New Tour Championship Format

[Titleist99]

> @buckeye440 said:

> It is flat out dumb, at least from American sports perspective. NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and MLS do not handicap their playoffs other than a bye. Seriously could you imagine if the 16-0 Pats team got like 3 TD lead against the wildcard Giants years back? Yeah, did not think so and it is because Americans love their underdogs. The current format is un-American. The tour could adjust the prizes to give more money to the regular season winner and less to the playoff winner if they want to emphasize the regular season. Could always make it like the EPL and have no playoffs (I think) but then no ability for that sweet FedEx sponsorship money.

 

Well, you do know that golf is not a team sport, it's an individual sport and not to be compared with others. It's played over four days not one. First you have to make the playoffs then you can make something happen because the points are quadrupled. Nothing is guaranteed because there is no Bye, nor is there a home field advantage.....just ask Brooks about losing his #1 seed......Let's see how this plays out. Been pretty exciting for me so far. Golf would like to have it's own identity, not follow some other sports format.

[Titleist99]

> @Titleist99 said:

> > @buckeye440 said:

> > It is flat out dumb, at least from American sports perspective. NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and MLS do not handicap their playoffs other than a bye. Seriously could you imagine if the 16-0 Pats team got like 3 TD lead against the wildcard Giants years back? Yeah, did not think so and it is because Americans love their underdogs. The current format is un-American. The tour could adjust the prizes to give more money to the regular season winner and less to the playoff winner if they want to emphasize the regular season. Could always make it like the EPL and have no playoffs (I think) but then no ability for that sweet FedEx sponsorship money.

>

> Well, you do know that golf is not a team sport, it's an individual sport and not to be compared with others. It's played over four days not one. First you have to make the playoffs then you can make something happen because the points are quadrupled. Nothing is guaranteed because there is no Bye, nor is there a home field advantage.....just ask Brooks about losing his #1 seed......Let's see how this plays out. Been pretty exciting for me so far. Golf would like to have it's own identity, not follow some other sports format.

 

On a side note: That sweet FedEx money$$$ comes to golf for a specific reason and that is other than soccer, golf is a Global game and FedEx is a global company that does business all over the world.

[dasams]

The biggest problem was quadrupling the FedEx points the last two tournaments. Then someone gets hot and moves way up (JT) while someone else plays poorly and falls way down (BK). I'd be fine with the handicapping the championship if the points had stayed the same. Then you'd be rewarding the season long best players.

[dmecca2]

From a competitive golfers viewpoint, this sucks. You can have someone "win" this tournament by 9 shots and not win. That just doesnt seem right at all and its why I dont think this format will last.

From a casual viewer, this is awesome. No more confusing numbers and dealing with "This guy only wins if he finishes second and guy B finishes T8 or worse."

 

I fall under the competitive golfer viewpoint. I think the setup they have used in the past is sufficient and the best way to make this a combination of the "season long race" and "the playoffs". Plus, I just dont think I could take seeing Tiger win by 3 shots to break the record and not get the win because of the format.

[dmecca2]

>

> I agree with this, but would go one step further. You could actually take the top 32 from the second to last event of the year, seed them in match play for a 4-day event, and determine the FedExCup winner. Losers in the first round would play each other based on seeding on Friday to determine positions 17-32 in the final standings to make sure everyone is guaranteed at least two matches. Losers in the second round play each other based on seeding Saturday to determine positions 9-16. Losers in the round of 8 play each other based on seeding on Sunday after the first final four match to determine spots 5-8. That way Sunday there is more than just 2 matches to televise; it would help the viewing public to see a couple other matches on the course going before the final two matches.

>

> Determine the winner on the field, just like any other sport, in heads-up games. That would pretty much eliminate any confusion, as well as make it as level of a playing field as possible.

>

 

I like this and its much better than what we are stuck with this year, but this really rewards the "match play players" instead of the best player over the course of the week.

[mattwood]

It's a bad idea that won't last.

[Pepperturbo]

The FedEx Cup is a pathetic joke. I embrace capitalism but the FedEx Cup and other similar unearned payouts do not represent capitalism in the way it is intended. They are nothing more than extremely large unearned giveaways under the name of commerce.

 

The new format is nothing more than a screwed up handicapping system. When we first saw one person started the tournament with -10 strokes, etc., everybody in the room thought it was absurd.

