Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Nike’s exit from the golf equipment business: How will it impact the college game?

Published

on

Back in early August, Nike threw the golfing world for a loop by announcing its exit from the golf equipment business. After years of disappointing sales and growth, the company revealed that it will “transition out of equipment — including clubs, balls, and bags.”

Once the news broke, a wave of questions arose as many in the industry were left with uncertain futures. Much of the initial focus converged on the company’s existing professional endorsement contracts. Nike’s PGA Tour players, ranging from up-and-comers like Patrick Rodgers and Abraham Ancer to big name stars like Rory McIlroy and Tiger Woods, now had to carefully consider their next step.

The decision not only affected the professional ranks, but anyone associated with Nike Golf. Retailers, distributors, employees, sales representatives and teaching professionals all were left searching for answers. Nike’s sports marketing reach also extends to collegiate athletics; as such, the sponsorships of many college golf programs was suddenly up in the air.

Over the years, Nike has supported a large contingent of college golf’s top programs, and by extension many elite collegiate players. This past season, Nike schools took top honors in both the men’s and women’s NCAA golf championships with the respective victories of Oregon and Washington. Further, the Nike Collegiate Invitational, held at historic Colonial Country Club in Fort Worth back in October, brought together a strong field (10 of the top-20 ranked men’s teams) in a Nike-only affair.

Meanwhile, coaches at these schools have spent much of the fall season formulating a post-fallout strategy. If they haven’t already, these programs must now switch sponsors and begin the process of implementing significant changes in their equipment.

As with the tour players, many of whom were “shocked” by the news, Nike’s decision caught everybody in the college ranks off guard. Casey Martin, the men’s golf head coach at Oregon, noted that he was “definitely surprised,” a sentiment shared by his colleague at Stanford, Conrad Ray. This reaction included the players as well. Maverick McNealy, the current No. 1 ranked amateur in the world and a senior on the Stanford team, got the news from his brother and “thought he was playing some sort of joke.” The lack of advanced notice, however, can be explained by Nike’s status as a publicly traded company. Thus, they were required to withhold any classified information related to the company as a going concern.

Maverick McNealy in the first round of the Web.com Tour Ellie Mae Classic at TPC Stonebrae on July 28, 2016 in Hayward, California. (Photo by Ryan Young/PGA TOUR)

Maverick McNealy, a senior at Stanford, is the No. 1-ranked amateur golfer in the world.

While Nike’s departure from the equipment business has been swift, it was also predictable to a certain degree. “Looking back, I could see a few signs,” Martin said. For the last two years, annual sales in golf (including footwear and apparel) were either flat or down. Nike also held only a fraction of the market share in club sales. In addition, a few days before making the big announcement, the company dropped prices substantially on its 2016 line of clubs. Coach Ray said the decision “makes sense when learning about the economics and business side.” Still, for those impacted by the decision, there remains a trace of disappointment.

“I was really excited about how good the equipment was getting,” McNealy said. “I had just put the last few pieces (of equipment) in play.”

Ray was also impressed with the newer line of products, saying Nike was “making good headway with R&D.” But with Nike’s departure and the fall season winding down, the next few months will serve as a great opportunity for players to begin switching equipment.

McNealy, who played Nike equipment exclusively beforehand, said that the only thing he’s switched back was his golf ball, “because to me everything should be fitted around the golf ball that I play.” He also revealed plans to use this upcoming offseason to continue implementing equipment changes. Coach Martin recognized that there will definitely be an adjustment period for his players, but agreed that “now is a great time to adjust.” He believes most of the challenges will come with getting the proper fit for the driver.

Oregon recently signed with Parsons Xtreme Golf (PXG), an up-and-coming equipment manufacturer. Martin mentioned that a few of his players already put some of PXG’s clubs into play when they competed at the East Lake Cup in Atlanta. In the search for a new sponsor, Martin said he was “looking for a quality product that would serve the guys.” He said he feels fortunate to have built a relationship with PXG, which is one of many equipment companies that stand to benefit greatly from Nike’s departure. Indeed, Bob Philion, president and CEO of Cobra Puma Golf, humorously said that his company is “poised to pounce” on the newfound opportunities.

On the other hand, the Stanford men’s golf program will align with Callaway, another likely beneficiary of the shake-up in the industry. Ray said that the decision was “based on service and support for the program” and identified Callaway’s proven track record and its full product line as key factors.

While a good number of players are already experimenting with new equipment, Coach Ray emphasized the importance of “being methodical in testing,” as it can be “dangerous to make a full-scale switch.” He advised changing one thing at a time, which is exactly the approach that his star player McNealy is planning to follow.

“I want to go piece-by-piece instead of a wholesale change,” McNealy said, “so that I can really eliminate variables…and have a comparable testing through the bag.”

Certainly these next few months will provide some much-needed time for players to hone the different feel of their new equipment.

