or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Fed Ex Cup- Jordan Spieth
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fed Ex Cup- Jordan Spieth - Page 2

Poll Results: Should "Special Temporary" PGA Tour Members like Jordan Spieth be allowed to earn Fed Ex Cup points and compete in the playoffs?

 
  • 65% (19)
    Yes
  • 20% (6)
    No
  • 13% (4)
    Undecided
29 Total Votes  
post #19 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post

I haven't done the research but I thought I heard the reason he wasn't eligible for FedEx is because he isn't officially on the PGA Tour.  He's been getting sponsor exemptions and qualifying based on his performance but he still isn't a member of the Tour.  He's playing so much because he's getting the exemptions and he's trying to win one.  My understanding is the only way for him to qualify for this year would be to win an event otherwise he was to wait until next year to play FedEx. 

 

NFL, NBA and NHL are totally different with their own rules for eligibility within their leagues.  He couldn't play in the NFL because he's 19.  There are probably only a few players on MLB rosters that are 19 and I think the NBA uses years of college ball and / or age as their criteria.  Plus each sport has a cut off date that a player has to be on the roster for in order to play post season.  

 

I don't know how tennis works but that would be the closest to the PGA Tour in terms of how players qualify for Tour events. 

I think you are correct as far as I can tell, BUT he is a "Special Temporary Member" and can get into tournaments not only through sponsors exemptions, but also from category 31 of the Tour Priority rankings, prior week top 10 and Monday qualifying.  I believe the minimum age for a tour member is 18- even if he was 35, he would not be playoff eligible without a win which would then make him a full tour member (which he is guaranteed of being next year based on this years results.  Bill Haas was able to win the Fed Ex Cup with no wins and 6 top 10s during the "regular" season.  Spieth already has 5 top tens so I don't see way winning alone should change things for him.

 

I think team sports have cut off dates to avoid late season trades that stack playoff bound rosters.  In any case, Spieth has been a "Special Temporary Member" since March, way before any equivalent cut off date (and would have earned enough points based on his results since then even if you exclude his pre ST Member results.

post #20 of 86

And just so everyone's clear, this is the PGA Tour's last word on Spieth's membership, from the Valero Texas Open in April.

 

Quote: PGA TOUR Report, 4-4-2013 -- "Clarifying Spieth's FedExCup status"

Jordan Spieth earned Special Temporary Membership for the remainder of the season after tying for seventh in Tampa two weeks ago.

 

Now he's looking to take it a step further in San Antonio.

 

Should Spieth go on to win, he would lock up his TOUR card for the next two years -- and the FedExCup points he's accrued so far would be applied retroactively, making him eligible for the FedExCup Playoffs later this year.

In the meantime, however, Spieth continues to sit on the non-member FedExCup Points list, which means his points will be used toward 2013-14 membership.

 

This is a change from a few years ago when Arjun Atwal won the Wyndham Championship in 2010 as a non-member but not eligible for the Playoffs.

 

The same happened to Graeme McDowell when he won the U.S. Open earlier that summer.

 

So far, Spieth has two top 10s in five starts -- a runner-up in Puerto Rico and the aforementioned tie for seventh in Tampa. (He's also recorded a couple of top-7 finishes in two starts on the Web.com Tour.)

 

Of course if Spieth goes on to win, that would take care of everything.

 

They did change the rule on FedEx Cup points that shut Atwal out of the playoffs a few years ago, which was my primary concern. Everything else is straightforward: he gets his tour card immediately if he wins, or he gets it for the Fall Series (which is now part of the 2014 season) if he doesn't. He's near the bottom of the priority list in regard to automatic entries to events, but has unlimited exemptions into any tournament that otherwise invites him.

post #21 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by MEfree View Post

 

Fourputt was saying Spieth is either on tour or he is not- the fact of the matter is he has played in 15 events this year while guys like Tiger, Justin Rose, Adam Scott, Graeme McDowell and Rory have only played in 9 or 10...seems to me Spieth is more on tour than these guys. 

 

So, in your world, a 4 time winner half way through the season is trumped by a guy with a few top tens. I'm scratching my head over that one.

post #22 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorty View Post

So, in your world, a 4 time winner half way through the season is trumped by a guy with a few top tens. I'm scratching my head over that one.

 

This.

 

"Only played 9 events"...and won 4 of them. And is currently #1 in points...by a LOT.

post #23 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorty View Post

So, in your world, a 4 time winner half way through the season is trumped by a guy with a few top tens. I'm scratching my head over that one.

