After losing LPGA card, Maria Fassi learned how to look inward and stop self-sabotaging
After losing LPGA card, Maria Fassi learned how to look inward and stop self-sabotaging
Maria Fassi hit rock bottom last year when she lost her LPGA card. Then came the hard conversations – with herself and her team.
"I think I was sabotaging myself a lot," said Fassi ahead of the 2025 Meijer LPGA Classic.
Six years ago, the powerful Mexican player was on top of the world. She didn't win the Augusta National Women's Amateur but became a fan favorite and overnight star after finishing runner-up to Jennifer Kupcho. A month later, she won the NCAA championship in front of a home crowd in Arkansas and kicked off a professional career that many thought might change the tour.
Perhaps it's not surprisingly to learn then, that the now 27-year-old put a lot of pressure on herself.
Fassi now finds herself in Grand Rapids, Michigan, playing on a sponsor exemption due in part to the actions of Brittany Lincicome. After the two-time major winner accepted a sponsor exemption of her own to the Meijer, she learned from her friend and former caddie Michelle Simpson that Fassi wasn't in the field. (Simpson now loops for Fassi.) Lincicome realized that she could get in the field using her status as a past champion and didn't need the exemption. She called the tour to make the change and offer a suggestion.
"Her and my caddie are very good friends and they were just trying to help me out," said Fassi. "I know I needed a little more this year, the extra help, and it's nice to know that I don't only get it from sponsors, but from fellow competitors and players."
The Meijer mark Fassi's fifth LPGA start to the season, and while the scores aren't yet where she'd like them, she's starting to regain some of her confidence.
Fassi credited her team for helping to hold herself accountable.
For example, when she'd practice last fall, she might be at the golf course for several hours, but wasn't putting in the work in the right places. Her team got right to the point: Stop wasting time. Identify what needs to improve and get to work.
"Drills are very boring," Fassi said. "It was not what I wanted to do, but it was what I had to do.
"You know, that's more on the golf side. On the mental side, just like stopped lying to myself about things that I was not doing and I was, again, lying to myself, saying that I did do them or something like that. Instead be like OK, you can't expect for something different if you're continuing to go down the same hole ... it was painful looking inward because there was a lot of things I didn't like to see, and I was very angry with myself."
But the hard process was worth it, and on the other side, one of the most naturally talented athletes on tour found a way to enjoy the game again.
"I'm just proud that I'm showing up for myself and showing up for my team in a positive way," said Fassi, "and not kind of shooting myself in the foot before I even start."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
35 minutes ago
- USA Today
Tennessee's attempt to undermine settlement is a red flag in new world of college sports
Tennessee's attempt to undermine settlement is a red flag in new world of college sports Show Caption Hide Caption Which NCAA baseball teams could blow up the bracket The Montgomery Advertiser's Adam Cole and The Southwest Times Record's Jackson Fuller break down who could wreck the tournament bracket. Katherine Crytzer, a 41-year-old federal judge appointed by President Trump to serve on the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee, saved the college sports world a huge headache on Thursday. By denying an injunction that could have granted former Tennessee basketball star Zakai Zeigler a fifth year of eligibility, thus opening the floodgates on athletes potentially earning NIL money far beyond their college lifespan, the NCAA's ability to enforce its four-year rule seems somewhat safe – for now. 'This Court is a court of law, not policy,' she wrote. 'What the NCAA should do as a policy matter to benefit student athletes is beyond the reach of the Sherman Act and (Tennessee law) and by extension, this Court.' But Zeigler's petition should set off major alarm bells for this new world of college sports – not because he filed it (which is his right as an American), but because Tennessee's athletic department seemed to support an idea that would spark the kind of chaos power-conference schools have spent months trying to fix. On Saturday, one day after Judge Claudia Wilken approved the landmark House vs. NCAA settlement, Tennessee's senior deputy athletics director/chief revenue officer Ryan Alpert filed an affidavit telling Judge Crytzer that Zeigler would have a 'guaranteed spot' on its 2025-26 basketball team, which would of course also