Been a while since I've posted here. hello everyone. I was watching some old golf footage during Jack's tournament and felt players seemed to have more style with higher quality apparel. I even read a comment in the article in GD on Rocco and how he was wearing sweats and one of the pro gave him a card for a guy to make him some pants. Now with all of the sponsorships all the players are wearing what you can buy off the rack. Seems to be pressure to wear what can be sold and manufactured in mass quantities and not made to last. I don't mind the logos and corporate sponsorships so much.

I think the argument for this case begins and ends with John Daly. That's it folks lock er up

i think that golf style has generally become homogenized.

all those guys look the same....basically. sure, there are a few who stand out on a weekly basis and the few who create their own style.

for the most part, though....85% of the guys sport the same style.

Pesronally, I like the styles as I'm pretty conservative when it comes to clothing, but between guys like Tiger, Poulter, and Gay we've got everything we need in terms of styles.

It has nothing to do with sponsorships. Whereas once upon a time it was typical for a man to get his clothes tailored (especially if he was about to perform professionally in public), most people these days wear off the rack clothing. Why would that be different on the golf course?

Besides, it's obvious that there are a lot of players wearing tailored version of off the rack stuff. Tiger's pants may have a Nike logo, but there was definitely some sort of tailor between the factory and his closet (a lot like his clubs). Others who don't believe in such military precision and grew up in the modern era would be unlikely to have the business card of a "guy" for pants, but rather a preferred brand.

I don't know, this is a really good question. I'm really over the whole J.Lindeberg and Puma look with bright colored pants and white belts. I'm only 23, but as I get older, I really like the way Tiger dresses, he always looks classy as well as DLIII, I'm pretty sure he was born to wear Polo Golf. I'm all about the classyness. However, I also don't like the way a lot of guys dress on TOUR, you can tell which guys really don't care what they look like...

Woody Austin anyone??? lol

You're not into the Tabasco look?

What hasn't sponsorship ruined in most sports!? - I miss the days when it was simply: the cotton bowl, the rose bowl, the feista bowl... ... and all on new year's day.

Without sponsorship's there would not be professional sports.

As for the fashion, I think it just shows that times change and styles come and go.

I like being able to see something there wearing and be able to purchase it for myself.

I voted better, with the exception of JD lol

Yeah, the whole white belt thing is yesterday big time. Especially with Phil and Stewart Cink doing it now from time to time.

I believe it has become better. The tour has brought golf fashion to the forefront. I couldn't imagine a group of guys talking about golf clothes during the solid color shirt days of the mid to late 80's. For that I am thankful.

You have an issue with the quality of golf clothes? Don't break your foot kicking any tires!

Golf clothes have become technically better through use of wicking materials and flexible materials that allow you to move better.

IMO these same clothes seem to look good for longer so I would argue that the quality has improved as well.

BTW - what this has to do with clothing sponsorships, god only knows?!?

Golf clothing is also having an influence on non-golf clothing.

I was shopping for clothes yesterday and noticed the store had a lot of golf style cool/moisture-wiking clothing. This wasn't a golf store, just a regular clothing store. And not just the shirts, but the pants and shorts as well.

I can see this stuff replacing the corporate casual khaki/Dockers look. It has a more tailored look because the material is more permanent press and durable (holds its color and shape longer than cotton.) It will certainly have an impact on what people consider better looking casual clothing.

The more casual dress codes in society have been pushing golf towards more casual dress. Meanwhile the advances in materials used in golf clothing may push society's more casual dress style towards a more tailored/upscale look.

Ironic, when you think about it.

Personally I like the more retro look. Its refreshing to see the Camilo, Poulter, Darren Clark, Miguel Angel Jimenez look.

Those guys have style IMO. But, on the other hand, there are players who sport the more traditional look and thats fine too.

Players have the right to tell a sponser what he/she wants to wear....I think most players would rather turn a buck than look cool. If you are sponsered by Titleist, you are going to be pressured to wear FJ shoes plain and simple. So if you decide to wear custom design shoes, ala Jimenez, you're probably going to lose money.

Its all about the money.

