Editorial

31 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

USGTF or PGA? The truth may surprise you.

If you go to the Internet and search for “USGTF” and “PGA,” you inevitably will come across some discussion boards and blogs debating the pros and cons of each organization.  And, also inevitably, some of these opinions are rendered by PGA professionals, who, of course, tout their organization as the superior one when it comes to teaching.

Does perception meet fact?  Well, let’s look at the facts and see what they are.

The PGA has been around since 1916, with no competition whatsoever and the USGTF’s position has always been that the PGA is a fine organization.  Their members do a great job running the nation’s pro shops and serving the public.  They also promote themselves as teachers of the game.  But, it might surprise you to know that, prior to 1994, PGA professionals had NO REQUIREMENTS to learn anything about teaching, or even give a lesson, to become a Class A member.  That changed in 1994 when the PGA introduced the Golf Professional Training Program (GPTP), in direct response to what the USGTF was doing. Isn’t competition great! For the first time, PGA apprentices were required to learn something about teaching the game before acquiring Class A status.

The problem back then, and remaining to this day, is that the process the PGA goes through in “training” its teachers is woefully lacking. They give “apprentices” who pay a small fortune just to try and enter the golf business, a book written in the 1970s, give them a written test on it, and require them to present one lesson given on video for critique…and that’s it.  I’ve read the book.  While it does give adequate information, it is presented in such a scattershot way that it woefully lacks a coherent curriculum for learning how to teach.  Only experienced teachers can hope to glean any benefit from this book.

Another thing the PGA doesn’t make well-known is that apprentices are sent out to the lesson tee under the title “PGA apprentice” without, in many cases, having learned one thing about teaching golf!  And, when was the last time you saw a PGA professional on the lesson tee with his or her apprentice charge, observing the lesson?  Personally, I’ve seen it only once, and I’ve been around courses and driving ranges for a very long time.

PGA professionals will tell you that you can’t learn to teach golf in a week, that you have to have at least a couple of years of experience on the lesson tee before you can be considered “good.”  With their inadequate teacher training program being their only point of reference, it’s understandable that they would say that.  Combine that with the fact that almost no PGA apprentices are full-time teachers but give only a few lessons a week at the most, it’s no wonder that it takes most PGA pros several years before they can be considered competent to give a good lesson.

The fact of the matter is that no other sport besides golf (and more specifically, no other organization besides the PGA) requires its teachers to spend years doing other things besides teaching (such as running a pro shop) in order to gain full membership if all you want to do is teach.  Look at sports such as skiing, tennis, and swimming and diving, for example.  All of those sports certify teachers in one-week seminars, and no one is saying that’s inadequate.  Candidates are expected to bring a certain knowledge base and competency before they attend the certification seminars – much like the USGTF requires.

As founder and president of the USGTF, I have direct knowledge on this subject.  I was previously a ski teaching professional, certified through the Canadian Ski Instructors Alliance, as well as the Professional Ski Instructors Association of America and they produce some of the best ski teachers on the planet.  As owner of The Florida Golf School back in the 1980s (which evolved into America’s Favorite Golf Schools) and looking to hire qualified, personable instructors, I experienced first-hand how many PGA professionals were simply not good teachers.  In fact, about half the teachers I hired were not from the PGA, because at the time the PGA wasn’t producing enough competent members who were qualified to be full-time instructors.  I figured there had to be a better way.

I realized that if you learned to teach under the old system, it was possible to become a good teacher, but only after years of doing it. This explains the perception from PGA pros that this is the only way to become competent.  But, after you do become competent, you realize it shouldn’t have to take nearly that long.  You see teaching concepts that repeat themselves over and over, and these concepts can be taught in a short time frame, as long as there is a structured learning environment. We provide that.  Unfortunately, according to many of my PGA professional friends, the PGA to this day still doesn’t.

Fully-certified USGTF professionals have to go through 22 hours of academic training, 8 hours of playing tests, and 3 hours of academic testing in order to earn their status.  Our PGA detractors make it sound like you can just show up and we’ll give you certification, but that’s far from the case.