mean a large NIL payment coming his way via the terms of the House settlement. We assumed from the beginning that Zeigler being granted a fifth year would mean a return to Tennessee, where he played 138 games and graduated, thus extinguishing his eligibility. But to see it on the record from a Tennessee official in this context can only be interpreted one way: Tennessee was willing to undermine a key component of the House settlement on behalf of a player it wanted back on its basketball team. It's especially stunning given that Monday of this week, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey joined four of his colleagues on a call with the media to discuss the settlement finally going into practice. Undergirding the settlement, which grants schools the ability to pay college athletes from an initial $20.5 million pool of revenue per school, is a new College Sports Commission being formed by the four power conferences that will be charged with enforcing the salary cap and other regulatory duties. Everyone understands the only hope to bring order to the last several years of NIL and transfer chaos is if schools take the terms of the settlement seriously and not look for ways to get around it by lining up sham NIL deals for recruits. That's why schools have pledged to sign a document affirming the CSC's authority and forfeiting the ability to sue if things don't go their way. 'I've asked at every level … our university presidents and chancellors, our athletics directors, our head coaches: If you want an unregulated, open system, just raise your hand and let me know,' Sankey said. 'And universally, the answer is: 'No. We want oversight. We want guardrails. We want structures.' 'Those individuals don't have the luxury to just say that in meeting rooms. Period. They don't have the luxury to just be anonymous sources. They have a responsibility to make what they've sought, what they've asked for – to make it work." But, as the entire history of college sports has shown, push comes to shove when a coach or an athletics director has an opportunity to go around the rules and add a player to their team who will help them win more games, thus enhancing their job security and increasing their bank account. Easy to say you're committed to the new system in a meeting with the SEC commissioner, but hard to put in practice when tangible stuff is on the line. We can already see that in Tennessee's support for Zeigler's eligibility case, which was just a blatant attempt to blow up a longstanding NCAA rule that the vast majority of administrators support. I reached out to Tennessee for clarification of its position on Thursday morning, coincidentally, a couple of hours before Zeigler's injunction was denied, and then again after. They're not going to comment on his case. What Tennessee officials would likely say if they did comment is that they had nothing to do with Zeigler's case and that they filed the affidavit simply out of loyalty and support to their former player. Fair enough. But everyone needs to understand how big of a red flag this is already for the new world of college sports. For various reasons, a large number of college athletes are going to feel wronged or aggrieved in this new system or simply search for ways to make more money beyond the salary cap. And unless Congress passes a law with some kind of antitrust exemption, which doesn't seem likely anytime soon, they will have a legal right to challenge it with an army of lawyers ready and willing to take their cases. Like Zeigler, they have little to lose and potentially millions of dollars to gain. In some cases, they also have state legislatures like the one in Tennessee making laws that say NCAA rules don't apply in their state. You can't blame the athlete for that. But you can blame a school that puts into the legal record that it would be willing to, at minimum, violate the spirit of the system it built that was designed to give rule-making and enforcement power back to the schools. Schools have a choice: They can either have the system they say they want, or they can have rogue legislatures looking to build competitive advantages for good old State U into their laws. They can't have both. When Sankey shakes his finger at the media, talking about how his member schools are fully bought-in to coloring within the lines of the House settlement, the rest of college sports rolls its eyes. At the end of the day, are the people at Alabama or Georgia going to really be OK with losing a big recruit to a school with more salary-cap space? That's what we're talking about here. That's the whole deal. And if that doesn't work, the House settlement isn't going to be worth the paper it's written on. An SEC spokesperson did not return a text message asking for the league's interpretation of Tennessee supporting Zeigler's attempt to get a fifth year by guaranteeing his roster spot. And now, thanks to Judge Crytzer, this specific issue is moot. But it's merely a canary in the coal mine. There are going to be more Zeiglers, more Tennessee athletic departments and more Tennessee legislatures, constantly challenging the terms of the House settlement and the College Sports Commission's authority to do its job because, in the end, those actions will help them win games. Will schools stand firm on their own principles? Maybe in meeting rooms with Commissioner Sankey. But in the real world? Good luck.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
