After a lengthy time with Butch Harmon as his swing coach, Phil Mickelson decided recently to go in another direction for advice on his game, leading the five-time major champion to graciously give Harmon his walking papers.
So what does this mean for Lefty going forward?
Our scribes weigh in on those topics and more in this week's edition of Monday Four-Ball.
1. At 45, what can Phil Mickelson gain from changing swing coaches?
SportsCenter anchor Jonathan Coachman: It's pretty clear that Phil Mickelson wants one final multiyear run before his highly competitive game is over. I don't think it's about learning something new, I think it's about having a new energy with new voices in his camp. There is sometimes the perception that if you don't change what your normal is, eventually complacency can set in. Phil hasn't won since the British in 2013. For him, that's not good enough. Stacking cash is something Lefty can do on or off the course. He wants to win and if this can help get him back to the winner's circle, then that is what he was willing to do.
ESPN.com senior golf analyst Michael Collins: There's no age when you can stop learning. And sometimes, especially for golfers, hearing even the same info coming from a different voice in a different way can make things click. It sounds ridiculous, but it reminds me of when kids won't do something their parents ask them to do, but a different adult asks them and they do it with a smile!
ESPN.com senior golf writer Bob Harig: A new perspective. It seems odd at this stage to go down this road, but the guess here is that Phil isn't looking for any big overhauls or differences in swing philosophy. He just wants to hear something different about getting his swing on plane and being more consistent, whether it be hitting more fairways or greens. Now is not the time for a big change that might take all year to master.
ESPN.com senior golf writer Jason Sobel: An extra set of eyes. A new perspective. I think outsiders too often compare golf instructors with coaches in other sports. But an instructor isn't going to change a player's game plan or develop a new strategy. Really, the impact is much more limited. So don't expect any major changes for Mickelson -- he's not going to start hitting it righty anytime soon -- but maybe just a few subtle changes that can help him going forward.
2. How important is China's Hao Tong Li's T-7 finish at the WGC-HSBC Champions in the grand scheme of things for golf?
Coachman: It was fun to watch Li play well, then make mistakes, but yet still smile when it was all said and done. But in the whole scheme of things, I don't think this will have a significant impact on the world of golf. The LPGA is certainly Asian heavy when it comes to its players, so it makes sense to spend an entire month in the Asian countries. But on the Asian men's side, I don't believe they will ever be a major percentage of the players on the dominant tour in the world -- the PGA Tour. This is a good story, but not a big one worldwide.
Collins: About as important as Guan Tianlang's play at the Masters and subsequent PGA Tour events. It could really help grow the game in China, at least for those fortunate enough to be permitted to play. Could Li be a force to be reckoned with weekly on the PGA Tour? Doubtful, but he could make it out on tour and be successful. At 20, he's got a great attitude, and if he gets consistent on the Web.com Tour this year, who knows.
Harig: It is no more important than a Chinese player getting invited to the Masters with all the exposure that brings or perhaps a Chinese player performing well at the Olympics. It is another small step on the way to exposing golf to a huge segment of people who do not play the game.
Sobel: Golf is a global game and it appears the country with the world's biggest population is ready to emerge as a major player within the sport's elite circle. Li looks like he has a nice swing and a terrific short game. If he can help grow the game even bigger internationally, that would be an important step. Let's just hope he has some company, or else that could be a difficult burden to bear.
3. What percentage of PGA Tour players do you think agree with Boo Weekley's point about the wraparound schedule?
Coachman: I think that for those players who have more than two years of experience on the PGA Tour, 100 percent agree with Boo Weekley. They all might not use hunting and fishing as to why they don't like it, but everyone has different reasons. The biggest one is the simple fact that from January to October, there is high-pressure, high-stakes golf that requires tons of energy, travel, practice and laser focus. In any sport or business, there has to be real time to recharge your batteries. In the long run, this will affect what players are willing to do and how much they are willing to play. You want the players to be energized and happy to be at an event. When you make them go, then some of the joy of playing this game will naturally go away, and that's not good.
Collins: Seventy-five percent. The guys who like the wraparound schedule are the guys coming off the Web.com Tour who are playing well and don't want to stop. But for the guys who've had their PGA Tour card for a few years and are inside the top 100 in FedEx Cup points, I have not heard one guy say he loves the new wraparound season.
Harig: Less than 10 percent. The majority of the membership is the rank-and-file player pleading for more playing opportunities. And that is exactly what this time of year offers. Even those who don't need them don't have a huge problem with these tournaments. It is the elite who prefer to have no tournaments at all.
Sobel: Is there a number I could use that's higher than 100? Even though most won't say it publicly -- and none will say it as, uh, eloquently as Boo -- the 12-month rolling golf calendar is diminishing the overall product. The PGA Tour needs to realize that more isn't always better. As for the players, it's a catch-22: Sure, they're free to take this time off if it's too much golf, but if they do, they'll risk falling behind their peers who keep on keeping on.
4. If you could pick one sporting venue on the planet to pull off the Petco Park Golf Links stunt, where would it be?
Coachman: I would love to make the "Fenway links" a course that I would like to play. How much fun would it be to hit a tee shot from above the Green Monster? Or try and curl one around the foul pole in right field? As unique as Fenway Park in Boston is, a course with the same uniqueness could be fun there also. I can't think of a better, more historic place.
Collins: I'd pick Churchill Downs. Love a golf course set up around the horse racing track, through the paddock, etc. Then have the last three holes around the final turn to the finish line so on the 17th tee a guy could yell, "and down the stretch they come!"
Harig: Indianapolis Motor Speedway. It already has a golf course there and there used to be a Champions Tour event at the venue. Put as many holes as possible in the massive infield and now we've got something.
Sobel: The Colosseum. Sure, we might have to putt through some ancient ruins, but talk about a course with some history. Could even add a few lions to enhance the hazards. And after my first birdie, I'd turn to the Roman gallery and scream, "Are you not entertained?!?"