Our PGA detractors will also tell you that the USGTF credential is not credible in the field.  That would be news to the thousands of USGTF professionals who not only are working as head professionals at golf courses and driving ranges all across the country, but also in various other venues.  And, these same detractors may be surprised to find that not only are many PGA professionals sending their assistants to us every year to learn about teaching but Class A PGA professionals also attend our classes every year, too!  Of course, some of our members later enter the PGA program, but many of them retain their USGTF membership, giving us a fair amount of those with duel USGTF-PGA memberships.  I’m sure that surprises the detractors.  And, when you ask these detractors exactly what they know about the USGTF’s program in detail, they admit they don’t know anything about it specifically. They just feel threatened.

We at the USGTF are not so blind as we don’t see the many PGA professionals who are fine teachers in their own right.  We just happen to believe that our way of training those who simply want to teach the game to be a better, more efficient and more thorough way of doing it.

If the detractors were even only half-right, we wouldn’t still be here, but the fact that we are thriving shows they are wrong.  In 2013 we will celebrate 24 years of existence, and we show no signs of slowing down. That’s a credit, not only to those who work for the USGTF, but those who make the USGTF the fine organization that it is:  our members.

17 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Learning And Teaching Golf

There are two very general concepts when it comes to how to control the golf swing: (1) Control is achieved via the large muscles of the shoulders, chest, torso and hips, and (2) control is achieved via the smaller muscles connected to the hands and arms.

We hear all the time on Golf Channel about the large muscles of the chest controlling the turn and the hips producing power. While this might be the case for a few tour professionals, it certainly isn’t the whole story, and, in most cases, isn’t that much of the story. We hear a lot less about case (2) because it is no longer very fashionable. However, if an amateur golfer only uses the large muscles in (1), there will be little resembling a golf swing and not much in the way of clubhead speed. There has to be an arm swing as well, working in the correct sequence with the body turn. In effect, this means that (1) and (2) above need to be merged and coordinated in the correct sequence to power AND control the golf swing.

Most amateurs I see initiate the downswing by turning the shoulders as fast as possible, often coupled with a fast hip turn. This achieves a couple of things: (a) The club path AND plane are instantly changed to ensure an out-to-in path and steep swing plane; (b) it becomes impossible to create the correct swing sequencing; (c) maintaining the head position is very difficult, and (d) an extremely high left-to-right ball flight.

I am a firm believer that in order for someone to understand a change in their swing, they must be able to feel the difference between before and after an adjustment. This is not the same as describing someone as a “feel” player; rather, it is educating a student about what it feels like to use certain muscles. If someone can feel the difference, they can repeat the different motion. If used with certain key phrases, we can overcome the student’s difficulty in learning new body motions by verbal description alone.

For the player that uses their upper body as described above, I like to use a simple drill in order for them to feel an arm swing. With the feet and knees together, I have them hit balls by using just the arms. The swing has to be free and easy, with no tension in the upper body, and a light grip. Once they have attained some measure of balance and can swing the arms more freely, I have them increase the speed of their arms until they cannot go faster and remain balanced. It’s important to note I mean an arm swing, not a wristy or handsy swing. Once the student has a good feel for this drill, I introduce the concept of left forearm rotation during the golf swing. This will be the subject of my next editorial.

16 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Teachers should be the best learners

I believe that it is important that we always hunger to learn. Think of the many changes throughout our careers. I’ll begin with EQUIPMENT.

Over the years, golf instruction has been based on the equipment of the day. Much of the “old school” teaching was based on feel. The player had to harmonize with his equipment, and there were no guarantees of consistency from club to club. The way we swing the club today is a direct reflection of the equipment, which has been frequency-matched against much tighter controls.

Next, think about TECHNOLOGY. The use of video, launch monitors, TrackMan, and other advances have given us more information than ever before. At some point, though, a student will still need to know what causes their problems and what path they must take to find continued improvement. This is when the professional shows his or her true expertise.

Have PEOPLE changed? Certainly! We have always known that there are different types of learners (visual, verbal, tactile, etc.), but people ride the ebb and flow of our society. Students have been conditioned for instant gratification and the use of the shortcut. Kids, especially, have so many distractions that it is increasingly hard for them to dedicate to golf in the manner that creates golfers of the highest level.

I feel fortunate to be old enough to have used “wood” clubs, and have watched some of the all-time greats play. On the other hand, I am young enough to absorb information and make use of the many tools available to us as teachers. I try to learn about MYSELF, also. I don’t ever want to grow complacent. I realize we all change. I hope to always have the ability and willingness to look within and give an honest assessment.

