John McEnroe SENIOR wants to be head of the ATP

[Fee]

http://tennisworld.typepad.com/tennisworld/2008/08/mornin-everyone.html

Lots of words from Peter Bodo, then this letter from Senior Mac:

ATP Tour Chairman

Gentlemen: As you all probably know, I am the father of John, Mark (my “normal son,” the lawyer) and Patrick McEnroe. I have met some of you at various tournaments, Davis Cup ties, etc.

To get promptly to the point, I am interested in succeeding Etienne de Villiers as Chairman of ATP Tour, Inc. I am strongly of the view that the best interests of men players, particularly the top ranked players, have been very badly served by M. de Villiers, to put it mildly, and by his predecessors.

The rules for participation on the Tour are an abomination. My own view is that NO player should be required to play in ANY TOURNAMENT if he doesn’t wish so to do. Also, as long as a player’s ranking entitles him to entry, he should be able to enter any tournament without requiring a minimum of tournaments each year. This is a position I have held for over thirty years.

You are all too young to remember that, in the early 1980s, I represented the “quintessential quintet” (Borg, Connors, Gerulaitis, McEnroe (John) and Vilas), in negotiations with the Men’s International Professional Tennis Council (“MIPTC”) over newly proposed rules. Those rules included proposed "hard designations" by the MIPTC for the top hundred players on the ATP computer. You will not be surprised that the QQ were not happy with that proposal. We were able to negotiate an arrangement whereby the QQ and the Council agreed in advance what the "designations" would be.

I am aware that the Mercedes-Benz international sponsorship of the Tour ends at the end of this year and will not be renewed. As your new Chairman, it would be a major priority of mine zealously to work to find a new sponsor. Also, I would work diligently to find opportunities to monetize various aspects of the Tour in order to ensure its financial foundation is solid.

Additionally, I have represented John and Patrick in connection with all of their legal needs. This includes all of their broadcasting contracts with BBC, NBC, CBS, ESPN, Tennis Channel and Australia’s Channel 7, agreements with respect to special events, endorsement agreements with Nike, Dunlop, Wilson, Snauwert, Sergio Tacchini, etc., not to mention a myriad of endorsements for companies not directly involved with tennis, book contracts and so on. I know and have interfaced with all the constituencies in professional tennis for many years.

Finally, I am currently Of Counsel to the internationally recognized law firm, Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton and Garrison LLP, where I practiced commercial law since 1967. From 1974 through 2000, I was a partner in the Corporate Department.

I would be most pleased to meet in person at a convenient time and venue (the US Open site?) with any or all of you, your agents and anyone else you deem appropriate. Please feel free to call or e-mail me with any questions, comments or suggestions you may have. Thank you all in advance for your consideration of this proposal.

Sincerely,
John P. McEnroe


Followed by many more words by Peter Bodo that made the article too long to post here. The most important thing is that John Sr wants to be the head of the ATP. Intriguing...

 

[superstition]

Only if he starts getting the ball rolling on more grass venues.

 

[Fedexeon]

I hope he won't become the next president. While it may seem tough for the players to be forced to play a certain tournaments, it is actually a must for the tour to succeed. The reason we all like Masters Series is because we know that the top players will surely participate in them....

Look at what happen to WTA Tier 1 event... The top players like Sharapova, Williams sisters don't even give a damn to them... They can just quit and withdraw whenever they feel like doing so... While Masters Series such as Rome, Cincinnati and Rogers Masters have huge success because players like Federer, Nadal, Djokovic all take place in them...

I think its a wise move to continue mandatory participation for all Masters Series events.

 

[shawn1122]

I hope he won't become the next president. While it may seem tough for the players to be forced to play a certain tournaments, it is actually a must for the tour to succeed. The reason we all like Masters Series is because we know that the top players will surely participate in them....

Look at what happen to WTA Tier 1 event... The top players like Sharapova, Williams sisters don't even give a damn to them... They can just quit and withdraw whenever they feel like doing so... While Masters Series such as Rome, Cincinnati and Rogers Masters have huge success because players like Federer, Nadal, Djokovic all take place in them...

I think its a wise move to continue mandatory participation for all Masters Series events.

This is very true, I'd be lucky to see a few of the top ten players when the womens rogers cup comes to toronto. But, when the mens tournament comes I know I'll get to see all the top players and so its very exciting and there is a lot more hype. There is no way in hell I'd spend money on tickets to see lower ranked players when the womens tournament is here, but when the mens tournament is here I go almost everyday. That would definitely change if the top players were not required to come, I wouldn't throw my money around so easily to see lower ranked players. Its a matter of keeping the fans happy and keeping the excitement up. If players got to pick and choose, then the top players would only show up to some and the only tournaments that would be worth watching would be the grand slams, and that would absolutely suck.

I'm not saying this guy isn't qualified, just saying I sure as hell don't agree with him on the mandatory participation issue.

 

[leonidas1982]

The points gained should be enough of an incentive.

 

[ClarkC]

The points gained should be enough of an incentive.

But that is already how it works. Participation is not really mandatory, but the ATP rankings have been structured so that, if you are healthy, you play or get zero points and no other tournament can be substituted.

How are the points incentives of the WTA Tier 1 events working out? Not too well, huh? Maybe we can learn from that.

Read the fourth comment, from Tennis Fan, posted after the linked article.

 

[Sean Dugan]

J Mac Sr is 73. (J Mac Jr turns 50 in February, 2009.) Seems a bit too old for the job. Also his experience is confined to being a legal counsel. Being well qualified to review a contract doesn't position one to head the ATP. The ATP needs a marketing genius much more than a lawyer if revenue expansion is the goal.

If there is an ex-tour player with substantial executive experience that might be a good choice. Not sure if there is such a person. Otherwise, just find someone who has enough executive experience in a similar type of enterprise (i.e., the PGA) to successfully manage the ATP. As far as mandatory participation in events, it seems if any player doesn't want to play in a given event, he can simply claim an injury and be excused. That seems to happen fairly frequently under the current structure.

The ATP season is at least a month too long and the tour, as currently structured, supports far too many marginal players. If the ATP focused on the elite players, rid itself of marginal events or made them challenger level, the top 50 players could make as much or more money playing far fewer events. And if one attended an event, one would be guaranteed to see two top players, say top 50, instead of the usual scenario of a top player playing an unknown ranked 147 or two relative unknowns playing each other as often happens in the early rounds. For instance, I could have lived without seeing George Bastl play Fernando Meligini or Sampras (who appeared bored) overwhelm Jonathan Stark. Hewitt v Agassi was a great match though when they were 1 and 2 respectively. A lot less empty seats as well.

It seems to me that the elite players are forced to subsidize the rest of the pack. No one tunes in to see the 200th ranked man play (i.e. like the guy Fed played in the first round of the Open.) That match was very lame and predictably so. Now 200 against 189 might be a very entertaining match at a small venue Challenger tournament.