[cdnglf]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> The FedEx Cup is a pathetic joke. I embrace capitalism but the FedEx Cup and other similar unearned payouts do not represent capitalism in the way it is intended. They are nothing more than extremely large unearned giveaways under the name of commerce.

 

As opposed to the “earned” payouts of the PGA Tour regular season? Or for that matter the NFL, NBA, and the rest of pro sports?

 

 

> The new format is nothing more than a screwed up handicapping system. When we first saw one person started the tournament with -10 strokes, etc., everybody in the room thought it was absurd.

 

LPT: hang out with smarter people.

[BiggErn]

Over half the field is essentially just showing up to play with no chance. It’s a joke. For the love of god please don’t do match play either. A match play event on the pga tour is terrible. It’s ok for team events but not individual. I remember simpler times where you had a money list and the top 30 played at the end of the year. Good times.

[gioguy21]

the fact that the guy with the most points starts out -10 is ridiculous to me. unless someone from the back gets insanely hot and the guys at the top don't even show up - vegas may lose some money on their betting lines for this tournament. seems pretty straight forward as to who you should be choosing (anyone in the top 5)

[Pepperturbo]

> @cdnglf said:

> > @Pepperturbo said:

> > The FedEx Cup is a pathetic joke. I embrace capitalism but the FedEx Cup and other similar unearned payouts do not represent capitalism in the way it is intended. They are nothing more than extremely large unearned giveaways under the name of commerce.

>

> As opposed to the “earned” payouts of the PGA Tour regular season? Or for that matter the NFL, NBA, and the rest of pro sports?

>

>

> > The new format is nothing more than a screwed up handicapping system. When we first saw one person started the tournament with -10 strokes, etc., everybody in the room thought it was absurd.

>

> LPT: hang out with smarter people.

 

Given you're only able to act brave and insult on social media, you're not worth further discussion.

[aabcuue]

> @buckeye440 said:

> It is flat out dumb, at least from American sports perspective. NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, and MLS do not handicap their playoffs other than a bye....

> The tour could adjust the prizes to give more money to the regular season winner and less to the playoff winner if they want to emphasize the regular season. Could always make it like the EPL and have no playoffs (I think) but then no ability for that sweet FedEx sponsorship money.

 

You forgot or didn't know there was a Wyndham regular season award? Brooks got $2mil for #1. Rory got #2 1.5mil over Kuch #3 by a few pts & 1.2mil.

 

Only notable about presentation was Rors roasted Kuch over mexico caddy incident.

https://sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/rory-mcilroy-delivered-absolutely-vicious-000115036.html

[tiderider]

it's not a tournament ... it's the end of a year long competition ... for $15 mill ... tbh, i'll probably watch the kf tournament more than this thing ... it'd be great if they'd realize what a bad idea the 'playoffs' are, but that won't happen ...

[cdnglf]

> @Pepperturbo said:

> > @cdnglf said:

> > > @Pepperturbo said:

> > > The FedEx Cup is a pathetic joke. I embrace capitalism but the FedEx Cup and other similar unearned payouts do not represent capitalism in the way it is intended. They are nothing more than extremely large unearned giveaways under the name of commerce.

> >

> > As opposed to the “earned” payouts of the PGA Tour regular season? Or for that matter the NFL, NBA, and the rest of pro sports?

> >

> >

> > > The new format is nothing more than a screwed up handicapping system. When we first saw one person started the tournament with -10 strokes, etc., everybody in the room thought it was absurd.

> >

> > LPT: hang out with smarter people.

>

> Given you're only able to act brave and insult on social media, you're not worth further discussion.

 

No Pompousturbo seal of approval? So sad.

[stanger37]

> @Z1ggy16 said:

> I like it. Eliminates a lot of "what ifs" and avoids the weird scenario where somebody wins the Cup but does not win the final event and vice versa. It also rewards the top few guys who played good all year long with a fairly sizeable advantage over guys who barely crept in. With only a 10 shot differential and no cut anything could still happen.

 

I think there will be plenty of weirdness still. But I want to see it play out before I judge too hard. But out of the gate, I just don't understand how they can call it the 'season long race' and a guy in Brooks, who has 3 wins (1 Major 1 WGC) and 3 runner ups (2 Majors), 8 top 10 (1 Major), 12 top 20s...is NOT the #1, but JT who has 1 win, 1 2nd, 1 3rd and 6 top 10s...is the leader. Cantlay who has a win, few 2nd, few 3rd is above Brooks.