Quality has gone through the floor. I have ancient Ashworth and Lacoste shirts that look as good as new and 6 month old Nike / Ping shirts that are relegated to gardening and car wash duties. Very few classy shirts about and I f"£$%^n hate under armour and their nasty polyester tat. Give me double mercerised and pima cotton anyday.
Same as white belts - Bruno anyone?
Davis Love looks the part. Mickelson looks terrible, $25m a year and can't get a shirt or trousers to fit. Ernie always wears quality trousers, as does O'Meara. If I was on their money it would be Zegna or some other high class tailored, not polyester.

+1 on without sponsorship there wouldn't be pro sports. Probably because the money would be so little guys would be able to make a lot more money doing other things. Colin Cowherd on ESPN about a year ago or so said that it wouldn't be all that long before you saw corporate sponsors on jerseys, helmets, etc of pro teams and it looks like he may be right given that recently there was news of a WNBA that is going to have some corporate logo on their jersey.

I voted better myself because there are so many options out there now. You can be flashy like Camillo or you can be classy like Davis or you can be CRAZY like Daly, haha. Clothing is so much more technically advanced now that allows for more comfort and playability.

I think you could make the argument that you have people who do not have sponsors telling them how to dress, like Ryan Moore, that ruin golf style. Although John Daily is giving him a run for his money.

At the end of the day though, I don't really care all that much what pro golfers wear as long as they don't go out of their way to look like an idiot.

My "style" preference is Ben Hogan.. a simple elegance. I don't really think it's possible to have style when you've got a dozen logos plastered all over your body. When you're a walking billboard, style is out the window.. it's a choice to look like crap, but get paid a lot of money to do so. (But, I am more resistant to logos than most, and go out of my way to avoid wearing any.)

+1

I think this is one area where NIKE really succeeds. They dont allow any other logos. All of their players look clean and neat, Tiger, Lucas, Stewart, Justin, AK (although his pants could be fixed). They always look as good when the round ends as when it begins

I voted better. While there are those exceptions, i.e. Daly, Austin, Waldorf, players have stepped up the style for the better on tour. Nike has some great but simple looks and Phil's apparel, while he could stand to go a half-size to full-size larger in his shirts, is great. To the poster that said that all the guys look alike, they almost have to. Guys who try and look different get ridiculed all the time, i.e. Daly, Austin, Waldorf, heck even Camilo and Phil get bashed. So what is it? Look similar to the other guys or try and infuse different looks? I say go simple and classy.

I belive that the competition from varying comapnaies has bettered the style of dress on tour.
Greater variety in looks than ever from the bold of JL to the more conservative looks.
It will always border on the conservative side as that is the nature of the game, but by having so many comapnies competing for a aportion of the amrket we the consumers benefit.

As for "off the rack" ants...not too many on tour are wearing off the rack pants most are hand made by two or three well established "tour tailors'

We have benefitted as consumers tremendously from the input of the powers Nike and Addidas as they compete to provide the most comfortable attire to play the game in.
Outerwear in particular has made great strides in the past10 to 20 years.
who remebers those clumbersome weaterproof suiots we had to play in..rubberized sapcesiuts with limited mobility and no release of heat?

The lightweight clothing we now have for all seasons is a adirect result of competition between companies and thus sponsorship.
If it was not for competition between power hoses we would still be playing in theat horrible heavy stuff of the eighties...those companies that are unable to develop and keep up dissapear...no more la mode ....antiu\gua went and now back...even the likes of Ashworth went for a while as they were not willing to change material types.....

I think golf style has improved tremendously with the exception of giant bedazzled belt buckles (Kim) and the psuedo Aussy crocodile hunter cowboy hat (Shingo Kateyama).

We showed up recently at a course and walked to the tee, and the other twosome showed up soon there after. Two duffuses dressed like they were trying to be 20 again, cargo pants hanging down to their knees, shirts hanging out of their pants, making both look cheap and sloppy at best... no less both were nearing 40 yrs old. After a quick glance into their bag I knew right then what we were in for - and it came to past. by the way one of those idiots like to play his iphone music between shots when waiting; I finally said turn it off!

After posting I told the guys behind the desk - they are getting far to lackadaisical in their dress code for my tastes, so don't expect to see my money again. Courses have dress codes for reasons. Sadly with trendy youngsters behind the counter and a need for revenue to many courses won't reject slobs. If I am spending 75-150 to play golf and dress appropriately, I expect the course to adhere to their dress code.

It's not how much cloths cost it's how they are worn and if they meet the dress code. JD is not a good example because he's a rebellious bum.