Dumb argument.  He wasn't contending that Spieth is a better golfer, just that his participation level based on number of tournaments played, for the purpose of discussing status as a full-time member of the tour, was higher than that of a several top-ranked golfers who are full tour members.  To make a school analogy, he's talking about attendence to be considered a student at the school and you're trying to say that he was talking about grades and class rank.

 

If you spent as much effort making intelligent posts here as you do trying to be devastatingly clever, you'd probably have some worthwhile things to say.  And you'd probably have enough spare effort left over to come up with a comprehensive plan to solve global warming. 

post #24 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wisguy View Post

Dumb argument.  He wasn't contending that Spieth is a better golfer, just that his participation level based on number of tournaments played, for the purpose of discussing status as a full-time member of the tour, was higher than that of a several top-ranked golfers who are full tour members.  To make a school analogy, he's talking about attendence to be considered a student at the school and you're trying to say that he was talking about grades and class rank.

 

If you spent as much effort making intelligent posts here as you do trying to be devastatingly clever, you'd probably have some worthwhile things to say.  And you'd probably have enough spare effort left over to come up with a comprehensive plan to solve global warming. 

 

He's saying Spieth should be able to go in the playoffs because he plays more.

 

To go with your analogy, that would mean that Spieth should get honors because he shows up to class more than the kid who barely shows up and gets all As.

post #25 of 86
Thread Starter 

edit- thanks wiseguy for beating me to it.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shorty View Post

So, in your world, a 4 time winner half way through the season is trumped by a guy with a few top tens. I'm scratching my head over that one.

Not at all...of course a guy with 4 wins should be ahead on points and seeded higher in the playoffs than a guy with 6 top 10s.  My point was that there are guys who have a lot less tournaments played than Spieth, many of whom play on 2 tours, who are considered to be "on tour" (to quote fourputt) while Spieth is not considered to be "on tour" at least in terms of the playoffs.

 

I think making the playoffs should be about what you accomplished during the current regular season, not what you accomplished previously.  Based on that, if the season were to end today, I think Spieth should be in with his 5 top tens and 1.2 M of earnings and Ricky Barnes (current Fed Ex #125 with 0 top 10s and 12 missed cuts) should be out.

 

I'll point out that making the playoffs and being a "Tour Member" has more than just monetary implications-

 

1.  Because of his low priority rank (first in category 31 ahead of guys like Fred Couples, Duffy Waldorf and Lee Janzen who are playoff eligible), Spieth is playing mostly in tournaments that many of the top players skip- seeing him compete in the playoffs would give us a chance to see how he stacks up when the field is loaded.

 

2.  Finishing in the top 30 gets you into the Masters and U.S. Open (and a higher priority rank for all other PGA Tour events)...Spieth wouldn't be a lock to make it to East Lake, but I think he is more deserving of the opportunity than whoever finishes the regular season #125.

 

3.  Unless he becomes a "tour member" this year, the highest priority rank Spieth will have next year will be category 20, meaning he will only get into tournaments AFTER #125 despite the fact that he will likely be in the top 80 or better.  

 

Here are some of the guys who are currently in the top 18 priority categories on the all exempt tour-

1- Gene Littler, Bobby Nichols, Doug Ford

2- .Henrik Stenson

3- Trevor Immelman

4- Stewart Cink

9- George McNeill, Bryce Molder, Stephen Ames, Kenny Perry, Jhonattan Vegas

10- Stuart Appleby, Scott Hoch, Jerry Kelly, Mike Weir

13- Matt Dobyns

17- Greg Norman, Tom Watson

 

 

As it stands now, Spieth will be in category 20 next year with at least 150 guys ranked ahead of him to get into each tournament.


Edited by MEfree - 7/10/13 at 10:27am
post #26 of 86

He can solve this whole thing by just winning a tournament, right?

post #27 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life View Post

He's saying Spieth should be able to go in the playoffs because he plays more.

 

To go with your analogy, that would mean that Spieth should get honors because he shows up to class more than the kid who barely shows up and gets all As.

There are two counter arguments to this.

 

1.  He's not discounting Tiger Woods acheivements nor suggesting that Woods doesn't belong in the playoffs, by any means.  He's simply perplexed by the fact that somebody who plays MORE than Tiger Woods (and the others mentioned) and has worked hard enough to be well in the top of the class is being excluded for some odd reason.

