It’s been a wild last few days for yours truly, but in a good way this time. I flew out to North Carolina to meet some of my fellow Sand Trap staff members for the Newport Cup. The entire weekend was very fun and entertaining. I had a great time with everyone, and the golf courses were great. We definitely don’t have many courses like Pine Needles in Oklahoma. I wouldn’t mind playing golf in North Carolina for a month or two straight, but I guess two days will have to do. My team did take the loss, but we are better because of it.
Now it’s back to reality and back to Thrash Talk. I didn’t catch very much of the PGA Tour’s Michelin Championship at Las Vegas this past weekend, but I’ve seen some highlights from the final round. Wes Short Jr. defeated Jim Furyk in a playoff to win his first-ever PGA Tour event. If you are wondering who Wes Short Jr. is, well, join the club.
I’ll give Short credit for making a clutch birdie at the 72nd hole to make it into the playoff, and I’ll give him credit for defeating one of the world’s best in Furyk. That being said, I still don’t get real excited when no-names win on the PGA Tour. I would be lying if I said I wanted Furyk to be outlasted by a golfer who has never tasted victory on the PGA Tour. I’m not just picking on Short either. Every year on the PGA Tour no-name golfers win tour events, so it’s nothing new. That doesn’t mean I have to like it either.
In an earlier Thrash Talk, I called out the one-hit blunders. This select group of golfers only win one major championship and then dissapear into the black hole of golf. I don’t think the one-hit blunders are very good for golf, but at least they have a major championship on their resumé. They are a class above the no-name winners, but they aren’t on my top priority list either.
That brings me to my main question: Are PGA Tour winners like Wes Short Jr. and Andre Stoltz (last year’s Michelin Championsip winner) any good for golf? I think it’s obvious what my opinion is, but I’ll be fair and give some positives and negatives of each side of the story. I know there are a lot of golf fans that disagree with me every week, but all the differing opinions is what makes golf so great.
Positives
There are always going to be golf fans and sports fans in general that cheer for the underdogs. It’s just the way it is, especially in the United States. Golf fans love to jump on the bandwagons of golfers like Jason Gore and Chris DiMarco. I’m sure this past weekend was no different. There were a lot of fans, including myself, that would have wanted Jim Furyk to finish the job and win the tournament.
On the other hand, however, there were probably a lot of fans soaking up the moment when Wes Short Jr. defeated Furyk in the playoff. They wanted to witness the underdog spoil the day for one of the world’s best. Sometimes it makes it more exciting when the no-name golfers are in the hunt. It always gives the golf world an extra story or two, and that’s great for the media.
Other times, golfers like Retief Goosen, win as no-names and join the elite class in golf. This can definitely be a good thing. When Goosen won the U.S. Open in 2001, I had never heard of him. I really wanted Stewart Cink to win that week, but now I’m glad Goosen got the job done. He is currently one of my favorites to watch, and it all had to start somewhere. And that somewhere was the U.S. Open at Southern Hills as a no-name.
Retief Goosen is an exception, however, and most no-name winners get lost in that same black hole of golf. I’m not passing early judgment on Wes Short Jr. because he could go on to win more tournaments in the future. I would be willing to bet he will never win again, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt right now. For every Retief Goosen, there are at least ten other golfers that never have success again.
Negatives
The negative effects of the no-name winners are pretty obvious. I know I would rather watch Jim Furyk battle it out with Phil Mickelson or Tiger Woods any day of the week rather than have to watch him lose to Wes Short Jr. in a playoff. I just don’t see the television ratings being very good for the Michelin Championship, despite a solid field. That is somewhat sad, but true. Even the fans who cheer for the underdog probably weren’t even tuning in with as much excitement.
There are so many great golfers who have never won a PGA Tour event, and it angers me when no-name golfers win one time and never do anything positive again. Wes Short Jr. now has more PGA Tour events than Colin Montgomerie. Something just isn’t right about that fact. Joining Montgomerie in the winless group on the PGA Tour include names like Angel Cabrera and Tim Clark, and those three all rank in the top-20 in the world. That just don’t sit well with me.
I enjoy watching the world’s best go head-to-head, and that’s usually the situation on the PGA Tour. I don’t enjoy watching no-name golfers win tournaments, and I’m sure a lot of fans agree with me on that. It’s not as exciting, and a lot of fans probably ended up watching the NFL or LPGA Sunday instead of the Michelin Championship. Many sports fans go where the excitement is, and Wes Short Jr.’s victory wasn’t exciting.
The Final Say
I don’t mean to sound like a complete jerk on this topic, but I have to speak what I truly believe. And that’s the case with this week’s Thrash Talk. I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. I respect every golfer on the PGA Tour because they obviously have a lot more talent than I do. Just take a look at my scorecards from the Newport Cup to find that out.
Wes Short Jr. isn’t a bad golfer. Any golfer that can outlast Jim Furyk has a lot of talent. It’s just not as fun to watch when the no-names win tournaments. That’s not what I want to see, and I would like to think a lot of fans think the same way. There is also a chance for Short to win another couple events in the future and make me look like an idiot like Jason Gore did earlier this year. If that’s the case, I’ll be the first to admit it. That being said, I know that many no-name golfers in past never did anything positive after their only win on the PGA Tour.
If Phil Mickelson would have been at the top of the leaderboard in Las Vegas, the tournament would have been more exciting. That’s just the way it is in every sport for the most part. Nobody wants to see Dick Trickle win a Nascar event over Dale Earnhardt Jr. or Tony Stewart. I can’t stand Nascar by the way, but that was a good reference for the situation. Give me the world’s best, not no-names that will dissapear after one decent performance.
That’s all I have to say this week. Now it’s time for you to speak your opinions. I’m fully prepared to get the “underdog” speech, but that’s ok. I’ve heard it before and still don’t really care for it. Do you cheer for the no-names when they are at the top of the leaderboard on Sunday, or do you cheer for the big guns? Finally, do you think Wes Short Jr. will ever win again on the PGA Tour? If you have anything to add, feel free to comment below or discuss it in our forum. Thanks for reading Thrash Talk this week and have a great week of golf!
Photo Credit: © Jae C. Hong, AP.
I think the best answer to your question on no-names is your own positive / negative analysis which covers most of the question.
I won’t come back with “there’s got to be a first time.” However, what is most annoying in no names winning is when that golfer does not offer a good story or some original story like John Daly Story, Jason Gore, or Sean O’Hair. Show me the “underdog movie character,” not your Shaun Micheel, Craig Perks, Todd Hamilton, especially if they never win again or win again 12 years later.
But with over 50 events a year, you cannot expect the top 15 golfers to win every week. So the 80-20 rule applies: 20% of world class golfers would win 80% of the time and 80% of the first 150 golfers on tour will win only 20% of the time (and even less). Laws of Statistics prevail.