Miami-Dade mayor warns ICE crackdown may have ‘chilling effect' on World Cup
As Miami-Dade County prepares to host the 2026 FIFA World Cup next year and the 2025 FIFA Club World Cup this weekend, the excitement surrounding both events is palpable. With economic impacts and tax-generated revenues projected to exceed the public investment in ensuring a safe and successful FIFA World Cup — and an additional $100 million anticipated from the private sector — local leaders are preparing for the unique opportunity to share the global stage and showcase the strengths of our community. We know that soccer attracts international visitors who will bolster the local economy through increased tourism, hospitality and retail spending, bringing secondary benefits like global branding. However, beneath this optimistic outlook lies a growing and significant concern: the potential impact of recent heightened untargeted immigration enforcement activities on the local community and economy. In recent days, we've read news stories in the Miami Herald describing how U.S. citizens coming through our airports feel a tone shift when going through Customs and Border Protection (CBP). Even more troubling are the continued notices from immigration enforcement officials indicating their planned presence at this weekend's FIFA Club World Cup, where we expect thousands of international visitors who will be spending their dollars in our local community. It would be devastating to our economy and global image if the lasting impression were that visitors who came to enjoy the wonders of Miami-Dade were inappropriately targeted or mistreated. The implications of this fear are twofold. First, the anticipated economic benefits of the World Cup may be undermined if a significant portion of the local or national population refrains from participating in the event. Second, the unprecedented targeting of legal visitors will create a chilling effect and deter international tourists who may perceive the U.S. as unwelcoming or hostile, affecting attendance and the overall success of the event. Let's not forget that FIFA fans around the world are making a choice by deciding to enjoy the World Cup in the United States when they can also participate in the fun by attending matches in Mexico and Canada. This poses a great challenge to Miami-Dade, as we will host seven matches, and to the national economy, as our country is set to host dozens of games, including the opening and closing matches. I wholeheartedly and forcefully express full support for efforts to protect our border and to target and remove dangerous criminals. In fact, congressional leaders must double down and redirect immigration enforcement to focus on these efforts rather than misguided blanket actions that only dilute Homeland Security's true mission to remove criminals and dangerous individuals from our streets. Further, I believe Congress must provide answers regarding the deal reported earlier this year that allowed 17 family members of dangerous Mexican cartels to freely enter our nation. Last month, Mexico's top security officials confirmed that family members of cartel leaders came to the U.S. through the border as part of a deal between the Trump administration and the son of the former head of the Sinaloa Cartel. So while our community prepares for what could be challenging moments for visitors, the federal government allowed family members of cartels to enter our nation — which makes no sense. The 2026 FIFA World Cup presents an incredible opportunity for Miami-Dade to further solidify its name on the global stage, and this weekend will serve as the first test of whether federal officials will cause economic hardship and global pain by making visitors feel less than welcomed and safe. Ensuring that all community members feel safe and included is crucial for the event's success and for maintaining our county's reputation as a welcoming destination for both residents and visitors. As they say in soccer, let's score big this weekend and show our community, state, nation and the world that Miami-Dade is a model for success. Daniella Levine Cava is the mayor of Miami-Dade.