 

or

 

2.  If you want to stick with the analogy ... yes, that is exactly what he's saying.  A kid who has perfect attendance, busts his butt, acheives straight A- grades, or maybe a few A's and a couple of B's definitely does deserve more accolades at the end of the school year than a slacker who happens to be a prodigy and is able to show up only for tests and ace them.  Absolutely.

post #28 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

2.  If you want to stick with the analogy ... yes, that is exactly what he's saying.  A kid who has perfect attendance, busts his butt, acheives straight A- grades, or maybe a few A's and a couple of B's definitely does deserve more accolades at the end of the school year than a slacker who happens to be a prodigy and is able to show up only for tests and ace them.  Absolutely.

 

Agree to disagree. Winning is winning. If you and I are competing and you work harder than me but I still win...I win. Doesn't matter that you put in more effort. I'd also argue that the "prodigy" isn't a slacker, but just knows how much effort he needs to put in to learn what he needs to learn and get the best grades. More time spent working is just a wasted effort.

 

With that said, I agree that Spieth should be in the playoffs, I'm just playing Devil's advocate per usual. e2_whistling.gif

post #29 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life View Post

 

Agree to disagree. Winning is winning. If you and I are competing and you work harder than me but I still win...I win. Doesn't matter that you put in more effort. I'd also argue that the "prodigy" isn't a slacker, but just knows how much effort he needs to put in to learn what he needs to learn and get the best grades. More time spent working is just a wasted effort.

 

With that said, I agree that Spieth should be in the playoffs, I'm just playing Devil's advocate per usual. e2_whistling.gif

I wouldn't disagree with that in the "real world."  But this was a school analogy after all, so I am willing to bet that almost all teachers/administrators would agree with me. :)

 

They would take smart kids who work really hard over smart kids that work when the want to (Randy Moss style) any day of the week.

 

EDIT:  Doesn't really matter here since we both agree that Spieth earned what he has and he belongs in the playoffs.

post #30 of 86

I for one think the whole FedEx points thing is dumb and only cool if you're a player, and more specifically a player that wins it all (serious $$$).  As a fan, I couldn't care less about it, and quite frankly it's a little cheesy to me.  Has anyone ever won the actual FedEx match and not won it all?  What's the purpose of tallying points over the course of 9 months and displaying it 19 times on air during every week's tournament if it really just comes down to one tournament that has a big purse and winner takes all?  I'm sure it's possible someone could win every tournament of the year and place 50th in the FedEx tournament and still win it all, but that's pretty unlikely.

 

I also really like Jordan Spieth, and I think he could in fact be the next Tiger if he stays in the zone like Tiger did.  He certainly has the talent.  And as far as his exemption or Touring status, if you take out #1 finishes of other random but not "household name" players (take Russell Henley for example), then Spieth probably has more implicit FedEx points/is higher on the money list than where he is now.  I know winning is a huge feat and more important to any Tour player, but the point is Spieth is probably more consistent than some of the already champions of 2013.  That reason alone, he should be able to play just like any other PGA player if he's going to already be playing better than many of them anyway.
 

post #31 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by tuffluck View Post

I for one think the whole FedEx points thing is dumb and only cool if you're a player, and more specifically a player that wins it all (serious $$$).  As a fan, I couldn't care less about it, and quite frankly it's a little cheesy to me.  Has anyone ever won the actual FedEx match and not won it all?  What's the purpose of tallying points over the course of 9 months and displaying it 19 times on air during every week's tournament if it really just comes down to one tournament that has a big purse and winner takes all?  I'm sure it's possible someone could win every tournament of the year and place 50th in the FedEx tournament and still win it all, but that's pretty unlikely.

 

I also really like Jordan Spieth, and I think he could in fact be the next Tiger if he stays in the zone like Tiger did.  He certainly has the talent.  And as far as his exemption or Touring status, if you take out #1 finishes of other random but not "household name" players (take Russell Henley for example), then Spieth probably has more implicit FedEx points/is higher on the money list than where he is now.  I know winning is a huge feat and more important to any Tour player, but the point is Spieth is probably more consistent than some of the already champions of 2013.  That reason alone, he should be able to play just like any other PGA player if he's going to already be playing better than many of them anyway.
 

Looks like in '08 and '09 the Tour Championship winner was not also the Fedex Cup winner.  In '08, Camilo Villegas won the Tour Championship, but Vijay Singh won the Fedex Cup, and in '09 Mickelson won the TC and Tiger won the Fedex Cup.  But in 2007, and the last 3 years, yes, the TC winner was also the Fedex Cup winner.