We must be open to continued education. The instructor who can speak knowledgeably about the past, present, and future of the game of golf will always be valued.

There is no better way to promote this game than through instruction. We make the game healthy by introducing new golfers to the game and keeping golfers of all ages playing well and interested in the future. We have a great opportunity, as members of the USGTF, to be leaders in the field of instruction. It should be more than a slogan. It should be a firm commitment. 

Finally, I’m looking forward to going to the US Golf Teachers Cup in Nevada. The competition is great and the people are even better. I hope to see you there.

16 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Golf in the olympics

After a 112-year absence, golf returns to the Olympics in Rio in 2016. The push for golf to be returned as an Olympic sport has been a longtime goal of the golf establishment, but the success and effect on the game is a point of debate among many experts and the golf media. There are also many open questions about the format, course, and the competitors.

Several factors contributed to the acceptance of golf back into the Games, the most important being golf’s increasing international appeal and popularity. There is no question that this is also another after-effect of Tiger Woods’ dominance, popularity, and international appeal. The recent push for golf back into the Games started during the height of Woods’ perch as the king of golf.

There is no question that golf is also more accepted as a sport. Golf has also been embraced by minorities more than ever. The players look and appear to the public to be more athletic, mostly again thanks to Woods, who looks and trains like an NFL wide receiver. One could argue that golf is much more of an athletic test than table tennis, for example. For many decades, golf was not considered a sport. It was considered by the public and the sports world as a game for overweight smokers who drank too much. Many tour players during the post-World War II era did nothing but enhance this image. Who can forget the videos of Hogan, Nicklaus, and Palmer smoking on TV while playing?

The Olympics’ huge success as a TV event and its immense popularity among the general public should do nothing but help the game. A lot of the impact will be decided by two things: How much coverage NBC devotes to golf and who participates. Of courses the anticipated ratings compared to other traditional Olympics events will be tough for NBC to judge. It would a big gamble to put golf on in prime time. More than likely it will have a devoted channel like basketball had for the London Games. As evidenced by the poor ratings for the Nationwide and LPGA Tours would suggest, unless the best male players in the world participate, the number of viewers might be small.

Judging by the competition to be the architect of the yet-to-be-built golf course, one would think that there will be great interest among golf’s elite to participate. Gil Hanse beat out a who’s who list of modern-day architects, including Jack Nicklaus. Hanse is an American architect from Pennsylvania.

The exact format to pick the players has also not been determined. The Olympics have been moving to professionals in all sports for many years, so it is a good bet that we will see the usual faces. If the recent comments of the game’s top players are any indication, there will be strong competition among the top 100 players worldwide to represent their country.

Some purists are calling for the International Olympic Committee to require countries to send pure amateurs. While the idea is admirable, it would greatly lessen the interest and the ratings success. The excitement generated, the TV ratings, and the smoothness of the operation will determine if golf will be extended into future Games. From strictly a big-splash standpoint, I think golf would be wise to include the world’s best players for at least the Rio Games. We need to hear the media and the public in general talking about golf when the Games are happening. The competition for attention is overwhelming. Gymnastics, swimming, track, and beach volleyball rule the modern Olympics. For golf to get some attention, we need the best players participating.

Hopefully, we will get more details for the format and the plan to pick players in 2013. While the format and players are up in the air, and the golf course not having been built yet being a big question mark, personally I think the importance of having golf return to the Olympics is not debatable. It can do nothing but help propel the game to even greater heights from an international standpoint.

An Olympic golf hero winning a medal may create new interest among his country’s youth. It should also continue to further the perception of golf as a real athletic sport. If international minority players do well, it can also create more interest for golf in third-world countries and further erode golf’s image as a rich white man’s game. All of that can be nothing but good for the game.

16 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

The heart of matters

Another Ryder Cup has come and gone. It is difficult to quantify the reasons for the devastating defeat the American squad endured. There is no doubt fingers are being pointed in a variety of directions. Media pundits have countless theories, but the answer lies at the heart of matters.

