We’re five weeks into the TGL experiment, I’ve spent way too many hours thinking about screen golf and, now, it’s time to unload that particular section of my brain onto you, the reader. I’ll say that generally, my feelings have run the gamut between initial disappointment (in contrast to a lot of the big independent golf accounts I follow) to legitimate enjoyment during last week’s Jupiter-Boston match—the only competitive one of the bunch—to a current state that I would call “acceptance/hope.” Throughout, I kept tuning in, both out of professional duty and curiosity, and also, at times, because I was legitimately entertained. But I want to start with what I see as the most pressing issue, namely…
1: It’s too long.
I’ve watched all five matches since the Jan. 7 debut, and each week, like clockwork, I could feel the energy nosedive after the intermission. Blame the cringe-y DJ Khaled interview in Week 1, or the overlong break (I like Scott Van Pelt as much as the next guy, but I don’t need him giving me a 10-minute recap at halftime). Yet judging by even the most positive takes I’ve seen, I’m not alone—there’s a significant momentum loss after an hour. The speed is part of the appeal with TGL, but even in the best matches, that speed comes to a halt at the intermission, and afterward it’s a slog. There’s no reason this can’t be 12 holes instead of 15, and no reason a match can’t be completed in an hour. Run two matches back-to-back to fill the TV time slot. This has to be top priority, because it’s the thing that will kill TGL the fastest.
One thing we kept hearing throughout the first three weeks is that things were going to improve when there was a close match. And they did—as mentioned above, the Jupiter-Boston clash, featuring Tiger Woods and Rory McIlroy, was far more compelling to watch in the second hour. But … so what? We’ve had five matches to date, and four have been blowouts. That doesn’t necessarily mean 80 percent of future TGL matches will be routs, but it’s a good indication that a lot of them will be, and if your product is dependent on late drama, that’s a bad omen. “Wait for a close match” isn’t a good marketing tactic; you need to force close matches with a format change. My suggestion above, reducing the matches to 12 holes, would help. If only the last three holes featured one-on-one singles play, you could also make those worth two points apiece, and—again, just for those last three holes—make the points roll over, so that even if it’s a 5-0 whitewash after nine holes, there’s still a prayer of a big comeback.
3: Change the f***ing hammer rule, already. 
Megan Briggs/TGL
The hammer stopped being a fun concept the minute the players started to understand it. Last night, Collin Morikawa, declaring himself the brains of LAGC, knew the absolute perfect hammer strategy for the team in front: do absolutely nothing. And thus it stayed in their pocket, unused, for the entire match. It’s starting to feel like the hammer is Godot in a very avant-garde production of “Waiting For Godot”; talked about endlessly, never appearing. Don’t get me wrong—it’s a great device, which will increase volatility and help solve the blowout problem. But you’ve got to force teams to actually use it, and the simplest way is to mandate that if you don’t use it for three holes, it goes over to the other team.
4: Personalities matter, but the personalities have been surprising. 
Megan Briggs/TGL
Some of the most entertaining players haven’t been a shock—Kevin Kisner is funny, even at his playing worst, and whatever you think of Tom Kim, he brings an undeniable energy to the stage (the shot clock helps). Tiger and Rory will always be welcome presences, even if they’ve been surprisingly low key so far. A few other high-profile players, like Xander Schauffele (pre injury), Billy Horschel, Justin Thomas and Rickie Fowler, have also delivered. But I’ve been pleasantly surprised at other players who I thought might be duds. For very different reasons, I’ve thought that Justin Rose, Sahith Theegala, Keegan Bradley and Morikawa have stood out as especially compelling; they raise the energy level every time they’re on camera. When you think about it, though, it makes sense that player impact would be unpredictable … TGL is a weird idea, and it’s going to reward a specific type of personality. On the flip side, though I find Matt Fitzpatrick hilarious in his wry, tweedy English way (he and his brother had one of my favorite “Full Swing” episodes), it’s not really translating to TGL yet. Others, like Adam Scott, seem ill-at-ease. And what’s the point of having a guy like Cam Young on there if he’s not going to talk? If TGL is going to continue past this year, I’d like to see the organizers be pretty ruthless with their “casting,” because it makes an enormous difference.
5: The surroundings are best when they’re goofy and theatrical, but the players are best when they care.