 

and Brooks is only a shot above a guy in Reed that was irrelevant for 18 months since his Master's win to Northern Trust, who was I think ranked in the 50s before the Northern Trust.

 

Again, I want to see it play out but I think some points need to be weighted differently for bigger events, and calm down on the x4 for the Playoffs. I'd almost like to see all the playoff events have some sort of handicapping system, not just the last event.

[Z1ggy16]

> @stanger37 said:

> > @Z1ggy16 said:

> > I like it. Eliminates a lot of "what ifs" and avoids the weird scenario where somebody wins the Cup but does not win the final event and vice versa. It also rewards the top few guys who played good all year long with a fairly sizeable advantage over guys who barely crept in. With only a 10 shot differential and no cut anything could still happen.

>

> I think there will be plenty of weirdness still. But I want to see it play out before I judge too hard. But out of the gate, I just don't understand how they can call it the 'season long race' and a guy in Brooks, who has 3 wins (1 Major 1 WGC) and 3 runner ups (2 Majors), 8 top 10 (1 Major), 12 top 20s...is NOT the #1, but JT who has 1 win, 1 2nd, 1 3rd and 6 top 10s...is the leader. Cantlay who has a win, few 2nd, few 3rd is above Brooks.

>

> and Brooks is only a shot above a guy in Reed that was irrelevant for 18 months since his Master's win to Northern Trust, who was I think ranked in the 50s before the Northern Trust.

>

> Again, I want to see it play out but I think some points need to be weighted differently for bigger events, and calm down on the x4 for the Playoffs. I'd almost like to see all the playoff events have some sort of handicapping system, not just the last event.

 

It's definitely flawed, but I think it's a less confusing set up than years prior. I do kind of agree with other people though... maybe some kind of play off system over 3-4 days would be better, where it's stroke play for 2 days with eliminations, then those guys advance on to match play against the top "seeds". That way, your advantage is a better seed, but upsets can still happen. In the current format, it will take quite the feat (either a few very good rounds int he low 60's or a high seed player to tank) for upsets. In the current format, I think it's very unlikely somebody outside the top 10 wins, which in other sports would be seem quite silly.

[DavePelz4]

Give everyone a participation ribbon, $2M and let's get on with the NFL.

[Cincy_Ken]

The problem is golf is just not conducive to a playoffs. If you want to go pure playoffs you'd completely reset the points at the end of the regular season then whoever plays the best in the playoffs takes home the money. That would have Brooks out of it at this point and you're looking at JT, Cantlay, Reed, fighting it out for the money. My other issue with it is that since the first two events are only for seeding and the person who comes in #1 has a two shot lead regardless of how they got there. If Brooks comes into the playoffs at #1, wins both playoff events, he still gets the same 2 stroke lead that JT has now.

 

It's very arbitrary for a very large sum of money. I'd like to see a little more opportunity to separate in the two preceeding playoff events but that prevents exactly what the tour set out to create; a massive made for TV cash grab. Just don't insult our intelligence by calling it a season long race for the Fed Ex Cup. It's a season long race to position yourself for the made for TV cash grab in Atlanta

[FairwaysToHeaven]

> @JaNelson38 said:

> > @HoosierMizuno said:

> > i keep hearing that officials wanted to eliminate the confusion in points and ensure the winner of the last tournament is also the overall winner.

> >

> > are you telling me if Finau loses to JT by one shot the golf world isn't going to know that finau actually beat JT during the week by 6 shots and JT was gifted a 7 stroke lead over finau?

> >

> > the only way to get a true overall champion is to use the points system to work your way down to final 8 or 4 players and do match play from there. i'm not sure there is any setup that rewards great play throughout the year while also ensuring the best performing player in the 'playoffs' wins the championship. koepka has had by far the best season. so we need to decide if this is a true playoffs or if he deserves to have this wrapped up with a mediocre finish this week.

> >

> >

>

> I agree with this, but would go one step further. You could actually take the top 32 from the second to last event of the year, seed them in match play for a 4-day event, and determine the FedExCup winner. Losers in the first round would play each other based on seeding on Friday to determine positions 17-32 in the final standings to make sure everyone is guaranteed at least two matches. Losers in the second round play each other based on seeding Saturday to determine positions 9-16. Losers in the round of 8 play each other based on seeding on Sunday after the first final four match to determine spots 5-8. That way Sunday there is more than just 2 matches to televise; it would help the viewing public to see a couple other matches on the course going before the final two matches.

>

> Determine the winner on the field, just like any other sport, in heads-up games. That would pretty much eliminate any confusion, as well as make it as level of a playing field as possible.

>

making it into the finals or the top 30 is huge for the players because of all the exemptions that are involved. but i just don't want a guy ranked 29th to have much of a shot to win it all. the larger the field in match play, the more likely we'll get years where lesser seeds make the finals soley because they had a single hot round or their opponent had an off day.

 

i still prefer 6-8 top players max. but i do think some sort of match play is absolutely needed to determine the winner.

 

[FairwaysToHeaven]

another scenario we're not mentioning is the opposite of lesser seeds needing to go really low to win...

what if JT goes low and koepka and cantlay struggle just a bit. the tournament could effectively be over after day 1.

 

because i dislike the current system, this is the scenario i'm rooting for. i'd like to see thurs include jt shooting 64, the others 70, and the entire finals become a giant snoozer.

[JaNelson38]

> @HoosierMizuno said:

> > @JaNelson38 said:

> > > @HoosierMizuno said:

> > > i keep hearing that officials wanted to eliminate the confusion in points and ensure the winner of the last tournament is also the overall winner.

> > >

> > > are you telling me if Finau loses to JT by one shot the golf world isn't going to know that finau actually beat JT during the week by 6 shots and JT was gifted a 7 stroke lead over finau?

> > >

> > > the only way to get a true overall champion is to use the points system to work your way down to final 8 or 4 players and do match play from there. i'm not sure there is any setup that rewards great play throughout the year while also ensuring the best performing player in the 'playoffs' wins the championship. koepka has had by far the best season. so we need to decide if this is a true playoffs or if he deserves to have this wrapped up with a mediocre finish this week.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > I agree with this, but would go one step further. You could actually take the top 32 from the second to last event of the year, seed them in match play for a 4-day event, and determine the FedExCup winner. Losers in the first round would play each other based on seeding on Friday to determine positions 17-32 in the final standings to make sure everyone is guaranteed at least two matches. Losers in the second round play each other based on seeding Saturday to determine positions 9-16. Losers in the round of 8 play each other based on seeding on Sunday after the first final four match to determine spots 5-8. That way Sunday there is more than just 2 matches to televise; it would help the viewing public to see a couple other matches on the course going before the final two matches.

> >

> > Determine the winner on the field, just like any other sport, in heads-up games. That would pretty much eliminate any confusion, as well as make it as level of a playing field as possible.

> >

> making it into the finals or the top 30 is huge for the players because of all the exemptions that are involved. but i just don't want a guy ranked 29th to have much of a shot to win it all. the larger the field in match play, the more likely we'll get years where lesser seeds make the finals soley because they had a single hot round or their opponent had an off day.

>

> i still prefer 6-8 top players max. but i do think some sort of match play is absolutely needed to determine the winner.

>

 

That's what happens in the playoffs in any sport...many times the "better team" loses to another team that has the hot day. But in the end, a winner is not decided by a points system...its decided by performance.

 

That being said, the guys who get into the top 30 arent exactly pushovers. Why should it be that big of a surprise if they win a match or go deep? Guys like Louis Oosthuisen or CH3 have every right to play well. The Tour Championship is supposed to be the cream of the crop of the season.

 

Use the points system to set up the field, then play it out on the course. But dont handicap the field like the Tour is doing.

[aabcuue]

> @dasams said:

> The biggest problem was quadrupling the FedEx points the last two tournaments. Then someone gets hot and moves way up (JT) while someone else plays poorly and falls way down (BK). I'd be fine with the handicapping the championship if the points had stayed the same. Then you'd be rewarding the season long best players.

 

Even Brooks will admit he hasn't been the same player since he didn't win the US Open to Gary Woodland. Hasn't been a factor near the top of the leaderboard in any tournament since.

[stanger37]

> @aabcuue said:

> > @dasams said:

> > The biggest problem was quadrupling the FedEx points the last two tournaments. Then someone gets hot and moves way up (JT) while someone else plays poorly and falls way down (BK). I'd be fine with the handicapping the championship if the points had stayed the same. Then you'd be rewarding the season long best players.

>

> Even Brooks will admit he hasn't been the same player since he didn't win the US Open to Gary Woodland. Hasn't been a factor near the top of the leaderboard in any tournament since.

 

He was T4 at The Open and won WGC-St. Jude since the US Open...I'd say he was at least a little factor.

[LICC]

> @aabcuue said:

> > @dasams said:

> > The biggest problem was quadrupling the FedEx points the last two tournaments. Then someone gets hot and moves way up (JT) while someone else plays poorly and falls way down (BK). I'd be fine with the handicapping the championship if the points had stayed the same. Then you'd be rewarding the season long best players.

>

> Even Brooks will admit he hasn't been the same player since he didn't win the US Open to Gary Woodland. Hasn't been a factor near the top of the leaderboard in any tournament since.

 

It's a playoff tournament. This isn't the Player of the Year Award. It's a Tour Championship Tournament. Winning the playoff events is supposed to count more as these are the events that are part of the playoffs.

I read an interesting suggestion to make this like a three-week tournament, instead of three different tournaments. Have the 216 hole cumulative score winner be the winner of the Tour Championship. You can still have the winners of the prior two tournaments be recognized, but the Tour Championship winner is the 216-hole winner. Interesting idea.

[SkiSchoolPro]

FWIW, I think Cantlay now has the lowest scoring average on Tour this year, just ahead of Rory.

Haven't done the research, but I would bet that the year Haas or another one of the dark horses won the FEC, they beat the #1 guy by 7-10+ shots. How many shots did JT beat BK by last week? Point is, there very well could be a winner from outside the top 5 (but the guy who shoots the low score for the week may not win).

Is the OWGR going to ignore this tournament?

[Ignatius Reilly]

Some more thoughts...

 

No other sport uses handicapping in the finals. Both teams go in 0-0 and whatever happens happens. Of course no other sport has tried to run a playoffs for a big prize and trophy while simultaneously running a separate tournament with its own trophy and winner.

 

So the simple solution to that is to just declare the winner of the Tour Championship the year-long winner.

 

That doesn't give the year-long good player much of an advantage though (although getting into the final 30 is some advantage over .... not getting in!).

 

Maybe they should have a daily cut line for the Tour Championship. Bottom 6 get dropped each day, leaving only12 players on Sunday?

 

No to any match play. I love it in the team competitions and once a year in the WGC but there's too much can go wrong in the playoffs. Mostly, as others have pointed out, you can lose your best player on day 1. And some schlub (who managed to get in) can have 4 hot days and win it all.

 

I don't like the money not counting as official money. It's a problem of their own making, with the Fedex being so stupid big at $15 million. So why not count a percent of this as official money? The biggest "regular" purse is just over $2 million right now, so make it 15 or 20% of Fedex winnings, which would be 2.25-3million. Seems reasonable for the year long winner. It also seems more reasonable than zero. Like WAY more reasonable.

[OldBridge]

Playoffs just don't work in golf. Simple as that.

[chickwebb]

> @dasams said:

> The biggest problem was quadrupling the FedEx points the last two tournaments. Then someone gets hot and moves way up (JT) while someone else plays poorly and falls way down (BK). I'd be fine with the handicapping the championship if the points had stayed the same. Then you'd be rewarding the season long best players.

 

I'm with you. There's nothing particularly wrong with handicapping the final event, but they gave far too many points for the last two. On the other hand, I suppose, if Koepka can climb over the top of these guys, it'll make it crystal clear who the best guy's been out there this year.

[randywildman]

Notah, made a great point.

I thought it was even better that he works for the channel that owns the tour championship viewing rights. If the channel/tour are going to promote these monthly winners Rory (players ) and the 4 major winners, the Formula should make sure those celebrated winners should earn more points from winning those events that almost guarantee's them entry into the tour championship. Missing Lowery and Tiger is not the big of a deal, but overall winning a major shouldn't be bigger then a playoff winner but it should get you in the top 30 ???/

[Lefty96]

I would like to see the playoffs turn away from the idea of rewarding “season long” performance and turn into an actual playoffs like any other sport.

 

At the end of the season take the top 125 players and let them play the first event. Then take the top 70 and ties and let them play in the second event. Then take the top 30 and ties and let them play the championship, winner take all without a handicap.

 

The reward for playing well in the regular season should be making the playoffs. Once you’re in you should have to win it just like every other sport. I’d watch that start to finish.