When I first met Geoff Bryant, he spoke of his “modus operandi,” which was to have fun, and to this day he has never wavered from this philosophy.  Having fun is a pure concept, but it is the most basic fundamental and one that encompasses in its entirety why we play golf. This holds especially true for players who compete at the pinnacle of the sport, the Ryder Cup.  Not one of these men picked up a club in their respective youth without falling in love with the game. They didn’t work at the game; they practiced hard because they loved it and it was fun, as was the challenge, the competiveness, the camaraderie, the golf course environment, etc. They loved it.

The Ryder Cup embraces all of this, but its history – and more importantly its recent history – has had an impact on recent results.  When continental Europe was included in the matches in 1979 as a means to even out the results (the U.S. would seldom lose and would most often win the matches in a lopsided manner), little did anyone know at the time how the tide would turn. Little did anyone know that one figure that embraced these matches as his own would catapult future generations of European golfers to play with the same passion and heart, that regardless of the opposing team’s skill level, they would not be overcome.

Seve Ballesteros lives in Ryder Cup lore. Yes, we all know of his fiery competitive nature and passion, which he took to another level during the matches. However, he rounded up the Europeans as a family and took a loss by Europe as a personal attack to his family.  After three consecutive losses in 1979, 1981, and 1983, Seve and the Europeans broke through in 1985 as well as 1987 in Jack Nicklaus’ backyard, Muirfield Village – the latter, of course, being the first time the U.S. lost on home soil. The Ryder Cup would never be the same. Europe has now won

10 of the last 14 matches and 7 of the last 9.

Europe hates losing this event and loves winning it. They take it personally, and this comes from Seve. They love everything about it, but most of all they love the camaraderie, and Seve’s influences are never stronger than here.  More than anything, though, the Europeans remember watching Seve and his family celebrate, and is there anything more fun than celebrating with those closest to your heart? There was no way the Europeans were not going to win for Jose-Maria Olazabal, Seve’s surrogate younger brother.

A surrogate older brother on the American squad, someone the players want to win for and celebrate with, would help turn the tide – someone who knows how to have fun and make it fun, but more importantly, someone who can turn the American squad into a family, a family where the heart is.

Can anyone say Freddie Couples?

16 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Is it time for the Ryder Cup to change its format again?

Prior to 1979, the Ryder Cup was not a competitive event and the public had little interest in it, save for some die-hard golf fans in Great Britain and Ireland.  All of that changed that year, when Jack Nicklaus’ suggestion to Lord Darby for GB & I to include all of continental Europe was put into action.

The first three editions of the USA vs. Europe did not pay immediate dividends, as the US squad triumphed.  In 1985, Europe won on home soil for the first time, and in 1987 the unthinkable happened – the US lost at home. Far from being catastrophic, at the time it was seen as a healthy development for the matches, because it created interest in 1989 that the matches had never before seen.

Fast-forward to the year 2012, and the Europeans’ record since 1985 is 9-4-1, including an astounding 6-1 since 2001.  The Europeans have turned the tables, and how!

The problem is that the Cup matches are threatening to return to the pre-1979 days when they simply weren’t competitive.  You may ask, how can this be? The United States still produces the best golfers in the world in terms of depth.  While this is true when considering individual countries, it is not true if you combine all of Europe.  Yes, I know the Official World Ranking says otherwise, but that system is very flawed in my opinion (and is another issue for another time).

This will probably sound like sour grapes to some, but consider this:  It took eight…yes, eight…countries to beat the US this year.  Now, one might argue, “Well, of course!  It’s Europe vs. the USA!”  But consider this:  In what other sport does Europe gang up against the USA by forming a continental team?  None that I can think of.

The best basketball players in the world are from the USA, and no other country can beat us when we put our minds to it.  You don’t see Europe forming a team with Germany’s Dirk Nowitzki, France’s Tony Parker, England’s Luol Deng, etc., to compete against us.  World Cup Soccer?  It’s country vs. country.  Yet, in golf, it’s somehow okay for Europe to gang up on us.

I’m not necessarily arguing for a return of the USA vs. GB & I, but if you think about it, the golfing world is far away from where it was in 1979. Back then, GB & I simply had no depth.  Today, that can’t be argued.  A potential squad could be Rory McIlroy, Darren Clarke, and Graeme McDowell (Northern Ireland); Padraig Harrington (Ireland); Luke Donald, Justin Rose, Paul Casey, Simon Dyson, Ian Poulter, and Lee Westwood (England); Paul Lawrie and Martin Laird (Scotland).

