing shall not be worn on club grounds, except on your way into the facility when changing immediately once inside. They may be worn only in appropriate areas such as the fitness center, locker room areas, gentleman's grill and ladies lounge."

Direct quote from the above mentioned board member. I am assuming they would consider male tights to be "exercise clothing".
Click to expand...


Then again, I make the argument. Why allow compression tops under golf polos?
 
I have no problem with it. I wear my compression tights under my shorts to work all the time but I am a P.E teachers. Compression gear has great advantages.
 
What's with the avatars in the signature. They really clutter the page.
 
Golf Ghost said:
The argument could be made. Just like the argument could be made that adding a long sleeve polo over a short sleeve one does not add additional bulk or restriction.
Click to expand...

hah, if you don't agree you don't agree. I'm good with that. I'm talking from personal experience and am happy we're in an era of five layers being about the equivalent of two or three 10 years ago.

That said, I'd never feel hindered by wearing pants. It's a bit of a strange thought to me.
 
Canadan said:
Yeah that's where we disagree I guess. This conversation doesn't really vault Nike forward in any way, they just happened to spark debate on what makes sense to wear on a golf course.

It's not really any different than the Puma jogger conversation. It sparked conversation, sure, but did it really do anything?
Click to expand...

Time will tell. Marketing isn't a 100% guarantee that it will make someone buy it. But getting people talking is the first step to then getting people to buy or sparking interest. To be fair, the Puma jogger thing just happened during a time where the vast majority of people aren't out golfing. And it's certainly not the hardcore golfers that are going to be buying them either. So we'll have to revisit this by the end of the year and see what happened.

Remember the Taylormade PSi irons? Neither does anyone else. If you don't market them to get people talking, they will fall by the wayside. Even a silly conversation/argument about these is a big step on getting them in the back of people's minds.
 
Blazer said:
What's with the avatars in the signature. They really clutter the page.
Click to expand...

Please take this to the proper section of the forum (Tech Support).
I am not seeing this issue at all.
 
JB said:
Its funny to me how sleeves under short sleeve are "accepted" but the exact same thing done on the legs is not.
Golfers are such a funny bunch.
I remember when the mock shirt was this same exact conversation because it wasnt a collar.
I remember when soft spikes and sneakers were going to ruin the game.
I remember when flat brims and orange loud clothes were taboo.

This is all in the last 20 years. Crazy thing is I wear none of them (I think most are awful looking) and still kind of chuckle at how against it people are.
The mock turtle neck was downright laughable. These same conversations with the same "board members" at the same clubs all said the exact same thing. Two years later, they were everywhere.
Click to expand...

I don't think golf is that different from anything else. We like what we like and what we 'know' to be proper.

If this takes off I doubt there will be an uproar in a year or two over it, as you've used samples above referencing interesting changes. But I bet that it'll play out a lot more like flat bills than it will soft spikes or mock necks.
 
Canadan said:
hah, if you don't agree you don't agree. I'm good with that. I'm talking from personal experience and am happy we're in an era of five layers being about the equivalent of two or three 10 years ago.

That said, I'd never feel hindered by wearing pants. It's a bit of a strange thought to me.
Click to expand...

It's all for good discussion. Think there's some great points in this thread and the concerns brought up is why I don't think the PGA will approve of it.

I'm with you on the pants front. I haven't either, I just can see how someone could shape an argument around it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top