Despite dropping its underperforming golf equipment business, Nike vows that it will remain in the golf business. “We’re committed to being the undisputed leader in footwear and apparel” said Trevor Edwards, Nike Brand president. Certainly, this evolved strategy represents a step in the right direction. Ray believes that Nike “needed to re-trench and focus on their apparel and shoe business,” and stressed that the company will “not be pulling back budget-wise.” Indeed, there are indications that Nike will look to expand its athlete roster, as the announcement disclosed plans to “partner with more of the world’s best golfers.”

Both Ray and Martin are confident that their programs will maintain a strong relationship with Nike. Martin pointed to the deep ties that Oregon and Nike have developed over the years, and said that he continues to “keep in touch with the reps on a weekly basis.” Both schools will continue to be outfitted in Nike apparel and shoes.

As college teams continue to work out their short-term response during this time of change, the lasting impact remains uncertain. The golf equipment industry will continue to evolve and deliver innovative products, and Nike appears to be taking a more practical approach to its investment in golf.

Still, many ball and club R&D employees have been laid off, and certain Nike Golf facilities, such as The Oven and The Clubhouse, are likely to be shut down. Even among college golf programs, the enduring effects are hard to grasp at this time. Coach Ray suspects that the changes “won’t leave a huge mark” on the Stanford program, but also recognized that it “depends on the perspective you take.” Coach Martin acknowledged that the news came as “a pretty big hit” due to his school’s fondness for Nike.

Speaking in the immediate aftermath of the news release, one Nike staff player told Golf Digest: “I really love their equipment, but I’ll tell you this: In all the pro-ams I’ve played, I’ve never once seen one of my partners using a Nike club.” Ultimately, the real problem for Nike was as simple as that. Now, in the wake of their departure, the golfing world is obliged to fill in the void, for better or for worse.

Jeffrey Knox's main interests are junior and college golf, but he also follows the professional tours closely. Jeff graduated from the College of William and Mary in 2014, where he served as the Sports Editor and later as Editor-in-Chief of the campus news magazine. He currently lives in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, where he works as an environmental scientist for Providence Engineering.

15 Comments

15 Comments

  1. Darryl

    Dec 16, 2016 at 8:15 am

    Nike equipment was pretty decent, they made a couple of sets of irons over the years that will be spoken about in the same conversations as some of the best contemporary products from Mizuno, Titleist, Callaway, Taylormade or Ping. The VRS line of drivers and fairway woods was as good as anything around at the time even if their wedges and putters never quite hit the same highs. Their ball was as good as any of the alternatives. Their main problem was price, they pitched their gear too high too soon so they didn’t get a good enough market share early on, so no amateurs really became what you would call “brand loyalists”. What are you going to do when you are buying your $400 driver, buy a proven name like Taylormade or Titleist, or go with a new player who have no track record in the game? That was their problem when they first came out.

  2. Sam

    Nov 28, 2016 at 12:33 pm

    WOW that’s crazy to hear that PXG is getting into the college levels!! This is great for them to get more exposure, but also do some more testing on their products. I wonder how many schools they will sign next year and in the next few years.

  3. M Smile

    Nov 25, 2016 at 2:45 pm

    Even if i am a hacker I like to look great in Nike clothing!

  4. Tom

    Nov 24, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    Oregon goin with PXG. HA!

    • Boobsy McKiss

      Nov 26, 2016 at 1:26 am

      I agree that is quite funny. From one billionaire to another I suppose.

  5. Tom

    Nov 24, 2016 at 1:55 pm

    good on ya Smizz

  6. RAT

    Nov 24, 2016 at 12:54 pm

    They are and have always been a shoe and clothing business .Golf clubs and balls were not their expertise and it showed that’s why they aren’t in that business and I give them credit for seeing that and making the change .

  7. Dj

    Nov 24, 2016 at 11:23 am

    Interesting article. It’s funny that Nike gets ripped here but staffers and d1 athletes loved the gear and have great things to say about it.

    • TR1PTIK

      Nov 24, 2016 at 12:56 pm

      I’ve been playing a vapor pro driver, flex 3 wood, and flex hybrid since June and really enjoy them. Still contemplating if I want to scoop up some vapor pro irons while they’re still available. I don’t think I could ever do their wedges or putters though. Just not for me.

      • Dj

        Nov 24, 2016 at 9:38 pm

        Think you’d be surprised by both. But hey not everything is for everyone

    • Brian

      Nov 24, 2016 at 9:16 pm

      I personally don’t care to hear the opinions of people that are paid to play or given free gear from an OEM.

      • Dj

        Nov 24, 2016 at 9:38 pm

        College players can play whatever they want.

        • Boobsy McKiss

          Nov 26, 2016 at 1:29 am

          I’m curious what college players can get from manufacturers, when a football player can’t take $5 from someone for an autograph without destroying the reputation of the entire football program.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending