It has been five months since former CPGA executive director Steve Carroll left the organization (ending up with the RCGA, strangely enough), and while no one has ever accused the CPGA of moving quickly, the group finally announced they’ve hired someone. It is an internal hire, with Gary Bernard taking the gig after meetings among the CPGA board in Florida. Seems to me the press release wants to make it clear that while this was an internal hire, it wasn’t a done deal from the start. At least that’s the only way I can explain the wording in the lead:
After a lengthy search and intense deliberation, the Canadian PGA announced today that Gary Bernard has been named the Associations new Executive Director. The executive search process conducted with McKinley Solutions Inc., a leader in the corporate hiring world, began in early November and culminated in todays announcement.
It gives me great pleasure to announce to our membership that Gary Bernard has been selected as the Canadian PGAs next Executive Director, said Lindon Garron, President of the Canadian PGA. Gary has always acted in the best interests of the Canadian PGA Members and his intimate knowledge of our Association will ensure that current initiatives will continue in a seamless manner. Canadian PGA Director of Education since 2004 and currently acting in the Interim Executive Director role since October, Gary has clearly demonstrated that he is the right person at the right time for this pivotal position.
What makes him the “right person?” The press release is a little vague, but it sounds like it comes down to this:
[Bernard] holds valuable knowledge of the Canadian PGA and its partners within the World PGA Alliance, as well as with our industry partners in Canada. He has excelled inside and outside of the Canadian PGA and we are confident that he is the right candidate to set the present and future direction of our sport and our organization.
Certainly Bernard has done a lot in the world of golf, most recently as director of education (or at least that’s what the CPGA’s website had him listed as). He served as interim ED after Carroll departed. How the CPGA is involved with the RCGA, especially in the “Golf Canada” initiative, as well as what it does with events like the CPGA Championship, will define Bernard’s tenure in the short term. I’ve only ever interviewed Bernard once, but he seemed like a decent chap. That said, pointing the CPGA in a cohesive, specific direction going forward is going to be a challenge.
A bestselling author and award-winning columnist, Robert Thompson has been writing about business and sports, and particularly golf, for almost two decades. His reporting and commentary on golf has appeared in 
I have met Gary several times and like you say Robert he is a “decent guy”. But the right guy to lead the CPGA? Not even close. He doesn’t have the business sense or the connections to fulfill what is needed in this position. I’m afraid this appointment is a mistake that will show itself very quickly.
Hey Mr. Henry Something and Brian see what I mean? Here is an example of a comment from Mr. Fellow CPGA Pro that has little or no credibility unless he attaches his name to it. Im embarrassed to have a Canadian PGA Professional make a comment like this with a bag over his head. Stand up and be counted! BTW Gary Bernard is the right guy at the right time he gets it!
Ive known Gary for many years. He is knowledgeable, hard working and well respected within the golf industry.
I do not know who the other candidates were, but in my opinion, the CPGA made a good choice.
Ken:
I disagree with your assertion that people should identify themselves on this site (obviously as I am one of the people who has a handle…). There are valid reasons why people choose to use a handle versus their name as Brian articulated in an earlier post.
I agree with you that readers should evaluate a post’s content but having a name behind a comment is only one of several methods to do so. Posters can also create credibility with sound analysis and facts to back up their opinion or a well articulated argument for a specific position.
Requiring a person’s name on a posting in order to attach credibility to a post is simplistic. I believe one should evaluate comments regardless of the author. If an opinion is offered without supporting evidence, challenge the argument not the author. The oldest, easiest, and most manipulated response in a discussion is to discredit the person making the opinion. Challenge the thinking not the person doing the thinking…
Having said the above, certain people with a reputation are granted latitude (and credibility) in making opinions. For example Alan Greenspan can make an opinion on economic policy that would have a very different impact than a small time economic professor from a small college. But it is the author’s choice as to whether he or she wishes to leverage that reputation…not a requirement from the people who are on the receiving end of the opinion.
Dear Weekend Enthusiast…thank you for setting me straight. Your comments are well put and I respect your position as I do Brian’s. I have entered your world of no accountability or liability for your remarks and for that I apologise. It makes no sense for me to get into a pissing match with a blindfold on! Enjoy reading Robert as I do… agreeing or disagreeing!
What the hell is going on here??? You mean to say that someone can pretend to be me? This is crazy
The CPGA is a mediocre organization at best. Like many organizations it is held back by beraucratic bull @#$%.
Ken, Leave my name? Sorry not going to happen. The interent is not the place to place your name. But I will reveal myself to you my friend!!!
Dear “cpga”-
The CPGA is a mediocre “organization” at best? Well… hopefully your opinion and insight is more rounded than your horrible spelling skills…