 

EDIT:  There are only 30 players in the TC, so finishing 50th is not a possibility ... but Vijay did finish T22 in '08 and still walked away with the trophy.  (Tiger finished 2nd in '09)

post #32 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

Looks like in '08 and '09 the Tour Championship winner was not also the Fedex Cup winner.  In '08, Camilo Villegas won the Tour Championship, but Vijay Singh won the Fedex Cup, and in '09 Mickelson won the TC and Tiger won the Fedex Cup.  But in 2007, and the last 3 years, yes, the TC winner was also the Fedex Cup winner.

 

EDIT:  There are only 30 players in the TC, so finishing 50th is not a possibility ... but Vijay did finish T22 in '08 and still walked away with the trophy.  (Tiger finished 2nd in '09)


Vijay and Tiger should always be considered anomalies when it comes to anything golf b2_tongue.gif

post #33 of 86

Spieth has to win, if he does, he gets all his FedEx points retroactively and can compete for the FedEx Cup, I think that's fair.  If he doesn't win, he misses out on the FedEx Cup this year but gets a shot to play in it next since he's qualified to be a full member of the PGA Tour in 2014. 

 

I like Spieth, think he has great potential but the PGA Tour has rules and qualifying criteria that need to be met to be considered a full member of the Tour.  Ultimately it comes down to paying your dues, Jordan is doing that this year and next year he will reap the rewards, I have no problem with that. 

 

I'm rooting for him to win one so he can compete in the FedEx but I have no issue with him being forced to wait until next year if he doesn't win. 

post #34 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slice of Life View Post

He can solve this whole thing by just winning a tournament, right?
Not only that,if he doesn't, he's cemented his place in 2014 anyway. He's a great player who doesn't need to rush.
And anybody who thinks that I am suggesting that someone else is suggesting that he is better than Woods because he plays more should read my posts and those I refer to more closely.
Hell probably be ranked higher than mcilroy in three years, so I don't think his career will suffer if he doesn't participate in the obscene cash fest when they don't bend rules for him.
Nor should Robert Allenby be included because he continues to hack away week after week.
post #35 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtogolf View Post

Spieth has to win, if he does, he gets all his FedEx points retroactively and can compete for the FedEx Cup, I think that's fair.  If he doesn't win, he misses out on the FedEx Cup this year but gets a shot to play in it next since he's qualified to be a full member of the PGA Tour in 2014. 

 

I like Spieth, think he has great potential but the PGA Tour has rules and qualifying criteria that need to be met to be considered a full member of the Tour.  Ultimately it comes down to paying your dues, Jordan is doing that this year and next year he will reap the rewards, I have no problem with that. 

 

I'm rooting for him to win one so he can compete in the FedEx but I have no issue with him being forced to wait until next year if he doesn't win. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shorty View Post


Not only that,if he doesn't, he's cemented his place in 2014 anyway. He's a great player who doesn't need to rush.
And anybody who thinks that I am suggesting that someone else is suggesting that he is better than Woods because he plays more should read my posts and those I refer to more closely.
Hell probably be ranked higher than mcilroy in three years, so I don't think his career will suffer if he doesn't participate in the obscene cash fest when they don't bend rules for him.
Nor should Robert Allenby be included because he continues to hack away week after week.

I certainly don't think rules should be bent for anybody, I just question the necessity of this particular rule.  If the requirements for qualifying for the Fedex Cup playoffs were simply that you had to play in X number of tournaments, then it absolutely makes sense that sponsor exempt players shouldn't be gifted entry into the playoffs.  But it's not ... it's based on earnings.  The top 125 earners (obviously this means amateurs have to be excluded because they earn no money) should make it, period.

 

It reminds me of basketball and the 8 (pro) and 10 (college) seconds to cross the half court line rule, while also having a shot clock.  You don't need both.

post #36 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Golfingdad View Post

 

I certainly don't think rules should be bent for anybody, I just question the necessity of this particular rule.  If the requirements for qualifying for the Fedex Cup playoffs were simply that you had to play in X number of tournaments, then it absolutely makes sense that sponsor exempt players shouldn't be gifted entry into the playoffs.  But it's not ... it's based on earnings.  The top 125 earners (obviously this means amateurs have to be excluded because they earn no money) should make it, period.

 

It reminds me of basketball and the 8 (pro) and 10 (college) seconds to cross the half court line rule, while also having a shot clock.  You don't need both.

Where you're getting stuck is that the criteria is top 125 earners of full PGA Tour members, Jordan hasn't officially qualified as a full member yet.  If he wins a tournament then he's considered a full member. 

 

As for basketball, I agree with you, but the thought process was it's easier to stall utilizing the entire court than just 1/2 so the half court clock forces teams to at least advance the ball to half court with the bulk of the shot clock remaining. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Tour Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Tour Talk › Fed Ex Cup- Jordan Spieth