Those 12 are extremely formidable and would give the USA a huge tussle, and which team would be favored would be very much up in the air.

The downside, of course, is interest in continental Europe would be destroyed.  That downside is too much to overcome in returning to USA vs. GB & I.  A potential solution might be to limit Europe to two continental players.

The other solution would be for the USA to simply play better and produce better players.  Since changing the composition of the European squad will probably not happen, playing better remains the only solution for the USA at this time.

But let’s be honest – we’ve tried everything and it’s not working.  Europe is simply producing better players as time goes on, and I’m going to boldly say unless Europe’s team composition is somehow weakened, Team USA will be consistent losers for years to come.  Such dominance is bound to diminish interest in the USA – once unthinkable – and perhaps in Europe as well.

Something needs to be done eventually, but the question is, will it?  Time will tell.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Maybe a little reverse psychology should be used to grow the game

Every year a golf organization comes up with some type of initiative whose intent is to grow the game of golf. This year it is Golf 2.0. Last year was Play it Forward. We have also had Play Golf America, Link up to Golf, Get Golf Ready, and a myriad of other catch-phrase programs. Yet, the number of people playing golf has declined over the past five years. Maybe this type of approach is wrong. There is an old saying regarding golf that goes “less is more.”  Maybe that approach should be applied to marketing the game. Instead of trying to make it easier for people to take up golf, perhaps a forbidden-fruit philosophy or grass-is-greener on the other side mentality is the way to go.

I just read a terrific article by good friend Bill Fields in Golfweek Magazine about how he rediscovered his love for playing golf this year. In it, he wrote some very pertinent words to the point: “Golf requires effort. Effort requires commitment.” In none of the initiatives trying to drive people into the game is there any mention of effort and commitment. In many European countries, people have to demonstrate a certain skill level before they are allowed to play an actual round of golf. Those that I have met appreciate and respect the game much more and stay with it.

Now, it is unlikely such a system would be popular here in America, where anyone with a green dollar believes they are entitled to play, even if they don’t know a putter from a ball retriever. I am not saying we should make it difficult for people to take up golf, but maybe just put more emphasis on finding those willing to make the commitment necessary to really become enamored with the game. Those are the people that will stay with it and keep playing for years to come.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Fedex cup good but, but it can be made great

Several years ago, the PGA Tour instituted the FedEx Cup to give an exclamation point to the end of the season.  The Cup was based on the NASCAR system, which determines the champion of that racing circuit.  The Cup has done some of what it’s supposed to do, namely keep fan interest alive and provide some drama at a time when interest in professional golf starts to wane.

Still, in 2012, the FedEx Cup has somewhat of an identity crisis:  What, exactly, is it supposed to determine?  The major championships all have their long-established niches, and the Player of the Year may well be someone other than the FedEx Cup champion.  Contrast that to other sports, where there is a clear-cut champion at the end of each season.  The NASCAR Chase winner is THE champion; there is no debate.  Same goes for the World Series, Super Bowl, Stanley Cup, and NBA Finals winners.  But winning the FedEx Cup means…?

Given golf’s somewhat random nature, where virtually anyone can win in any given week, it doesn’t make much sense that someone can come from 26th position, as Bill Haas did a year ago, and claim the overall championship. Sure, major championships are decided by who plays well in that given week, but the FedEx Cup is billed as a “season-long” event.  Here is a proposed fix to make the “season-long” part more relevant, but with elements of a playoff that keeps some unpredictability.

Right now, points in the three “playoff” events (Barclay’s, Deutsche Bank, and BMW) are quintupled (5 times normal points).  The points are re-set for the Tour Championship.  While this makes the playoffs relevant, it over-rewards those who do well in the playoffs.  Yes, we know other sports do the same thing, but remember, the FedEx Cup is supposed to be season-long.  We propose a more modest doubling of the points for the first three events, and then tripling them for the Tour Championship with no pre-tournament re-set.