I realize I’m in the minority of Americans when I say that I’m a fan of professional darts, but I say without a hint of irony or sarcasm that the TGL’s model should be the world darts championship at the Ally Pally. In short, it features world-class players doing world-class things on stage for serious stakes, but with all the trappings of a human circus—drunk fans going crazy, cheerleaders and a general sense of semi-absurd theater. Just like darts, the TGL works best when the players care. They can care in a fun way—or, like Keegan Bradley, they can just be really intense—but the result has to matter. This sounds paradoxical, but you need that paradox to pull off the high-wire act. Justin Rose, of all people, has threaded the needle perfectly on that front, and so has Tom Kim. You don’t have to force it; you just have to be naturally competitive and have some natural showmanship. But the theatrics are important—it has to look like a sideshow, but be treated by the players like a meaningful event. (Think Ernie McCracken bowling his final frame.) As for those surroundings …
I love that they seem to be encouraging fans to shout at the players, and I love that some of the players come right back at them. But they’re not close enough, and it doesn’t feel sufficiently immediate. I understand that the “playing field” is part of the problem—it’s massive, pushing the seats back—but they need to find a way to fix it. Creating a kind of fan culture around TGL is going to be massive, and it doesn’t have to be centered on the teams themselves, which continue to be kind of a joke in terms of inspiring regional allegiance.
Megan Briggs/TGL
To go back to darts, people go to the Ally Pally because they know it’s going to be two hours of drinking, singing, dumb costumes, and general revelry. They don’t even have to care about the darts. You can’t build that in a day at the SoFi Center, but as it stands there doesn’t even appear to be an attempt to foster any wild fan culture. They rarely show anyone in the crowd except the rich owners pretending to care, which is kind of a classic professional golf mistake—the Reddit guy seems to have a very nice life, but I’d rather watch the drunk idiot wearing a toga, please. Encourage the people to reach a certain level of rowdiness, and then show them! Have some cheerleaders! Have a mascot! Have a nine-drink minimum! This should be the kind of thing where if you tell your buddies you’re going to a TGL match, they all raise their eyebrows like you said you’re going to a bachelor party in Vegas.
7: Do (much) more with the announcers.
I don’t think anybody involved in the current production is doing a bad job—and everybody is creating broadcast that has never been tried before—but are they actually entertaining you in any tangible way? Or are they just doing the traditional basics and making sure the trains are running on time? One way or another, the announcers and interviewers should be additive to the entertainment. I’m not even joking when I say they should get a comedian like Shane Gillis involved somehow.
8: The sim is great, even when it’s not flawless. 
Megan Briggs/TGL
The most point-missing critiques I’ve seen over the past five weeks have been about the sim’s possible imperfections. I recognize the need for it to be extremely accurate, but it’s also a giant computer, and the points where it screws up are hilarious. I’m thinking of Tuesday’s match, when Justin Rose’s drive defied gravity by stopping above a hazard on a vertical slope. That’s great! It’s a little bit wacky, a little bit random and exactly what I mean by the surrounding devices contributing to the chaos. Every time a player moans about the sim not picking up a draw spin, or whatever, I’m delighted. It’s a phenomenal piece of tech, but the little moments of imperfection are pretty sweet too.
9: Can we do a little better with the music?
I don’t think the music comes off quite as tragic in TGL as it does in LIV—indoors, in front of a screen, it doesn’t give off the same “your accountant uncle trying to be cool” vibe—but my God, the choices and the repetition! My breaking point last night was hearing “Land Down Under” for Adam Scott followed by a Fleetwood Mac song for Tommy Fleetwood. “Land Down Under” is a fun song, and Fleetwood Mac are great, but the TGL has apparently hired the world’s most literal DJ. I learned later that Fleetwood actually chose the Fleetwood Mac song himself, which is kind of funny, but if it’s the case that the players are picking their own music, we really need someone to help these guys out, because clearly a lifetime spent perfecting your golf game has left huge development gaps elsewhere. And yes, Tiger choosing “Eye of the Tiger” for his walkout song was an absolute low point.
10: I actually do think this can work.
The professional game is mired in the rut of ruts right now, and I think part of the initial positive reaction to TGL within golf media was a mixture of fantasy and wish fulfillment—a lot of people want this to work. But even if I rolled my eyes at some of the early cheerleading, this thing has grown on me with time, at least to the point that I want to keep watching, and that I’m sitting here writing a nearly 2,000-word analysis of it. It’s going to take some smart stewardship to help it reach its potential, but as far as I can tell the ratings seem at least decent so far, and the bones of a good product are there. But there’s not really a true precedent for the TGL, much less any kind of blueprint, which means that to make this thing special, the brains behind the operation need to be extremely flexible and adaptable right away. I hope they have the foresight and the courage to make the important changes. It could be a high tide in professional golf that raises all ships, and it’s sorely needed.
This article was originally published on golfdigest.com
