Tim Finchem was masterful in the way that he managed to quell the questions surrounding a potential delay in implementing the USGA's Condition of Competition about grooves for 2010.  He understood the situation, negotiated with player Policy Board members, and ultimately was allowed to make the call on his own.  The regulations and the date stand.

Now, as Rex Hoggard notes in Making the Cut column, there is chatter of a PGA Tour Players Union.

"If Tim wanted a union, he’s got one now," said one player who noted that a healthy cross section of the Tour was in favor of delaying the rule one year.

That's all well and good, but this is not the first time that players have started bemoaning their "independent contractor" status and sought to unionize.  After the FBR Open last year, Bob Verdi's game story contained this Tim Herron quote:

Concluded Tim Herron, "We need an association." He added, however, that the means toward that end requires a certain consensus among independent contractors with differing agendas. Meanwhile, at least one tour player has contacted a legal eagle about representing a group of the disenchanted.

Last year, the union talk was in response to the new PGA Tour cut rule and the implementation of drug testing that was set for July 1, 2008.  In both of those instances, not only did the Tour go through with implementing those rules, but they are still in place today.

The Tour did modify rule 78 to allow players who made the 36 hole cut to play the third round, then leading to a 54 hole cut to the lowest 70 players.  And, the Tour is yet to record a positive test for performance enhancing drugs (PEDs), though Finchem has noted that they have found other drugs that were considered "conduct unbecoming" of a Tour pro.

In other words, the call for a players union is a crutch for the rank-and-file players on the Tour that have special issues with which they take exception with the Tour.  Now, we can add grooves regulations to the list. 

The issues with an attempt to unionize are multi-faceted.  First, there is very little concensus on Tour issues among all of the players.  There are pockets of resistence to each of these particular issues.  Many others simply don't care enough to complain.  They are more of a nusiance than a dealbreaker.

Second, there are dire consequences to unionizing and surrendering the notion of being an "independent contractor."  A Tour union would have to negotiate a variety of terms with Finchem and his staff.  That would include a minimum number of tournaments, payout structures, membership rules, field and schedule structures.  On almost every issue, a Tour union would likely lose against Finchem. 

Perhaps more than losing to Finchem, a players union would likely not boast Tiger Woods or Phil Mickelson as members.  They may be the two players that most benefit from being "independent contractors."  Without the support of those two players - and Tiger vehemently supports the grooves regulation - a Tour union is nothing but a good quote.

Just ask Danny Edwards.