Remember the playoff between Haas and Hunter Mahan last year for all the marbles?  How would you like to have that every year?  Here’s where it can get interesting.  After the Tour Championship, take the top four in points and have them engage in a series of three sudden-death playoffs:  #4 vs. #3, the winner to face #2, and the winner of that match to face #1.  The winner of the Tour Championship, if not in the top four, would automatically become the #4 seed, bumping whoever was there.

The integrity of the regular season would be maintained to a higher degree, and yet the excitement of the post-season would be in play, too, to a degree never before seen.  This formula would give golf fans really something to talk about during football season.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Diversify your life’s portfolio to increase your happiness and productivity

Brandt Snedecker won the 2012 Tour Championship as well as the FedEx Cup for a whopping $11.4 million. When we see his victory from a distance, we might come to believe it was his ability to hit fairways and fantastic putting that made the difference (Brandt was #1 for both in this tournament). I say it is Brandt’s attitude which makes him a champion.

I had the wonderful opportunity to work with Brandt when he played at Vanderbilt University.  My impressions of him were that he was quite insightful and bright, well beyond his years.

When interviewed at the Tour Championship this past week, Brandt stated that he has learned a powerful lesson as he got older:  Having balance in his life gave him a better golf game. Brandt mentioned that he has hit more than 1 million golf balls, and he does not have to practice so much anymore. He also said he works out in the gym much less. However, he does spend more time with his family (he has a young daughter, with another child on the way). This balanced perspective has not only helped with his mental well-being, but also, this new perspective has supercharged his game.

When we diversify and have more balance in our lives, we reduce our stress levels. Here is an analogy:  You have a variety of ego egg baskets. But, if you place all your ego eggs into only one basket, there is more pressure to perform well at that one activity to get those self-esteem points. For Brandt, he diversified his baskets. With greater balance in his life, the pressure is diminished for Brandt to always perform well, and as a result, he plays better in competition.

The ironic point of balance is that it increases your production by taking time away. When you have greater balance, you will have less stress and more energy to produce at higher levels for longer periods of time.

Unfortunately, many people in the business world do not see the irony of balance. They believe it is a badge of honor to work 80 hours a week and never take a timeout or go on vacation. Lee Iacocca, of Chrysler fame, has said, “I have seen many executives who have said with pride to me, “Boy, I worked so hard last year that I did not even take a vacation.” To Iacocca, that is foolish thinking. Taking a vacation and having balance is essential to your overall well- being in business.

Besides hurting your mental health, being uni-dimensional in your life can contribute to burnout. Sports psychologists have discovered that athletes who are uni-dimensional (only played one sport) suffered from greater burnout than those athletes who are multi-dimensional (played a variety of sports).

When all your ego eggs are in one basket, they can crack more easily. The same principle applies to your life.

Are you feeling drained and tired as a golf teacher? Are you on the way to burnout? Are you suffering from being uni-dimensional?

As a golf teaching professional, it is easy to overwork. When the lessons are there in this tough economy, you need to take them – right?  I would say be careful. While money in the pocket is always great, your longevity in this business is also essential. You must protect your overall well-being.  As Lee Iacocca mentioned, working 80 hours is not the best way to run a business.

Like Brandt, add to your balance sheet by diversifying your life’s portfolio. Add meaningful and fulfilling activities to your day. Make sure you play enough golf and spend time with your family. Diversify and you will greatly accrue in pleasure as well as productivity.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Equipment and balls have not changed the game significantly… oh, really?

The USGA continues to say that equipment and ball improvements have had little effect on how the game is played. Are you kidding me? If that were the case, then why is it they are adding 500 yards to the Merion Golf Club for next year’s US Open? The original layout of the East Course measured just less than 6,500 yards. For the Open next year, it will be stretched to a whisker under 7,000 yards. I’m sure they would have made it longer if there was room. Merion is situated on a mere 128 acres. As it is, one tee is being moved almost off the golf course for added length.

The fact of the matter is modern equipment and balls have significantly altered how the game is played. If not, then why the need to redesign or lengthen all the courses that national championships are played on? The PGA Championship played at 7,676 yards. This year’s Open included par-four holes of more than 500 yards. The average golf course length in the 1960s was 6,400 yards. It is rare these days to see tournaments played at under 7,000 yards. The advances in technology are the reason. Let’s just be honest about it. I’m not passing judgment, good or bad, but to try to convince people that nothing has changed is ridiculous.