Shotgun Start: Filling Tiger void, Kim's future, groovy grooves - Golf, PGA Tour - CBSSports.com Leaderboard, Schedules, Stats

1. PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem asserted last week that the absence of Tiger Woods creates an "opportunity" for other players to make a splash and create an identity in his absence. While that's indisputably true, will anybody other than hardcore golf fans notice who's winning? If so, then what's the net gain, if any?
Steve Elling	Ross Devonport
Not much that I envision, and that's an optimistic view. Facts are facts, and since we technically work for a network, I feel obligated to point out TV ratings are at least half-again higher when Woods is in the weekend mix. Without him, golf draws mostly hardcore fans who watch regardless of the field. True aficionados had heard about Anthony Kim before he won Sunday at the AT&T National, so what's the upside in a world without Woody? At least there's the chance players will collect positive Sunday experience with Woods not hogging all the trophies, and that could bode well down the road for the development of rivalries and the like. Beyond that, calling this addition by subtraction is stretching it.	If you went out on the street today and asked 100 people who Anthony Kim is, I think maybe three people would be able to answer you correctly. Unless he or someone like Kenny Perry goes on a massive run and wins both of the final two majors, a couple of FedEx Cup events and the $10 million prize, or however much it is these days, no one outside of the sport will notice. As you say, the only people that are benefiting from Woods' absence are the guys winning the bigger tournaments, but as the old saying goes, if a tree falls in a forest and no one is there, does it make a sound? Anyway, we all know Finchem is a little nuts.

2. It's crystal-ball time. At 23, Los Angeles-born Anthony Kim already has as many PGA Tour victories this season as any other American player currently under age 30 has managed in their career. Where do you see this guy in five years?
Steve Elling	Ross Devonport
For years, a player came along every decade to take over as top dog. Arnie was replaced by Jack who was supplanted by Tom Watson all in 10-year intervals. Kim is nine years younger than Woods, so the timing is close. Other 20-somethings have had success, including international stars Sergio Garcia and Adam Scott, and there's an emerging crop of under-30 U.S. players with multiple wins (J.B. Holmes, Sean O'Hair, Charles Howell, D.J. Trahan). There are reasons to believe Kim will be the most memorable. He can putt, a shortcoming of nearly every other sub-30 player you can name. And he has charisma, plus a good bit of pride and ego. Five years down the road, with major winners Mickelson, Els and Furyk well into their 40s, Kim easily projects as a top-10 player.	Kim is gonna be good -- very good. I was pimping him all last year in my Fantasy Golf column because I was looking at his stats and knew he was due for a victory sooner rather than later. This year he hasn't failed to impress, and his title at the Wachovia was over a stellar field, so it was no fluke by any means. He does have that cocky side to him that Tiger used to have when he was starting to make noise on tour, and all of the legendary players have had a little of that in them. In five years, I can see him with at least two major titles and as the next challenger to Tiger's throne, even though he'll probably fall just short of deposing Mr. Woods at the top spot.

3. PGA Tour veteran Tom Pernice criticized Finchem and the tour last week for not taking a lead role in forcing the elimination of U-grooves on irons, saying the tour should consider unilaterally ordering players to make the change. The game's global rules-makers continue to drag their feet, which appears a couple of years away at best. Do either of you have an opinion on whether a return to V-grooves will improve the game?
Steve Elling	Ross Devonport
Like many other players, Pernice has grown tired of watching players bash drivers 330 yards with only a passing thought as to whether they land in the fairway or not. With the toothier U-grooves, players can still spin the ball enough out of the rough to get close to the flag. (Exhibit A: Woods is No. 157 in driving accuracy and No. 3 in greens in regulation). Taking some of the spin off the ball would place a greater premium on driving the ball in the fairway, which has become a secondary art. The rules-makers at the U.S. Golf Association and the Royal & Ancient need to get this change on the books as soon as possible. Bomb-and-gouge, dump-and-chase golf places too much emphasis on strength and not enough on tactics and execution.	I'm no groove expert, in golf or on the dance floor, but from hearing all the hubbub about the U-grooves, I'm assuming there is scientific evidence to back up the claim that they produce more spin. But instead of making all the players change their equipment, wouldn't it just be a hell of a lot easier to grow the rough a little longer on the courses? I swear these guys have to get really wild off the tee just to find some grass where they can't see the top of their ball. Just watch next week at Birkdale when these guys start spraying it with their drivers -- they'll be wishing they hadn't when they're wading through knee-high spinach to look for their ball and then spraining ligaments when they try and hack it out sideways back to the fairway. No rule changes, just put those mowers away!