Phil Mickelson needs to offer an explanation. Not necessarily a confession, but an explanation as to why his name keeps coming up in relation to federal investigations of unsavory people.
Last year, the five-time major winner and one of the PGA Tour’s most popular players was connected to a federal investigation of insider trading. He was cleared of any wrongdoing and the issue was largely forgotten until Monday. That’s when an ESPN report cited court documents and sources linking Mickelson to an illegal gambling operation which accepted and placed bets on sporting events.
Mickelson, according to the report, is alleged to have transferred nearly $3 million to an intermediary of an offshore gambling operation. Gregory Silveira, of La Quinta, Calif., pleaded guilty to three counts of money laundering of funds from an unnamed “gambling client” between February 2010 and February 2013.
Mickelson was not named in court documents, but according to ESPN, sources familiar with the case indicated Mickelson is the “gambling client.”
Mickelson isn’t expected to be charged with a crime. Still, guilt by association is starting to cast a darkening cloud over Mickelson’s image. If Mickelson wants to lose $3 million gambling, it’s his American right to do so. But this association with a money launderer doesn’t feel right for someone whose endorsement deals are largely built around his wholesome image. Mickelson needs to explain why we shouldn’t think the worst.
No one has been better for golf over the last two decades than Mickelson. Now 45, he became a sympathetic figure during the rise of Tiger Woods as Mickelson failed to win any of golf’s major championships until the 2004 Masters. He has since won the 2006 and 2010 Masters along with the 2005 PGA Championship and the 2013 British Open. He has finished second in the US Open a record six times.
But while Woods was aloof, Mickelson embraced his galleries. He was consistently accommodating to media, and no athlete was admired more than Mickelson when he stood by his courageous wife, Amy, and his mother during their public battles with breast cancer.
While newcomers like 2015 Masters and US Open champion Jordan Spieth and four-time major winner Rory McIlroy have emerged as the new generation of golf stars, Mickelson’s role as the elder statesman will be important as his career moves into his senior years. He will be revered the way aging legends Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer are today if he protects his image.
It is well-known Mickelson doesn’t mind a good money match on the course, and in past years his interest in wagering on NFL games was part of his appeal. It was and continues to be mostly good-natured stuff. But there were also unsubstantiated rumors his move from Titlelist to Callaway in 2004 was instigated by Callaway paying off Mickelson’s gambling debts, and there were crazy rumors of Mickelson losing $200,000 during a recent round with members at Augusta National.
It’s hard to know what’s truth and what’s fiction, which is why we need to hear from Phil. If the $3 million was nothing more than some harmless recreation, then who are we to judge? He has won more than $75 million during his career on the PGA Tour, and annually earns more than $40 million in endorsements. He is known to be generous and charitable. He’s also not the first highly paid professional athlete to lose millions gambling and he won’t be the last. If anything, Mickelson should at least find better gambling partners or stick to Las Vegas, where it’s legal and the state could use the revenue. Otherwise, it’s hard to shake the feeling that one of golf’s biggest stars might be hurting his legacy.
Woods will be forever scarred by his sex scandal, made more infamous because he was packaged as the ideal father-husband-athlete. Mickelson has that image, too. But he needs to explain why we shouldn’t think otherwise.