Welcome to the debut edition of the Crosswalk, an occasional feature in which Joseph LaMagna and Brendan Porath toss out a take and then debate its merits.

Enjoy this feature? Consider subscribing to the Fried Egg Golf newsletter, and have this and other pieces just like it sent directly to your inbox for free.

Joseph LaMagna: Brendan, I think one of my biggest pet peeves (which I am guilty of myself) is statements of zero substance. For example, almost everyone loves to say “Golf needs to come back together” without offering any solution for bringing that to fruition. It’s a statement that is uncontroversial, sounds lovely in theory, and has zero substance behind it. Do we even know what each involved party is stipulating as part of a deal?

The latest hot-button statement of zero substance is that “Bryson should be competing in Paris”, along with its corollary: “Wyndham Clark shouldn’t be there.” Yes, Bryson DeChambeau is clearly playing better golf than Wyndham Clark right now. It isn’t close. But what was the qualification process supposed to look like that puts Bryson DeChambeau ahead of Wyndham? And when should an alternative process have been put into motion? I think it’s important to note that Olympic qualification, which is based on one’s Official World Golf Ranking, has been in place since golf returned at Rio in 2016, well before golf’s schism and the issue of access to OWGR points rose to prominence.

Looking ahead to the 2028 Olympics, I think the role of the OWGR in determining Olympics qualification should absolutely be scrutinized. But there does need to be an alternative proposed solution before doing away with OWGR. If you think each country should have a committee that picks its own golfers to represent their country, as Jon Rahm believes, fine!

But how is the number of players each country gets to send determined? Do you need some kind of metric that standardizes performance across tours to determine that? Who serves on each country’s committee? And are we sure changes made would result in a fairer system?

Additionally, I find the social media hate that’s being heaped upon Wyndham Clark to be a little bit disheartening. People seem to be champing at the bit for an opportunity to take shots at Wyndham, a player who has accomplished a great deal in the last 15 months but is struggling mightily right now. He’s not currently playing like a top player in the world, but he qualified for the Olympics fair and square. Whatever problems people have with the qualification system aren’t Wyndham’s doing, and it just seems odd how pervasively people seem to be celebrating the downturn of a promising career.

I don’t think it’s a stretch to suggest that much of the hate targeted at Wyndham stems from people noticing, screen-grabbing, and publicizing his Twitter likes, which at one point included content related to the storming of the U.S. Capitol on January 6th. Everything we do online is public information, including the “Father of two. Happily married. Love Golf” bio-ed guy who replies to Paige Spiranac’s “Want to play a round?” tweets. Public online activity is fair game in determining who resonates with us and who we want to cheer for, but it doesn’t seem particularly healthy to bash people online for political views they didn’t even voice themselves. That’s how we end up in a world where people are afraid to discuss anything with each other, and athletes turn into complete robots, trained by handlers who have seen what happens to other athletes who fall out of favor with the public.

Anyway, Brendan, that’s my take on what’s happening this week. There’s a legitimate case to be made that OWGR should be abandoned at the Olympics moving forward, and I’m all ears as to what an alternative solution would be. But “Bryson should have Wyndham’s spot!” lacks any substance without a feasible accompanying solution. It also just reflects both enthusiasm for Bryson and an eagerness for people to pile on Wyndham Clark, a player many people just don’t seem to like.

Brendan Porath: I think you’re overinflating the “Wyndham’s Twitter Likes” effect on all this. I’d honestly forgotten that happened. I think Wyndham is just in the crosshairs of Bryson backers and OWGR haters, two very loud and strident groups. He’s playing poor golf and right now makes for a target at which to launch those grievances. He also took a shot at LIV during the Masters, and that crowd doesn’t forget things like that.

So I think that’s the pile-on that’s happening. But another aspect of this is the extreme fascination with star players going through it. The interest is as high, sometimes higher, than when the star player plays well. Was there more interest in Justin Thomas’s struggle last year than there was for some of the stars who were playing well? And Jordan Spieth before that? This is not to put Wyndham Clark in that same class of star, but there is always a fascination with a recent major winner or other “great” player going through a prolonged struggle, and that adds to the scrutiny and pile-on. It’s hard to stay under the radar and work things out these days, especially when you’ve accomplished what Wyndham has in recent years. Stir in some motivated Bryson and LIV fans, and you have a potent cocktail, regardless of how you think the Olympics field should be built.

This piece originally appeared in the Fried Egg Golf newsletter. Subscribe for free and receive golf news and insight every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.