http://www.twitter.com/Brodiesmith21...27292315389953

pretty cool that Jeff seems to be accessible and engaged with Brodie very respectfully here, IMO

Sometimes Jeff gives a vibe that his partnership with the PDGA is not long term.

He was making a nice run at the top5 today before dubogey on 14. Was -7 thru 13 and tied for 5th then went par par par bogey to finish -4 and t-25th

Brodie Smith, average round in 2021: 1015, over 23 rounds.

I still think the end goal of the DGPT is to the THE elite series, and I anticipate them absorbing the NT at some point. Majors are a weird outlier though, PDGA will probably keep those.

I think you are right, the NT already seems superfluous and at some point the PDGA will give that up. Majors? Not a chance the PDGA gives those up anytime soon.

Brodie just posed a Ween song on his Instagram story. Kinda surprised he even knows who Ween is. Brodie just keeps growing on me...

I agree, it’s nice to see him responding, but what’s probably the best part was that his responses were fairly direct and to the point, didn’t dodge any questions, and didn’t feed any trolls.

I didn’t know much about him prior to the change of DGPT leadership, but so far I’m impressed.

And as far as Brodie goes...making a passive aggressive statement about the player pack value needing to be added to the actual payout instead...

Was the intent to see how those funds were actually used? And then try to say that use was unnecessary and should’ve just been added to the payout? If so asking the question appropriately would probably make you come across as less entitled. I think asking for an explanation and providing feedback is a fair situation, how many random TD posts do we see asking about what kind of player’s pack items to include that aren’t a disc or a shirt? Spring’s response that those funds were personalized cups and a dinner...donated items that are required to have a value associated for the sake of tournament financials shot him down pretty quick.

Which brings me to my second thought. If you’re going to start questioning the financials at DGPT events you probably need a decent understanding of how they work. Otherwise you’re just that guy taking a huge dump on the volunteer efforts of many and are going to wear out your welcome very quick.

I get it, he’s trying to generate discussion and get people excited about the concept of legit professional disc golf. However, there’s been a ton of thankless efforts among thousands of people who have helped get it to the point it is now. I’m a firm believer in the manner in which something is communicated is just as impactful as the message itself...I want to think he meant to generate a legitimate conversation about payouts, how to grow them, and all that...but instead it came across as the FNG complaining about something he knows nothing about.

I think it’d be a great opportunity for him on a couple different levels to host a few random flex start events throughout the touring season. We’ve seen a couple different pros do it for the last couple seasons. No doubt something like that with his name and Discraft on it would draw huge crowds...you could charge $100 a pop to ams for a 1 round flex start tourney with some random Brodie disc included and they’d eat it up. He’d get to see other side of tournaments and maybe learn a thing or two, or gain some respect for the volunteer side of things.

Perhaps the idea of a business model, built on the backs of volunteers, is a short term success model anyway?

https://www.pgatour.com/impact/2019/06/12/make-impact-your-community-volunteering-pga-tour-event.html]Ball golf still uses them fairly extensively, I believe. I think maybe that’s just what happens when a venue is mostly used for non-tournament activities.

I didn't get that from his small tweet at all. It was an opinion, and he even said he could certainly be in the minority.

Plus it gave Jeff a chance to answer something. No big arguments ensued. Pretty decent points made. Good way to learn.

I think every TD who has ever had to do any fundraising has come across this exact scenario. Go into a business, ask for sponsorship.
Business: "Sure, here's 72 koozies and 72 coupons for a free trinket at our store."
TD: "Well, that's cool and all, but I'd really love to just get straight cash instead."
Business: "It's these trinkets or nothing."
TD: "These trinkets are exactly what I was looking for! They're perfect! The players will love them!"

Then you have a player asking you how much money you spent on the trinkets and why that money didn't just go straight to payout instead. (Nothing wrong with players asking questions, of course.)

PDGA mandates at least 40% payout. DGPT pays 50% to the FPO field. I don't think he views the tour standards as a burden.

I think Brodie sees Twitter as really efficient casual conversation and the critics see it as a public statement.