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
The road ahead after the NCAA settlement comes with risk, reward and warnings
ORLANDO, Fla. — Two days after the approval of a groundbreaking $2.8 billion antitrust settlement, thousands of athletic directors and department personnel traveled to Orlando, Florida, for the annual National Association of Collegiate Directors of Athletics convention. The hot topic, of course, was the influx of changes both threatening and beneficial for schools across the country. According to NCAA President Charlie Baker , approval of the settlement may be the biggest change in college sports history. On July 1, schools that opt in to the settlement will embark on a new era of revenue sharing, changing the game both on and off the field. A handful of convention attendees breathed a sigh of relief on Friday night when U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken announced her decision. It's a quick turnaround and a period of trial and error is anticipated, but Division I athletic directors welcomed the news. 'The best thing is clarity,' UCLA athletic director Martin Jarmond said. 'The best thing about July 1 is we now have clarity on the rules of engagement, what we're allowed to do, how we can move forward. Does it solve everything? No, it doesn't. But when you have clarity, you can operate more efficiently and effectively.' Kentucky AD Mitch Barnhart was relieved to get the agreement in hand. 'We've been trying for so long to be part of this,' Barnhart said. 'Maybe, just maybe, on July 1, we'll sort of all know where we are on this one.' Barnhart added that the College Sports Commission, an entity that will enforce compliance and set market value for NIL deals, will be a major positive. 'The College Sports Commission and the way that is coming around gives us guardrails and enforcement in a way that we can move forward collectively, together, for college sports,' Barnhart said. In a settlement where high-revenue sport athletes have the most to gain, Title IX has emerged as a topic to watch. The 75-15-5-5 formula has emerged as a popular revenue-sharing formula, meaning that schools are likely to allocate 75% of revenue-share funds to football, 15% to men's basketball, 5% to women's basketball and the remaining 5% dispersed to other programs. If a school spent the full $20.5 million allowed this coming year, that would mean a breakdown of $15.4 million for football, $3.1 million for men's hoops and about $1 million each for women's hoops and everyone else. Montoya Ho-Song, an attorney for Ackerman LLP who specializes in higher education issues, expects Title IX lawsuits to come, just like one filed this week by eight female athletes. The area has shifted again under President Donald Trump, with guidance suggesting the federal government won't hold schools to rigid requirements to distribute proceeds equitably between men and women. 'There are definitely going to be legal challenges related to this revenue-sharing model. I always tell my clients, look, your student athletes' perceptions are their reality. If they think that they are not being treated equally, they will raise those concerns,' Ho-Song said. She warned that the 75-15-5-5 formula shouldn't be a one size fits all and suggested dividing revenue based on how it comes in isn't a valid argument. The majority of rev-share funds going to football and basketball programs, especially when coupled with losing records, will inevitably stir the pot. 'Just because there is a 75-15-5-5 budget breakdown, that does not mean that that's going to work on all campuses,' she said. 'The analysis under Title IX is making sure that it is available and everyone has the same type of access to non-grant funds. So, you do have to figure out a way to creatively divvy up those funds, but always keep in mind, if someone feels as if they're not being treated correctly, then that is always a legal risk.' Attorney Mit Winter, a college sports law specialist with Kennyhertz Perry, said it is paramount that athletic departments present an organized, united front. Since the launch of name, image, and likeness compensation four years ago, Winter said, he has encountered several instances where athletic departments are giving conflicting statements and numbers to current and prospective athletes. That can lead to legal headaches, too. 'You need to have a plan that everyone is on board with and that everyone knows,' Winter said. 'As a school, you don't want to have a situation where five different people are talking to an athlete about how much they're going to pay him or her. I think that needs to be much more formalized. The coach, assistant coaches, GM, everybody needs to be on the same page.' St. Bonaventure men's basketball general manager Adrian Wojnarowski and coach Mark Schmidt know exactly what their roles are — and aren't. 'I will never talk to a player or a parent or an agent about playing time, their role,' Wojnarowski said. 'During the season, if someone is disappointed in playing time and they call, the only conversation I'm having with a family member is supporting the head coach, supporting the coaching staff. And in the end, that's a conversation for their son to have with the head coach. Then economically, we have to have one clear message in negotiations and finances.' There are concerns that the revenue-sharing era will have multiple impacts on college rosters. Few athletic directors were willing to talk in any detail about plans for their campuses, but some of the moves have already begun in the search for more money to fulfill the details of the NCAA settlement: UTEP dropped women's tennis, Cal Poly discontinued swimming and diving, Marquette added women's swimming and Grand Canyon shuttered its men's volleyball program. The athletic director at Cal noted the school expects to lose about 100 athletes. Just how many of the so-called non-revenue sports — the ones that often feed U.S. Olympic teams — will be affected is also a concern. And many programs will need to find a niche that works for them, even if that means not consistently contending for national championships. ___ AP college sports:
