Comments on: Five Reasons to Be Excited for 2013

By: Lord Caldlow

Lord Caldlow — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 20:46:57 +0000

More match play events!

By: mmcbride1986

mmcbride1986 — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 16:05:15 +0000

Thinking that the Playoff's are working is definitely an opinion and one that probably isn't even shared with the best players in the world. Take any Major or Ryder Cup match and tell me what player who finished 1st, 2nd or 3rd cared how much money they were about to make or eventually made? ZERO, because it's about the game, the prestige, the ultimate championship. However, this whole FEDEX CUP is a waste. Remember when they made the rule that if you skipped a Playoff you wouldn't be eligible to win the overall title? Kind of funny that they had to make rules and dangle millions at these players to convince them to even play. Remember Heath Slocum or Charley Hoffman? They played one good tournament during those years and were a guaranteed lock at East Lake. I promise you if one of them had actually Won at East Lake and by your Match-Play opinion all these golfers are evenly matched, you wouldn't be singing the praises of the FedEx Cup. It was a shame that Rory didn't win the FedEx Cup. Even if you don't like the guy or his game, you can't deny that he was the best player in the world at the time of East Lake. Tiger Woods is the only FedEx Cup champion who deserved the CUP. 2009 was the best year of the Cup. Tiger Woods didn't win at East Lake and Mickelson who did came up short, not because he isn't a champion, but because Tiger was the best that year. It's nice to see Brandt Snedeker and Bill Haas play well after winning the CUP, but being glad to see them do good things is like me wishing Lucas Glover and Stewart Cink would to good things. So you may ask, "where is he going with all this?" Well I have two suggestions 1) whoever is the season ending FedEx Cup leader would receive a guaranteed 5th spot (top 5 winner takes all) entering East Lake 2) use a Matchplay format at East Lake. You said it yourself, too evenly matched, then let the best 32 players go head to head in a 1st seed against 32nd seed in a bracket type format. Your seed is a reflection of how you played up until this point, exactly like tennis, and yes, I would love to see Rory, Tiger, Phil and whoever else go head to head in a final!

By: Erik J. Barzeski

Erik J. Barzeski — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 19:25:36 +0000

It's not a "silly rule." It's simply the way it was set up that year. In previous years Vijay had it locked up and had to simply survive at East Lake. That's no fun either. If you can come up with something better, go for it. Until then, it's incredibly easy to criticize when you can't come up with something better. The FEC gives us exciting golf into and through September. That's its only real purpose, and it succeeds at that. P.S. Match play is a non-starter, so don't even try. Tennis works because you rarely get upsets. In golf the players are so evenly matched you often end up with bizarre quarterfinals that lack the big names.

By: scottyjoe145

scottyjoe145 — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 19:05:44 +0000

The point I was making is that the format could be better than it currently is. Rory won 2 of the 4 playoff events and lost the FEC because of a silly rule that allowed Snedeker to win it all if he won East Lake. It just doesn't make any sense. Rory was at his best!!! The format failed him. Erik, you made a good point in saying that the best team doesn't always win the Super Bowl, World Series, etc... and those are all team sports. Shouldn't an individual sport have a different format for crowning champions? Take tennis for example... an individual sport with a very efficient & indisputable playoff format. You say no one is putting the FEC on the same level as the majors? My point exactly! It should be what defines your career. I'm not ignoring logic & facts... I'm calling some much needed attention to them.

By: Erik J. Barzeski

Erik J. Barzeski — Sun, 10 Feb 2013 14:28:02 +0000

The best team doesn't always win the Super Bowl, the World Series, the NBA Finals, or the Stanley Cup. They're a "hit" because the ratings say so, and we get meaningful golf in September. Just because you don't like them means you get to ignore logic and facts. The best players ARE the most decorated already, and the FEC doesn't change that. If Brandt goes through the rest of his career and doesn't win a major nobody's going to care that he won a FedExCup. Nobody's putting FEC's on the same level as majors. Bubba and Webb wouldn't trade their wins at Augusta or Olympic for a FEC.

By: scottyjoe145

scottyjoe145 — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 19:53:40 +0000

I will have to totaly disagree about the Playoff's being a hit. The FedEx Cup itself is a great idea, but the format is lacking. A great playoff system for "individual sports" should ALWAYS exalt the best player. The point being, you can't adopt a "team sport" playoff format and apply it to an "individual sport". What the PGA Tour built was a system that reminds me of a reality TV show. They sacrificed quality for ratings and money. The best players in the game should be the most decorated... PERIOD. If the playoff formats do not promote this, it's an absolute tragedy. It's an even greater tradgedy when those elite golfers are at their best (and they are clearly above the rest as you stated in your article above) and the system fails them. It's nothing more than a game of random chance. The system failed because its not the ideal playoff format for individual sports. Sure, Brandt Snedeker is a great golfer, and he arguably did catch fire at just the right time. However, he was not the BEST golfer through the playoffs. The system does an OK job of whittling down the 125 into the top 30... it just takes a turn for the worse at East Lake. I don't have all the answers, but I know it can be better. Maybe a bracket...