...and neither are particularly wrong.

This is why I do not run Pro B tiers. I am a volunteer TD and do not have the time/skills/patience to go into local businesses begging for money. If pros want that $700 added cash so it's a B Tier they can go get those sponsorships themselves IMHO.

Out of curiosity, do you also only pay out the minimum 85% of the Pro purse?

He strikes me as a Limp Bizkit guy.

From the vendor/business side of things, this is in line with my thoughts. A recent discussion I had - $400 for a base level sponsorship of a major event. Cool, I understand getting cash money is important to your event, but if I'm sponsoring your event, I want to get my product out in front of people, $400 cash gets my brand in front of people, but none of my product, how about $800 product? No? How about $400 product and $200 cash. OK, sounds great. I'd rather get my product into a dozen people's hands, than just my brand in front of 400 people.

Maroon 5

We learned a page earlier that he is a Ween guy..... a bit more evolved than LB or Maroon5.

Yes. I acknowledged that. Hence the reason why I said he strikes me more as a Limp Bizkit guy. Try to keep up.

I'm probably going to get in trouble for this...My formula for all divisions is this: Total registration $ for division minus expenses for division = payouts.

So in other words, I payout as much money as I can for any one division without running the event in the red. Is it 85%? I donno. Don't care either. I'm paying out as much as I can.

I'm suggesting you consider just paying out 85% to pros to at least be closer (fairer) to the Am payout format who can and typically do cover all of the tournament expenses in C-tiers without losing merch value payout.

Pretty heavy on the generalizations there.

Are you saying some Am only C-tiers can't break even these days in your area, even with specific expenses/fees not counted to determine net entry fees for payout?

C Tiers can always break even whether Am only or not.

Then the TD goes and charges players for the cost of the item, which was really free, thus possibly reducing the payout. The sponsor I'm sure did not intend to pay the TD or club for handing out this merchandise. he expected the players to get them for free.

How about pro-only C-tiers paying out 100%?

Your knowledge of the inner workings of tournaments is amazing...:doh:

No problem to break even despite the PDGA trying to screw you on the sanctioning fee. Why would it be difficult?

Sponsor are looking to get their name in front of as many people as possible to generate new business. Unless they are disc golfers they have not a clue how an event is run let alone how the event is financed.

I don't believe sanctioning fee is an allowable expense to reduce Net Entry Fees so I don't see a way you can offset that without paying out less than 100% or getting sponsor money to cover it.

I lump it into a $1/player "admin fee" which I put under "other fees" in the tournament manager whether it is allowable or not. The PDGA expecting TD's to come out of pocket for it is absurd.

The fact you have to do that is one sign the financial model is unfavorable for offering pro divisions. I know TDs who also allocate fixed shelter or course reservation fees on a "per player fee basis" which is technically not allowed versus the Park Dept charging a direct fee per player.

all of the parks departments I've dealt with (not many, but a couple) charge fees differently. Shelter fees are typically flat, but fees for renting other open public spaces are normally based on the amount of people projected to be at the event - so it 100% makes sense to allow this cost to be passed on to the people who 'bought tickets' to that event. Even fixed fees should be allowed to be passed through. Concerts, for example, charge a fee to access the site as well as pay the stage act, and it's all rolled into the face value of the ticket.

A lot of the PDGA rules are archaic and based on very narrow use cases, this being a good example of it. Just because it's a flat fee doesn't mean that the cost can't/shouldn't be passed through to those participating, especially when TDs are already getting the **** end of the stick.

So PDGA rules are so funked up that both TDs & players have a hard time following (and calling) them. groovy....

Exactly. If the PDGA expects me to cover stuff out of pocket then guess what...I don't run the tournament.

Probably more likely to be a Nickeback guy. Anything else is just trying to sound cool! :thmbup:

Brodie doing a course preview/practice round on Jones Gold front9...

Good news bad news for Brodie at DDO...


He gets to play his first round before the afternoon winds pick up but that's because he has the first tee time, lol.