LIV Golf is the clear winner of tussle with PGA Tour – it forced change
Those who see the convergence between LIV Golf and the PGA Tour as a victory for the old order fundamentally misunderstand how disruption works, writes Matt Readman.
“What are we even doing here anymore?” That was the reaction of golf journalist and vlogger Dan Rapaport to the news that LIV Golf was shifting from its signature 54-hole format to the traditional 72 holes — abandoning the very feature that inspired its name.
The move is designed to give LIV greater legitimacy and, crucially, world ranking points for its players. And it’s true that if it succeeds, the gap between the disruptor and the establishment will narrow to almost nothing.
Both the PGA Tour and LIV would be running premium events with limited fields and $20m purses, featuring players who will compete on multiple tours. LIV risks becoming just like everyone else.
It’s not the only disruptor league facing a regressive decision. Following the ECB’s sale of stakes in The Hundred franchises to outside investors, there is already speculation that its eponymous format could eventually be dropped, turning it into just another T20 competition.
The traditionalists see these compromises as victories. To them, prodigal breakaway leagues returning to the fold is proof that disruption doesn’t pay — a cautionary tale of what happens when a challenger flies too close to the sun.
Sports disruptors provoke emotional response
It’s easy to see why challenger competitions can be unpopular. Sport is emotional as well as commercial, and new leagues create disruption in more ways than one.
For athletes, disruptor leagues must be a torment. Most aspiring professionals know they have a big mountain to climb to get to the top, but at least they knew which mountain they were climbing.
Suddenly players are being asked to gamble mid-career on their welfare, lifestyle and future earnings. You can see it in Rory McIlroy’s apparent vehement dislike of LIV; these decisions become personal not just professional.
For executives, rival formats can feel like a direct attack. Most leaders of leagues and clubs genuinely believe they are acting in the best interests of the sports they love.
A breakaway competition not only feels like an invasion of their territory, but a personal critique. Last week’s comments from Sale Sharks co-owner Michelle Orange on the proposed R360 rugby union franchise competition illustrate that instinct clearly.
For fans, disruptor leagues are often also seen as an unnecessary distraction. To use the famous Henry Ford story, modern fans often want the “faster horse” of today rather than the car of the future.
It’s true that breakaway leagues rarely benefit fans in the short term and can even fragment their viewing experience as an unwilling side effect.
Given all that, it’s no surprise many people in sport are rooting for disruptor leagues to fail. They see the apparent convergence between LIV and the PGA as a victory for the old order. But this fundamentally misunderstands how disruption works.
LIV Golf forced the PGA Tour to react
The undoubted winner here is LIV. Not because it’s different to the PGA but because it’s so similar. The PGA Tour has been forced to react and keep up.
McIlroy may have missed out on the enormous signing bonuses offered to LIV players, but this season he has earned $36m on the course — more than a third of his entire career total. That was only possible because LIV pushed the system.
Cricket is another clear example. Few would argue that the sport isn’t in a dramatically better place than it was 20 years ago. The Indian Premier League’s arrival in 2007 transformed the entire game, from tactics to talent pathways. The Bazball revolution of England’s Test side, whatever its flaws, wouldn’t exist without it.
This is how disruption works. Progress isn’t driven by the drip-drip of incremental change. It comes from leaps that force everyone else to catch up.
Sport should understand this better than most because it’s how progress is made on the pitch too. Athletes who are disruptors move everyone forward. From Fosbury to Federer – they show us what’s possible.
New leagues can seem unnecessary, even harmful, when they arrive. But their value is not in replacing what exists now, but in reshaping what comes next. It will be years before we fully understand the impact of LIV and other disruptor competitions like it.
True disruption always leaves a mark, whether the disruptor survives or not.
Matt Readman is chief strategy officer at sports creative agency Dark Horses.